"LOL" is Stan Bowman's expression when he realizes there's someone dumb enough to take on Seabrook's contract

Lol I'm all for it if we can get a 1st and maybe another pick for it. Habs need to rebuild anyways this team is nowhere near cup contenders

This doesn't make any sense.

But............if I was in charge of rebuilding the Habs. Seabrook accepted coming here and Chicago was looking to trade Seabrook for whatever they could get. I wouldn't be opposed to working a deal where Habs get Seabrook and some picks in exchange for some dead weight on our side. (Not Petry or Plekanec who actually have value)

Let's say Seabrook and a 1st + 3rd for Alzner + Schlemko. I'd be all over that.

That would be even better haha

I agree they have to rebuild but it shouldn't last more than 2-3 years. By taking on another bad, long-term contract like Seabrook's you sacrifice financial flexibility for the next seven years!

If, Seabrook waives his NMC, it would be to be a contender. So Montreal wouldn't be a team of choice.

Normally I agree but given that the Habs seldom have players in free agency want to come here and that we have virtually no good players in the system coming, what exactly are we saving that money for? Plus it wouldn't be for the next 7 years would it? Petry is making 5.5 until 20-21, Seabrook 6.8 till 23-24. that is only 3 more years. So it really is just 1M a year for the next 3 years and 6.8 in the following 3 years after that. Any smart accountant can forecast for those years in the future and work with it. Plus there are other options at that point in time. regular buyouts or compliance buyouts. Anway that is just for the Petry trade above. Which i wouldn't do. I'd prefer Alzner and Schlemko which has some merit to it.

People on here freak out for something so far in the future that they have no idea what the future entails. If the gain is getting a 1st rounder that turns into a guy like Barzal, is it not worth the cap inflexibility in the 21-22 through 23-24 seasons? Or better yet the buyout penalty that would be applied when he is eventually bought out? I think so.

Plus rebuilds on certain teams take longer than others. 2-3 years in generous for the habs. We have a lot of big contracts to move that may take several years get rid of all of them. Picks take more than 2-3 years to develop. if they ever do. I think years is when you can realistically expect to start competing for a cup. By that time Seabrook's contract would almost be over...

Normally I would agree with you, but in our case we're not talking about Seabrook's contract only, we're talking about Seabrook's, Weber's and Price's. Almost $25M commited to three guys in their 40s who won't be able to perform to the level their deals would suggest. The problem is that by committing so much cap space to these three you won't have the money to pay the guys you draft during the rebuild. It's ok to have overpaid guys, both in terms of money and length of the deal, if you want to retain them for part of their prime years in order to win, but we would have three players who are signed long-term way out of their prime and who would contribute very little to a winning squad (Seabrook especially has already declined hard)

Realistically, how long did it take for Subban for example, to go from drafted to a 9M player? The answer is 8 years. From the year Subban was drafted to the first year of his big contract was 8 years. That would have Seabrook off the books, price on the last year of his contract and Weber who will more then likely be traded for the high cap hit/retire/etc by the time the 9th year comes along. Plus in that time a lot can change. If push comes to shove buying out the remaining year of a players contract simply to afford a guy like Subbans new big contract for example would be a necessary sacrifice.

There are plenty of options at a GM's disposal. I think the best strategy is to be somewhere in between "worrying about the future now" and "worrying about the future when it comes". Too far on either spectrum is what gets GM's into trouble. If they risk nothing, they gain nothing and if they risk it all, they can lose it all. You mention not having enough money to pay for those new guys but you need those young guys first before you can start paying them. look at MTL's last 8 years of drafting. We have two players from that list that we are paying over 3M dollars. Galchenyuk and Gallagher. Hardly anything to worry about there.

You're under the assumption that those picks will all turn into 7M dollar studs. Lol I think its safe to say, we'll be lucky if we land one of those types of players with those picks within a 8 years span.

We won't have to pay just this year's picks though, we will have to pay Lehkonen, Gallagher, Galchenyuk (maybe), Hudon, Danault, Drouin again, and all the players who are already in our system who haven't graduated yet (Juulsen, Mete, Brooks, Poehling and maybe others). And even if we had enough money for all those players, this doesn't include the possible free agents or trade pieces we might add once we can contend again. I know you think Montreal can't attract big names, but I think winning perspectives change things. Look at Toronto for example, a market similar to Montreal except for the French language (a pretty big barrier to be honest). They were able to attract Marleau because of the extra cap space they had and because they are very close to being a team that has a legitimate shot at the cup. They wouldn't have been able to lure Marleau if they had that type of contracts (they have Horton and Lupul but having them on LTIR is not as punishing).

Rebuild with two RHD taking nearly $15M in cap space, sounds like a good plan.

Well looking long term like that, Weber, Price and Seabrook would equate to 25M. The current estimates for next years ceiling is 80M. what do you reckon it will be in 8 years from now? A pretty modest estimate would be 90M. That still leaves more than enough to sign these other players. Once again, we only have to pay for these players if they are worthy of being paid like it. Is Hudon ever going to be worth 5M? Will Juulsen? Its easy to name all these guys off our heads but frankly what % of those mentioned will ever be 5M+ players? Pacioretty most likely will be traded so Drouin is. Maybe Galchenyuk. Maybe Poehling if he pans out. I think there's an argument that no else is really worth that kind of money now nor do they have the potential really to ever be that much.

You are assuming all these guys reach max potential and are decently paid players..... lehkonen at 2, Hudon at 2, Danault at 4, etc etc....tally that up that still leaves a big chunk of cap space.

In the past 20 years, MTL drafted a total of 7 players who with the Habs or another organization made at least 5M cap hit in one season.

Subban, Price, Plekanec, Grabovski, Streit, Markov and Ribiero.

Lets just say that average continues, and we draft another Price, Subban and Plekanec. Took Subban 8 years to reach the 5m+ plateau. Price 7 years. Plekanec 9 years........

As for free agents, I'm not sure you can make the same comparison. Matthews, Nylander, Marner, Reilly, Babcock, Shanahan, Lamoriello all played significant roles in adding a player like Marleau, who funny enough probably shouldn't have been signed given those 4 other players mentioned will cost in excess of 30M+ on their next contracts which are all sooner rather than later. I've ever only seen two scenarios where a team was so cap strapped that they paid for their problem to go away. Chicago with Bickell and Detroit with Datsyuk. They were hardly organizational altering trades even then. So If ever the cap is getting to be too much of a problem, a trade is always last ditch effort if necessary. Especially when a buyout isn't.

Even then, how mnay big name free agents who signed long term big $$ contracts actually were worth those contracts anyway? Radulov was nice but he only cost us 1 year. Was Lucic, Ericksson, Okposo, Shattenkrik, Yandle, Ladd, Sekera, Orpik, etc worth their contracts? i'm starting to think good teams don't go into free agency to add big name players. Bad teams do. Marleau might be a nice mentor for the young Leafs but he is a costly one I feel.

People are so afraid of being frugal with their cap space that it sometimes doesn't make sense. With all these loopholes like LTIR and "Robidas island" and buyouts and trading high cap hits to teams that need it to reach the floor, there are a lots of ways to always remain cap complaint and stay ahead of the curve by adding pieces to ensure a winning team in the future when it counts.

Do not confuse calculated risk taking with going all "Garth Snow" on Dipietro's ass as the same thing. That was an unnecessary risk, one with a ok but not great long term potential benefit that really wouldn't of been that crazy anyway even if Dipietro wasn't a train wreck of a player.

Asset management is sometimes about calculating the risk of going into debt and reaping the long term benefits as much as it is being consistently frugal in the here and now.