Out of town thread: Where the grass is ALWAYS greener!

[Runner77]

So you're going after moms now? Talk like that in the real world would get you a down right whooping! Hope the mods take notice of this cancerous poster.

417 has been played the Mom card more than once today. He even shot out a "mamma mia" in another post. The gall.

 

[417]

He would be on the 1st line playing with players he plays well with, and Lekhonen would drop to a line that he could work better with(hasn't worked at all on the 1st line). This alone would improve the offense.

What? It would add a few more goals than we currently have?

OK...sure.

Still a bottom-third-to-middle-of-the-pack offense IMO.

Neither of us can know for sure, I respect your opinion, but I respectfully disagree.

 

[Censored Toad]

It could potentially go to a number of other options as well...

Tavares is a pipe dream, but there are legitimate and available targets that could help us right now, more than I think Radulov would.

I think a Michael Backlund would help this team a hell of a lot more than Radulov would.

Just an example

Can you provide a few more?

Also why are we not going after said player/players with all this capspace?

I mean thats why we have it, why not use it?

 

[Runner77]

I love how Bergevin admits that his only plan was to resign Radulov, but people are happy because of the extra cap space that could POTENTIALLY go to Tavares.

If Radulov was his only plan, I couldn't tell from the way he handled his negotiations. He clearly bluffed and had no back-up plan. The resulting cap room is not the result of some intended master plan. Teams that need cap room always find ways to manufacture it. High revenue teams like the Habs don't typically carry it into a season, for a reason. So, it's a testament to the GM's failings, more than anything else.

 

[417]

Can you provide a few more?

Also why are we not going after said player/players with all this capspace?

I mean thats why we have it, why not use it?

I have several times and really, it just drags the conversation down into comparing Radulov to other players and that's not what I want to do.

Do I think Radulov is better than Backlund, in a vacuum, absolutely.

But we have a much BIGGER need for a center, than we do a playmaking winger.

So to me, the impact Backlund would have ON THIS TEAM, would be greater than the one Radulov could provide.\

Imagine no more 16-18 mins of Plekanec dumping the puck...we'd actually have another center other than Drouin who teams have to worry about.

We'd then be able to push Danault down in a #3 role.

That, IMO, has a greater net benefit...then adding Radulov to this same lineup and maxing out our capspace handcuffing us even more than we currently are.

 

[le_sean]

Cap space is a commodity, but only if you have to have something to use it on. Right now all we're arguing about is a single long-shot a year after the fact. Every other outcome makes not signing Radulov a failure (leaving all the other arguments for why the rest of his moves just don't make any sense). This is not a compelling argument against signing Radulov.

Fair enough. I saw a player that was tired after 50 games and is 31. If it would take $7m per year to sign him, I’d be wary as well. But if they are willing to go to 6.25, then 7 was doable.

 

[MaxDummy]

I have several times and really, it just drags the conversation down into comparing Radulov to other players and that's not what I want to do.

Do I think Radulov is better than Backlund, in a vacuum, absolutely.

But we have a much BIGGER need for a center, than we do a playmaking winger.

So to me, the impact Backlund would have ON THIS TEAM, would be greater than the one Radulov could provide.\

Imagine no more 16-18 mins of Plekanec dumping the puck...we'd actually have another center other than Drouin who teams have to worry about.

We'd then be able to push Danault down in a #3 role.

That, IMO, has a greater net benefit...then adding Radulov to this same lineup and maxing out our capspace handcuffing us even more than we currently are.

Byron - Galchenyuk - Radulov

There ya go. 50-60 points center by adding Radulov.
And Danault pushed to 3C

 

[Andy]

Fair enough. I saw a player that was tired after 50 games and is 31. If it would take $7m per year to sign him, I’d be wary as well. But if they are willing to go to 6.25, then 7 was doable.

What player - that isn't Crosby, Malkin, McDavid - doesn't have periods throughout the season where they slow down? The knock you direct towards Radulov can be directed towards almost any player in the league that isn't a generational talent.

Radulov is better than any forward on the team not named Drouin....and even at that, it's debatable whether Drouin has a larger impact on the ice.

Lastly, when you pay guys like Alzner and Shaw in the 4 million dollar range, you should not be afraid at bringing in Radulov at the 6-7 million dollar range after what he showed what he was capable of.

 

[Captain Mountain]

What player - that isn't Crosby, Malkin, McDavid - doesn't have periods throughout the season where they slow down?

Radulov is better than any forward on the team not names Drouin....and even at that, it's debatable whether Drouin has a larger impact on the ice.

Crosby went on an 11 game run this year with no goals 3 assists, every player has peaks and valleys.

 

[MaxDummy]

and maxing out our capspace handcuffing us even more than we currently are.

Yeah we are so handcuffed

 

[417]

Byron - Galchenyuk - Radulov

There ya go. 50-60 points center by adding Radulov.
And Danault pushed to 3C

You may or may not be aware...but CJ doesn't think Galchenyuk is a center.

 

[417]

Yeah we are so handcuffed

Add whatever it would of cost to re-sign Radulov...say 7M.

How much cap space do we have left to address the following needs

- top 6C
- top 4D

??

Look, I don't know why this is so contentious...

Some of you think Radulov would singlehandedly change the fortunes of this team...I disagree.

I'd rather the GM get off his *** and acquire a Backlund & a DeHaan (just an example), then spend 35M over the next 5yrs to re-sign Radulov.

Give me

Galchenyuk-Drouin-Gallagher
Pacioretty-Backlund-Shaw
Byron-Danault-Lehkonen
Hudon-XXXX-XXXX

DeHaan-Weber
Alzner-Petry
XXXX-XXXX

over

What we currently have + Radulov.

That is MY preference...you're just going to have to accept that, just as I have accepted your point of view

 

[The Great Weal]

You may or may not be aware...but CJ doesn't think Galchenyuk is a center.

Galchenyuk-Drouin-Radulov. Yeah I'm sure Radulov would be a total non factor.

 

[G0bias]

I have several times and really, it just drags the conversation down into comparing Radulov to other players and that's not what I want to do.

Do I think Radulov is better than Backlund, in a vacuum, absolutely.

But we have a much BIGGER need for a center, than we do a playmaking winger.

So to me, the impact Backlund would have ON THIS TEAM, would be greater than the one Radulov could provide.\

Imagine no more 16-18 mins of Plekanec dumping the puck...we'd actually have another center other than Drouin who teams have to worry about.

We'd then be able to push Danault down in a #3 role.

That, IMO, has a greater net benefit...then adding Radulov to this same lineup and maxing out our capspace handcuffing us even more than we currently are.

Retaining Radulov at 7 per still leaves us with give or take 1.5 to 2M in wiggle room-- there'd be no need to sign Hemsky, if there even was one.

The most important thing to consider is the fact his presence opens up trading options in Pacioretty -something the team currently can't afford if the idea is to go all in now- for a better C option. You not only end up keeping a guy of Radulov's skillset on the wing but also gain a much better center line by moving Pacioretty (or Galchenyuk or package of Lehkonen,Gallagher etc).

That to me has a greater net benefit than having our current team with Pacioretty and a center of Backlund's caliber.

 

[417]

Galchenyuk-Drouin-Radulov. Yeah I'm sure Radulov would be a total non factor.

I'm sure that would also be a fun line to watch...I don't deny that.

I still don't think it cures what ails the Habs. It still doesn't prevent teams from loading up to stop that line.

I think you're more interested in arguing with me, than really understanding my point of view. I think I've gone out of my way, several times now, to validate yours and others point of view.

Perhaps time to extend the same courtesy...or else, this 'debate' will continue to degenerate.

 

[le_sean]

What player - that isn't Crosby, Malkin, McDavid - doesn't have periods throughout the season where they slow down? The knock you direct towards Radulov can be directed towards almost any player in the league that isn't a generational talent.

Radulov is better than any forward on the team not named Drouin....and even at that, it's debatable whether Drouin has a larger impact on the ice.

Lastly, when you pay guys like Alzner and Shaw in the 4 million dollar range, you should not be afraid at bringing in Radulov at the 6-7 million dollar range after what he showed what he was capable of.

What you’re alluding to is that players go stretches with lower productivity. That’s obvious.

What I’m alluding to is him not playing at all the same way as he did the first half of the season. Physical, backchecking. He was gassed.

 

[417]

Retaining Radulov at 7 per still leaves us with give or take 1.5 to 2M in wiggle room-- there'd be no need to sign Hemsky, if there even was one.

Fair point

Add that to the fact his presence opens up trading options in Pacioretty -something the team currently can't afford if the idea is to go all in now- for a better C option.
You not only end up having a guy of Radulov's skillset on the wing but also a much better center line.

I don't see how trading Pacioretty and retaining Radulov, on a team starved for goals, makes us better.

That to me has a greater net benefit than having our current team with Pacioretty and a center of Backlund's caliber.

Well I respectfully disagree...we're both spitballing here.

What makes your opinion more valid than mine?

 

[MaxDummy]

Add whatever it would of cost to re-sign Radulov...say 7M.

How much cap space do we have left to address the following needs

- top 6C
- top 4D

??

Look, I don't know why this is so contentious...

Some of you think Radulov would singlehandedly change the fortunes of this team...I disagree.

I'd rather the GM get off his *** and acquire a Backlund & a DeHaan (just an example), then spend 35M over the next 5yrs to re-sign Radulov.

Give me

Galchenyuk-Drouin-Gallagher
Pacioretty-Backlund-Shaw
Byron-Danault-Lehkonen
Hudon-XXXX-XXXX

DeHaan-Weber
Alzner-Petry
XXXX-XXXX

over

What we currently have + Radulov.

That is MY preference...you're just going to have to accept that, just as I have accepted your point of view

Dehaan and Backlund will cost almost 10 millions as UFA, and this is IF we can sign both.. Anyways.

 

[The Great Weal]

I'm sure that would also be a fun line to watch...I don't deny that.

I still don't think it cures what ails the Habs. It still doesn't prevent teams from loading up to stop that line.

I think you're more interested in arguing with me, than really understanding my point of view. I think I've gone out of my way, several times now, to validate yours and others point of view.

Perhaps time to extend the same courtesy...or else, this 'debate' will continue to degenerate.

I'm not arguing with you. I just don't understand how you don't think Radulov helps this team when he was the best forward last year. Keep on naming players that we can POTENTIALLY acquire. You said Oshie and other suggestions before, but it just never happened. When was the last time a franchise center in Tavares was available for free? Why would the Flames trade Backlund when they are trying to make the playoffs? And even if they were, what can we even offer? Yeah I'm sure the Flames would accept McCarron+JDLR in matter of seconds. Once Tavares resigns you guys will say something like "we can just sign Seguin once he becomes a free agent".

 

[G0bias]

Fair point








Well I respectfully disagree...we're both spitballing here.

What makes your opinion more valid than mine?

Would you not agree the returning C would be greater if Pacioretty was the bait rather than a collection of average picks and prospects? Something keeping Radulov would've allowed us to do.

 

[417]

Would you not agree the returning C would be greater if Pacioretty was the bait than a collection of average picks and prospects?

Who is this center?

And how does it benefit him, if the player whose scored the 3rd most goals in the NHL since 2011 was traded for him?

Our goal is to try to add, not re-arrange the furniture.

Re-sign Radulov, trade Pacioretty...what happens after?

Find a goal scorer. This is very Bergevin-like team building...just making moves without a clear plan to build.

Again, I'm not dismissing your point...just trying to understand it further.

 

[417]

I'm not arguing with you. I just don't understand how you don't think Radulov helps this team when he was the best forward last year. Keep on naming players that we can POTENTIALLY acquire. You said Oshie and other suggestions before, but it just never happened. When was the last time a franchise center in Tavares was available for free? Why would the Flames trade Backlund when they are trying to make the playoffs? And even if they were, what can we even offer? Yeah I'm sure the Flames would accept McCarron+JDLR in matter of seconds. Once Tavares resigns you guys will say something like "we can just sign Seguin once he becomes a free agent".

I'm not the GM...doesn't matter who I name, those are just examples, they are not rumors or trades I'm attempting to make on behalf of the team.

You ask who, I provide names...its not really fair to come at me afterwards saying "well why hasn't he done that or why would that team trade him". I don't have that answer anymore than you have the answer as to why Bergevin didn't re-sign Radulov.

Furthermore, and I can't say how many times I've said this...

Yes, I think Radulov would help this team...he's a good player and if you add a good player to this team, this team is better.

But HOW much better is what I'm questioning?

Better enough for me to say this team is a surefire contender in the East?

No...

And personally, if I'm going to spend that kind of money to make a forward our highest paid forward, the answer to that question better be yes.

It's like the Drouin trade, I love that trade...was wonderful, but he's now our highest paid forward.

Are we better for it? Nope...

You keep making these sideways moves, and eventually you end up...well...as the Montreal Canadiens.

 

[G0bias]

Who is this center?

And how does it benefit him, if the player whose scored the 3rd most goals in the NHL since 2011 was traded for him?

Again, I'm not dismissing your point...just trying to understand it further.

It could be Pacioretty like it could be Galchenyuk or a package of Lehkonen and Gallagher etc. It doesn't really matter.

The point is retaining Radulov allows us to move one of our current wingers or package of wingers, in attempt to bolster the center position.

Moving Pacioretty or Galchenyuk for a center now would be sideways. It'd be plugging a hole and creating another one. Radulov allows us the means to fill a hole and not create another.

 

[groovejuice]

Somehow, I get the feeling you'll get off much easier for calling Radulov a complimentary player, than I have/will.

As for the rest of your post...fair enough.

The problem is calling Radulov a complementary player on a team full of complementary players. There are no genuine stars currently. We lost Subban, and Price injured or otherwise hampered, has been well below average.

Is he top tier on the Canadiens, comparatively? Was the team better with him than without him? To me, these are the pertinent questions.

To those who excuse Bergevin with an "He tried", all I have to say is that antagonism, inflexibility and backhanded insults aren't typically successful strategies in signing free agents. In short, it was a remarkably inept failure in the part of Bergevin.

 

[417]

It could be Pacioretty like it could be Galchenyuk or a package of Lehkonen and Gallagher etc. It doesn't really matter.

The point is retaining Radulov allows us to move one of our current wingers or package including a winger, in attempt to bolster the center position.

Moving Pacioretty or Galchenyuk for a center now would be sideways. It'd be plugging a hole and creating another one. Radulov allows us the means to fill a hole and not create another.

Once more...I don't see it that way.

Re-sign Radulov and move Pacioretty or Galchenyuk...is a sideways move. The team doesn't get better.

Though I would agree with you if you're talking about moving Lehkonen or Gallagher.

But then, what do you really expect to get back for them alone?