Player Discussion The Slaf Thread - Parabolic Growth Edition

[Habssince89]

No trust me I don't have the mindset of 'that Suzuki cap is the cap forever' I just mean it as it's definitely a little 'hack' HuGo know they can use for a few years, they 'used it' with CC and I believe they will use it juuuuust one more time when it comes to Slaf
Who is obviously a team first guy and clearly reveres Nick for who he is at the moment

This is also why I don't see an 8 year deal for Slaf, as you said it's different for him
I see a 4-5 year 7M deal
And after that, depending on what level of stardom he has hopefully reached
Then he will get 8+Mill yes, only logical

Slafkovsky can also make a shit ton of $$$ being a Euro Star playing for the Habs. I bet you he'll have some status in Europe, and if he becomes a true star I have no doubt that the NHL will use him to promote themselves in eastern europe.

 

[Team_Spirit]

 

[Egresch]

My safe range for Slaf is 50-70 pts range and I see it going up/down season/season.

I guess you do not know Slaf. I watch him few years and this guy does not look back. He was 50 pts player this season, his goal was to be top 6 player in NHL. Instead, he is a star in Montreal, now the next stage is a NHL star and he will make it. Probably not next season, but give him 2-3 years and he will be there.

 

[Treal]

Here's a cool little lighthearted tidbit since it's the offseason. Yesterday, I was watching a movie with my wife and noticed that this actor (Nicholas Galitzine) looks eerily like Slaf. Pretty sure, he could play him in his autobiographical movie . Am I the only one who sees the resemblance?

 

[JoelWarlord]

Because I feel like if you bridge him at a time when cap grows to $92M+, the cost for a top 6 winger goes from $7M to $9M in a heartbeat. So a 60 pts forward today vs a 60 pts in 3 years time grows by $2M+. Pay the top 6F rate now is what I say.

I guess but again if I didn't think he was a top line guy and thought his range will be more like 50-70P from year to year I wouldn't want to give him 8 years in the first place unless the number was closer to 6.

I'm not arguing that I would rather spend 8.25 or 8.5 but if that's what it costs that's fine, and it's a lower cap% than Suzuki's deal was.

If we were still in Covid Flat cap years, I'd have no problem with bridge contract and letting him play out his last ELC year. However, we are at a critical point of cap increases to come.

Of course, but this is why his agent may advise Slafkovsky not to accept an 8 year deal at 7.5 when the cap will be 92M before he plays a game on that 8 year contract. If he does that's excellent news for us, but I'm not going to nickle and dime with him over 500k because Suzuki signed a front loaded deal in 2021.

Granted I think we just have quite different perceptions of this player in general.

So he passes Suzuki or does Suzuki go to 80-90 pts range? Personally, I don't see Slaf becoming more valuable than Suzuki. Do you see B Tkachuk in Slaf in terms of where he maxes out at?

I would be pretty disappointed if Slafkovsky does not become a more valuable player than Suzuki. In my opinion for that to be the case, Suzuki will need to have another significant growth year or we're in trouble long term with this build.

I think B. Tkachuk is kinda overrated and I think Slafkovsky's ceiling is higher. I think Slafkovsky has a good shot at getting to and surpassing B. Tkachuk that level of play because he doesn't necessarily need to match him in point totals as Slafkovsky's all around and two-way game should be stronger than Tkachuk.

 

[Pomee]

 

[Habs Halifax]

I guess you do not know Slaf. I watch him few years and this guy does not look back. He was 50 pts player this season, his goal was to be top 6 player in NHL. Instead, he is a star in Montreal, now the next stage is a NHL star and he will make it. Probably not next season, but give him 2-3 years and he will be there.

I know and watched him just like you. Safe range is 50-70 pts and I stand firm on that. He's on a good track but none of us know where he maxes out at.

 

[Scriptor]

I know and watched him just like you. Safe range is 50-70 pts and I stand firm on that. He's on a good track but none of us know where he maxes out at.

Where Slafkovsky maxes out will depend on the skilled depth that lines up behind him on the team roster. The same goes for Suzuki and Caufield, even if Suzuki has shown consistent growth despite an injury plagued team that hasn't provided a genuine 2nd line long term to support him in the last few years.

Without a top-9 that can score more than we have seen lately, the Canfield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky line will be good, but won't be great.

Montreal needs some luck on the injury front (Dach and Newhook) and needs to inject some real offensive talent (without sacrificing too much D) up front.

Before that translates into the actual NHL lineup, we are still couple of years away, at best, short of seeing some cracklin' for Macklin later tonight.

Hopefully,Hughes adds at least one element at a time and we see a 2nd line of, barring winning the Celebrini lottery:

Newhook - Dach - Hughes Acquisition (however it is done)

-OR-

Hughes Acquisition (however it is done - Dach - Roy


as a second line to support Suzuki's line.

I prefer developing Roy with Dach and an NHL-level acquisition that can have an immediate impact because new hook would help pivot a quality 3rd line for a healthy top-9at the same time.

IMO, Montreal does not have an elite top line, or top-6 in the making (yet) tone a two-line offensive team. We will need to rely on the scoring depth of our top-9 and the strength of our future D-Corps to make headway in the playoffs, eventually.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Where Slafkovsky maxes out will depend on the skilled depth that lines up behind him on the team roster. The same goes for Suzuki and Caufield, even if Suzuki has shown consistent growth despite an injury plagued team that hasn't provided a genuine 2nd line long term to support him in the last few years.

Without a top-9 that can score more than we have seen lately, the Canfield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky line will be good, but won't be great.

Montreal needs some luck on the injury front (Dach and Newhook) and needs to inject some real offensive talent (without sacrificing too much D) up front.

Before that translates into the actual NHL lineup, we are still couple of years away, at best, short of seeing some cracklin' for Macklin later tonight.

Hopefully,Hughes adds at least one element at a time and we see a 2nd line of, barring winning the Celebrini lottery:

Newhook - Dach - Hughes Acquisition (however it is done)

-OR-

Hughes Acquisition (however it is done - Dach - Roy


as a second line to support Suzuki's line.

I prefer developing Roy with Dach and an NHL-level acquisition that can have an immediate impact because new hook would help pivot a quality 3rd line for a healthy top-9at the same time.

IMO, Montreal does not have an elite top line, or top-6 in the making (yet) tone a two-line offensive team. We will need to rely on the scoring depth of our top-9 and the strength of our future D-Corps to make headway in the playoffs, eventually.

We got lucky with adding Dach for Romanov IMO. We need another hit like this on the trade front. We have the assets but we should still be patient. Don't force a bad deal because we are looking to make a deal (kind of thing).

Man, Celebrini would be nice. We will find out shortly.

With Slaf, I am just as high on him as others. Same with Hutson and others coming. I just prefer to predict safe bets vs overly pumped up inflation.

 

[Jabba11]

Here's a cool little lighthearted tidbit since it's the offseason. Yesterday, I was watching a movie with my wife and noticed that this actor (Nicholas Galitzine) looks eerily like Slaf. Pretty sure, he could play him in his autobiographical movie . Am I the only one who sees the resemblance?

So you’re telling us you made your wife watch the romcom/drama movie with Anne Hathaway and this stud on Amazon Prime?

 

[Scriptor]

We got lucky with adding Dach for Romanov IMO. We need another hit like this on the trade front. We have the assets but we should still be patient. Don't force a bad deal because we are looking to make a deal (kind of thing).

Man, Celebrini would be nice. We will find out shortly.

With Slaf, I am just as high on him as others. Same with Hutson and others coming. I just prefer to predict safe bets vs overly pumped up inflation.

We need another hit like this on the trade front (Dach for Romanov + 3rd Rounder).

I agree. However, not in a hit or miss approach where we target another underperforming player who has been repeatedly injured, hoping for some magical turnaround in a new location.

As you say, we have the assets.

At this point, we should be targeting already established talent, not a project.

We want to go into next season knowing that the new acquisition up front can help players already on our roster progress, whether it be in support of our first line on a second line, or assisting the development of Dach, Newhook, Roy, etc..

 

[Treal]

So you’re telling us you made your wife watch the romcom/drama movie with Anne Hathaway and this stud on Amazon Prime?

I gotta let her have a few wins after subjecting her to watch night after night of bad Canadiens hockey

 

[Habs Halifax]

We need another hit like this on the trade front (Dach for Romanov + 3rd Rounder).

I agree. However, not in a hit or miss approach where we target another underperforming player who has been repeatedly injured, hoping for some magical turnaround in a new location.

As you say, we have the assets.

At this point, we should be targeting already established talent, not a project.

We want to go into next season knowing that the new acquisition up front can help players already on our roster progress, whether it be in support of our first line on a second line, or assisting the development of Dach, Newhook, Roy, etc..

At this point, we should be targeting already established talent, not a project.

100% agree on the bold part. Why would we target more guys that are not that much better than J Roy? Why add more unproven middle 6F to this group of forwards? Pretty sure Hughes is after someone around Suzuki or Caufield's age and is proven.

Zegras fits in terms of already being a proven 60 pts forward at a young age. Not the gritty type with size (like Dach) but is that player with both proven offensive skill and size available?

 

[KevSkillz4]

Sooo goood with Slovakia. His passing ability is unreal!

 

[NotProkofievian]

Well, looks like I lost that f***in bet. Proko slaf jersey pic looms!

 

[Scriptor]

At this point, we should be targeting already established talent, not a project.

100% agree on the bold part. Why would we target more guys that are not that much better than J Roy? Why add more unproven middle 6F to this group of forwards? Pretty sure Hughes is after someone around Suzuki or Caufield's age and is proven.

Zegras fits in terms of already being a proven 60 pts forward at a young age. Not the gritty type with size (like Dach) but is that player with both proven offensive skill and size available?

but is that player with both proven offensive skill and size available?

That's a good question. Every team is looking for that type of player. There'd have to be something underneath it all for such a player to be available.

Problems outside the rink?
Problems within the room?
Problems with the head coach philosophy?

Basically, problems.

However, there is a difference between a prospect with upside and a prospect that is underperforming in regards to that upside as a trade target.

We'd need to target a team in the middle of a Cup window that would be willing to give serious upside and future production in the form of a bluechip prospect for a win now addition to their roster.

The only veteran that we have with such value is Matheson, IMO, but, alone, that's not enough value for such a bluechip forward prospect.

Would adding the WIN 1st rounder and the CAL first rounder, compensate for the missing value in Matheson?

However, I don't have the resources -- or the access to GMs -- to establish who could be available that fits the description in exchange for a top-4, offensively productive veteran PMD + +.

 

[Habs Halifax]

but is that player with both proven offensive skill and size available?

That's a good question. Every team is looking for that type of player. There'd have to be something underneath it all for such a player to be available.

Problems outside the rink?
Problems within the room?
Problems with the head coach philosophy?

Basically, problems.

However, there is a difference between a prospect with upside and a prospect that is underperforming in regards to that upside as a trade target.

We'd need to target a team in the middle of a Cup window that would be willing to give serious upside and future production in the form of a bluechip prospect for a win now addition to their roster.

The only veteran that we have with such value is Matheson, IMO, but, alone, that's not enough value for such a bluechip forward prospect.

Would adding the WIN 1st rounder and the CAL first rounder, compensate for the missing value in Matheson?

However, I don't have the resources -- or the access to GMs -- to establish who could be available that fits the description in exchange for a top-4, offensively productive veteran PMD + +.

It's going to be very difficult to steal another Dach away from another team IMO. Proven at both offensive skill and with size? Think about it... I think we are on the same page with the difficulty

 

[Scriptor]

It's going to be very difficult to steal another Dach away from another team IMO. Proven at both offensive skill and with size? Think about it.

Might find a tanking team that goes all in for the next phenom, McKenna? That's how we got Dach in the first place.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Might find a tanking team that goes all in for the next phenom, McKenna? That's how we got Dach in the first place.

Exact thought ran though my mind but who is that team?

 

[BaseballCoach]

but is that player with both proven offensive skill and size available?

That's a good question. Every team is looking for that type of player. There'd have to be something underneath it all for such a player to be available.

Problems outside the rink?
Problems within the room?
Problems with the head coach philosophy?

Basically, problems.

However, there is a difference between a prospect with upside and a prospect that is underperforming in regards to that upside as a trade target.

We'd need to target a team in the middle of a Cup window that would be willing to give serious upside and future production in the form of a bluechip prospect for a win now addition to their roster.

The only veteran that we have with such value is Matheson, IMO, but, alone, that's not enough value for such a bluechip forward prospect.

Would adding the WIN 1st rounder and the CAL first rounder, compensate for the missing value in Matheson?

However, I don't have the resources -- or the access to GMs -- to establish who could be available that fits the description in exchange for a top-4, offensively productive veteran PMD + +.

Matheson is worth two firsts or equivalent, so you seem to be suggesting to trade four first rounders for a player with potential that is dispaying 'problems' of some kind.

I can't see Hughes doing that for anyone but a sure-fire home run.

 

[KevSkillz4]

What a goal!!!

 

[HomaridII]

 

[WeThreeKings]

Disgusting.

 

[417]

Well, looks like I lost that f***in bet. Proko slaf jersey pic looms!

My man!

How you been?

 

[Hannibal]

Jesus.