Prairie Habs
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2010
- 11,998
- 12,475
Is that a bad thing?
Losing your best D for nothing? Depends if you want to win I guess...
Is that a bad thing?
He can’t play forever is my point. He is visibly getting slower and it's only going to get worseLosing your best D for nothing? Depends if you want to win I guess...
He can’t play forever is my point. He is visibly getting slower and it's only going to get worse
Bergevin won’t expose him even if it means losing a promising young D which is the wrong strategyI know people have been kicking dirt over his grave since he got here, but he's still a top 10 D in the league. It would be crazy to expose him.
Bergevin won’t expose him even if it means losing a promising young D which is the wrong strategy
They could become as good as Shea Theodore...Vegas likes him.Remember when everyone was freaking out at the possibility of losing promising young forward Charles Hudon? Give me the all-star over Fluery or Juulsen.
They could become as good as Shea Theodore...Vegas likes him.
Seriously what is the concept of an aging, slowing player don’t you get? Are you watching the current game? Weber looks like he is skating in quick sand
My evaluation is very simple-The thing I don't get is your evaluation of Weber. His return has saved our season.
The idea of exposing an all-star to protect a long shot prospect is ludicrous.
You can also only lose one player, we can't lose both and we might lose neither if they take a forward (or a goalie if Lindgren or Primeau look good). Its also pointless to speculate because we have no clue what our roster and prospect pool will even look like 2 years from now.
My evaluation is very simple-
He is aging, he is slowing and the game is getting faster
Anything to back this up? He is holding up just fine.
Seriously? All I have to back it up is watching the games. Weber looks horrible or he is hurt.Anything to back this up? He is holding up just fine.
Eye test, Weber's own admission in interviews, MB saying so in interviews etc etc
You have a link to an interview where either of those guys say that Weber has slowed to the point that the game is passing him by? Because that is the insinuation when its said that he should be exposed because he has slowed. Of course he isn't going to be as fast as he was in his early/mid 20's no one is. Markov was obviously slowed when he came back from his blown knees, he was smart and skilled enough that it didn't really matter. I see no reason that Weber won't be able to maintain his high level of play as he ages like other D of his caliber.
He can’t play forever is my point. He is visibly getting slower and it's only going to get worse
In regards to 7 forwards guessing we keep:
Kotkaniemi
Danault
Domi
Gallagher
Drouin
Tatar
Shaw <-- on the bubble
Lehkonen <-- on the bubble
and expose:
Byron <-- Tough choice if continues to score 20
Evans <-- Could emerge
Armia
Peca
Thompson
Weise
Weal
Deslauriers
Hudon
Shinkaruk
Audette
Waked
Pezzetta
Alain
Verbeek
Vejdemo
McCarron
This is true IF ..... we wait to sign Tatar, Danault and Gallagher (and Petry too) to their extensions at the last minute, after the expansion draft but before or on July 1st. I guess we will see how teams and agents will be handling these files in the year prior to expansion.Apparantly since Tatar, Danault, and Gallagher are UFA's we don't necessarily have to protect them.
So, we'd be able to protect Byron, Lehkonen, and Armia.
Apparantly since Tatar, Danault, and Gallagher are UFA's we don't necessarily have to protect them.
So, we'd be able to protect Byron, Lehkonen, and Armia.
Same thing happened with Radulov & Markov during the Vegas expansion and we ended up losing both. If we truly value Tatar, Danault, Gallagher and Petry we get them signed and locked up long in advance. I can't think of any examples of this working out for another team during the Vegas expansion draft.
I don't think the NHL looks very favourably upon gentlemen's agreements and I also imagine players don't feel too comfortable getting that close to UFA status without a contract as they would be risking injury or poor performance that could jeopardize millions. Plus if they get that close to UFA status (I'm assuming the expansion draft takes place mid June) they would likely be very tempted to test the market two weeks later (i.e. Radulov)
That doesn't negate Steve Shutt's point. The reason they could make those demands was that they were not already signed up.They both wanted to re-sign. Only reason they didn't is Bergevin didn't pay them up to their demands, which I would have...
Almost every team did the gentleman's agreements to avoid losing key players, only Bergevin treated Markov and Radulov like dogs, not gentleman, during negotiations.
Same thing happened with Radulov & Markov during the Vegas expansion and we ended up losing both. If we truly value Tatar, Danault, Gallagher and Petry we get them signed and locked up long in advance. I can't think of any examples of this working out for another team during the Vegas expansion draft.
I don't think he's been the best in the world for quite some time tbh, he's in the top 5, but clear cut the best, nope.He still is, look at his stats in 2019, only Vasilevski has better numbers while his team is having a +80 differential and the Habs are +3, what proves how dominant Price really is..
Edit: Also, if 41% of the NHL players thought Price was still the toughest goaltender to face after a such disastrous season, just imagine now that he is back in beast mode...
As for Andersen, He is very good and is easily a top 10 goaltender in the league, but still, he isnt close to Price level of greatness...
I already posted that in fact there was no team that successfully pulled this manoever with a non-rental player.
Mostly, I agree with your main point of protecting the guys you really want.
Assume that by re-signing and protecting Tatar, Danault, Gallagher, plus protecting KK, Domi, Drouin, you may have to lose one of Byron, Shaw, Armia or Lehkonen. So you protect the one with the best value cap-wise. And if for example, you re-signed Tatar to a big contract and then he crapped out, you just DON'T protect him anyway.
In the end you will only lose one player, and it can likely be arranged that it is a player with a high enough cap hit to not significantly hurt the team in the end.