Will habs ever be successful if they keep Price/Weber?

WinterLion

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
5,251
5,233
Stop hoping and start assessing.

He’s given no previous indication that he’s learnt anything.


Yeah but he is not going anywhere... he will be the GM for the next 3 years minimum. That's how the Molson's work. That's how they always have. Don't kid yourself.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,249
3,411
Edmonton, Alberta
Lol why should we give him credit for failing to keep a valuable asset under team control? Radulov even did the work for him: he rejected a 2 year offer from Detroit, and accepted a 1 year offer from Bergevin when Bergy refused (Bergy's words) to do the smart thing, and sign Radulov for 2 years.

Bergevin gave Radulov a no-strings attached audition for the rest of the league, and then told him to ''take it or leave it'' afterwards. Sorry, but he's getting the credit he deserves on the Radulov dossier.
People bitch about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31. I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs this year and they're a better team than the Habs. Next year he'll just be another year older.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scrubadam

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
People ***** about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31. I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs this year and they're a better team than the Habs. Next year he'll just be another year older.

I don't really see how this contradicts the point that he should've just signed him for 2 years to begin with.
 

Mario Lemieux fan 66

Registered User
Nov 2, 2012
1,927
406
People ***** about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31. I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs this year and they're a better team than the Habs. Next year he'll just be another year older.

You don't sign Price for 8 years and 10.5 millions/year with a NTC if your plan is to rebuild the team. So you go for it while Price and Weber are not too old. If that was the plan, than signing Radulov and Markov were obvious signing.

Bergevin choose to not go for it and not too rebuild. So the team will continue to have no direction as long as clueless Bergevin is in charge.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,249
3,411
Edmonton, Alberta
I don't really see how this contradicts the point that he should've just signed him for 2 years to begin with.
The term length is a separate issue. For what he was being paid a 2 year deal wouldn't have been out of line, although I think we'd have still missed the playoffs this season and likely not re-signed Radulov this summer so the net effect would have been the same.
 

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
The term length is a separate issue. For what he was being paid a 2 year deal wouldn't have been out of line, although I think we'd have still missed the playoffs this season and likely not re-signed Radulov this summer so the net effect would have been the same.

It's not really a separate issue. Radulov was only being negotiated with because Bergevin put himself in that situation, and for no reason at all. Bergevin then went on to tell the biggest UFA ticket to ''take it or leave it.''
 

Ezpz

No mad pls
Apr 16, 2013
14,768
10,801
Nope. We have not even two pieces of an elite core anymore. We had a great thing 6 years ago in Subban, Price and Patches and complimented them with absolutely nothing in that time. Drafting and developing has been pitiful. Pro scouting has been league worst by far. No matter how you shuffle the deck Bergevin isn't going to play his way out. This team is done. Trade everyone that has experience losing here. Bring in some good vets and get rid of our garbage ones. Need to throw out guys like Chucky too who we already ruined and aren't going to stay here when they hit UFA. God this roster sucks. Flip Patches, Chucky, Byron or anyone else that has value for futures. Shaw is so god damn bad we couldn't get something useful even at 50% retained. Who the hell pays long term 4 mil for a third liner? How the hell did Shaw get term without giving up dollars? MB is the worst negotiator I've seen in my life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mariolemieux66

HockeyDBspecialist

Habs 2019 cup champ
Jan 30, 2018
6,000
3,386
Montreal
I posted on a Canes post, but what would, we fans, think about that line up

Zadina/Tavares/Gallagher
Drouin/Rask/Galchenyuk
Lehkonen/Danault/Sherbak
Deslaurier/De la Rose/Carr

Hanifin/Weber
Mete/Petry
Alzner/Juulsen

it's based on the trade below:
To Hurricanes:
- Pacioretty ( let's say here that the trade is based ONLY if Pac signs right away with the canes)
- Shaw+ Shlemko or Benn

To Montreal:
- Hanifin
- Rask
 

Ezpz

No mad pls
Apr 16, 2013
14,768
10,801
We dump 8 mil including Patches who is due for a giant raise and take back 5 mil from a budget team who is offering low six figures for a GM?
 

Captain Mountain

Formerly Captain Wolverine
Jun 6, 2010
20,341
13,876
Perhaps with different management. There are probably a lot of opportunities out there to fill out the roster with undervalued guys that haven't been given the shot they deserve. The FO isn't equipped to identify those guys though.
 

JohnnyB11

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
1,659
96
Saint John, NB
People ***** about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31. I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs this year and they're a better team than the Habs. Next year he'll just be another year older.
Bingo. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of the hard core MB hatred. Oops, now I’ve been labelled as an MB sympathizer. Off with my head I guess?
 

JohnnyB11

Registered User
Jul 14, 2003
1,659
96
Saint John, NB
And in what way would things be different now? I'm just not sure what you're trying to give Bergevin credit for.

In order to win anything, you have to gamble something. Bergy was unwilling to gamble a single extra year, and unsurprisingly, won nothing. You have to give yourself the opportunity to reap the rewards when you're right.
Your hatred for MB blinds you to the fact that signing Radulov was a good move. Hindsight shows he should have signed him longer, and it’s unfortunate Rads got away, but how you can’t see that Radulov had a successful season in Montreal and thus his signing was a good move seems like a personal problem which I can’t help you with.
 

groovejuice

Without deviation progress is not possible
Jun 27, 2011
19,277
18,222
Calgary
Your hatred for MB blinds you to the fact that signing Radulov was a good move. Hindsight shows he should have signed him longer, and it’s unfortunate Rads got away, but how you can’t see that Radulov had a successful season in Montreal and thus his signing was a good move seems like a personal problem which I can’t help you with.

Radulov was the potential third strike for Bergevin. He swung hard and missed on both Lucic and Perron first. They were his priorities before Radu. Neither of these guys are superior to Radulov yet Bergevin had to "settle" for him.

Pure luck that we got Radulov instead of 6 years of Lucic. This was not a coup. It was a fortuitous result to a very poor plan.

Losing him after one season (among other absurdities and dismal failures) is what put Bergevin at the SI GM ranking of Disaster Artist. Well deserved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grate n Colorful Oz

Grate n Colorful Oz

Hutson Hawk
Jun 12, 2007
35,310
32,163
Hockey Mecca
People ***** about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31.

1. Who are those people? Would they happen to be made of straw?

2. You try to equate Weber and Radulov's contracts as "big money" and "term" so it sounds like those two players have similar situations. But they aren't. Weber takes 20% more on the cap until he's 39, compared to Radu's 36. 35+ is the age at which a huge dropoff is expected and highly probable. So on top of a strawman, you use a false representation, twice, because that's also actually what people **** about when it comes to Weber. He ain't taking close to 6 mil on the cap, no, it's 8 mil. And the term is far worst.

3. In all probability, Radulov will give better ROI than Weber.


I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs t

McDavid didnt for the Oilers either. Guess they shouldn't have re-signed him. What's the point really.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
People ***** about how it's stupid to be paying big money and term for Weber because he's 32, but the same people think it was perfectly okay to pay big money and term for Radulov, who is already 31. I get how our hatred for Bergevin is all consuming but let's be fair. Radulov didn't get the Stars into the playoffs this year and they're a better team than the Habs. Next year he'll just be another year older.
You seem to be confusing a bunch of things together.

1) People didn't think it's stupid to pay Weber because he's 32, they thinks it's completely stupid to have paid PK Subban, a younger and arguably better Dman, for him in the process.
Nobody would have had a problem if we signed Weber to an 8 year deal at 7M had we retained Subban.
The big problem is how we gave up a younger and arguably better asset.

2) People didn't mind re-signing Radulov because a) he was a very key component of our offense, and b) the idea is to add to the team, not substract. We already had issues scoring, we just traded our only blue chip prospect for Drouin, letting Radulov go at that point accomplishes jack crap. If we are trading away younger assets for older ones, well then commit all the way.

Radulov didn't get the Stars into the POs..correct. So f***ing what? The length of stupid arguments some people go to here is astonishing. Neither did Tyler Seguin or Jamie Benn, I guess having them wouldn't be good for us...:facepalm:

The biggest problem with Bergevin is and has always been his failure to seriously commit to any specific direction. Rebuild through draft? Well...not really...he mostly just kept his picks. Focus on development? Again...not really...terrible hires, nothing to really show for after 6 years. Focus on building the team through trades and free agents? Nope...mostly 1 year deals and low risk trades/signings, his two biggest trades Weber and Drouin, happened over the past 2 years only and could very easily end up being major fails.

So that's what people have a problem with. His complete lack of planning, vision, and structure.
Having a 32yo Weber, that could be totally fine, or it could be completely stupid, it all depends on the context. As it stands, it's f***ing stupid.
Hope this clears up your confusion.
 

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
Your hatred for MB blinds you to the fact that signing Radulov was a good move. Hindsight shows he should have signed him longer, and it’s unfortunate Rads got away, but how you can’t see that Radulov had a successful season in Montreal and thus his signing was a good move seems like a personal problem which I can’t help you with.

Yeah, sounds like you don't have much of an argument, so now you're resorting to a personal attack.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
Well, signing Radulov till he was 36 years old is not the same as b*tching about Weber being signed (for more) till he's 41.....

Weber is signed till 40 and there is a high probability he don't play the age 38, 39, 40 years due to only making $1M. His contract was structured that way.

Not worried about Weber. He has shown no signs of decline. His age 30+ stats are on par or better than his career stats. I think because of who he was traded for, people are waiting for him to fall. It's not how we should treat our players. And I'm not saying you in particular are treating him this way.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: c_robio

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
The Habs need to rebuild properly.

Weber likely has good value, and might yield a pair of 1st round draft picks.

Price probably has null trade value, but he has negative value to the Habs.
 

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
Weber is signed till 40 and there is a high probability he don't play the age 38, 39, 40 years due to only making $1M. His contract was structured that way.

If Weber is as big a warrior as his defenders make him out to be, then he'll keep playing hockey as long as he can.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
If Weber is as big a warrior as his defenders make him out to be, then he'll keep playing hockey as long as he can.

His game was never build on speed. It's all about playing smart and feeding of his partner. And scoring goals. I don't see this changing anytime soon. And I think it depends on how our roster looks (if he is still with us) at age 37. That's when he starts thinking about retirement. $3M at age 37 and then $1M from age 38-40.

So, Count on Weber being who he is for the next 4 or 5 years. Age 33-36/37. Not worried about him as much as I am with Price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beer and Chips

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->