Sens on July 1st, Free Agents, Trades - Interesting storylines to watch.

At noon today, which would have made you happier:

Volchenkov @ 4.25
Gonchar @ 5.5

LOL @ Ian Mendes:

http://twitter.com/ian_mendes/status/17523969306

Flames moves today would be like if Sens brought back Redden & Corvo to solve their problems on the back end.

Sutter has to be the worst GM

dennycrane wrote:At noon today, which would have made you happier:

Volchenkov @ 4.25
Gonchar @ 5.5

Knowing the terms of the contracts, I definitely go with Gonchar.

Cullen is going to Minnesota

I wonder what the term and dollars are. Probably 3+ over 3-4 years

RobbyJ wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:The way some people talk it sounds like we just signed MA Bergeron

Wow. You're really reaching here.

People aren't allowed to dislike this signing? I've been the most vocal today about this, and I've freely acknowledged his offensive abilities. It's everyone else who needs to take the rose coloured glasses off and realize that Gonchar isn't the be all end all. In fact, I see plenty of downside to this deal, which I've stated more than once. Very few people here want to even acknowledge that.

Bang on. I love Gonchar's offense, but I don't think he puts us over the top. I'd put the East right now at 1) Pittsburgh 2) Washington 3) Philadelphia 4) Ottawa.

Let's not forget about Boston, who could be better as well with a full year out of Lucic and Savard (if he's still there).

I think we are still a middle of the (playoff) pack team and should finish around 5th in the conference.

The thing that's being overlooked about Gonchar he too, is the fact that he's missed 77 games in the past two seasons. That's damn near half the games. He won't be so much of a bargain if we average 40 games out of him at $5.5 million will he?

No, you're right, an injured Gonchar most of the season and it's a failure.
Here's the thing, I think the signing is overpaid by 0.5M. So considering that, what exactly could we do here with 0.5M more in cap space?

So you think $5 million is reasonable for Gonchar? Ok then, what could we have done? Signed Paul Martin instead. Despite being not as good offensively, he's easily as good defensively (I think he's better) and isn't in his adult diaper years as a hockey player.

He is not even close to being as good offensively. You are worried about Gonchar's health, how many games did Martin play last year ?

Yes I realize that Martin is not as good offensively, that's what I said. You know, that part you bolded. Thanks for repeating it for me though.

Gonchar has been injury for 2 years now. Once I can understand, but twice?

^^^
I was emphasizing that IMO he is not even in the same offensive realm as Gonchar, not just "not as good offensively", not even comparable. As for missing time, Gonchar has missed 81 games in the last 3 years, Martin has missed 77.

RobbyJ wrote:^^^
I was emphasizing that IMO he is not even in the same offensive realm as Gonchar, not just "not as good offensively", not even comparable. As for missing time, Gonchar has missed 81 games in the last 3 years, Martin has missed 77.

I'm not disagreeing about Gonchar being better, or even light years better. I thought I qualified the statement. I didn't realize that people were so sensitive (not just you, you aren't the first person to jump down my throat for not immediately dropping to my knees and fellating Gonchar) or else I would have been a little clearer. Yes, he's in a different league offensively, but he's a hell of a risk. IMO, Martin or Michalek would have been a safer way to go. Plus both are younger and cheaper.

As far as the injuries go, they are about the same. Martin missed 60 games this season, and the 4 seasons previous to that, missed 21 total. Gonchar on the other hand, missed 20 this season and 50+ the season before. But with Gonchar the fact that he's already old, I just think it's a huge risk, not to mention the other risk I mentioned of his decline, which will certainly happen at his age.

This signing to me is boom or bust. Either he's going to come in and play injury free, and do what everyone seems to think he's destined to, or he'll be a bust for whatever reason, be it injury, decline, or just plain suckdom.

You think Gonchar gets an "A"?

An "A"? No, I don't think so. It's Alfredsson as C, Phillips and Fisher as A s.

Hoags wrote:LOL @ Ian Mendes:

http://twitter.com/ian_mendes/status/17523969306

Flames moves today would be like if Sens brought back Redden & Corvo to solve their problems on the back end.

Sutter has to be the worst GM

that medal goes to sather.... sutter this year is the runner up.

desperate times in calgary. i think sutter gets replaced if this year is as bad as last. they won't even wait till the end. possibly get rid of both sutters. blow the team up and do an edmonton.

Sather takes the cake over the years... but today... Sutter is the king.

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:The way some people talk it sounds like we just signed MA Bergeron

Wow. You're really reaching here.

People aren't allowed to dislike this signing? I've been the most vocal today about this, and I've freely acknowledged his offensive abilities. It's everyone else who needs to take the rose coloured glasses off and realize that Gonchar isn't the be all end all. In fact, I see plenty of downside to this deal, which I've stated more than once. Very few people here want to even acknowledge that.

Bang on. I love Gonchar's offense, but I don't think he puts us over the top. I'd put the East right now at 1) Pittsburgh 2) Washington 3) Philadelphia 4) Ottawa.

Let's not forget about Boston, who could be better as well with a full year out of Lucic and Savard (if he's still there).

I think we are still a middle of the (playoff) pack team and should finish around 5th in the conference.

The thing that's being overlooked about Gonchar he too, is the fact that he's missed 77 games in the past two seasons. That's damn near half the games. He won't be so much of a bargain if we average 40 games out of him at $5.5 million will he?

No, you're right, an injured Gonchar most of the season and it's a failure.
Here's the thing, I think the signing is overpaid by 0.5M. So considering that, what exactly could we do here with 0.5M more in cap space?

So you think $5 million is reasonable for Gonchar? Ok then, what could we have done? Signed Paul Martin instead. Despite being not as good offensively, he's easily as good defensively (I think he's better) and isn't in his adult diaper years as a hockey player.

5 years... We could potentially be paying 3 of Karlsson, Rundblad, Cowen and Wiercioch 4M+ by that time.
And no offense to Martin, I like him but his best year was at 37 pts.

In New Jersey.

Don't think they play the trap on the PP...

hemlock wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:^^^
I was emphasizing that IMO he is not even in the same offensive realm as Gonchar, not just "not as good offensively", not even comparable. As for missing time, Gonchar has missed 81 games in the last 3 years, Martin has missed 77.

I'm not disagreeing about Gonchar being better, or even light years better. I thought I qualified the statement. I didn't realize that people were so sensitive (not just you, you aren't the first person to jump down my throat for not immediately dropping to my knees and fellating Gonchar) or else I would have been a little clearer. Yes, he's in a different league offensively, but he's a hell of a risk. IMO, Martin or Michalek would have been a safer way to go. Plus both are younger and cheaper.

As far as the injuries go, they are about the same. Martin missed 60 games this season, and the 4 seasons previous to that, missed 21 total. Gonchar on the other hand, missed 20 this season and 50+ the season before. But with Gonchar the fact that he's already old, I just think it's a huge risk, not to mention the other risk I mentioned of his decline, which will certainly happen at his age.

This signing to me is boom or bust. Either he's going to come in and play injury free, and do what everyone seems to think he's destined to, or he'll be a bust for whatever reason, be it injury, decline, or just plain suckdom.

There's quite the difference between "This signing is boom or bust" which I kinda agree with, and what you posted here:

http://www.gmhockey.com/this-just-in-f7/gonchar-to-ottawa-t4728-40.htm

"Brutal, too much, too old"...

which I definitely disagree with. HOw can you say it's "brutal" when you think there's a change it's a "boom"?

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:^^^
I was emphasizing that IMO he is not even in the same offensive realm as Gonchar, not just "not as good offensively", not even comparable. As for missing time, Gonchar has missed 81 games in the last 3 years, Martin has missed 77.

I'm not disagreeing about Gonchar being better, or even light years better. I thought I qualified the statement. I didn't realize that people were so sensitive (not just you, you aren't the first person to jump down my throat for not immediately dropping to my knees and fellating Gonchar) or else I would have been a little clearer. Yes, he's in a different league offensively, but he's a hell of a risk. IMO, Martin or Michalek would have been a safer way to go. Plus both are younger and cheaper.

As far as the injuries go, they are about the same. Martin missed 60 games this season, and the 4 seasons previous to that, missed 21 total. Gonchar on the other hand, missed 20 this season and 50+ the season before. But with Gonchar the fact that he's already old, I just think it's a huge risk, not to mention the other risk I mentioned of his decline, which will certainly happen at his age.

This signing to me is boom or bust. Either he's going to come in and play injury free, and do what everyone seems to think he's destined to, or he'll be a bust for whatever reason, be it injury, decline, or just plain suckdom.

There's quite the difference between "This signing is boom or bust" which I kinda agree with, and what you posted here:

http://www.gmhockey.com/this-just-in-f7/gonchar-to-ottawa-t4728-40.htm

"Brutal, too much, too old"...

which I definitely disagree with. HOw can you say it's "brutal" when you think there's a change it's a "boom"?

Because quite frankly, I don't think this signing goes well at all. AT. ALL.

For a 36 year old d-man, the term is too long (although I think it wouldn't have gotten done otherwise), and too much.

The guy is an outstanding defenceman in terms of offence. I'm not sold in the least on several things though, particularly his defensive commitment or ability to stay healthy. If those two things are ok, then I think the Sens are fine, but this has real potential to get ugly very quickly.

Bottom line, to me, it reeks of the Kovalev signing where Murray had to add term to "outbid" someone else. I don't think Ottawa is/was Gonchar's first choice, but unless Murray comes out and says something like "We had to add a 3rd year", we'll never know.

It's funny how you pick my posts apart but don't touch some of the other ridiculous comments on here like "There is literally no downside to this signing" or "He's elite, so he won't decline." In others words, homerism on PCP.

I want this signing to work. I surely do. I'm a Sens fan, just like you, but to ignore the obvious potential pitfalls of this signings is just plain irresponsible.

Now I know what N4L goes through daily on this site. 20 posters trying to brow beat their opinion on you is no fun. Next time, I'll tow the line since I have no desire to be put in the position where I have to defend my completely rational OPINION again. Aside from Sens4theCup and a couple of others, no-one here even wants to acknoledge that this could blow up in Murray's face.

Is it Sutter-level bad? No, in fact I like that Murray is taking a chance, since I think he's a little too cautious, but if he is taking a chance like this, I'd have preferred it was on a forward. I know, you seem to think there are no forwards available, as you posted earlier, but did Murray even inquire about Kovalchuk, or Frolov? Why does he continue to pile on the defence, which is clearly our biggest area of strength, instead of focusing on weaker areas?

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:

hemlock wrote:

Big Ev wrote:

hemlock wrote:

marakh wrote:The way some people talk it sounds like we just signed MA Bergeron

Wow. You're really reaching here.

People aren't allowed to dislike this signing? I've been the most vocal today about this, and I've freely acknowledged his offensive abilities. It's everyone else who needs to take the rose coloured glasses off and realize that Gonchar isn't the be all end all. In fact, I see plenty of downside to this deal, which I've stated more than once. Very few people here want to even acknowledge that.

Bang on. I love Gonchar's offense, but I don't think he puts us over the top. I'd put the East right now at 1) Pittsburgh 2) Washington 3) Philadelphia 4) Ottawa.

Let's not forget about Boston, who could be better as well with a full year out of Lucic and Savard (if he's still there).

I think we are still a middle of the (playoff) pack team and should finish around 5th in the conference.

The thing that's being overlooked about Gonchar he too, is the fact that he's missed 77 games in the past two seasons. That's damn near half the games. He won't be so much of a bargain if we average 40 games out of him at $5.5 million will he?

No, you're right, an injured Gonchar most of the season and it's a failure.
Here's the thing, I think the signing is overpaid by 0.5M. So considering that, what exactly could we do here with 0.5M more in cap space?

So you think $5 million is reasonable for Gonchar? Ok then, what could we have done? Signed Paul Martin instead. Despite being not as good offensively, he's easily as good defensively (I think he's better) and isn't in his adult diaper years as a hockey player.

5 years... We could potentially be paying 3 of Karlsson, Rundblad, Cowen and Wiercioch 4M+ by that time.
And no offense to Martin, I like him but his best year was at 37 pts.

In New Jersey.

Don't think they play the trap on the PP...

Yep, it's all about the PP. I'd rather a guy who is good at everything, is cheaper, and young enough for me not to have to worry about retirement and a giant anchor on our books.

It's laughable how fairweather some people are. I don't remember who, but someone today called Volchenkov a "dime a dozen" player. Seriously? Give me a Cussing break.

hemlock wrote:
Now I know what N4L goes through daily on this site. 20 posters trying to brow beat their opinion on you is no fun. Next time, I'll tow the line since I have no desire to be put in the position where I have to defend my completely rational OPINION again. Aside from Sens4theCup and a couple of others, no-one here even wants to acknoledge that this could blow up in Murray's face.

Any move that Murray could have done today could blow up his face, there's no guarantees in anything.

We needed an elite PMD to get our PP and transition game out of the gutter and to show Karlsson and our other prospects how it's done. Murray went out and got the best one available and he did it quick.

Could this blow up in our face ? Sure. Did we overpay a bit, is the 3rd year a concern ? Yes. But we don't want to sign any D-men to longterm contracts when we've got some of the best defence prospects coming up through the system.

At some point we have to roll the dice and I feel BM went out and got what the team (desperately) needed. Listen to Murray's comments you need D-men to move the puck, have a quick transition game and a threat from the point on the PP. We don't need a shot blocking pylon.

Gonchar's comments make me feel better as well. He's excited to play here and in Canada ( says he always does) and he wants to play in Sochi. Excellent attitude so far.

I understand the concerns but I think we did good.

Now that the excitement has died down, I'm starting to agree more with Hemlock here. I still think Gonchar will help a lot, but there's no guarantee that a 35-year old Gonchar will look like the Gonchar that we all know and drooled over when he was with Pittsburgh. Even if the signing doesn't work well, we can all be happy that the criticism will be all on Gonchar and Murray and people will ignore guys like Karlssona and Cowen who will have their ups and downs. Hopefully his recent plague of injuries subsides when he puts on the Sens jersey. However, even if it doesn't work out, I don't think Murray will be around to take the blame.

I watched the same amount of Pens games that I did Sens games for the most part, and Gonchar's biggest strengths are definately moving the puck into the zone by himself (always keeping his head up and making the smart move), his shot and vision on the PP, and also a very underrated strength, KEEPING the puck in the zone on the PP. Many times our PP's fail because we can't keep the puck in to keep the pressure on the penalty killers. Gonchar is slick at keeping the puck in when it looks like it will cross the blue-line and go out of the zone.

As for his faults, he does get lazy at times and he seemed to be very tired this year, especially in the postseason. But that can be linked to his injuries and the fact that his team was in two straight Cup finals and he just cam back from the Olympics as well. Doesn't really relate to him being on the Sens, but I wonder how Malkin will do without his mentor leading him on the ice and American life in general.

FWIW, Gonchar actually wanted 4 years, but he settled for the 3. Pittsburgh just didn't want to give him the 3rd year, and they would have paid him like $4.5 mill for 2.

This is a GOOD signing, but I don't think it's AMAZING when you're talking about an older player like Gonchar. This doesn't fully fix Murray's reputation of being a terrible trader and FA signer.

I want Murray to take one more chance and sign a guy like Kariya. I don't think this team is ready for primetime just yet.