xXx..CK..xXx

When Aaron Asham turned the puck over, it was usually because he lacked skill. When Galchenyuk turns the puck over it's more often than not because of poor decision making. There are also goons who lack skill and have a low hockey IQ. I just don't particularly think Asham was one of those guys. I'm not personally attacking Galchenyuk's hockey IQ, but the Russian ice is much bigger than here in North America and so retrieving the puck after a dump in would be a little more difficult. Less chance to wear the defense down by getting the body on them deep which in turn leads to a relatively easy loss of possession.

What I’m saying is that the team would be in similar shape had it traded Pacioretty and not Subban. Pacioretty is an elite player as well. That would leave us in a similar predicament with Subban, had his contract been expiring at this very point in time. Which is hypothetical in and of itself, but not totally irrelevant. My question was based on nothing more than curiosity because I would have been surprised if as many people would have hoped Subban would get traded had he been on our team now, instead of Pacioretty. They draw comparisons because Subban and Pacioretty are only 6 months apart in age, and age has been the primary reason in stating that we should move Pacioretty rather than resigning him at this point in his lifespan. If we had Subban on our team, I’d have a hard time imagining everyone stating so obviously that we should have no part in a contract extension with an aging player. The only reason I’m saying that Pacioretty is off the team in this scenario, is because we’d be that much less competitive as well. The disconnect in perception here is that some people don’t see Pacioretty as an elite player, as they do Subban. That’s fine but I don’t agree. Pacioretty hasn’t scored a ridiculous amount of points in any given season, but given the right situation, he could have. Players in the past decade or so seem to have relatively low totals on the Canadiens, perhaps because of our defensive minded approach. I don’t think we had a scenario where either Pacioretty or Subban had to get traded, and that wasn’t my point. My point stems from the fact that...... 1) Available cap space has not been an issue for our team 2) Pacioretty loves it here and clearly wants to stay (though he better ignore a lot) 3) We can be a competitive team while Pacioretty is still relevant 4) We’re expecting an organization who has had its intentions made unwillingly clear to get a significant return 5) Elite talent hasn’t wanted to sign here via free agency 6) A return similar to Carolina’s leaves us with the possibility of never having a player of Pacioretty’s capability even in his mid 30s as part of the return 7) We need goal scorers and Pacioretty has been our best goal scorer with a spice of Brendan Gallagher and Alex Galchenyuk (gone) I have the same impression as yourself in that I don’t have great expectations with our current GM being in charge of the rebuild. That ties in with why I don’t want Bergevin being the one to trade him. It doesn’t make sense to me for someone to say they don’t have faith in our management, but they still want our best player traded by them.

In this hypothetical scenario, we never traded Subban but Pacioretty was traded and so we don’t have him on the team. It’s tough to find a comparable to the Subban trade but the best compareable by position and age would have been as though we traded Max Pacioretty two years ago for either Tomas Vanek or Zach Parise one for one. That’s a similar deal to that of Subban for Weber, only LW for LW. With Subban and Vanek, we are no more of a competitor than we are with Pacioretty and Weber. Regardless of whether or not that can be debated, let’s say that we’d likely be in a similar position as we are now. If Subban’s contract were up after this season do we look to trade him? Entertaining offers at the trade deadline if we’re not a good team would seem obvious, however going into the season with a mission to trade him would seem frustrating to most. If only because of a relatively low expectation on the return when compared to what he actually deserves to bring in. In my opinion, the same argument could be made for Pacioretty holding the tide over until the rebuild fully takes place. Trading Pacioretty for futures will likely make our team Edmonton Oilers bad for a few seasons and that’s why everyone who believes we should trade him for futures already acknowledges that we won’t be good for 5 years “anyway”. I think the only only reason we wouldn’t be Edmonton Oilers bad has nothing to do with Pacioretty ot Subban and more to do with whether or not Price will ever show up again. Price can make our our team more competitive than it should be and while most people look at that as a negative thing due to the fact that it constantly “allows management” to hide behind our weaknesses, this is a reason why we should be careful with any assets that we already have who are proven to be elite. Domi is arguable naive but he’s not fully wrong when he states that this team has some “pieces”. What always gets lost lost in these arguments are the specifics. While one person doesn’t understand why we should hold on to Pacioretty until he’s 34, when we’ll once again be competitive, no one who is stating that we should perhaps have thought about keeping Pacioretty believes it will take 5 years to be a contending team again. IF it does take 5 years to do so, then that will have further demonstrated an incompetence in management, not an obvious timeline that we should have been targeting. 3 years max should be the target date, no pun intended, and Pacioretty will be entering that season at the old age of 31, 3 years from now.

If Subban were still on the team instead of Pacioretty and his contract were up after this season, would it be time to trade him for whatever future assets we could acquire without even having thought twice about signing him to an extension?

I agree but in all these circumstances outside of Price they were new faces coming in. Bergevin having acquired those players will rate them as highly as anyone. In fairness, on the other end, he also acquired Semin and Kassian and then let them go, if that’s how one wants to look at that situation. I guess one could look at it as you stated and summize that the organization wants to move on from the majority of its old core (outside of Price and perhaps Gallagher) and that this is the natural process of that. The only thing I’ve read is that the “organization is looking to trade him as soon as possible”, and I don’t think that has to be said by anyone in the organization, even by Bergevin to Pacioretty’s agent. If Bergevin didn’t even say that to Pacioretty’s agent or a reporter, then all of this is being said for nothing. That’s not even getting into the argument about why the organization wants to get rid of Pacioretty so obviously in the first place. I know that much of the knowledgeable fan base discuss age as being a prime reason but had we been one year removed from a successful season, I can’t imagine that this would have been a great justification in and of itself when it comes to not resigning our captain. So it’s the timing? For me, it can work either way. I can easily see us getting a few young players in return for him who in turn make our team better than it would ever have been 5 years down the road had we kept him. On the other hand, I can also see us having a decent team in 3 years and needing that extra piece once again while Pacioretty pots goals elsewhere. I can’t argue that some years of his contract would not turn out to be bad, but it turns out that way for many players, first liners or not. I’d rather be worried about having an overpaid top 6 player, with elite potential than an overpaid 3rd liner. I’ve accepted that Pacioretty will be moved. I’m hopeful I’ll be happy with the return.

He did. In Boca Raton, Florida.

It seems to me that it’s been very difficult in recent years for our organization to have contract talks with players who have talent and are going to request to get paid. This is not an isolated incident. If we had a new GM and his voice of reason were to state that the team is headed in a completely different direction and Pacioretty is going to be shipped out despite the reality that we may have to accept less than adequate value, I’d be all open ears. Contract talks with Markov and Radulov went south a year ago and I’m sure there are other examples people can bring up a little more prior to that. Some were okay with the moves or lack there of but in every instance the majority of the fan base were upset. This is the first time that it seems as though the majority of the fan base are actually in support of sending away someone who has reason to be well respected around the league. Is it simply because this is the final nail in the coffin? If we’re in such a state of duress, where we may as not sign our own good players, it’s because of no one other than our GM. One year ago we were a Radulov or Markov signing away from being relatively competitive and a year later it seems it would be ludicrous to sign our best player to an extension. Had we signed Markov or Radulov would we be signing Pacioretty to an extension? Would it be the right thing to do? I hope these questions get answered. I didn’t expect to be good last year and do not think the outlook is great for this year, although we can only surprise. With that being said, I don’t agree with those that think it will be an eternal wait. My belief ties in with what I stated about how we weren’t too far prior to not resigning Markov or Radulov. Now we already have some exciting youth coming in. Trading Pacioretty only prolongs how long it has to take for us to be good in my opinion. If he’s not being reasonable in his demands that’s another story but it seems I’ve been hearing that narrative a lot lately.

Let's get a good return for Pacioretty and I'm all for moving him. On the other hand, I don't know who said anything about signing him to an overly long term deal. 6 x 7.5 would be fine any way you slice it and if Pacioretty isn't willing to take it, good riddance. He won't be getting anything much better than that on the open market anyway. Considering we currently have very few free agents who sign here, having left us with unusable cap space, signing an actual performer, who's been our best player for many years doesn't seem so out of the ordinary. Eric Staal is an exception and Max Pacioretty can be as well. Anyone who thinks he's going to fall off a cliff may be incorrect because he's demonstrated throughout his career that he comes back from injuries quickly, heals unlike any other and I except that to translate into longevity in his career. Combine this with the fact that this situation has unfolded the way it has and the rest of his career will either be a shit-show, or he will be playing with a sort of chip on his shoulder. Regardless of the reality that every player is ageing, the point is that people want him gone regardless of what the return is. That's not applicable to some, but it is to others. There are different "groups" when it comes to those who want him gone. Recently we heard from people who were advocating trading Pacioretty due to the fact that he was the only asset we had who could get a return that would fill our needs. The more time passes us by, the more we see those who want Pacioretty traded simply because they want to be over with the "drama" surrounding him. At what point does the scale tip towards signing Pacioretty to an extension when we realize that the value isn't there? It seems to me that there are many who's scales would never tip the other way. It's possible that management is in that camp as well, which is an issue.

I get you. This is one of those crystal ball scenarios where no one truly knows the outcome... ? It’s also easy to downgrade one’s expectations when everyone’s telling you his demise is there to be seen. I’ve simply always viewed Pacioretty as a quick healer, for instance and one that defies the logic of time when it comes to things like regressing. His nickname is still Wolverine somewhere deep down in there. I think it’s fair to expect that he’s going to start having a down year here and there after having been a model of consistency in his younger age. Similar to last season. However I still won’t be surprised when he tears it up, relatively speaking, in 5 years. Rick Nash did “happen” but I don’t get the same vibe with Pacioretty. For every Rick Nash, there are Eric Staals and Alexander Ovechkin. What I do believe is that in his older age, a lot of his statistical output will become more reliant on those he’s surrounded with, as well as the manner in which his coaching staff uses him. That’ll be something that will be a little bit out of his control.

He’s going to be producing those stats for more than 2-3 more years. I firmly believe it. Eric Staal scored 42 this year and Max will be his age in 4 years.

I have a hard time believing it as well. However, if it was his agent who started this then the story is pretty much meaningless and we shouldn’t expect him to get moved until the deadline. I also think that while the media likes a story, if it were only his agent who made a comment on this topic, it shouldn’t have been reported as though this was something that was written in stone.

I’m fine with trading Pacioretty in the end because of specific circumstance, but I hate that it came down to getting 2-3 picks and a prospect if that’s what ends up being the case. We’ll see how it plays out but that type of return will only be subdued amongst the fan base by the fact that he’d been on the market for some time, as well as the fact that our intentions were made clear. If we’re better in 2 years due to making the trade, then by all means. If we only might be better in say, 3 years, I would have preferred resigning him to an extension. The only thing I somewhat understand is if Pacioretty wanted long term as well as a no movement clause, which has been thrown out there as a reason for the Habs having made their intentions clear to whatever reporter that spilled the beans. I think those things are sometimes waived anyway and so one would think they could figure something out if that really were the biggest hurdle.

The Habs have zero chance to make the playoffs..... never. One reason to resign Pacioretty is because he is currently our best offensive threat. Another reason to resign him would be if the assets we get for him are not all that impressive. But no, instead we can just trade him because we’re going to be bad anyway. Moving Pacioretty for futures increases the odds that we will be bad in the short term. In that sense, the prophecy will be fulfilled. I don’t understand the logic of that (we’re going to be bad anyway) being the reasoning we should move him.

I’ve been on my own island when it comes to Pacioretty but I don’t think any type of drama should be the reason we trade Pacioretty. That’s what I always feared the most. We should be trading him because he is hypothetically truly about to reach his best before date and won’t deserve his impending raise and term. That point is the one that’s up for debate. The Canadiens themselves have created the drama more than Pacioretty as they’ve apparently stated that they won’t extend Pacioretty and are looking to move him. Teams don’t trade elite players on expiring contracts in August or September. If they do, that’s an issue in and of itself and quite honestly I’m surprised and didn’t expect the hurricanes to trade Skinner when they did. They got a bad return in my opinion and everyone’s acting surprised. We should be holding on to Pacioretty, see how the season plays out and look for the best return we can get at the deadline, which at absolute worst should be compareable to what Skinner’s return was anyway. The best case scenario is an even better return sometime during the season or a change of heart between Pacioretty and the team (based on recent history, this won’t happen). That the Habs shot themselves in the foot with such bold proclamations, is their own fault but I don’t like the thought of letting go of Pacioretty ‘ASAP’ at this point in time.

I’m somewhere in the middle with Scherbak. I have high expectations of him in this league in general but it doesn’t mean it will come to fruition this year. I see a Voracek type player who instead finishes more compared to Voracek being a passer. It all depends on health as well as opportunity but I’d be hoping for 40-50 points from him. If he’s in the bottom 6 then I agree with the 20-30 point range.

Yes. Yes they do. I drafted Price for a few years in a row prior to last year and I’ve had Weber the past few years. I also had Markov and Plekanec a few years ago. I also drafted Gallagher last year which worked out quite well. On the other hand, I drafted Mete relatively early last year and that didn’t go as planned. I’ve always wanted Pacioretty and Galchenyuk but they seem to get drafted earlier than I’d consider them. Possibly because I’m often drafting with other Hab fans!

Shout out to Joel Armia. I’ll be watching you closely for 5 games plus.

I don’t think the appropriate attitude is to suggest that we won’t be good for x amount of years. Teams are supposed to be able to turn things around rather quickly in the modern NHL. But if we keep doing things because we’re not going to be good anyway, that’s exactly what we’ll be. Not good anyway. My fear with Pacioretty as I defended him for months was always that we wouldn’t get a solid return for him and people would be happy anyway. Now that everyone has caught up to that sentiment due to the team having made it abundantly clear that they want to (apparently) move him, I’m just hoping we actually can get something of substance in return.

I’m not entirely sure what the topic is right now but I will guarantee that Pacioretty will not be a 20 goal scorer in 2-3 years. He may have a 20 goal season in 2-3 years but he’ll then have 3 or 4 more ~ 30 goal seasons after that. One can compare him to Rick Nash, who seems to have fallen off a cliff at around this “feared best before date” in relation to Pacioretty. One can also compare him to Ovechkin who while being a more elite goal scorer than Pacioretty, was also called over the hill, but then had an even more outstanding season than expected a few years into his 30s. Either way, Pacioretty is his own person so no one can know which comparison, if any, are accurate. However, from anything that I’ve seen of him over his career, he has generally been a model of consistency statistically over an entire season, and has also always healed even quicker than your average player when it has come to some relatively serious injuries. When looked at from a neutral standpoint, I don’t see why there would be any more pessimism than optimism when it comes to attempting to predict what the future holds for Pacioretty. I don’t think he’s lost that much of a step, and even if he has, he will always remain a dangerous shooter in the offensive zone. Regardless, while I would personally like to see him resign long term with the Habs, I don’t see why this discussion is even on the table considering all signs point to him being traded by the deadline. If the Habs have a good season, only then will I be unsure of what would happen with Pacioretty, but based on Bergevin’s comments, I would assume he’ll be gone even in that scenario.

I agree fully with the fact that there are holes in our lineup and that they haven’t really been addressed in the short term. With that being said technically speaking, Petry is a puck moving defenseman by comparative standards to other defensemen in the league. I can’t argue that he’s really a #3 playing a #1 role though. Pacioretty himself mentioned Radulov’s departure as having influenced his season negatively. He said that Radulov was strong on the puck and allowed Pacioretty more space. I think he’ll be great this year and then moved anyway. Armia is an interesting choice on the right.

I'd also like to add that a lot depends on what one's expectations have been on the Pacioretty file. If one has felt as though he should have been moved for quite some time now, it will seem as though other teams have been prioritizing player after player over Pacioretty. If one feels as though he wasn't ever likely to be moved prior to this year's trade deadline, or if they were hoping he would remain a Hab, it won't seem that anything out of the ordinary is transpiring.

Players like Pacioretty don’t get traded during the off season for fair value. With the exception of really only a couple of teams, teams don’t have that “contender” or “seller”mentality prior to the season starting. Pacioretty has value, and other teams are interested. There isn’t much to be thought about it when we look at what’s happening, or hasn’t happened, with Jeff Skinner. He’s another quality winger who becomes a free agent after this year, and he’s likely not going to be moved any time soon either.

It’s funny how some say that Pacioretty has done all his work in the past without a legit number one centerman and then others say he needs “this or that” to produce. I expect 25-35 goals from him this year, and that’s fine.

Outside of having pronounced Pacioretty dead to the future of the organization, I don’t see how anything at all has hurt his trade value. While Pacioretty was demanding too much, if everything with the Kings is true, they were also low balling him with an offer of 6x6, which is also too low for him. I don’t know what he will end up getting but what I do know is that Pacioretty is well worth 8x8. I’m not saying I would pay it myself, but it’s not far off from what I would give him and people get too caught up in 500,000 to a million. The term is a couple of years too long, admittedly, but the money isn’t so far off from what he deserves, especially with the cap going up year after year. Signing an extension with whichever team he’s traded to is also a byproduct of the organization having made it obvious that they’d like to move him. Any normal situation would have played out differently.

The reason he’s not being talked about in grandiose terms is because his name has been involved in rumors for quite some time, as well as the fact that the organization hasn’t done him any service when it comes to recent comments surrounding his future with the club. A name like Matt Duchene took a hit once he fell out of favour within his organization. I understand that I’m currently discussing a topic with people who have very little positive to say about Matt Duchene, but he ended up doing quite alright last year after having been moved, despite having taken a few jabs, and that’s when everyone got quiet about him. Despite public view, which is similar to the public view on Pacioretty, Sakic did quite well with such an under appreciated player being quite readily available to the league. Hopefully we can do the same as I’m certain there are many GMs who would appreciate Pacioretty, needless to say. While it’s certainly possible, I’m not convinced that Pacioretty was actively being shopped with great desperation at last year’s deadline. Bergevin hasn’t convinced me that he without a doubt has such a clear plan from year to year. In short, just because Pacioretty is (apparently) going to get traded “as soon as possible”, this does not mean that it was the clear cut sentiment of the organization to do the same thing at last year’s deadline. This, despite the media having said so, as well as many fans having had the expectation that he would get moved. What may very well end up happening is what happens to so many players out there, and he may just eventually get traded at the deadline due to the reality that he’s an impending free agent. If that’s the case, then people talked about him being shipped constantly, well in advance, without anything transpiring. If you ask me, that’s demonstrative of a player having generated even more buzz than your average joe around the league.