Player Discussion Jeff Petry

[Braun]

And the habs in the last 7 drafts had top 10 pick in 3 of them, thats like 40%.

People shouldn't worry about getting top picks, with parity the habs will most likely draft top 10 another 4 times over the next decade.

100% agree

 

[LaP]

Kulak seems more than fine in the fold, just not a top pair. He's still very young too for a d man.

But we need a top 3. A real one not one that will be carried by Weber à la Gorges/Bouillon/Murray/Gill who all were carried by Subban (or Emelin by Markov). Can we get a real top 3 to go with Petry and Weber and not do the same mistake we did when we had Subban and Markov? I don't see any top 3 potential in Kulak or Reilly personally.

 

[LaP]

Seriously, did you just put Weise and Byron in the same category?!

Did Weise score 20+ twice and on pace for a third straight season?

I'm was talking about the hype toward the players that's why i said Dale Weise it and not just Dale Weise (and should have used Lord Byron instead of just Byron). Both players gather lot of hype and attention by the media and fans (and praise toward the GM) but at the end of the day it's not enough to take the next step. If we are serious about winning we must get more than that.

I want a serious attempt this time. Kok as a top 6 center next season and not burn Danault until there's no gaz left à la DD. Getting a real top 3 dman.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I'm was talking about the hype toward the players that's why i said Dale Weise it and not just Dale Weise (and should have used Lord Byron instead of just Byron). Both players gather lot of hype and attention by the media and fans (and praise toward the GM) but at the end of the day it's not enough to take the next step. If we are serious about winning we must get more than that.

I want a serious attempt this time. Kok as a top 6 center next season and not burn Danault until there's no gaz left à la DD. Getting a real top 3 dman.

I agree with KK as top-6 but I have no issue with a 20-goal scorer who is also good on PK like Byron. He is not Dale Weise.

 

[LaP]

I agree with KK as top-6 but I have no issue with a 20-goal scorer who is also good on PK like Byron. He is not Dale Weise.

I don't have issue with him. I'm just saying we must do better than players like Byron if we want to take the next step. We absolutely need a top 6 center and a top 3 dman. If we can't get that any other addition will just make us better but still not a contender like we have been most of the years MB was our GM. The only year i really did believe we could win it was the Vanek year.

Personally i think we must try or not. Being in between is not a good plan.

 

[admiralcadillac]

But we need a top 3. A real one not one that will be carried by Weber à la Gorges/Bouillon/Murray/Gill who all were carried by Subban (or Emelin by Markov). Can we get a real top 3 to go with Petry and Weber and not do the same mistake we did when we had Subban and Markov? I don't see any top 3 potential in Kulak or Reilly personally.

I don't either, but I was just replying to what you said originally

 

[26Mats]

I purposely didn't include all the teams who lost in the finals but to me, once you get to the finals anything can happen. I.E. Vegas, TB etc...

vegas is also an exception - they had an expansion draft where pretty much every team in the league had to leave a top 4 dman or top 6 forward unprotected - and did a masterful job.

Tampa had 4 top six overall picks in 6 years, including a #1, #2, and #3 overall. They were horrible for a long time, and it paid, getting Stamkos, Hedman, and Drouin, who became Sergachev. Not sure Tampa makes it to the finals without those 3.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I don't have issue with him. I'm just saying we must do better than players like Byron if we want to take the next step. We absolutely need a top 6 center and a top 3 dman. If we can't get that any other addition will just make us better but still not a contender like we have been most of the years MB was our GM. The only year i really did believe we could win it was the Vanek year.

Personally i think we must try or not. Being in between is not a good plan.

Byron on a third line is more than fine.

Tatar-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher
Drouin-Domi-Suzuki
Byron-Danault-Lehkonen
Agostino-Poehling-Armia

Shaw moved for a D.

 

[Braun]

vegas is also an exception - they had an expansion draft where pretty much every team in the league had to leave a top 4 dman or top 6 forward unprotected - and did a masterful job.

Tampa had 4 top six overall picks in 6 years, including a #1, #2, and #3 overall. They were horrible for a long time, and it paid, getting Stamkos, Hedman, and Drouin, who became Sergachev. Not sure Tampa makes it to the finals without those 3.

Well if everyone is an exception is it really an exception? Also the "beauty" about the NHL today is that you can finish 15th and still pick top 3. So, to me, tanking isn't worth it. Good asset management is key.

 

[BaseballCoach]

vegas is also an exception - they had an expansion draft where pretty much every team in the league had to leave a top 4 dman or top 6 forward unprotected - and did a masterful job.

Actually, each team lost either a goalie or a 4th D or an 8th F, maybe lower as first and second year pros were exempt.

Some teams with crappy forwards protected 4D, and lost either their 5th D or their 5th F, but again probably lower due to the exemptions.

The reason Vegas did well is that many teams did a lousy job of choosing the guys they protected. Protected too many safe players and left scorers exposed. Then to compound the problem, some GMs outsmarted themselves and found ways to lose more than one player in many cases.

 

[26Mats]

Actually, each team lost either a goalie or a 4th D or an 8th F, maybe lower as first and second year pros were exempt.

Some teams with crappy forwards protected 4D, and lost either their 5th D or their 5th F, but again probably lower due to the exemptions.

The reason Vegas did well is that many teams did a lousy job of choosing the guys they protected. Protected too many safe players and left scorers exposed. Then to compound the problem, some GMs outsmarted themselves and found ways to lose more than one player in many cases.

True about the 8F. But in the end, Marchessault, Rielly Smith, Karlesson, Perron, Tuck, Neal, and the Finn were good top six forwards, the D was stellar, and MAF played like an upper tier #1 goalie.

 

[Naslund]

Byron on a third line is more than fine.

Tatar-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher
Drouin-Domi-Suzuki
Byron-Danault-Lehkonen
Agostino-Poehling-Armia

The lines in the next few years will be:
Drouin-Domi-Gallagher 1st line
Lehkonen-Kotkaniemi-Armia 2nd line
Tatar-Poehling-Suzuki 3rd line
Byron-Danault-Shaw 4th fourth line

Danault will start trickling down to the 3rd line starting next year. The emergence of Poehling in late 2020/early 2021 will then seal his fate. He is actually the player we are the most likely to lose in the expansion draft, unless MB finds a taker for him next season. Suzuki and Poehling are made to play with each other, and Tatar will be a great complement to that line.

 

[26Mats]

Well if everyone is an exception is it really an exception? Also the "beauty" about the NHL today is that you can finish 15th and still pick top 3. So, to me, tanking isn't worth it. Good asset management is key.

I agree 100% about asset management.

But Vegas is an exception that's impossible to repeat (expansion draft). Detroit was at a time when European scouting was still lacking (that's been fixed league wide). Boston benefited from Chiarelli spending big during the first cap era - when Gainey was hesitant to commit so much to one player. If there is ever another player like Chara available as a UFA, I hope MB offers him the max possible under the rules. Tavares should have been offered 17 million - or whatever the max was. Chara proved the idea that if a player gets a max you can't win is simply false (or whatever the equivalent of 7.5 out of 39 million is next year - well over 15 million).

 

[26Mats]

Byron on a third line is more than fine.

Tatar-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher
Drouin-Domi-Suzuki
Byron-Danault-Lehkonen
Agostino-Poehling-Armia

I like this a lot. Really looking forward to next year just on this post. Because with a good trade or UFA signing it can be this plus more...

 

[Legend123]

I agree 100% about asset management.

But Vegas is an exception that's impossible to repeat (expansion draft). Detroit was at a time when European scouting was still lacking (that's been fixed league wide). Boston benefited from Chiarelli spending big during the first cap era - when Gainey was hesitant to commit so much to one player. If there is ever another player like Chara available as a UFA, I hope MB offers him the max possible under the rules. Tavares should have been offered 17 million - or whatever the max was. Chara proved the idea that if a player gets a max you can't win is simply false (or whatever the equivalent of 7.5 out of 39 million is next year - well over 15 million).

17M for a 27 yo player?? No thanks. Maybe offersheet that money and term to Matthews or Marner to put them on a bind or snag one of their 3 superstars.

 

[26Mats]

17M for a 27 yo player?? No thanks. Maybe offersheet that money and term to Matthews or Marner to put them on a bind or snag one of their 3 superstars.

Chara must have been about that age when he signed his big deal. But for a 27 year old forward you have to limit the years to 3 - 5.

 

[Legend123]

Chara must have been about that age when he signed his big deal. But for a 27 year old forward you have to limit the years to 3 - 5.

That's more than 50% premium to what the leafs are paying. Ez no

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

I like this a lot. Really looking forward to next year just on this post. Because with a good trade or UFA signing it can be this plus more...

We really just need to shore up the left side of the defence, that needs to be the focus.

 

[26Mats]

That's more than 50% premium to what the leafs are paying. Ez no

Lol, he wouldnt come here no matter hiw much we paid him, but thats not the right way to look at it. If the Senators were only offeri ny Chara 5.5 million, i.e. roughly equivalent to 11 million against todays cap, would that mean it would be dumb for Boston to offer a 50% premium, i.e. 8.5 million, roughly equivalent to 17 million today? It would have been a decision to not win a cup.

 

[26Mats]

We really just need to shore up the left side of the defence, that needs to be the focus.

We need to get assets however we can. If we had added skinner, duclair, and perron this summer, all forwards, it would be much easier for us to shore up the left side of the defense now, than it is in our current position. Ainec

 

[Legend123]

Lol, he wouldnt come here no matter hiw much we paid him, but thats not the right way to look at it. If the Senators were only offeri ny Chara 5.5 million, i.e. roughly equivalent to 11 million against todays cap, would that mean it would be dumb for Boston to offer a 50% premium, i.e. 8.5 million, roughly equivalent to 17 million today? It would have been a decision to not win a cup.

Yes. 17m is too much. What's so hard to understand?

 

[26Mats]

Yes. 17m is too much. What's so hard to understand?

Your argument for why. Its crap.

 

[Legend123]

Your argument for why. Its crap.

you wanna pay Tavares 17M per year?? god damn, really??

 

[26Mats]

you wanna pay Tavares 17M per year?? god damn, really??

yes I would take him without giving out assets at that rate for 3 to 5 years, just like I would have paid Chara 8.5 million per year against a 39 million dollar cap.

You do understand that 8.5 million for Chara at that time is roughly the same as 17 million for Tavares in terms of percentage of the cap now?

Ask yourself, if 27 year old Chara were available now, would you pay him 17 million per year? If the answer is no, you're saying the Bruins shouldn't have paid him 8.5 million. But no way they win the cup without him. Elite players are worth the big bucks.

 

[Legend123]

yes I would take him without giving out assets at that rate for 3 to 5 years, just like I would have paid Chara 8.5 million per year against a 39 million dollar cap.

You do understand that 8.5 million for Chara at that time is roughly the same as 17 million for Tavares in terms of percentage of the cap now?

IDC about chara now. stop bringing him up plz.