Digest for alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens@googlegroups.com - 14 updates in 1 topic

Saturday, June 17, 2017

Mike <mike@gmail.com>: Jun 17 02:56PM -0300

https://twitter.com/CanadiensMTL/status/876134850692083714
 
There must be some other plans in the offing I would say because the
defence is suspect WITH Beaulieu. Without him its downright scary.
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 17 12:10PM -0700

On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 10:56:44 AM UTC-7, Mike wrote:
> https://twitter.com/CanadiensMTL/status/876134850692083714
 
> There must be some other plans in the offing I would say because the
> defence is suspect WITH Beaulieu. Without him its downright scary.
 
I don't know about that. MB may have just figured that getting a 3rd rounder is better than losing Beaulieu for nothing in the expansion draft.
 
Of course, that's only because he already decided not to protect Beaulieu.
 
Jim
Nyssa <Nyssa@flawlesslogic.com>: Jun 17 03:22PM -0400

Jim Bauch wrote:
 
 
> Of course, that's only because he already decided not to
> protect Beaulieu.
 
> Jim
 
Or he thinks defense is unnecessary with Price in the net.
 
Yeah, sure.
 
The mess becomes messier (and no, I don't mean we're
getting Messier...thank goodness!).
 
There is no master plan. It's all done with a crystal ball
and Miss Cleo.
 
Nyssa, who could do a better job as the Habs' GM with a
dart board
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 17 01:03PM -0700

Hmm, I don't think so. It honestly would have been better to lose him in expansion than to get just a 3rd for him. Instead, we'll just lose somebody else... probably Hudon or De La Rose, who is worth more than a 3rd.
 
This just says to me they felt they absolutely HAD TO trade Beaulieu because their evaluations had written him out of their plans, regardless of any other consideration.
 
Which is also basically what they did with Subban, just on a higher scale and with the relative fortuitousness of finding a more willing taker.
 
It's bad talent evaluation in my opinion. I mean, I know Beaulieu's personality isn't sparkling and his comportment is sometimes rated in the "bag of hammers" category, so as usual we don't have all the off-ice considerations at our disposal. But just based on ice performance and talent level, this is a really really stupid trade IMHO. Horribly bad, tbh.
 
l8r,
Gerry
zip by <kilgore@trout.com>: Jun 17 04:17PM -0400

In article <c630565a-f57b-4514-8be7-c411234ade8b@googlegroups.com>, Jim
 
> I don't know about that. MB may have just figured that getting a 3rd rounder
> is better than losing Beaulieu for nothing in the expansion draft.
 
As I see it, the trouble with that argument is that now he will lose
somebody else instead.
 
Now, it could be that maybe he WANTS to lose Pleks and that big
contract.....
 
I don't think that is necessarily a good idea - but I offer it as an
explanation.
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 17 01:26PM -0700

If they actually do lose Plekanec or Emelin, then that would take the sting off. In a way, you just give up the 3rd to create cap space.
 
But it's a big IF that Vegas takes on one of those IMHO.
 
And of course, while I'm not a huge Emelin fan, still, losing both of Bealieu and Emelin would definitely cause us issues on D.
 
l8r,
Gerry
Mike <mike@gmail.com>: Jun 17 05:30PM -0300

On 06/17/2017 05:26 PM, Gerry wrote:
 
> And of course, while I'm not a huge Emelin fan, still, losing both of Bealieu and Emelin would definitely cause us issues on D.
 
> l8r,
> Gerry
 
otoh, losing Plekanec creates a crater at the centre position where
there once was a hole.
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 17 01:37PM -0700

On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 4:30:34 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
> > Gerry
 
> otoh, losing Plekanec creates a crater at the centre position where
> there once was a hole.
 
I think his cap space is far more valuable then he is. The same with Emelin
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 17 02:05PM -0700

Losing a 3rd round pick in the expansion draft would be relatively attractive for many teams. Depending on how my protection list looked, I'd actually trade a 3rd for a player I thought was highly likely to be picked by Vegas. :S
 
l8r,
Gerry
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 17 03:36PM -0700

On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 1:30:34 PM UTC-7, Mike wrote:
> > Gerry
 
> otoh, losing Plekanec creates a crater at the centre position where
> there once was a hole.
 
I'm not so sure about that.
 
It probably does in Bergevin's mind, because he's ruled out using Galchenyuk at center, and therefore Plekanec is being counted on as a 1st or 2nd line center. In which case, yeah, now you're looking at, who, Torrey Mitchell as 2nd center? Andrew Shaw?
 
Realistically, I'm not sure that Plekanec has much offensive spark left in him, and isn't really appropriate in the 2nd center role anyway. I'd give Galchenyuk a real shot at the job. The drop off at 3rd line center between Pleks and Mitchell is modest, and the 4th line job can go to De la Rose, or McCarron, or whichever bargain basement acquisition MB picks up next.
 
Jim
Jim Bauch <j.bauch@ca.rr.com>: Jun 17 03:52PM -0700

On Saturday, June 17, 2017 at 1:37:59 PM UTC-7, Chuck wrote:
 
> > otoh, losing Plekanec creates a crater at the centre position where
> > there once was a hole.
 
> I think his cap space is far more valuable then he is. The same with Emelin
 
No doubt Pleks and Emelin have cap hits in excess of what they're truly "worth." From the Habs' point of view, though, this is mitigated somewhat by the fact that both contracts expire after this coming season, and there isn't a lot else for Montreal to do with their cap space. It's an unappetizing UFA market, and the Habs probably already have enough space to re-sign Radulov and Galchenyuk as is. (And Markov for that matter). It's not clear that the cap space being eaten by Pleks and Emelin is really preventing MB from doing anything useful, although I suppose it could be a complicating factor if a trade for (e.g.) Duchesne is being discussed.
 
Having cap space in 2018-19 will be pretty important, though, as Price's new contract will kick in, and if there's any chance of Tavares hitting the UFA market you'd want to be able to be a player.
 
Jim
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 17 04:08PM -0700

Plekanec doesn't have the playmaking skills to be a top line center and has never been been an option B when the team did not have a true number one center. In that situation he is best called an only option available center since his invisibility rarely goes away when his responsibilities increase. His best passing skills are shown while killing penalties setting up short handed goals. If his contract was cheaper he'd be a good third line center. If you start the season expecting him to be a offensively productive as a full time 1st or 2nd line center it's time to tank and rebuild
Chuck <barberphoto411@gmail.com>: Jun 17 04:33PM -0700

Ignoring the cap issues. What I do not like about them the most is when they are played in too high of a role on the team depth chart. Emelin is a 3rd pairing defenceman with marginal passing skills. It was stupid to have paired Emelin with Weber. It did nothing to create more point shot opportunities for Weber. Any gain from Emelin looking better came at the price of making his partner worse. Unless Price is stopping everything more TOI for Emelin usually results in low scoring for Montreal. If CJ doesn't over use him. Another year is fine. The same with Plekanec, he isn't capable of producing offence at the level they want him to, so keep him locked into a 3rd line and PK role. Giving them umpteenth chances to play above thier skills, gets in the way of putting, player development of people, players who would still be with the team after next season
Gerry <gerry14@hotmail.com>: Jun 17 04:47PM -0700

Plekanec would be fine as a 3rd line center making $2.5 or $3M IMHO. He's not really physical or "self-sacrificing" per se, but he is still quick and smart and knows how to play the position.
 
My issue with the current group is basically that his "safe-ness" tends to win him icetime, he was 3rd amongst all Habs forwards in icetime last season, and with him taking that icetime, it inherently limits the team offensively. One really big issue was that he was getting 1:54 PP/gm (actually more than his 1:53 PK/game). He needs to be at zero there, regardless of faceoffs, that time has passed for him.
 
l8r,
Gerry
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment