Confirmed with Link: Canadiens re-sign Andreas Martinsen

[Whitesnake]

What I love about Flynn news is that the negotiations are ongoing....What negoatiations?

- Hey Brian, it's 900k/1 year
- No
- K. Bye.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Lehkonen is waivers exempt, the team will be in Laval, I don't see anything catastrophic if he starts the season there and the other guys get a chance to show what they can do.

I didn't say it will happen, I said it's a scenario that could be used.



How is Martinsen or Flynn signing going to impact anything going forward?

If you need to send Lehkonen to the minors to make room after signing Martinsen and Flynn, you are doing something wrong.

This isn't about hoarding **** players and using guys who can be sent down without waivers to do it.

Its about playing your best guys, and Lehkonen is easily one of the top 9 forwards on the team.

Don't forget Lehkonen also has the Sweden clause in his contract. He can refuse to go to Laval. But that shouldn't be an issue. He's a better hockey player than Martinsen, Flynn, Mitchell etc... so there is no way they should be on the roster ahead of him just because of waiver rules.

 

[MXD]

Thought I read on twitter yesterday that there was a reason why the Habs re-signed Martinsen which had to do with the types of players and their experience, who had to be exposed in the upcoming draft.

Perhaps Flynn falls under this 'rule' as well?

Every team must expose at least two forwards (and one D) under contract for 17-18 (right don't suffice) who meets the 40/1,70/2 rule.

Mitchell and Martinsen meet the rule and WILL be exposed.

M.P, P.B., P.D., A.G., B.G.

That's five guys that are absolute locks to be protected (the only way they aren't protected is if they're traded). And there are quite a few players between those five players and Mitchell/Martinsen, starting with the obvious Alex Radulov if he has to be protected. If not, well, there's still Plekanec and Shaw. And even Hudon for all I care (who doesn't meet the criteria above but is otherwise not exempt).

Bottom-line : Even if we end up protecting both Plekanec and Shaw, we'd satisfy the requirements as far as exposed players are concerned. Hell, any combination of Plekanec, Shaw, Mitchell and Martinsen would work. Flynn doesn't have to be signed for that sole purpose, unless of our our players that need to be protected is traded for an exempt player, in which case we might be stuck protecting three of Plekanec, Shaw, Mitchell and Martinsen (and if it comes to that, just protect Hudon and you still have two players who meet the criteria without having to sign Flynn, or Radulov if you want to go absolutely by the book.)

 

[MXD]

Lehkonen is waivers exempt, the team will be in Laval, I don't see anything catastrophic if he starts the season there and the other guys get a chance to show what they can do.

I didn't say it will happen, I said it's a scenario that could be used.

...wat?

 

[montreal]

I'd say it's clear that CJ wants bigger players and he got them at the trade deadline. Personally I hope McCarron goes to the AHL if there's a new coach to help him work on his offensive game. I know when the Habs acquired Martinsen it was said on sportsnet or somewhere that the Habs really liked him and were likely to bring him back so not surprised with the move. He should be a solid spare forward that we can use when we face bigger teams.

 

[jaffy27]

What I love about Flynn news is that the negotiations are ongoing....What negoatiations?

- Hey Brian, it's 900k/1 year
- No
- K. Bye.

.......

 

[MXD]

What I love about Flynn news is that the negotiations are ongoing....What negoatiations?

- Hey Brian, it's 900k/1 year
- No
- K. Bye.

You're very generous with 900K.

 

[Whitesnake]

You're very generous with 900K.

This was Bergevin talking. Not me.

 

[Belial]

If you need to send Lehkonen to the minors to make room after signing Martinsen and Flynn, you are doing something wrong.

This isn't about hoarding **** players and using guys who can be sent down without waivers to do it.

Its about playing your best guys, and Lehkonen is easily one of the top 9 forwards on the team.

Don't forget Lehkonen also has the Sweden clause in his contract. He can refuse to go to Laval. But that shouldn't be an issue. He's a better hockey player than Martinsen, Flynn, Mitchell etc... so there is no way they should be on the roster ahead of him just because of waiver rules.

Clearly, I was not talking about those guys... it's about Hudon and DLR here.

 

[Andrei79]

Clearly, I was not talking about those guys... it's about Hudon and DLR here.

Doesn't help your point in any way.

 

[1909]

It makes my day to know that MB wants Flynn back with the Club...and vice versa...



Looking forward to see :

Martinsen-Mitchell-Flynn as our bottom line.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Every team must expose at least two forwards (and one D) under contract for 17-18 (right don't suffice) who meets the 40/1,70/2 rule.

Mitchell and Martinsen meet the rule and WILL be exposed.

M.P, P.B., P.D., A.G., B.G.

That's five guys that are absolute locks to be protected (the only way they aren't protected is if they're traded). And there are quite a few players between those five players and Mitchell/Martinsen, starting with the obvious Alex Radulov if he has to be protected. If not, well, there's still Plekanec and Shaw. And even Hudon for all I care (who doesn't meet the criteria above but is otherwise not exempt).

Bottom-line : Even if we end up protecting both Plekanec and Shaw, we'd satisfy the requirements as far as exposed players are concerned. Hell, any combination of Plekanec, Shaw, Mitchell and Martinsen would work. Flynn doesn't have to be signed for that sole purpose, unless of our our players that need to be protected is traded for an exempt player, in which case we might be stuck protecting three of Plekanec, Shaw, Mitchell and Martinsen (and if it comes to that, just protect Hudon and you still have two players who meet the criteria without having to sign Flynn, or Radulov if you want to go absolutely by the book.)

Mitchell and Terry meet the rule. Terry has 70 games over 2 years.

Martinsen is expansion draft exempt (only 2 years pro in North America).

 

[LastWordArmy]

Clearly, I was not talking about those guys... it's about Hudon and DLR here.

There is room for Lehkonen, Hudon, and DLR all on the roster, if those guys are not on it.

 

[MXD]

Mitchell and Terry meet the rule. Terry has 70 games over 2 years.

Martinsen is expansion draft exempt (only 2 years pro in North America).

Chris Terry isn't under contract next season though.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Chris Terry isn't under contract next season though.

Yes he is. We resigned him in April

 

[MXD]

Yes he is. We resigned him in April

Fair enough.

 

[ProspectsFanatic]

He either contributes on the 4th line or someone we don't mind scratching for long length of time or waived/sent down, where is the issue?

 

[MXD]

He either contributes on the 4th line or scratched or waived/sent down, where is the issue?

No issue with this actually.

 

[Belial]

There is room for Lehkonen, Hudon, and DLR all on the roster, if those guys are not on it.

And what if those guys are not good enough? I don't see the problem having a couple of warm bodies that can help if we have injuries or someone is struggling...

They will all get a chance to make the team during training camp and decisions will be made before the season starts.

If guys like Martinsen and Flynn are being brought back it's pretty obvious Julien is fine with those guys and he wanted them back...

 

[1909]

And what if those guys are not good enough? I don't see the problem having a couple of warm bodies that can help if we have injuries or someone is struggling...

They will all get a chance to make the team during training camp and decisions will be made before the season starts.

If guys like Martinsen and Flynn are being brought back it's pretty obvious Julien is fine with those guys and he wanted them back...

Having guys like Martinsen and Flynn back might mean:

1- No big hope on guys like McCarron and DLR to play on that 4th line; ??

2- DLR and McCarron involved in trades ?

 

[13 Black]

...wat?

Yeah...seriously

Lekhonen had 18 goals as a 20 years old rookie. There is absolutely no way that he start the year in Laval just so that guys like....DLR/Hudon/Scherbak or whoever else get a chance to showcase something. It doesn't make any sense

If the Laval guys want to show something well that's what the training camp and pre seasons games are for. You don't punish Lekhonen in that basiss even if he's waiver exempt.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

Yeah...seriously

Lekhonen had 18 goals as a 20 years old rookie. There is absolutely no way that he start the year in Laval just so that guys like....DLR/Hudon/Scherbak or whoever else get a chance to showcase something. It doesn't make any sense

If the Laval guys want to show something well that's what the training camp and pre seasons games are for. You don't punish Lekhonen in that basiss even if he's waiver exempt.

Indeed. Crazy to even suggest this as a possibility.

As for Martinsen.........I thought he was useless, but fair enough. Minimum deal, s'all good. I just hope that Bergevin does stop with this bargain 4th liner shopping after all this. Come July 1st, you either find a way to get the big boys, or you turn your focus on the youngsters in the system.

 

[montreal]

Having guys like Martinsen and Flynn back might mean:

1- No big hope on guys like McCarron and DLR to play on that 4th line; ??

2- DLR and McCarron involved in trades ?

1) Don't see why, they should be 14 forwards and we could lose 1 in the expansion draft, plus we don't know what other moves will be made. But I really think McCarron needs more time in the AHL to work on things. DLR does as well but he has to clear waivers.

2) while anyone can be traded, doubt either have the value that would be worth it to trade them as my guess is CJ wants bigger players and both fit the bill so would be surprised if moved. I'm all for trading anyone if the price is right though.

Indeed. Crazy to even suggest this as a possibility.

As for Martinsen.........I thought he was useless, but fair enough. Minimum deal, s'all good. I just hope that Bergevin does stop with this bargain 4th liner shopping after all this. Come July 1st, you either find a way to get the big boys, or you turn your focus on the youngsters in the system.

agreed on Lehkonen. When he was struggling badly to produce, I thought it wouldn't hurt to have him sit out a game or two but to suggest he will be sent to the AHL is just crazy.

Martinsen to me showed both, he looked useless at times but other times I saw flashes of a big body that likes to hit and moves well enough with some offense. This board overreacts to everything the Habs have ever done and likely will ever do, sometimes they end up being right but more often then not they are wrong but that doesn't stop the mob mentality from banging the drum night and day about how bad a move xxx is. In the end this is just a small move that has almost zero impact. Clearly someone in the organization likes him and thinks he can help us, I'll say this about management, they do seem good at finding lesser known players and getting something out of them while getting rid of players that had this board up in arms only to see said player go on to do nothing. Maybe Ghetto breaks that trend, I thought Kristo would have been the one they regretted moving on from but so far they have been pretty good at knowing who to walk away from.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

Martinsen to me showed both, he looked useless at times but other times I saw flashes of a big body that likes to hit and moves well enough with some offense. This board overreacts to everything the Habs have ever done and likely will ever do, sometimes they end up being right but more often then not they are wrong but that doesn't stop the mob mentality from banging the drum night and day about how bad a move xxx is. In the end this is just a small move that has almost zero impact. Clearly someone in the organization likes him and thinks he can help us, I'll say this about management, they do seem good at finding lesser known players and getting something out of them while getting rid of players that had this board up in arms only to see said player go on to do nothing. Maybe Ghetto breaks that trend, I thought Kristo would have been the one they regretted moving on from but so far they have been pretty good at knowing who to walk away from.

I'm not really sure I see the offense part like you do, but to each their own. We shall see how he does next year; I had the same general opinion of him as I did the younger Stefan Matteau, who only seemed like a viable NHL lineup option if you have injuries and need emergency bodies on the ice.

Come April, he better not be in the lineup anymore is essentially what I'm saying; otherwise, this team will be in serious trouble come playoff time when every line needs to contribute, even offensively.

Not really mad at the resigning, just hope that the long delayed reinforcements from the farm finally arrive......and I also hope Flynn is not in their plans whatsoever at this point, beyond some housekeeping factors I might not be aware of when it comes to expansion.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Still people scratching their heads over this, it seems. You guys know that signing these guys doesn't mean they're etched in stone for the lineup next year without NTCs, right? Veteran depth already familiar with your systems isn't exactly worthless stuff to bring into camp. And furthermore, that what they sign for definitely impacts what they can be traded for at any point in the future if someone beats them out next year?

It's important to get these deals done, and done cheap. The sooner the better sometimes, even. If there's no direct reason NOT to bring them back (ex: salary, term, or destination demands), you don't put them on the back burner all summer as if they're unimportant if you can help it. You want motivated, not DE-motivated, vets pushing these guys in the fall. These aren't just video game characters.