Monahan has been very good with the Habs. But, I will also trade him. I can accept another 1 years deal with him.
Monahan: Trade or Extend (assuming a decent season)
- Thread starter DAChampion
- Start date
Those who think Monahan will be traded and come back grovelling for a 1-year deal in Montreal are somewhat disconnected with reality, IMO. You trade Monahan to a contender and the odds are he will re-sign there on a one-year deal at 2M, rather than comeback to Montreal, if they just fall short of winning in the postseason.
I'm all for re-signing Monahan in the range of a 3-yr deal at 4.5M, if he agrees, obviously. Yet, I don't see that as a move to see Monahan contribute to an eventual Cup run in person as a Hab. The value of extending Monahan is to keep a skilled veteran around that can help the youngsters develop closer to their projected ceilings.
Nothing more, nothing less.
I never said trade him and sign him back in the summer. More like, I'm open to sign a extension with him for one more year this summer. If he does not want a 1-2 years contract. Trade him in the TDL. Signing at 4.5m for 3-4 years a injured player like Monahan is absurd.
It wasn't clear for you, but more than a few posters have suggested this farcical best of all worlds scenario.
Three years is the tilting point, IMO, for extending Monahan. Two is better and shows that you value the player more than another 1-year offer (which would be insulting if the player (finally) remained healthy on a prove yourself contract.
Three is relative job security, given the injury history, and can lower the AAV, especially on a front loaded contract that would make Monahan more easily traded in the final year(s) of his contract.
I think he's important for depth and leadership. We don't have any centers that can play top-6 in case of injuries, and, outside of Beck, I don't see any good prospects at center that will make the team in the next 2-3 years. I prefer keeping him that Dvorak.
It is not farcical. It rarely happens but if Monahan wants to play for the Habs but would like a chance to win a Cup now he can go to a contender and re sign with the Habs in the off season.
If they want to re sign him that should be done after the season anyway to see if he can stay healthy the entire year. He might decide then to go to a contender if there are offers.
It's unlikely he will re-sign with the Habs if they move him. Could be your wet dream, but let's be realistic.
It depends on whether he wants to play for the Habs or not. If he does he can have the best of both worlds. A chance to win the Cup and then return next season. It all depends on what he wants.
Spearmint Rhino
Registered User
- Sep 17, 2013
- 9,329
- 9,348
If we can’t make something of all our current prospects to compete with one more 1st rounder won’t make a difference but if Monahan can stay healthy he would take a lot of pressure off our young core and we struggle to attract any UFAs without overpaying so might as well try and keep him - assuming he can finish the season
JianYang
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2017
- 19,492
- 18,832
Even in a hypothetical situation where the habs attempt to extend monahan, I see little reason why he would want to come back.
At this stage in his career, I think it's about winning for him before his body completely breaks down. Unfortunately, montreal is not in a position to offer him that.
The deal works with montreal right now because his health makes his demand low, and Montreal is fine with trying to build him back up to extract some trade value. If monahan stays healthy and plays like he can, then both parties get what they wanted out of the project..... A trade. In monahan's case, this means a move to a contender.
HuGort
Registered User
Monahan born in '94. He's 29, be 30 next contract. His body ravished with injuries. Staticsts show players injured often more likely to be injured again.Or maybe some J-B Weld
He’s closer to 28 then 30….on a 3yr deal he’d be 32 at it’s expiration. It would be perfect IMO
It's wishful thinking to believe that the Habs will get the best of both worlds is all I am saying.It's looking at the situation through fan goggles and not considering the impact on the player of packing his bags, moving, packing his bags again and moving, likely needing to pack his bags again and move once more, all within two or three years.
Hey, if you want to believe in a longer shot...
It might well be just that.
Leon Lucius Black
Registered User
- Nov 5, 2007
- 16,025
- 6,221
If Monahan stays healthy most of the year and continues being productive, he will cash in and get a nice contract after the season.
He's been great to have around for the young guys, but this team shouldn't be giving out multi-year deals to injury prone guys soon to be in their 30s. Cash in at the deadline if he manages to stay healthy.
Dvorak can fill in as the #2C after the deadline and as #3C next year, then be traded at the deadline as rental.
He's been great to have around for the young guys, but this team shouldn't be giving out multi-year deals to injury prone guys soon to be in their 30s. Cash in at the deadline if he manages to stay healthy.
Dvorak can fill in as the #2C after the deadline and as #3C next year, then be traded at the deadline as rental.
Nico Cauzuki
Registered User
i like Moneyhands hes been a great add but this is a easy trade we are rebuilding and he hasnt been healthy in years
If he wants he can always comeback in the summer but 4 years is too long
If he wants he can always comeback in the summer but 4 years is too long
VirginiaMtlExpat
Second most interesting man in the world.
Absolutely. That notion never works. Players who are let go invariably turn the page, unless traded back to the same team, which is equally rare (and even then, Petry didn't want to play again once traded back). They are not automats. They view being traded away as a rebuke, in which case, there are 31 other teams they'd rather play for.
VirginiaMtlExpat
Second most interesting man in the world.
That depends. This team believed in him when no other team did, least of the all Calgary. He likes play for MSL, I'd also wager. If this team is close to a wild card spot, we can make the case that it is on the upswing, especially with a mobile, juggernaut defense maturing. It's not cut-and-dried.
The Gr8 Dane
L'harceleur
Redux91
I do Three bullets.
In their defenseDid I read that right? 4 years 4.5 mill?!?! And some of you guys voted for that????
Not a whole bunch of options to vote on lol
Redux91
I do Three bullets.
VirginiaMtlExpat
Second most interesting man in the world.
We would not negotiate that way of course. The thread-starter willfully gave it a biased wording, which I can see through. It works out to sign at 4x$4.5m or trade him, with no other option, which is silly. I can see Monahan coming in under that, but that too is speculative on my part.Did I read that right? 4 years 4.5 mill?!?! And some of you guys voted for that????
As I often write, it's an overused trope to simply label the guy as injury-prone, without actually trying to ascertain whether he can heal from his chronic injuries as well as prevent them from re-occuring. If he can, he is playing like the best forward on the team not named Caufield, and he is arguably more complete than the latter. He just turned 29, so he can be useful to the team if he can put the hip and groin ailments behind him, at least for the duration of a contract like that.
Patrice Bergeron had to overcome 4 concussions from 07 to 13. Bruins management could easily have cut bait like that, labeling him as injury-prone or worst still, concussion-prone. They had the good sense to stay patient with him and watch a Hall-of-Fame career bloom.
Last edited:
Yes, four is too much, but three, front-loaded, is manageable.
I'm all for trading Monahan, but not just for a late 1st round pick, if he's still healthy at the deadline.
BenchBrawl
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2010
- 31,059
- 13,989
Takeru
Registered User
- Oct 6, 2014
- 2,238
- 753
Not as clear cut as I'd have initially thought, good points brought for both scenarios.
On the one hand, I'm not a big fan of committing to a player with multiple injury history when we have such trouble icing a fully healthy lineup for more than two games of a season. Plus we already have Price to manoeuvre around cap-wise during summer before we can put him on LTIR so I'd be weary of adding another candidate to the equation. Thus anything over 3 years would be iffy to me.
On the other hand, I don't think we need another Mesar type so if that's what's in store with the return, might as well keep the guy around as he's a genuinely useful player/mentor. Or it could be another Newhook package deal so it really boils down to ultimate return which is hard to predict.
It's not a franchise defining move either way so I'd probably be ok with either option unfolding.
On the one hand, I'm not a big fan of committing to a player with multiple injury history when we have such trouble icing a fully healthy lineup for more than two games of a season. Plus we already have Price to manoeuvre around cap-wise during summer before we can put him on LTIR so I'd be weary of adding another candidate to the equation. Thus anything over 3 years would be iffy to me.
On the other hand, I don't think we need another Mesar type so if that's what's in store with the return, might as well keep the guy around as he's a genuinely useful player/mentor. Or it could be another Newhook package deal so it really boils down to ultimate return which is hard to predict.
It's not a franchise defining move either way so I'd probably be ok with either option unfolding.
That was the Dvorak contract. Also one of Eller's contracts.Did I read that right? 4 years 4.5 mill?!?! And some of you guys voted for that????
Monahan is a better player than both. I'd target 3 years, but if 4 then drop the AAV below $4M.
This is presuming Sean is a 60 point pace player or more, well into the 2nd half of the year.
