• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Habs sign Alex Galchenyuk to two-year, $5.6M deal

I never lose sleep over players who have no options other than holding out. It was a fear I had when Bergevin was trying to grind Subban because I felt that Subban was a generational talent who should just be accorded the respect that any white generational talent would get. But Galchenyuk, as good as he is and will (hopefully) be, is not in that class. For him to hold out or to reject a fair offer on a bridge deal would be absurd. He hasn't done enough for anyone to think that he's good enough to circumvent it.

Seriously WEHave, do you actually believe that MB tried to "screw" PK because he is black?
 
Seriously WEHave, do you actually believe that MB tried to "screw" PK because he is black?

I don't think Bergy tried to screw PK because he's black. I think he tried to screw him because he and the club are cheap. I also think that a lot of the talk around the negotiations with PK centered around the sort of nebulous characteristics that always seem to be used to diminish black athletes. The whole "well he's got great physical gifts but he lacks maturity/leadership/insert other nebulous quality here, ergo we shouldn't have to pay him as much." There just seemed to be these intermediate steps taken with PK that would never happen with a white French Canadian superstar.

I know the numbers weren't on par but look at DD's contract. Bergevin could have grinded him down to the league minimum and DD would have gladly accepted it. Not one other NHL team had even the slightest bit of interest in accquiring him yet Bergevin, amittedly on a much smaller scale than PK, opened the vault for DD. Again I realize the numbers are a lot smaller but it's significant when you take the Habs' traditional avarice into account. No player of DD's limited abilities that I can think of could get a long-term deal at $3-$4 million per season out of the Habs. Where was DD's low-rent bridge deal?
 
Bergevin's handling of Subban on both of his contracts was very strange.

I've said it enough times that most just feel like smacking me, but the Subban bridge deal dumb at the time and it turned out to be sheer idiocy as time went on.

But, whatever, fine. Bergevin wasn't sure about him, wanted to make sure he was the real deal, okay, fine. Subban was already the team's #1 d-man at 23 and was already a superstar in the making, but I guess that wasn't enough for Bergevin. (And before you give me the "He didn't get to see him!" excuse, he didn't get to see Price or Pacioretty either but still gave them longterm deals before watching them play a single game.)

He proved that and then some, yet Bergevin played hardball with him again? To the point that the owner had to step in and order Bergevin to give Subban his money?

What the ****?

Bergevin always says that with a bridge deal, he has no problem paying the player if they prove themselves and show that they're worth it.

I can't help but think that if Subban was white, this whole ordeal wouldn't have happened.
 
I don't think Bergy tried to screw PK because he's black. I think he tried to screw him because he and the club are cheap. I also think that a lot of the talk around the negotiations with PK centered around the sort of nebulous characteristics that always seem to be used to diminish black athletes. The whole "well he's got great physical gifts but he lacks maturity/leadership/insert other nebulous quality here, ergo we shouldn't have to pay him as much." There just seemed to be these intermediate steps taken with PK that would never happen with a white French Canadian superstar.

I know the numbers weren't on par but look at DD's contract. Bergevin could have grinded him down to the league minimum and DD would have gladly accepted it. Not one other NHL team had even the slightest bit of interest in accquiring him yet Bergevin, amittedly on a much smaller scale than PK, opened the vault for DD. Again I realize the numbers are a lot smaller but it's significant when you take the Habs' traditional avarice into account. No player of DD's limited abilities that I can think of could get a long-term deal at $3-$4 million per season out of the Habs. Where was DD's low-rent bridge deal?

Limited abilities and no interest from any other team is based on what exactly? And $3.5m is a huge overpay is it. what are you smoking?
 
Bergevin's handling of Subban on both of his contracts was very strange.

I've said it enough times that most just feel like smacking me, but the Subban bridge deal dumb at the time and it turned out to be sheer idiocy as time went on.

But, whatever, fine. Bergevin wasn't sure about him, wanted to make sure he was the real deal, okay, fine. Subban was already the team's #1 d-man at 23 and was already a superstar in the making, but I guess that wasn't enough for Bergevin. (And before you give me the "He didn't get to see him!" excuse, he didn't get to see Price or Pacioretty either but still gave them longterm deals before watching them play a single game.)

He proved that and then some, yet Bergevin played hardball with him again? To the point that the owner had to step in and order Bergevin to give Subban his money?

What the ****?

Bergevin always says that with a bridge deal, he has no problem paying the player if they prove themselves and show that they're worth it.

I can't help but think that if Subban was white, this whole ordeal wouldn't have happened.

How was bridge deal for Subban idiocy? I hear some say that but I do not understand the reasoning why it was such a huge mistake? Were the other similar deals (which are many) also sheer idiocy?
 
How was bridge deal for Subban idiocy? I hear some say that but I do not understand the reasoning why it was such a huge mistake? Were the other similar deals (which are many) also sheer idiocy?
The belief is u "save money on superstars by signing a long term extension in the 2nd contract.

IMO it's asinine. I don't ever want to see a Habs player signed to a longterm deal ending at 36, 37, 38. I.e long term on contract #2 taking them to late 20s to re-up on another long term deal. The Getzlaf, potential Kopitar type extensions - they're disasters waiting to happen. A players best years are done by his early 30s.

I have no problem with MB dealing MaxPac at 29 for a lofty package, or Price prior to his final year. Subban will be 32 or 33 when his present deal expires, take a 2-yr deal thereafter or bye bye.
 
Last edited:
Limited abilities and no interest from any other team is based on what exactly? And $3.5m is a huge overpay is it. what are you smoking?

Yep, any player who puts up 50 points a season and makes less than 3 million on a long term contract would fire his agent.
 
How was bridge deal for Subban idiocy? I hear some say that but I do not understand the reasoning why it was such a huge mistake? Were the other similar deals (which are many) also sheer idiocy?

Because in this league, you win when you have your best players signed at way below market worth. There's no two ways about it. Look at all the Cup winners over the last few years and examine how much $ their star players were making; Most of them were underpaid relative to their market worth by either being on an ELC, being given a long-term second deal or being one of those (now illegal) cap circumvention contracts. Look at the majority of the top teams in the league and look at how much their star players are making relative to their production.

Look at just about every young star player in the league. Tavares, Stamkos, Doughty, Seguin, McDonagh, Toews, Kane, etc. Those guys all signed a long-term deal after their ELC was finished and they were signed at below market value. $5.5M AAV over six years for John Tavares? $7.5M AAV over six years for Steven Stamkos? Are you kidding me? If Tavares & Stamkos were UFAs tomorrow, how much do you think he'd get from their respective teams? $11M? $12M? $13M? Toews & Kane were making $6.5M for six years, allowing Chicago to get good depth players to surround them with the money they saved. Now that they're both making $10.5M, Patrick Sharp is gone, Johny Oduya's gone, and they're hoping the cheap alternatives can step up. Tyler Seguin makes $5.75M for four more years.

With a hard cap, teams with the best "bang for buck" contracts win and the math is very simple; It's impossible to argue that Subban at $5M to $5.5M over 5 or 6 years (depending on what reports you read or believe) isn't a better deal than Subban at $2,875M for two years then 8 years at $9M. You just can't. Especially when you consider this team finished dead last in the East the year before his new contract kicked in. It's not like this was a contending team and we had to get Subban on the very cheap to go for it. The deal was sheer idiocy and it is holding this team back.
 
Because in this league, you win when you have your best players signed at way below market worth. There's no two ways about it. Look at all the Cup winners over the last few years and examine how much $ their star players were making; Most of them were underpaid relative to their market worth by either being on an ELC, being given a long-term second deal or being one of those (now illegal) cap circumvention contracts. Look at the majority of the top teams in the league and look at how much their star players are making relative to their production.

Look at just about every young star player in the league. Tavares, Stamkos, Doughty, Seguin, McDonagh, Toews, Kane, etc. Those guys all signed a long-term deal after their ELC was finished and they were signed at below market value. $5.5M AAV over six years for John Tavares? $7.5M AAV over six years for Steven Stamkos? Are you kidding me? If Tavares & Stamkos were UFAs tomorrow, how much do you think he'd get from their respective teams? $11M? $12M? $13M? Toews & Kane were making $6.5M for six years, allowing Chicago to get good depth players to surround them with the money they saved. Now that they're both making $10.5M, Patrick Sharp is gone, Johny Oduya's gone, and they're hoping the cheap alternatives can step up. Tyler Seguin makes $5.75M for four more years.

With a hard cap, teams with the best "bang for buck" contracts win and the math is very simple; It's impossible to argue that Subban at $5M to $5.5M over 5 or 6 years (depending on what reports you read or believe) isn't a better deal than Subban at $2,875M for two years then 8 years at $9M. You just can't. Especially when you consider this team finished dead last in the East the year before his new contract kicked in. It's not like this was a contending team and we had to get Subban on the very cheap to go for it. The deal was sheer idiocy and it is holding this team back.
We agree to disagree, now MB can deal Subban at 31 or 32 for a nice package (unless he's willing to re-up on a shortterm deal), and let someone else worry about an early 30s long term headache.

If Subban would've been signed to a 5-yr deal at 23, the ur stuck in Getzlaf land, re-upping a potential UFA at 28/29 - thus being stuck with a potential 8-yr deal @ high cap hit, running into the late 30s.
 
Truth hurts I guess.

Subban IS hockey stupid - sub par defensive IQ, and doesn't understand the finer points of making the right play at th right time whatsoever.

Bang on elite skills but erratic and lacks the poise of other D. He was outplayed by Hedman .
 
We agree to disagree, now MB can deal Subban at 31 or 32 for a nice package (unless he's willing to re-up on a shortterm deal), and let someone else worry about an early 30s long term headache.

If Subban would've been signed to a 5-yr deal at 23, the ur stuck in Getzlaf land, re-upping a potential UFA at 28/29 - thus being stuck with a potential 8-yr deal @ high cap hit, running into the late 30s.

Who gives a shit?

I'm sure Anaheim is extremely happy they got Getzlaf & Perry signed longterm even if they might trail off near the end. By then, who gives a ****? If they're both elite players until they're 35, that means they'll be overpaid for one or two years of their contracts, meanwhile the first six years of that deal is money well spent.

I don't know what the issue is.
 
Bang on elite skills but erratic and lacks the poise of other D. He was outplayed by Hedman .

And it took 6 seasons for that 2nd overall pick to get there.

Subban is improving every season in his decision making. He makes brilliant plays all the time but sometimes he gets burned by trying to do too much. Live and learn.
 
Back
Top