Gauging support for the Saku deal...

Ando · Guru

Gauging support for the Saku deal...

Nil d · Guru

Most of what you say is "fair to say", And-o, but where is this "other Board" that is 80/20 not in favour of hanging on to Koivu?

As George Bush Sr. used to say, "Trust but verify".

AB Habman · Guru

Ando wrote:

It seems that the 80%-to-20% split (80% for Saku) on this board are pretty satisfied with Saku's new deal with the Habs. However, And-o thinks it is it fair to say that we pretty much have a concensus of opinion that Gainey was way too generous in terms of the dollar amount??? Is that fair to say??? Also, it is perhaps interesting to note here that the "other board" (sorry Mario) might have been split in the opposite direction 20%-to-80% in favor of cutting bait with regards to Saku! BUT...having said that...And-o thinks Saku could probably have mustered 50%-to-50% support to remain forever IF...and ONLY IF...Gainey could land another top line centre (otherwise, fans were willing to just take the chance that Saku might move on). Does that make sense???...reasonable...fair??? Anyway, my point here in the end is simple. It seems EVERYONE would be happy if only Gaineywould/could somehow land us a top line centre to compliment/elevate/support (choose whichever word) Saku's contributions to this teams. ...and having said all that - And-o thinks that Saku could go a lonnnnnnnnggggg way to gaining 100% support from all of Habdom if he could convince a guy like Ollie Jokinen to sign on with Montreal (even if Bob had to send Florida a lower pick on deadline day). And-o thinks this would pretty much square this deal!!! Does this not sound reasonable? And-o certainly accepts though that Bob (And-o's all-time HERO) wants Saku's regime to continue...but the fact remains that AT LEAST one-third (and probably closer to 50%) of all Habdom feel that Bob Gainey just signed us all up for 3 more years of medicrity UNLESS he lands a top line centre! (anyone dispute that figure??? I respect it if so...but just have a read of other boards...blogs...chat rooms - Hab fans are split!!!) Peace! Enjoy the break!

I partly agree And-o! I still want to compliment our center position with a productive #1 center! I, along with the 50% habdom (as you put it) agree that it is still too high of a contract even if we get that centermen!

JohnM · Guru

Actually, I have checked the other boards and the support is 80-20% in favour of Saku all around. It actually might be closer to 90-10%.

The main concern is the salary, most people believe it is high but I posted an article from the other board which shows it is right where it should be. The other concern is injuries, this is a valid one. However, if he has a long term injury, then his salary would not be counted against the cap.

As for adding depth at center, can't argue with that whether it is a 1a/b or 2. I'd also like to see depth at wing and defence...

plouf · Guru

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I pretty much agree with you And-o.

On the other hand, I think Plekanec and a (slightly) resurgent Bonk may make the centre issue less central (no pun intended), and reminds me of the fact that we really need a top d-man more than anything. Montreal forwards play fairly defensively because we don't have a good backline to shore them up. They need protection. If we had a killer bunch of defensemen we could really unleash the offensive talent on this team. There are a lot of guys (including Saku himself) who'd probably score more for a more offensively-minded team. I know a lot people are saying we lack goal-scorers, but I think Zednik, Ryder, Kovalev and Perezhogin looks like a solid top 4 of wingers if they play to their potential. Not to mention Kostitsyn on the way,Higgins improving all the time, and Bulis showing softer hands lately.

I'm not sure what I think about the dollar amount yet, until I see how free agents go this summer. My first reaction was the same - seems like a high amount. But now I've heard two convincing arguments that it's about right. Time will tell, but I'm still leaning in the "it was about a million too much" direction.

Brings up another random question/idea:

Say one of our long-term contracts got a career injury (Saku being the most obvious candidate we've talked about), wouldn't it seem more fair if somehow there was a rule that a guy who had an injury of that sort wouldn't count towards the cap? Removes some of the luck factor in the building of a team.

AB Habman · Guru

JohnM wrote:

Actually, I have checked the other boards and the support is 80-20% in favour of Saku all around. It actually might be closer to 90-10%. The main concern is the salary, most people believe it is high but I posted an article from the other board which shows it is right where it should be. The other concern is injuries, this is a valid one. However, if he has a long term injury, then his salary would not be counted against the cap. As for adding depth at center, can't argue with that whether it is a 1a/b or 2. I'd also like to see depth at wing and defence...

I guess that's one positive is that if Saks is out long term with let's say another knee injury, that it won't count against the Cap! It will just be an additional financial loss to Mr. Gillett! Also I think teams have insurance on players if they are on the IR a certain number of games! Anyone know more about this?

JohnM · Guru

Insurance kicks in after 30 games I believe.

AB Habman · Guru

plouf wrote:

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I pretty much agree with you And-o. On the other hand, I think Plekanec and a (slightly) resurgent Bonk may make the centre issue less central (no pun intended), and reminds me of the fact that we really need a top d-man more than anything. Montreal forwards play fairly defensively because we don't have a good backline to shore them up. They need protection. If we had a killer bunch of defensemen we could really unleash the offensive talent on this team. There are a lot of guys (including Saku himself) who'd probably score more for a more offensively-minded team. I know a lot people are saying we lack goal-scorers, but I think Zednik, Ryder, Kovalev and Perezhogin looks like a solid top 4 of wingers if they play to their potential. Not to mention Kostitsyn on the way,Higgins improving all the time, and Bulis showing softer hands lately. I'm not sure what I think about the dollar amount yet, until I see how free agents go this summer. My first reaction was the same - seems like a high amount. But now I've heard two convincing arguments that it's about right. Time will tell, but I'm still leaning in the "it was about a million too much" direction. Brings up another random question/idea: Say one of our long-term contracts got a career injury (Saku being the most obvious candidate we've talked about), wouldn't it seem more fair if somehow there was a rule that a guy who had an injury of that sort wouldn't count towards the cap? Removes some of the luck factor in the building of a team.

Plouf, this sounds like an objective post and I agree with what you say! Our Defense certainly could be improved and it would give a whole different perspective with offense!

I would of also been more comfortable with about a mil less!

AB Habman · Guru

JohnM wrote:

Insurance kicks in after 30 games I believe.

Thanks John! That helps and lessons the signing gamble as a manager, I would think!

Muller93 · Guru

Finally, is this board coming together? I liked And-o's post(although I doubt the 20%/80% thing unless that board he talks of is an all francophone web page---no anglophone's aloud type of thing...).

Otherwise yes, I agree with everything. Saku's injury woes are a gamble but if he gets injured it won't count towards the cap. I imagine if this was not the case, Saku's market value would have been less.

AB Habman · Guru

Muller93 wrote:

Finally, is this board coming together? I liked And-o's post(although I doubt the 20%/80% thing unless that board he talks of is an all francophone web page---no anglophone's aloud type of thing...). Otherwise yes, I agree with everything. Saku's injury woes are a gamble but if he gets injured it won't count towards the cap. I imagine if this was not the case, Saku's market value would have been less.

I guess it means we're coming together in a diplomatic way!

Right now I have it at 3 for the contract and 3 that thought it's too high!

We have a few wks. to kill and based on this opening thread by And-o, this is a good bases to start a pole or discussion! Let's keep it going!

Anyone else have anything to add?

Ando · Guru

Good stuff!!! And-o feels we are slowly gaining some common ground here (nice to see...because I REALLY do think that Habdom is collectively really quite savvy...and VERY split on this)!

...perhaps my "guess-timation" of 80%-20% being so-called "against" Saku on the "other board" (and in general) is a tad over-estimated...but guys (especially you JohnM)...I think saying 66%-33% is being fairly accurate (perhaps even generous)...and I believe wholeheartedly that the majority of Hab fans would be VERY unsatisified if next September rolls around and the Habs roll-out of the gates with a middle consisting of Saku, Ribs, Pleks, Bonk and possibly Begin (anyone else think that is a recipe for mediocrity???)!!!

At any rate, my gut feel remains that there is an enormous gap in opinion on this one across the entire spectrum of Habdom.

Just as an example...and maybe this question is mostly for JohnM...what proportion of Habdom unconditionally supported resigning previous Captains like Carbo and Gainey (without debate...or questions of consistency - except at careers end of course)??? Would 90% in favor be over-estimating that???

Anyway...obviously we all have our opinions...but they ALL seem to have a few common threads and truths...lets all hope/cheer/encourage management can/will address these common beliefs!!!

Muller93 · Guru

AB Habman wrote:

Right now I have it at 3 for the contract and 3 that thought it's too high!

Are you counting me as for or to high? I don't think it was too high...it was market value. I'm FOR to be clear.

I agree with And-o about needing more depth at center...Jokinen would be great. Not that Koivu without another center=mediocrity. I think that would be equal to team mediocrity...kinda like it is now due to Ribs and Bonk flop.

And to back up a previous post...I would be happy if Ribs pulled it together and provided us with the depth at center we need. I don't care really.

AB Habman · Guru

Muller93 wrote:

AB Habman wrote: Right now I have it at 3 for the contract and 3 that thought it's too high! Are you counting me as for or to high? I don't think it was too high...it was market value. I'm FOR to be clear. I agree with And-o about needing more depth at center...Jokinen would be great. Not that Koivu without another center=mediocrity. I think that would be equal to team mediocrity...kinda like it is now due to Ribs and Bonk flop. And to back up a previous post...I would be happy if Ribs pulled it together and provided us with the depth at center we need. I don't care really.

Understood it as you're for the contract!

Chris68 · Veteran Member

Ando wrote:

It seems that the 80%-to-20% split (80% for Saku) on this board are pretty satisfied with Saku's new deal with the Habs. However, And-o thinks it is it fair to say that we pretty much have a concensus of opinion that Gainey was way too generous in terms of the dollar amount??? Is that fair to say??? Also, it is perhaps interesting to note here that the "other board" (sorry Mario) might have been split in the opposite direction 20%-to-80% in favor of cutting bait with regards to Saku! BUT...having said that...And-o thinks Saku could probably have mustered 50%-to-50% support to remain forever IF...and ONLY IF...Gainey could land another top line centre (otherwise, fans were willing to just take the chance that Saku might move on). Does that make sense???...reasonable...fair??? Anyway, my point here in the end is simple. It seems EVERYONE would be happy if only Gaineywould/could somehow land us a top line centre to compliment/elevate/support (choose whichever word) Saku's contributions to this teams. ...and having said all that - And-o thinks that Saku could go a lonnnnnnnnggggg way to gaining 100% support from all of Habdom if he could convince a guy like Ollie Jokinen to sign on with Montreal (even if Bob had to send Florida a lower pick on deadline day). And-o thinks this would pretty much square this deal!!! Does this not sound reasonable? And-o certainly accepts though that Bob (And-o's all-time HERO) wants Saku's regime to continue...but the fact remains that AT LEAST one-third (and probably closer to 50%) of all Habdom feel that Bob Gainey just signed us all up for 3 more years of medicrity UNLESS he lands a top line centre! (anyone dispute that figure??? I respect it if so...but just have a read of other boards...blogs...chat rooms - Hab fans are split!!!) Peace! Enjoy the break!

I think Saku is just the player the Habs need, on and off the ice. I like the way he's playing, a lot with heart and brain. His contract is high, but compared with Theo still on the acceptable (but WHO wants to compare with Theo???).

YES, please BG, sign Olli !!!! That would be a marvelous move!

Power · Veteran Member

I think that approximately 3mil and 3 years and no clauses would have been enough, but it´s only me. But still I am glad that BG signed him, otherwise Habs would have been forced to trade him for almost nothing= 2nd or 3rd round pick. He will be very good 2nd line center for next 3 years. I think that BG knows that Habs need solid 1st line center because we have 3 2nd line centers now (Saks, Ribs and Pleks).

What comes to OJ coming to Montreal, I don´t think that is going to happen, because here in Finland media has reported that Ottava and Calgary are more than ready to spend lots of $$$$$$ for Ollis services. I think OJ wants about 7mil and at least 3 years and I don´t think that BG is ready to pay that much for him. If OJ would come to Montreal, Media and fans would set expectations so high that I think that he can´t fulfil those.

Although I would like to see 2 Finnish players as main architects for Habs next Stanley Cup victory.

barry33 · Guru

AB Habman wrote:

JohnM wrote: Actually, I have checked the other boards and the support is 80-20% in favour of Saku all around. It actually might be closer to 90-10%. The main concern is the salary, most people believe it is high but I posted an article from the other board which shows it is right where it should be. The other concern is injuries, this is a valid one. However, if he has a long term injury, then his salary would not be counted against the cap. As for adding depth at center, can't argue with that whether it is a 1a/b or 2. I'd also like to see depth at wing and defence... I guess that's one positive is that if Saks is out long term with let's say another knee injury, that it won't count against the Cap! It will just be an additional financial loss to Mr. Gillett! Also I think teams have insurance on players if they are on the IR a certain number of games! Anyone know more about this?

Actually And-O hit the nail right on the head (by the way I have to say that it is refreshing to read the posts today from BOTH sides of the Saks debate...much less controversial, much less biased, and much more well thought out IMO). I think everyone on thi sboard would be happy if Gainey goes out and gets a number one center (or call him number 2..I really do not give a darn). Did Gainey pay too much? Most think so excpet Saks and his agent. But that was the going rate, we have him signed and now we move on.