SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

F50marco

Member Since
May 29, 2015
Favourite Team
Montreal Canadiens
Forum Posts
19654
Posts per Day
6.0
Forum: Armchair-GM22 hours ago
Thread: What if the Habs get everyone
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Fox_Czar_Cup</b></div><div>Has anyone ever said yes to wanting Armia Dvorak Mesar besides habs??</div></div>

Armia was actually good this year. Career high in goals so yeah I think there will be interest in him come the TDL at the minimum, especially at 50% retained. Not sure why anyone wouldn't. The guy is a puck possession playoff performer. That's why he got that big contract in the first place. The ppl who keep thinking he sucks are the ones who clearly haven't seen him play this year and are just keeping an old opinion of him. If we had this convo last year, I would agree 100% with you but things changed since then.

Dvorak, couldn't agree more. Cant wait for that contract to end. He's a just throw in to a trade to offset some cap going both ways. Which most big trades have to have now. That's all.

Mesar? A former 1st round prospect? Am I missing something here? Why wouldn't anyone want him? He's a solid prospect.
Forum: Fauteuil - DGMay 25 at 5:44 p.m.
Thread: Please dont draft Igilna
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GuyGuyGuy</b></div><div>His potential is pretty limited. He doesn’t have the talent to be a ppg player, wich is our need. If he wasn’t named Igilna, nobody would ever consider him at 5. At 6-7 maybe, but not at 5 where Catton and Lindstrom are available</div></div>

Disagree wholeheartedly. Think your underestimating his skill level a ton. Its way better than people give credit for and its only getting better. If Iginla played as many minutes a game as Catton had, he would have broke 60 this year. And the dad take is lame beyond belief. He's earned it all on his own.

I like all 3 guys so I'm not advocating for taking Iginla specifically but if they did, I surely wouldn't be disappointed. He's going to be good. His game isn't as flashy as Cattons for example but its so NHL projectable.
Forum: Fauteuil - DGMay 25 at 2:37 p.m.
Thread: Please dont draft Igilna
The Iginla disrespect going around is astounding. This isn't 2023 with the reach for Reinbacher. Iginla could very well be the best forward not named Celebrini and probably Demidov.

Iginla is a sure thing but probably just not ELITE like a Pastrnak or a Rantanen. I'd bet none of the 5ov candidates will be either though. Lindstrom has ELITE size but is already looking somewhat injury prone and projecting as a winger, not a center. Eiserman es an elite scorer but is looking like a 1 dimensional half effort some nights type of guy. Catton has elite puck skills but is smaller and will have trouble translating that same offense to the NHL.

Iginla has a very good shot but just not quite as good as Eisermans. He has sick stickhandling ability but just not as good as Cattons. He plays an NHL style and has projectable size but just not as big as Lindtsrom. But all those other guys have a part of their game that is lacking. Where Iginla's doesn't. He is quite complete.

Then add on that he is going to be tried out at center next year and if he nails it, that is another weapon to add to his arsenal. He's been trained and mentored by one of the best captains in modern NHL history. Oh, and is only 45 days from being eligible in next years draft...

He is a serious candidate for 5OV and I would be perfectly fine with the Habs taking him.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 25 at 10:19 a.m.
Thread: The case for trading Guhle
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>gm_jeanguy</b></div><div>I'm not saying Guhle should be traded because there's a logjam at LD, I'm saying it's one of the reasons this move would make sense - I'll give you that, it's actually a pretty weak argument. But if I refer to the arguments I made above, my strongests selling points would probably be the 2nd and 4th.</div></div>

Got to keep in mind also that trading Guhle for the pick means they don't get a player of Guhle's calibre till like 26-27 probably. If this was a full rebuild tear down, you could make a case but KH doesn't appear to want to wait that long. They're going to try and be good as soon as next year. Losing Guhle for a pick would weaken them for the near future.

Also Im more than willing to change my mind on this but not right now. I need a season of Hutson and Mailloux in the NHL before moving Guhle for a future forward. Xhekaj's improvement also plays a factor as he could make Guhle's loss less of a burden but he needs to step big time then.

As of right now, Guhle is the future top pairing LD on the team. You don't move that. If we had two Guhle type LHD both vying for the same spot, than sure go for it.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 22 at 3:55 p.m.
Thread: The case for trading Guhle
I wouldn't move Guhle just because Habs have depth on LHD. Guhle could be arguably the best of all of them. Until we know what we have, there is no point moving him IMO. Not to mention that Guhle is not worth a top 10 pick in the draft, especially this year, at least not yet. So we'd likely have to move him for another young roster player from another team whose a forward if anything.

Guhle can also play RHD pretty decently so putting him on the right side, at least for 1 year, makes others who are more reasonable, expendable. Harris IMO has no future on this team if Hutson makes the club.
Savard and Kovacevic are likely gone by TDL, freeing up more spots. Barron needs to step up or he may be waiver claimed. Xhekaj can play the right side if need be. Struble is not waiver eligible so he can be sent down. Mailloux also. etc etc

There isn't as much of a rush to move a dmen as many think. Depth is a good thing, especially with how many injuries the team has every year. Also, It'll be nice for Laval to not have to rely on ECHL players for once.
Forum: Armchair-GMMay 17 at 2:53 p.m.
Thread: The Athletic recommended Markstrom trade
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Shaun80</b></div><div>The trade was proposed back in February, Markstrom had just stolen games against the Islanders and Devils

The trade was proposed back in February, Markstrom had just stolen back to back games for the Flames then lost a goaltending duel 1-0 vs the rangers (score was 2-0 but one was a empty netter). At the same time the Kings were falling in the standings because of poor goaltending. A fan made up the teade in his Flames Mailbag segment, MacKenzie added 3 million in retention to it. Obviously the trade makes no sense today, but it was some what realistic when it was proposed.</div></div>

Yeah I didn't know the whole back story here. Was just commenting as if it were something he just proposed or something.

Either way, there wasn't a point this entire year that this trade makes sense though so timing doesn't change a whole lot. Its not that Markstrom isn't an option, he absolutely is, but the value isn't anything that holds. Clarke+ would bring back a top goalie in his prime. Not a 34 year old.