Confirmed with Link: Armia sign with Habs (1 year, $1.85M)

BehindTheTimes

Registered User
Jun 24, 2018
7,063
9,287
How does this work? The HF poster knows Armia will break out, but the player himself is behind the times and will allow a 4-5 year contract at a discount?
I don't know that he will breakout, I said I'd be willing to make a bet on it. Save your strawmans for someone else please. You offer guaranteed money and show ur gambling 0n Armia, no reason to believe he would refuse a reasonable deal.
 

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
Montreal offered that. Radulov wanted tax relief. Blame him instead.


2 years would be stupid. Then he walks for free if he wants to.


If a player doesn't want to play for a team and is two years away from free agency then he goes for the 2 year contract. The one year contract tells me he wants to be a Hab and wants a long term deal once he has proven his worth. 2 year deal is worst case scenario.

Radulov proved his value after a one year deal. He got loyalty and dogs and first come, first served as a reward. Bergevin treated him and Markov with no respect whatsoever.

It was pitiful, unprofessional and if you think other players and their agents around the league didn't notice, then you're blinded by Bergevin love or simply extremely naïve.
 

scrubadam

Registered User
Apr 10, 2016
12,438
1,904
Team is in flux right now I don't see a big reason to commit long term to Armia. Who knows if we will want him here next year or what direction the team will be going in. Also can use him as bait at the TDL to add some more picks.

We don't know what we have with this kid, how he will fit in with the team, or where the team is going. 1 year experiment to see where it goes.

But nice to see that so many people now think Armia is going to become a great player and that we will have to pay him big money next season. Refreshing change of pace when the deal was announced and there was a lot of hate on the kid (though some love from many).
 

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
There's no win situation for this GM on this board. It's pretty clear.

Sign longterm= WTF!? The guy is an unproven 4th liner!

One year deal=WTF!? The guy is gonna explode next year and break the bank!

Well, in fairness, there's a lot of room between one year and long term, and it's not like Bergevin hasn't miscalculated many times on contract amounts and terms.

Just because you don't agree with other posters, doesn't make them wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: c3z4r

StanleyCH25

Registered User
Feb 14, 2003
970
27
Visit site
Handcuffed? Wtf are you worrying about being handcuffed for when we ought to be unloading Pacioretty and Byron for futures?

Please, explain to me how a deal like, say, 3x2.5 would ''handcuff'' the Montreal Canadiens?

That's because you assume Armia would sign for 3 X 2.5. Who knows what his price for a 3 year deal would have been. Would you have agreed to 3 X 4 if that was his asking price? If you had all the info in terms of what contracts he was willing to sign, then we could talk about which one would be worth the best risk / home run but we don't have that info. All we know is that he was willing to sign a 1 year deal for 1.85. If I'm Armia and I see the Habs roster, I see potential to fill a top 6 role and score a big contract from having good production on a mediocre team. Why would I sign a 3 year deal for 2.5 if I can sign a 1 year deal for 1.85 and then land a 3 year deal for 4.

It's a pathological thing for him. He's so afraid of being left holding the bag that he'll not even try to get a value signing. The Pacioretty contract seems to be the lone counter example. I guess the Shaw contract counts but...yeah that's just bad.

He does try to get value signings. He signed Alzner, Price, and Shaw. They backfired. He missed on Subban, Gorges, and Plekanec. They backfired. He landed a home run with Pacioretty. He tries.. but he often fails at his player evaluations and how they will fit in with our team. He sometimes scores on 1 year deals (Radulov) but then fails to keep that player after having him for a bargain for 1 year because he's afraid of overpaying. So we can't say he doesn't try.. he does try.. he just misses a lot.
 

Le Barron de HF

Justin make me proud
Mar 12, 2008
16,248
3,879
Shawinigan
That's because you assume Armia would sign for 3 X 2.5. Who knows what his price for a 3 year deal would have been. Would you have agreed to 3 X 4 if that was his asking price? If you had all the info in terms of what contracts he was willing to sign, then we could talk about which one would be worth the best risk / home run but we don't have that info. All we know is that he was willing to sign a 1 year deal for 1.85. If I'm Armia and I see the Habs roster, I see potential to fill a top 6 role and score a big contract from having good production on a mediocre team. Why would I sign a 3 year deal for 2.5 if I can sign a 1 year deal for 1.85 and then land a 3 year deal for 4.



He does try to get value signings. He signed Alzner, Price, and Shaw. They backfired. He missed on Subban, Gorges, and Plekanec. They backfired. He landed a home run with Pacioretty. He tries.. but he often fails at his player evaluations and how they will fit in with our team. He sometimes scores on 1 year deals (Radulov) but then fails to keep that player after having him for a bargain for 1 year because he's afraid of overpaying. So we can't say he doesn't try.. he does try.. he just misses a lot.
Chances are, if we went long term, it would have been closer to Jarnkrok's deal than the 4M you're suggesting. The dude doesn't have the resumé to aks for that much.
 

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
That's because you assume Armia would sign for 3 X 2.5. Who knows what his price for a 3 year deal would have been. Would you have agreed to 3 X 4 if that was his asking price? If you had all the info in terms of what contracts he was willing to sign, then we could talk about which one would be worth the best risk / home run but we don't have that info. All we know is that he was willing to sign a 1 year deal for 1.85. If I'm Armia and I see the Habs roster, I see potential to fill a top 6 role and score a big contract from having good production on a mediocre team. Why would I sign a 3 year deal for 2.5 if I can sign a 1 year deal for 1.85 and then land a 3 year deal for 4.

I think it's a reasonable assumption. Why would you sign a 3x2.5 or 3x3 if you were Armia? Because it's the most money you've ever been offered, by a long shot. You're telling me you'd balk at a guaranteed more than doubling of your career earnings for a chance at something more? You're talking about a guy who's been playing for less than a million in every single one of NHL seasons. Let's say Bergevin throws in a signing bonus so he gets more money than he made all last year as soon as the ink is dry.

He does try to get value signings. He signed Alzner, Price, and Shaw. They backfired. He missed on Subban, Gorges, and Plekanec. They backfired. He landed a home run with Pacioretty. He tries.. but he often fails at his player evaluations and how they will fit in with our team. He sometimes scores on 1 year deals (Radulov) but then fails to keep that player after having him for a bargain for 1 year because he's afraid of overpaying. So we can't say he doesn't try.. he does try.. he just misses a lot.

In what way are Alzner, Price, and Shaw value signings? Like seriously...the most expensive goaltender contract in history is a value signing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: c3z4r

WG

Registered User
Sep 9, 2008
1,693
1,490
We just gave 1.3 millions to a guy who played 20 games in career and is in the middle of his 20ies .... i don't see how giving between 2.5 and 3 millions to Armia would have been more ridiculous.
Big chasm between two years at barely above the waiver amount (i.e. if Peca is sent to the AHL most of his cap hit goes with him) vs. 3M X 5 years for a player who has been 0.5 ppg in the AHL and just set a career high of 29 points. It's the five years that would worry me, at what looks to me like max money for Armia's likely to produce.

I can see a chance at future progression but I don't see some explosion coming where he'd suddenly become a 5M player. I think best case he gets better minutes in Montreal, maybe gets himself to 40 points, at which point you could give him the 3 x 3M then.

If he was willing to take 5 years at 1.5-2M, then that's a different discussion but I doubt he would have accepted that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

StanleyCH25

Registered User
Feb 14, 2003
970
27
Visit site
I think it's a reasonable assumption. Why would you sign a 3x2.5 or 3x3 if you were Armia? Because it's the most money you've ever been offered, by a long shot. You're telling me you'd balk at a guaranteed more than doubling of your career earnings for a chance at something more? You're talking about a guy who's been playing for less than a million in every single one of NHL seasons. Let's say Bergevin throws in a signing bonus so he gets more money than he made all last year as soon as the ink is dry.



In what way are Alzner, Price, and Shaw value signings? Like seriously...the most expensive goaltender contract in history is a value signing?

Well, maybe you're right.. maybe he would have signed at 3 X 2.5 or 3 X 3. We don't know. Again, in his shoes, I might actually consider a 1 year deal to be my best option because I sincerely think the Habs look horrendous and they are at a shortage of goal scorers. I'm positioned to take a top 6 role on a team that can really use offense. I consider myself an offensively gifted player who was stuck behind a solid top 6 in Winnipeg who hasn't really gotten a chance to shine. From his perspective, he doesn't want to give away his UFA years for cheap. From the Habs perspective, they want to know what they're getting before they commit longer term. Also, as a Habs fan, I want Armia's contract to keep him with the team until roughly age 30. So ideally we get a good read on how he can contribute in the long term after this year and then sign him to a contract that fits that value. If you commit to 3 years, you are effectively buying 1 UFA year and then he becomes UFA at age 28. If he turns into a legit top 6, you potentially lose him as soon as that contract is up in his prime years or end up having to pay even more because now he'll be seeking at 5+ year deal at age 28 when he's now in his prime years. By giving him 1 year to figure out what he's all about and how he fits, you can then give him a 4 or 5 year contract next year at age 26 to hold him until age 30 to 31.


Also, my point with Alzner, Price and Shaw is that Bergevin went long term and blew it with those guys. They are horrible signings in my mind. Price isn't a horrible signing as he is elite but goalies are so dependent on the team surrounding them that it's harder to gauge the true value of a goalie. You're better spending those dollars on the players on the ice than the goalie since having a horrible team on the ice will lead to way too many quality scoring chances and Price can only stop so many.
 

StanleyCH25

Registered User
Feb 14, 2003
970
27
Visit site
Chances are, if we went long term, it would have been closer to Jarnkrok's deal than the 4M you're suggesting. The dude doesn't have the resumé to aks for that much.

Most people consider that deal baffling as Jarnkrok may have seriously undervalued his future years but I guess if you don't try, you don't know. Although the big difference is that the Predators already know what they're getting with him since he's played for them for 5 years now while Armia has played for 0 years with the Habs. Mind you.. you're probably very right that he would never ask for 4M with his current resume. 2.5 or 3 is probably about right. I still think taking a 1 year deal is best for both sides here. We can sign him to his age 30 / 31 after this year instead of signing him to his age 28 year and letting him become a UFA for his prime years.
 

BargainBinSpecial

Registered User
Jul 2, 2018
2,484
1,279
That's because you assume Armia would sign for 3 X 2.5. Who knows what his price for a 3 year deal would have been. Would you have agreed to 3 X 4 if that was his asking price? If you had all the info in terms of what contracts he was willing to sign, then we could talk about which one would be worth the best risk / home run but we don't have that info. All we know is that he was willing to sign a 1 year deal for 1.85. If I'm Armia and I see the Habs roster, I see potential to fill a top 6 role and score a big contract from having good production on a mediocre team. Why would I sign a 3 year deal for 2.5 if I can sign a 1 year deal for 1.85 and then land a 3 year deal for 4.



He does try to get value signings. He signed Alzner, Price, and Shaw. They backfired. He missed on Subban, Gorges, and Plekanec. They backfired. He landed a home run with Pacioretty. He tries.. but he often fails at his player evaluations and how they will fit in with our team. He sometimes scores on 1 year deals (Radulov) but then fails to keep that player after having him for a bargain for 1 year because he's afraid of overpaying. So we can't say he doesn't try.. he does try.. he just misses a lot.

MB is a bad GM plain and simple for today's NHL. He simply can't understand that you need goal scorers to win. Him and his newly hired buddy Julien still believe you can win games with grit and character like the Boston Bruins of the 2000s.

In the beginning, he seemed like a genius. He made low risk moves that improved the team. Right now, people are asking why he still has a job. After last year's performance, any team owner would have fired him because he blew up a potential contender.

When MB took over, the team was a center and a winger away from getting the cup. Instead of getting a few elite players to help them get there, he kept retooling the third and fourth lines. He got an elite player in Vanek. He got lucky because the Islanders had an equally bad GM. He didn't resign Vanek. Despite his age, Vanek is still a pretty good goal scorer even though he has played for different teams ever since.

He also got lucky with the addition of Petry but later overpaid him to keep him here. Right now, the deal doesn't look so bad because within one summer, he completely dismantled the Habs d-core and having a player like Petry is a blessing.

The other elite player he got was Radulov because no other team wanted to give him a chance apart from the Red Wings due to Radulov's past behavior. He could of easily overpaid for Radulov to stay here. It would have made sense because he acquired Drouin by giving up his best d prospect and at the end there was 8 million left on the cap which went unused. I don't know why he didn't spend it on Radulov. A line of Pacces Drouin Radulov could have been the difference maker for making the playoffs this year. He could of also traded Radulov at the trade deadline because we all knew Radulov wouldn't re-sign in Montreal. Getting assets for Radulov was the best move because we all knew the Habs would have an early playoff exit 2 years ago.

When the Habs didn't have much success in the playoffs, he started trading the best assets for lesser players (1 for 1 deals) in June, which he believed where of equal value because of character or targeting third or fourth liners in free agency, his focus should have been to add elite players especially centers. Instead, he blew it up. He let many players walk or traded for picks which amounted to nothing. Also, he traded those picks to get third or fourth liners and bottom d for depth. It seems he learned from his mistakes right now and is trying to stock up on picks. He basically traded fan favorites Subban and Galchenyuk for character yet Drouin and Radulov had also pretty bad behavior in the past.

Even bad GMs get lucky sometimes. MB's specialty is to find good third and fourth liners. However in today's NHL, you can't compete without talent. He got lucky with players like Danault, Niemi, Weise and Petry. The rest of his moves are bad. He also got lucky into getting Paccioretty and Gallagher to sign long term cheap deals. Drouin has yet to pan out and Weber is just declining due to his age. Subban is still in his prime.

Another terrible move was trading Desharnais for a 7th D who has yet to sign a new deal with an NHL team right now. The Habs basically lost a 50 point center for nothing. Also they placed Davidson on waivers and lost him to Edmonton again which is where Desharnais was traded in the first place. Time will tell if the Galchenyuk deal will hunt the Habs in a few years.

At the end, he mishandled many contracts and signed Price, Alzner and Shaw into over-inflated deals. Long term, you don't have many players locked up. Drouin, Petry and Weber are overpaid for what they do.

This year, he promised he would make the appropriate moves to make the team better. What I see is an AHL lineup with many question marks. He is trying to trade away his best goal scorer and is completely mishandling the situation. There's no elite center, the d is horrid and the Drouin experiment at center is ongoing. He also doesn't want to pay Danault but paid Plekanec up to 3.5 million to bring him back because he knows he has no other top centers.

I don't see any great value in his work. Gainey at least managed to turn things around and there was hope. With MB, there's no hope. This year, they drafted centers because he couldn't get one or traded them for nothing in the past. He did get lucky with Plekanec. Time will tell if Rychel and Valiev amount to anything.
 

admiralcadillac

Registered User
Oct 22, 2017
7,460
6,655
Well, in fairness, there's a lot of room between one year and long term, and it's not like Bergevin hasn't miscalculated many times on contract amounts and terms.

Just because you don't agree with other posters, doesn't make them wrong.

I don't think that was the point at all but its always easy to justify complaining.
 

Nedved

Registered User
Mar 30, 2008
13,452
4,948
this team is so bad, i don't care what they do until draft season. perfect, 1 year trade bait for a 2nd rounder come march. well done!
 
  • Like
Reactions: scrubadam

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
I don't think that was the point at all but its always easy to justify complaining.

I understand perfectly well what the point was. Just like you, perpetually complaining about other posters.

Bergevin's record with contracts is hardly exemplary.
 

calder candidate

Registered User
Feb 25, 2003
4,696
2,594
Montreal
Visit site
You trade for a player but than you sign him to 1 year deal... Armia is a top 9 NHL player on any team he is entering is prime, we have lot of space and we aren’t going anywhere for the next 3 years. Seem like this is a guy that we brought in also help kotkaniemi at the same time so to me, so a 1 year deal doesn’t really help and seem like a risk and no reward...
 

VirginiaMtlExpat

Second most interesting man in the world.
Aug 20, 2003
4,949
2,297
Norfolk, VA
www.odu.edu
I hope that the plan is to sign him long-term during the season. He strikes me as a diamond in the rough who was caught out by the Jets juggernaut's depth on the wing. So much in professional success, especially in hockey, hinges on the nature of the opportunity: linemates, PP time, presence at O-zone faceoffs, etc.

I can see making the most of this chance and rising to a genuine top6 winger.
 

Scriptor

Registered User
Jan 1, 2014
7,776
4,747
Radulov proved his value after a one year deal. He got loyalty and dogs and first come, first served as a reward. Bergevin treated him and Markov with no respect whatsoever.

It was pitiful, unprofessional and if you think other players and their agents around the league didn't notice, then you're blinded by Bergevin love or simply extremely naïve.

How the hell do you know what went on behind the scenes? You get the public statement that is the result of months of negotiation to that point. Who knows who lacked respect behind closed doors?

Naïve is when you have facts and overlook them, not when people don't buy your interpretation of events based on incomplete information and a personal bias to begin with.
 

BehindTheTimes

Registered User
Jun 24, 2018
7,063
9,287
Can't see Armia turning down a 3, 4, 5 year deal with real dollars much higher than he has ever earned before. Why would he refuse suck an offer ?
 

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
How the hell do you know what went on behind the scenes? You get the public statement that is the result of months of negotiation to that point. Who knows who lacked respect behind closed doors?

Naïve is when you have facts and overlook them, not when people don't buy your interpretation of events based on incomplete information and a personal bias to begin with.

I'm not overlooking anything. Bergevin said those things publicly. Markov said he felt disrespected. This is not my interpretation and Bergevin has a long history of throwing his players to the wolves.

As for the second part, do you think players around the league see that garbage from Bergevin and think, "Wow! Can't wait to play for that guy!"

Feel free to refute factual occurrences, or characterize them as positive when they're clearly not. You're not the only poster here willfully blind to Bergevin's unprofessional and a self-destructive behaviours.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->