Monahan dilemma, to sign or not to sign?

[Sorinth]

It's not my plan. It's me talking about their plan and how they got there. You're not comprehending this well

Where did I say we would not try to acquire good players during transition years? I said we need to maintain our draft power for as long as we can. We can make trades like the Dach/Romanov flip.

Trade anyone older than 28? Where are you getting this BS? Where did I say that? Oh wait, because I said Suzuki at age 27 or 28 is when our contending years start? Wow, you assumed we would not have players older than him on our roster from that? .

Go somewhere else with your lack of comprehension. It's annoying and your spinning the narrative into things I didn't even say. Go argue with yourself in a mirror

Have you not argued repeatedly that we should trade Monahan because we are still in this supposed rebuild phase?

Is that the type of thing Tampa did when they re-were in their rebuild phase but still signed MSL, Brewer, and others?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Have you not argued repeatedly that we should trade Monahan because we are still in this supposed rebuild phase?

Is that the type of thing Tampa did when they re-were in their rebuild phase but still signed MSL, Brewer, and others?

We should trade Monahan if we get a 1st. And I want to sign him in the offseason. If not, we can try to trade for PLD or sign him if he reaches UFA. We should not be tied to Monahan and only Monahan as the solution behind Suzuki. These are transition years and it's likely Monahan is not with us when the contending years come. I'm not going to say not to a 1st round dart cause we want to keep him in transition years.

I really don't think you are comprehending my stance well. I want both movement during transition years and I also want to maintain high draft power through those years. It has high probability of turning us into a contender vs a prolonged playoff pretender that can't go past 1 or 2 rounds.

 

[Sorinth]

We should trade Monahan if we get a 1st. And I want to sign him in the offseason. If not, we can try to trade for PLD or sign him if he reaches UFA. We should not be tied to Monahan and only Monahan as the solution behind Suzuki. These are transition years and it's likely Monahan is not with us when the contending years come. I'm not going to say not to a 1st round dart cause we want to keep him in transition years.

I really don't think you are comprehending my stance well. I want both movement during transition years and I also want to maintain high draft power through those years. It has high probability of turning us into a contender vs a prolonged playoff pretender that can't go past 1 or 2 rounds.

Which is not what Tampa did. They didn't trade MSL and then try to re-sign him or some other replacement in the offseason in order to get extra draft power.

Tampa did the opposite of what you suggest we do.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Which is not what Tampa did. They didn't trade MSL and then try to re-sign him or some other replacement in the offseason in order to get extra draft power.

Tampa did the opposite of what you suggest we do.

You're playing the nit pick game and overlooking the main point. Did you ever consider that I want to assemble a core like them but do it better?

Tampa didn't do the opposite. MSL and Monahan are different circumstances. Keep trying and digging a lack of comprehension hole even more. Yeah, a 38/39 year old in MSL is the same as a 28 year old Monahan. Go somewhere else with your narrative twist

FYI, the Tampa and Avs narrative was about how long they took to rebuild and won cups. How can you not comprehend that? Rebuilds don't turn into contenders without transition years in this era. Transition years is where GM's get antsy and loose focus

 

[Sorinth]

You're playing the nit pick game and overlooking the main point. Did you ever consider that I want to assemble a core like them but do it better?

Tampa didn't do the opposite. MSL and Monahan are different circumstances. Keep trying and digging a lack of comprehension hole even more. Yeah, a 38/39 year old in MSL is the same as a 28 year old Monahan. Go somewhere else with your narrative twist

FYI, the Tampa and Avs narrative was about how long they took to rebuild and won cups. How can you not comprehend that? Rebuilds don't turn into contenders without transition years in this era. Transition years is where GM's get antsy and loose focus

It's not nitpicking to point out that the thing you are trying to use as proof doesn't support your argument. Yes it usually takes many years to win the cup even after drafting a star player, but that doesn't prove anything with regards to your whole 3 phase theory. In fact when we look at what those teams did we can see they didn't follow your 3 phase theory, instead they tried to compete every year and signed older players, traded picks for NHLers, etc... Those are all things you are against us doing.

And now you claim you want to do better then those teams when a couple posts ago you said it's comical to think someone can do better.

 

[HuGort]

I would try trade him bring his back next year as second line center. A risk but good scenario. If he doesn't come back here 6 million caphit bring us he'll of a player.

If he signs elsewhere I would throw 8 million x 7 years at Horvat? Or trade for Dubois.

 

[Habs Halifax]

It's not nitpicking to point out that the thing you are trying to use as proof doesn't support your argument. Yes it usually takes many years to win the cup even after drafting a star player, but that doesn't prove anything with regards to your whole 3 phase theory. In fact when we look at what those teams did we can see they didn't follow your 3 phase theory, instead they tried to compete every year and signed older players, traded picks for NHLers, etc... Those are all things you are against us doing.

And now you claim you want to do better then those teams when a couple posts ago you said it's comical to think someone can do better.

The 3 Phases is not a theory, it's reality. You're trying to nit pick dumb things like comparing a 39 year old MSL vs a 28 year old Monahan to counter it which is both dumb and a nit pick. It took 9-12 years for both the Avs and Lightning to win a cup from when guys like MacKinnon and Stamkos were drafted. They won cups when most of their core was in the 25-30 year ranges. You arguing with that is nit picking. I can't stress this enough.. It's Rebuild years, then Transition years, then Contending years. You're trying to say it's my theory but I'm telling you it's factual information. Avs and Lightning are proof.

I repeat. Transition years is the tricky area. Lots of GM's get antsy in those range of years. The best situation is we trade Monahan for futures and then re sign him in the offseason.

Yes, I prefer we do it better. It's a strategy. Deal with it with better comprehension

 

[Sorinth]

The 3 Phases is not a theory, it's reality. You're trying to nit pick dumb things like comparing a 39 year old MSL vs a 28 year old Monahan to counter it which is both dumb and a nit pick. It took 9-12 years for both the Avs and Lightning to win a cup from when guys like MacKinnon and Stamkos were drafted. They won cups when most of their core was in the 25-30 year ranges. You arguing with that is nit picking. I can't stress this enough.. It's Rebuild years, then Transition years, then Contending years. You're trying to say it's my theory but I'm telling you it's factual information. Avs and Lightning are proof.

I repeat. Transition years is the tricky area. Lots of GM's get antsy in those range of years. The best situation is we trade Monahan for futures and then re sign him in the offseason.

Yes, I prefer we do it better. It's a strategy. Deal with it with better comprehension

You can stress it as much as you want it, you can claim it to be a fact, you can even continue to use the wrong age for when they signed St Louis. None of it makes it a fact/reality/true.

 

[Habs Halifax]

You can stress it as much as you want it, you can claim it to be a fact, you can even continue to use the wrong age for when they signed St Louis. None of it makes it a fact/reality/true.

It is a fact that both Tampa and the Avs went through transition years. Pens and Blackhawks didn't though but that was years ago now. Have a good day bud. We are getting nowhere with this.

 

[salbutera]

What's comical is that you say Colorado and Tampa are proof of your plan yet neither actually followed your plan. So show me a team that actually followed your plan of trading away anyone over 28 years, show me a team that didn't try to acquire good players during their rebuild/transition years like you want us to do.

One of Gorton’s first moves after sending his infamous rebuild letter to NYR fanbase was to extend then 28-year old Kreider

 

[CHfan1]

One of Gorton’s first moves after sending his infamous rebuild letter to NYR fanbase was to extend then 28-year old Kreider

I wouldn’t say it was right after. The letter got sent in February 8, 2018, they extended Kreider 2 years later on February 24, 2020 which was after they had signed Panarin and traded for Trouba (which they gave up a 1st round pick for).

 

[salbutera]

I wouldn’t say it was right after. The letter got sent in February 8, 2018, they extended Kreider 2 years later on February 24, 2020 which was after they had signed Panarin and traded for Trouba (which they gave up a 1st round pick for).

Thanks for clarifying - NYR were vying for 2020 draft lottery, and yet still extended Kreider va dealing him at deadline to continue the rebuild / transition

 

[Habs Halifax]

I wouldn’t say it was right after. The letter got sent in February 8, 2018, they extended Kreider 2 years later on February 24, 2020 which was after they had signed Panarin and traded for Trouba (which they gave up a 1st round pick for).

Rangers rebuild is a bit unlucky in some ways. High draft power from 17-20 years but several disappointments on guys that were hyped by both Rangers fans and other fans including us.

They added Fox, Panarin, and kept Zibby and Kreider during their beginning rebuild years and early transition years. Banked on the prospects blossoming at the same time and still waiting on several of them.

Now they are in Salary cap hell but maybe there will be a window of cap space that opens up for them starting next season. Lots of RFA's to sign which should take away most of their available cap space this summer.

Interesting team to follow and monitor in terms of getting over the next hump and a consistent contender for a cup.

 

[McGees]

Rangers weren’t already saddled with Gally, Anderson, Armia and Hoffman contracts.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Rangers weren’t already saddled with Gally, Anderson, Armia and Hoffman contracts.

Anderson is on pace for 24 goals AGAIN. His contract is nowhere near a problem compared to the other three.

 

[Habs]

Anderson is on pace for 24 goals AGAIN. His contract is nowhere near a problem compared to the other three.

I agree, I keep him around without question. The hate he gets, and if he had a different last name he would not get as much. Hoffman, Drouin, Armia, Gallagher, Dadanov.. those are the real problems on this team, not Anderson.

 

[BaseballCoach]

I agree, I keep him around without question. The hate he gets, and if he had a different last name he would not get as much. Hoffman, Drouin, Armia, Gallagher, Dadanov.. those are the real problems on this team, not Anderson.

We can't have only kids and no vets.

That being said, while I think Anderson has value, I would rather keep Monahan than Anderson, in terms of role, fit, leadership, etc. Monahan is even 5 months younger.

I'd be open to moving Anderson this year (no retention) for a first and a B+ prospect.

If we can't sign Monahan to a decent contract, keep Anderson until further notice.

 

[dcyhabs]

The injury history is tough. Monahan will have value if he’s healthy at the trade deadline and it may be his peak. It’s possible that he stays healthy and justifies a long term deal but it’s a long shot.

The avs and lightning had several high picks, not just one top 10 pick. They hit on them, too. Slaf may be fine but he won’t be MacKinnon or Stamkos. Trade anyone over 25 with a return and get a pick in this draft. Targeted tanking is very effective, but the habs don’t do that.

 

[dinodebino]

No dilemma on this forum.

 

[sandviper]

Barron is young, give him time.

Sakic has made some blunders along the way.

I'm still a believer that we should've gotten a first for Lekh, but I also believe that sometimes GMs will butter up other GMs by giving them what they want. That might've been the case here.

I know the thinking at the time for Hughes (and pretty sure he still believe this) is he‘d rather a player on the cusp of being NHL ready rather than a pick. At least, this is what he said in his early interviews.

I also guess in regards to picks, Colorado’s first was going to be a late one so it had less value to him compared to Barron.

 

[Sorinth]

The injury history is tough. Monahan will have value if he’s healthy at the trade deadline and it may be his peak. It’s possible that he stays healthy and justifies a long term deal but it’s a long shot.

The avs and lightning had several high picks, not just one top 10 pick. They hit on them, too. Slaf may be fine but he won’t be MacKinnon or Stamkos. Trade anyone over 25 with a return and get a pick in this draft. Targeted tanking is very effective, but the habs don’t do that.

What evidence do you have that trading everyone over 25 is very effective? Can you point to teams that actually did that and then went on to be contenders?

 

[sandviper]

I would try trade him bring his back next year as second line center. A risk but good scenario. If he doesn't come back here 6 million caphit bring us he'll of a player.

If he signs elsewhere I would throw 8 million x 7 years at Horvat? Or trade for Dubois.

I would wait on PLD. If he really wants to be a Hab, we should be able to pursue him after 2023-2024. If he doesn’t come, which I actually don’t think he will (all these rumours is just BS to drive up value; next contract or a trade), so be it.

As for Monahan, he should be traded for sure. I’d be hesitant to wait for the TDL. I’d do it sooner rather than later.

 

[Habs]

We can't have only kids and no vets.

That being said, while I think Anderson has value, I would rather keep Monahan than Anderson, in terms of role, fit, leadership, etc. Monahan is even 5 months younger.

I'd be open to moving Anderson this year (no retention) for a first and a B+ prospect.

If we can't sign Monahan to a decent contract, keep Anderson until further notice.

Monohan is broke, i move him if I can.. those injuries never get better

 

[Gaud]

wouldnt mind a "trade then extend " type of scenario. I think he is going to ask too much though, with the season he is having. More importantly, i think he is going to ask for too long and may be too old by the time this team truly gets competitive. In his shoes, i would also look for opportunities for hte cup ASAP

 

[McGees]

Anderson is on pace for 24 goals AGAIN. His contract is nowhere near a problem compared to the other three.

I wasn’t implying he was a problem, but he is a vet with a big contract was my point when comparing to how/why Rangers signed Kreider.

Having said that Id still trade Anderson now