Speculation: David Savard, Cedric Paquette & Chris Wideman: UFAs Linked to Habs

[MrNasty]

What depth should we acquire and for what price?

 

[Treb]

I hope Paquette is for our 4th line and Wideman is an extra D (or even better AHL D).

 

[MrNasty]

Yeah, 'cause that's what this team needs. Not quality. Depth.

Who do you recommend and what do you offer?

 

[Spring in Fialta]

No, the real reason is because of that unbelievably ridiculously stacked LD of Hedman, McDonagh, Sergachev, and then out of nowhere Cernak as a solid RD, god knows why they brought Savard in

Guy has 1 goal in his last 122 games... ONE
Guy has 1 goal in 57 career playoff games
Guy SOMEHOW goes -8 on TAMPA in 14 games

Yeah lets bring him in to replace Weber... f***

Once again, you're making shit up and proceed to get upset about it.

 

[MSLs absurd thighs]

I hope Paquette is for our 4th line and Wideman is an extra D (or even better AHL D).

Paquette, I have no doubt is for the 4th line or even the 13th spot. It's Wideman that I'm a bit nervous about.

 

[Adam Michaels]

That's what some people in here ALWAYS does. We sign players....we hear how we shouldn'T panic, they are here just to be the 7th d-man or the 14th forward and yet end up regulars...lol

It was the same with Chiarot and the same with Edmundson. When they were signed, most folks were saying they're for the 3rd pair. The organization signed them for the Top-4.

And Savard plays the kind of game Habs want their defensive corps to play, shutting things down and making opponents pay for it.

It's the identity we saw shaping in the bubble with Weber, Chiarot, and Petry. And then they added Edmundson who added to that. Weber out, Savard in keeps with that identity.

 

[Canadienna]

#4 lol. but its montreal so ..hey our new #1 C!

Haha. I think like last year the lines will be blurred between our bottom 3 lines.

So yeah wouldn't at all surprise me if a guy like Paquette ended up playing more minutes than Kotkaniemi or Evans.

 

[MrNasty]

It was the same with Chiarot and the same with Edmundson. When they were signed, most folks were saying they're for the 3rd pair. The organization signed them for the Top-4.

And Savard plays the kind of game Habs want their defensive corps to play, shutting things down and making opponents pay for it.

It's the identity we saw shaping in the bubble with Weber, Chiarot, and Petry. And then they added Edmundson who added to that. Weber out, Savard in keeps with that identity.

And ironically they turned out being awesome.

 

[Schooner Guy]

I hope Paquette is for our 4th line and Wideman is an extra D (or even better AHL D).

If the signings are imminent, I see Paquette at best as a 4th liner / healthy scratch. I see Wideman as an extra D as you mentioned with time in the AHL.

We still need a 3rd line center who can play a little top 6 if Danault is gone. Evans is an injury risk and can't be relied on yet for that role. I like Wennberg or Haula for that role. Both can also play the wing.

 

[Milhouse40]

More like he is not useless.

Of course not he's not useless....but he's not what we need on the top 4, that's for sure.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Of course not he's not useless....but he's not what we need on the top 4, that's for sure.

He is the best we can get. Sadly.

 

[WinterLion]

When did we start listening to Georges Laraques again??

 

[Agalloch]

He had a very solid AHL year and was much better at the end of the year than the start... but got injured so we will see...

I thought he played as a forward for some games. I think he's a bust.

 

[WinterLion]

I hope Paquette is for our 4th line and Wideman is an extra D (or even better AHL D).

Definitely. Depth moves no doubt. Not to mention guys that could be beaten out and sent down if need be.

 

[Adam Michaels]

When did we start listening to Georges Laraques again??

When he gets things right more often than not.

But he's not the only one who's linked Savard and Paquette to Habs.

 

[Redux91]

Once again, you're making shit up and proceed to get upset about it.

Sigh, I really do my best to ignore the posters who clearly dont know shit about hockey and waste peoples times lol
but theres a part of me DYING to know what exactly you feel is "made up" about the straight up facts I brought up that you seem to be refusing to comprehend? or having difficulty comprehending?

I brought up some glaring cons against signing him (but who are we kidding, hes obviously being signed), so bring up the pros to signing him? they better be juicy

 

[sampollock]

All this money, and these are the big names MB is suppose to be chasing?

 

[Agalloch]

Definitely. Depth moves no doubt. Not to mention guys that could be beaten out and sent down if need be.

Paquette and Wideman are good signings for depth. We would need to acquire better players via trades.

 

[Captain Mountain]

When did we start listening to Georges Laraques again??

Paquette is the only name he brought up that hasn't also been connected to Montreal by a major insider.

 

[Krnage]

acquire them in the summer & trade them at the trade deadline for more draft picks

 

[Agalloch]

If the signings are imminent, I see Paquette at best as a 4th liner / healthy scratch. I see Wideman as an extra D as you mentioned with time in the AHL.

We still need a 3rd line center who can play a little top 6 if Danault is gone. Evans is an injury risk and can't be relied on yet for that role. I like Wennberg or Haula for that role. Both can also play the wing.

Wennberg would be interesting. I would like Christian Dvorak too.

 

[Adam Michaels]

All this money, and these are the big names MB is suppose to be chasing?

I think the more interesting acquisitions would need to be done via trade.

 

[WeThreeKings]

All this money, and these are the big names MB is suppose to be chasing?

None of the big names don't want to come here. The negative attention from Mailloix won't help

 

[Adam Michaels]

acquire them in the summer & trade them at the trade deadline for more draft picks

Depending on how Habs are doing by deadline, that is exactly what they'll be doing.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Sigh, I really do my best to ignore the posters who clearly dont know shit about hockey and waste peoples times lol
but theres a part of me DYING to know what exactly you feel is "made up" about the straight up facts I brought up that you seem to be refusing to comprehend? or having difficulty comprehending?

I brought up some glaring cons against signing him (but who are we kidding, hes obviously being signed), so bring up the pros to signing him? they better be juicy

You fabricated narratives about Paquette replacing Danault (topping it off with making it about his ethnicity as well) and now about Savard replacing Weber and getting all amped up about it. Calling them 'straight up facts' is a laugh riot.