xXx..CK..xXx

That was my proposal for them from a few weeks ago.

It's not so bad but if the alternative is that we need to acquire two top 6 centers as a result of having not one, it's probably the more reasonable expectation. I'm probably not the best person on this topic though because I actually see this as being somewhat similar to the Semin situation now that you said that and I was in the minority with my thought process there. I was frustrated when we let Semin walk not because I was in love with Semin but because we were void of a top 6 player with skill and had no one to replace him, but most people's response was that he didn't have the skill of a top 6 player anyway so my argument was moot. The coaching staff has approached this situation similarly, at least in the playoffs this year, in that they did not play him in a top 6 role even though we need more top 6 skill. The main difference is that more fans seem to believe in Galchenyuk as a player than Semin and think he can fill that top 6 center role. It's one thing for some of us to say he should be slotted in as a top 6 center but I don't think it can be argued that the coaching staff seems to feel the way most fans did about Semin when he was let go and no one batted an eye. They have yet to act like they believe he belongs in the top 6, let alone at center. I personally haven't seen any glaring deficiency in his game when he plays center, but it looks like Julien has in his brief stint with us thus far. Not only that, he wasn't even in the top 6 as a winger. So while I would play him in a top 6 center role myself, especially since we have no top 6 centers, I've been through this before.

May 23rd I hadn't seen the article until Lovetts mentioned it. http://www.gohabsgo.com/2017/05/23/larry-robinson-sounds-off-on-pk-subban/ Enjoyed Ott. My perception of him changed due to his brief stint with us and I believe he will do well in his new role with the Blues.

I agree and I think as it stands, the answer is to play Galchenyuk as a top 6 center and to acquire another top 6 center. I feel as though Julien didn't really think he had a weak top 6 with Danault and Plekanec because of the past success he had with Plekanec as well as all the things he probably heard from his Bruins' players when they faced him. The fact is that while there can be an argument made that neither Plekanec nor Danault should have been in the top 6, I think there's no doubt that both of them should not have been in the top 6 simultaneously. I guess from the coach's perspective Galchenyuk-Danault or Galchenyuk-Plekanec was no better than Danault-Plekanec but I think it is. Galchenyuk scored the game winning goal in overtime in our last regular season game and had 3 points in his last 5 playoff games. He was still producing to an extent. Your statement is the only reason I would ever consider trading him even though I think he'll have a good year. Although I used to think he could be used in a versatile way, he seems to need some consistency.

If Plekanec could have been good for anything last year I'd assume it could have been this. At least the defensive mentor part. I think the whole Galchenyuk thing is overblown. He's scored some big game winning goals for us and had an injury riddled season. I am a little troubled by how Julien handled Galchenyuk since being with us but I'm willing to see how a full season plays out. I expect good things from Galchenyuk next season.

I agree. I mentioned in another thread that he hasn't played as well in the playoffs as he has in the regular season in general although his numbers have improved since Waite. This year he played well, but faced another top goalie in my opinion. I still don't question having Carey Price as our starting goalie. I understand the thought that we need our team to improve overall but I still stand by the fact he does give us a chance to win every year. In addition, having Price on another team and another decent goalie like Rinne or Halak on the Habs doesn't ensure that our offense magically becomes top tier. Right now, our goaltending is top tier. The only thing I question is how Price seems to control when he plays, when he gets pulled and all that. In addition, I like the Pittsburgh model of having two top goalies better than our model. I've always really liked Montoya but he's like a Bernier and we saw how that worked out for Anaheim. Having a goalie like Price leaves us little reason to have as solid a backup because it's not as necessary. Given that reality, we have a pretty good backup but we're still no Pittsburgh. Come to think of it, that was us in 2010 with Halak and Price and it was also Vancouver with Schneider and Luongo in Vancouver and neither of those teams were able to make it work in the long run. On the other hand, Pittsburgh decided to keep Fleury and he carried the load when Murray was injured. As I wrote that sentence, Schultz put the Pens up 2-1 with 8 minutes left so they are a few minutes away from cup final. Edit: Dzingel just tied it up 2-2 with 5 mins left.

Yeah, I think there are small divides that can never be resolved because there are so many uncertainties surrounding the actual reasoning behind the trade. I'm not a blind follower of management but I would like to believe they know more than any of us in terms of what goes on behind the scenes. I will say that I do not believe that Therrien would have requested the player be gone. In addition, I would like to think that if there were indeed unrelated hockey reasons, we got a pretty good player in return. Nothing comparable to Bourque or Thibault (liked Rucinsky but not for Roy). All in all, I'm not even personally convinced that there even was a personal reason for the trade because it was Poile who approached Bergevin at the very last minute. It's tough to separate emotion from reality because we had a relatively good season where most people predicted the Habs to beat an alright Rangers team. Those same people want the manager fired because those results didn't materialize. The stars don't align because we're all hockey minds here and I'm not sure how Bergevin was supposed to be the only one to know that we were in trouble prior to that series. We are not Leafs fans. We have experienced some seasons with a comparatively weak offensive unit and we've still had a chance to make some noise. The Leafs never had Carey Price, who gives us a shot to win in any given year. The more we take that for granted, the more we're going to figure out how much we miss him once he retires and goaltending is no longer a strength of ours.

That's fine but would you also spend your entire time with fellow Habs fans in the real world chirping our own team in front of those other teams' fans? Even without those other fans there? At least have some pride (not you personally). Not sure what to make of all of it. All I know is that I wouldn't enjoy watching Habs games with a friend or fan like that. That being said, sometimes people are also really hard on their team because they are passionate, but quite often that passion can lead to a tinted non-rose colored lense as well.

What I didn't realize is how many people became Avalanche and Flames fans after those trades. There's something childish going on here with your mentality and in this case Bergevin is your father.

Saw about 20 seconds of Sergachev today before I had to run out for an appointment. Looking forward to him making the big club.

I've actually never enjoyed debating anything on here more than the Weber-Subban trade and I'm on the other side of the fence. I could talk about it all day. I just realized for he first time that this thread feels like a Nashville Predators forum though, not a Habs forum. The more vocal people are those trying to debate how the Habs lost the deal. Call it a difference in personality, but even if it were true, that's something I'd try to keep on the down low. It's not something I would be constantly bragging about amongst Habs fans. Those are the types of fans that other fan bases take pleasure in chirping.

Last year we didn't make the playoffs. This season we did. Forget the argument that we are any better. How does the evidence show we're worse? That being said, three facts about last year are that Carey Price got injured, Brendan Gallagher got injured, and Subban had a terrible year by his standards. Despite how it seems, Subban and Eberle were probably my favorite Canadian Junior players of all time. I don't know how Subban wasn't picked up in he first round. It's crazy. This doesn't change the fact that while I pride myself on trying to have an open mind in life, I was harder on Subban than any other player last year because he actually deserved it. A close second would be Eller in the type of bonehead plays I am talking about. His fanboys are forgetting how he played last season, truly. As long as those hockey reasons for the trade remain mystical in your mind, then those reasons that the trade hurt our team should remain mystical as well. You've created the thought that the move was lateral, and that seems like a silly reason to complain about a trade unless one is irrationally attached to P.K. Subban in an emotional way. At least I register that other people have mentioned how the move potentially hurt our transition game but the main thing we actually lost is entertainment value. Rivers are being cried over that. We can continue to ignore that our team played more as a unit and improved on the power play, or we can criticize our coaches because their system doesn't revolve around P.K. Subban's style of play. Because that's all we continue to hear. And sure, let's keep thinking that this was as bad a trade as losing Patrick Roy even before Nashville lifts he cup. Trading Price and seeing him lift a cup (which I believe would happen) would be the equivalent. Not trading PK Subban for an equal but different and more renown player.

While I didn't mind Therrien as much as others, I completely agree that It seems as though Laviolette has pushed the right buttons with Subban. I give him huge kuddos for that. Like you, I'm not sure that would have happened in Montreal. The Radulov argument has been counteracted with the fact that Weber helped his decision in coming here. I think Weber deserves credit for helping our power play. I knew people would bring up Muller, but that's too easy to say. It doesn't change the fact that Weber seems to get more shots through. It's similar to comparing Burns to Weber. Burns gets more shots through than anyone else and Weber gets more through than others. I think it's obvious that most of the issues that were brought up about Subban would not show themselves in his first year after being traded. If being traded isn't enough for someone to introspect and make adjustments, then I don't know what is. He truly would have to be a legitimate narcissist to cause problems in the locker room of a new team right away after apparently having trouble with his previous team. I don't know if Subban actually was a problem in the room. At the very least though, it seems safe to conclude that he would have felt a lot more comfortable and "at home" in Montreal after years of being there. I can see how Nashville benefitted, thus the win for them as well, but it doesn't mean he would have been this way in Montreal without having dealt with being traded. It doesn't mean he wouldn't have been either, but the shock of being traded will have a blow to the ego and maybe he wants to prove everyone wrong more than ever. He was motivated and that's fine and to be respected. Im sure Edmonton isn't complaining about the problems we had with Kassian either. So what? Subban has no problem being a shut down defenseman. He can be physical and skates well and can shadow anyone as a result. I for one never thought he was as bad defensively as say, a Karlsson, although I think Karlsson is better offensively. The issue was his individualistic play and turnovers. Because of reasons which have been touched on, he seems to be playing more of a complete game now. With that being said, in game 5 against Nashville, he did a spin-o-rama behind the back pass as the last man back in his defensive zone which led to a breakaway for Anaheim. Those are the types of plays that I don't personally miss even though yes you'll see someone like Emelin do a similar play and turn it over as the last man back from time to time so it's not only him who does it.

What I don't understand is how people don't realize that Subban and Weber will have different impacts on their respective teams. When the trade happened, I hated it. As I learned more about the situation (still before last season) I saw how it could have been a win-win for both teams. I still support that notion and believe in it very much. Those who worry about Weber and Subban's respective futures to make a point, suffer from anxiety. Those who say it's a win now are only partially right. Weber played better than Subban for much of the season. He was also our best player in the playoffs and Subban has been one of Nashville's better players as well, but I wouldn't say best. Make of that what you will. Nashville genuinely has a deeper team than the Habs both on offense as well as defense. People thought this was the case even before the trade. At least I did. I've been watching and Subban has just been a piece of the puzzle. On the Habs, I couldn't envision him being just a piece of the puzzle because we need him more than Nashville does (we also need Weber more than Nashville does). There's no doubt that he tried to do much on our team. That's not a slight on Subban because he had to, but it's still true. The same analysis can be used with Nashville. The best argument I can see is that perhaps it's true that Nashville relied too much on Weber similar to how the Habs relied too much on Subban. The trade changed the identity of our team for that reason. Seemingly, however, the Habs still rely heavily on Weber, but Nashville doesn't need to rely so heavily on Subban. Again, not a slight against him. It's easy to look at Nashville in the final and say that they've won the trade but I can guarantee you that I personally would not have made the opposite claim if the Habs went further than Nashville because there's no I in team. I still would have thought of it as a win-win. I'm assuming if we made the cup final, players like Lehkonen, Pacioretty and Price would have also had to have stepped up to the plate. Subban does have a personality that rubbed some people the wrong way and people seem to dismiss that as being because of the coach. Similar to how Habs29 has argued that Boucher may have learned something after his first stint as coach and then getting fired, it would surprise me very little if Subban learned from getting traded. Subban has also said that Nashville has worked with him and supported him with his off ice endeavors, since he does have many interests off ice. Montreal could have done a better job of this with him but on the other hand, he's only been in Nashville for one season and let's see how things play out in that regard the longer their relationship lasts. If they do win this year, I'm sure that will be much easier 🙂 As for Montreal, our power play sucked for years. We went from 25th in the league to 13th and Weber had the second most goals by a defenseman In the league. Does that answer the question as to one of the ways the trade made our team better now? Or was our power play better because of all the power play assists Price had now that Condon was out? If this isn't a positive from the trade, then some other people are in denial. Finally, as for the comment that those who defend the trade, which is not even what I consider myself to be doing are only those who support management, this is not the case. Look who Bergevin acquired to help our power play two seasons ago: Semin and Kassian. Look how stupid those moves turned out to be and I called him out when he let his own two acquisitions(mistakes?) go before the new year. Either way you look at it, that turned out to be terrible GMing in my opinion. This trade has its positive elements, including the fact that it helped our power play. No, I'm not arguing that it was the only reason we made the trade. Subban can be dangerous on the power play as well but it you watch Nashville, he's getting all the assists. On Montreal, we had him blasting from the point and it became ineffective because he would fire wide or other teams would swarm him. For whatever reason, I had more confidence in Weber getting the shot through to the net on our power play, although I would have liked a little more shots from him on the PP in the playoffs. On Montreal, it would have been hard for Subban to be the assist man on the power play because we don't have a Ryan Ellis.

You have it backwards. I don't give a damn about Subban, win or lose, but we're on a Habs website and people take joy in seeing another team succeed all the while actually criticizing our player and boasting about our team's misfortunes. I don't hate Subban but I dislike Nashville. I also do not like Ottawa, Pittsburgh or Anaheim and I live right on the border of Orange County and Long Beach in California. I've said nothing about Subban and I don't see why I would. He's been a piece of the puzzle. On the other hand people have been literally mocking Weber's leadership or trying to diminish its importance when that has nothing to do with Nashville's success this year. Those are are the trolls, not me. By the way, I wasn't the one who gave you a down vote the other day when you responded to something I said. I actually agreed with you for the most part.