Trade Subban traded to Nashville

[Commandant]

Could actually care less what Nashville is paying its players.

But my point is, if you had skipped on bridge deal, you would of paid quite similar in long run. But, I am basing on vague recollection of debate from several years ago and those who know much more about salary stuff than I.

But "pay through the nose" rhetoric is 100% directly aimed at making Habs Mgmt look bad, that is your only point it seems (as Subban dosent even play for Montreal anymore) and if it didn't reflect badly, it would likely become one of your irrelevant intangibles and not worthy debating.

The guy with the biggest agenda of all accusing others of having an agenda. thats cute.

The point is that MB misidentified what he had in Subban - he had a beast, but treated him as a question mark - and therefore forced himself into the position where he had to award him that huge contract. If the contract is a consideration the trade, or used as justification for it - which is odd on the face of it, since Weber's deal is arguably worse - then the trade is a case of the early mistake compounding itself.

Bingo

if you are using the contract as a reason Subban had to be traded, you have to recognize the mistakes that led to such a contract were made by Bergevin.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I don't think the contract was a primary factor in either side doing what they did. If it was, one would think it would have been more on Poile's mind than Bergevin. Here we are theorizing that Bergevin was unhappy with being 'forced' to pay up the nose for Subban. Meanwhile Poile literally had to match Philadelphia's offer sheet on Weber so if anyone's hands were really tied in terms of dishing out for a contract, I'd tend to lean more towards Nashville.

[Scott462]

I don't think the contract was a primary factor in either side doing what they did. If it was, one would think it would have been more on Poile's mind than Bergevin. Here we are theorizing that Bergevin was unhappy with being 'forced' to pay up the nose for Subban. Meanwhile Poile literally had to match Philadelphia's offer sheet on Weber so if anyone's hands were really tied in terms of dishing out for a contract, I'd tend to lean more towards Nashville.

Another GM had to show Polie how much Weber was worth.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I think it's extremely telling that Poile matched the offer sheet. There was pretty much no price he wasn't willing to pay to keep Weber. I just don't quite agree with the theory that Bergevin was upset about the contract negotiations and traded him away in part due to Subban's contract negotiations and the manner they went down. While I've disagreed with some moves management have made, it portrays Bergevin as some type of big baby. I guess we as fans are just so unlucky to have that GM. If anyone was frustrated with the way their respective contract situations were handled, it should be Poile who was forced to match an offer for Weber that was out of his control. I'm not saying he regretted the choice, but that would have to make anyone feel uncomfortable.

[DON]

The guy with the biggest agenda of all accusing others of having an agenda. thats cute.

Aww shucks...thanks.

Here is what I recall reading when people start getting all high and mighty on how bad the bridge deal was (dlbalr hope you are OK with me using your stuff to try and counter Commandant assertion that Bergevin screwed up royally with bridge deal).

http://www.habsworld.net/2014/08/how-costly-was-subbans-bridge-deal/

[Commandant]

Aww shucks...thanks.

Here is what I recall reading when people start getting all high and mighty on how bad the bridge deal was (dlbalr hope you are OK with me using your stuff to try and counter Commandant assertion that Bergevin screwed up royally with bridge deal).

http://www.habsworld.net/2014/08/how-costly-was-subbans-bridge-deal/

Again the bridge deal is the cause of the 9 million contract. If you are fine with Subban making 9 million, because you saved money on the bridge deal, then great.

If you think the 9 million cap hit is too much, and a reason why he was traded, then you have to remember he makes that 9 million because of a choice Bergevin made to save money early and pay it later.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I think it's extremely telling that Poile matched the offer sheet. There was pretty much no price he wasn't willing to pay to keep Weber. I just don't quite agree with the theory that Bergevin was upset about the contract negotiations and traded him away in part due to Subban's contract negotiations and the manner they went down. While I've disagreed with some moves management have made, it portrays Bergevin as some type of big baby. I guess we as fans are just so unlucky to have that GM. If anyone was frustrated with the way their respective contract situations were handled, it should be Poile who was forced to match an offer for Weber that was out of his control. I'm not saying he regretted the choice, but that would have to make anyone feel uncomfortable.

Bergevin signed Subban to a deal he hardly expressed happiness in signing ("Subban is intense with a lot of energy" was his biggest compliment if I recall correctly, might have said he was an elite D) and then traded him the last day he was able to without Subban having a say in his destination. The very last possible day.

Again, don't think Bergevin ever wanted Subban in Montreal. He just couldn't find an out. Probably hoped an arbitration hearing would lead to people blaming Subban but instead they attacked him. His out ended up being Poile offering Shea Weber.

[DON]

Again the bridge deal is the cause of the 9 million contract. If you are fine with Subban making 9 million, because you saved money on the bridge deal, then great.

If you think the 9 million cap hit is too much, and a reason why he was traded, then you have to remember he makes that 9 million because of a choice Bergevin made to save money early and pay it later.

Don't think cap hit was anything but a relatively minor consideration in deal and when Subban signed, no one was very surprised with $9m/yr nor raised much of a fuss (Other than usual suspects, who seem to find fault in almost everything Hab related).

I would say Subban's excellent play was more the main 'cause' for 9m contract, wouldn't you?

[DON]

Again, don't think Bergevin ever wanted Subban in Montreal. He just couldn't find an out. Probably hoped an arbitration hearing would lead to people blaming Subban but instead they attacked him. His out ended up being Poile offering Shea Weber.

Arbitration idea is a bit kooky, but rest I kind of agree with.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Bergevin signed Subban to a deal he hardly expressed happiness in signing ("Subban is intense with a lot of energy" was his biggest compliment if I recall correctly, might have said he was an elite D) and then traded him the last day he was able to without Subban having a say in his destination. The very last possible day.

Again, don't think Bergevin ever wanted Subban in Montreal. He just couldn't find an out. Probably hoped an arbitration hearing would lead to people blaming Subban but instead they attacked him. His out ended up being Poile offering Shea Weber.

I think his NTC kicking in soon obviously played a factor but there are many reasons he could have wanted to move him. I think that at the time of the signing, Subban had won a Norris and distinguished himself as one of the better defenseman in the league. While Bergevin probably didn't want a $9,000,000 cap hit, it was hard to argue against it whether or not Bergevin wasn't happy with the way it worked out.

Fast forward a few years, Subban's clause is about to kick in and Bergevin asks himself is this the guy who we want to be the backbone of our team for the next decade? I know his contract isn't 10 years but the longer he stays, the higher chance he ends up becoming a lifer in my opinion. Most fans would argue "HELL YES" this is who we want to be our franchise player along Carey but Bergevin had a difference in opinion. One that whether or not I agree with, went in a completely different direction from the intangibles, for lack of a better word, that Subban brings.

I don't support the idea that Bergevin disliked the manner in which contract negotiations went down years ago and always wanted to trade him. If so, there's no reason to wait until other general managers know that his value might be a little lower than usual if Bergevin is desperate. Poils was the one to approach Bergevin after all and not vice versa.

I also don't agree that Bergevin pounced on the 'opportunity' that a losing season gave him in trading Subban in order to justify the move. At no point has anyone from the team commented that our off season was the reason for the move. I'm aware that they probably wouldn't come out and say that but the theory is one that unhappy fans have come up with. The same fans don't care for such a justification and so I don't see how a losing season made it any easier for Bergevin to pull the trigger.

[Guest Stogey24]

How do you not think a losing season made it easier to trade Subban?

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Seriously, how do you think a losing season made it easier to trade Subban? I mean I guess if we make the final, we don't need to shake up the team so from that perspective I get it. But everyone and their grandmother knows and understands, and surprisingly this includes our idiot GM, that we had a terrible season due to Price's injury.

Anyone who thinks Bergevin used the losing season to justify the trade isn't thinking straight. Who actually accepts that justification is my point?

Furthermore, I think it's a bit of a stretch that Bergevin has been premeditating the move for years. It's literally too silly to be true. He traded Subban because some approached him while knowing that Subban's clause was about to kick in. Not vice versa. If a lot of these comments actually are valid then we simply have the worst management in the league, with no exception because their agendas are absolutely ridiculous. I'm sorry, but while certainly possible, when you take all the comments made about management, they are indeed higher on the conspiracy level than they are in the reality realm. Both possible but if true, wow we are in deep trouble. I personally, don't believe some of the more extreme attacks.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I also don't agree that Bergevin pounced on the 'opportunity' that a losing season gave him in trading Subban in order to justify the move. At no point has anyone from the team commented that our off season was the reason for the move. I'm aware that they probably wouldn't come out and say that but the theory is one that unhappy fans have come up with. The same fans don't care for such a justification and so I don't see how a losing season made it any easier for Bergevin to pull the trigger.

Back in February it was being reported that Montreal was "listening" to offers on Subban. We all thought it was bull honkey. Bergevin refused to say he was not going to trade Subban (you say you refuse to, a GM can still come to you with an out of this world offer. Refusing to say it pretty much shows you're willing to do it, and he was. Especially when so many bring up the Gretzky trade as their justification) unlike Jim Rutherford and Evgeni Malkin. Then he traded Subban. There was word he first was trying to get a big package from Edmonton and Columbus taking the French Canadian put a stop to that. Then he trades him to Nashville for Weber, on a deal that they had been talking about for a while.

Montreal's seasons with Bergevin and Subban:

12-13: Bergevin hard balls him into a bridge deal, compliments him on getting an extra $600k on the deal, Subban goes ahead and wins a Norris. Montreal bounced quickly out of the playoffs but Subban is the golden child in Montreal.

13-14: Subban is still golden after winning a Norris. Montreal goes to the ECF with Subban leading the charge with Price. Playoff hero against Boston.

14-15: Contract dispute. Public sides with Subban. Subban gets a big new contract. Finishes top three in Norris vote. Playoff scoring leader for the team.

15-16: Last year before NMC kicks in. Montreal has really bad season. Attention on Subban after "I'm not paid to score goals" comment and a lack of finish. Rumours Montreal is listening on offers for him around the trade deadline. Montreal misses playoffs. Bergevin keeps entire staff intact except Craig Ramsay. Trades Subban before he could no longer.

He couldn't trade him after winning a Norris. He couldn't trade him after Montreal made it to the ECF and Subban was a playoff hero. Couldn't trade him after the contract dispute had people turning on Bergevin for pretty much the first time and Subban finished third in Norris voting. Clearly the time to trade him was after a poor regular season. And Bergevin had been "just listening" since earliest reported February.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Back in February it was being reported that Montreal was "listening" to offers on Subban. We all thought it was bull honkey. Bergevin refused to say he was not going to trade Subban (you say you refuse to, a GM can still come to you with an out of this world offer. Refusing to say it pretty much shows you're willing to do it, and he was. Especially when so many bring up the Gretzky trade as their justification) unlike Jim Rutherford and Evgeni Malkin. Then he traded Subban. There was word he first was trying to get a big package from Edmonton and Columbus taking the French Canadian put a stop to that. Then he trades him to Nashville for Weber, on a deal that they had been talking about for a while.

Montreal's seasons with Bergevin and Subban:

12-13: Bergevin hard balls him into a bridge deal, compliments him on getting an extra $600k on the deal, Subban goes ahead and wins a Norris. Montreal bounced quickly out of the playoffs but Subban is the golden child in Montreal.

13-14: Subban is still golden after winning a Norris. Montreal goes to the ECF with Subban leading the charge with Price. Playoff hero against Boston.

14-15: Contract dispute. Public sides with Subban. Subban gets a big new contract. Finishes top three in Norris vote. Playoff scoring leader for the team.

15-16: Last year before NMC kicks in. Montreal has really bad season. Attention on Subban after "I'm not paid to score goals" comment and a lack of finish. Rumours Montreal is listening on offers for him around the trade deadline. Montreal misses playoffs. Bergevin keeps entire staff intact except Craig Ramsay. Trades Subban before he could no longer.

He couldn't trade him after winning a Norris. He couldn't trade him after Montreal made it to the ECF and Subban was a playoff hero. Couldn't trade him after the contract dispute had people turning on Bergevin for pretty much the first time and Subban finished third in Norris voting. Clearly the time to trade him was after a poor regular season. And Bergevin had been "just listening" since earliest reported February.

The main difference I see is in the use of vernacular. While you use the term Bergevin "couldn't" I would say "shouldn't" trade Subban in previous years.

The key factor that is being left out is the reality that the team's as well as Subban's only off season on that timeline so happened to coincide with the same season that his no trade clause kicked in.

The theory is that Bergevin has been unhappy with Subban since Subban got paid big time and that's all I'm disputing. It's entirely possible Bergevin considers the offer from Poile even if we had a good season last season. That is also entirely hypothetical though because it changes the whole scenario. Instead of saying that Subban's off season as well as the Habs' poor performance last year gave Bergevin the opportunity to trade Subban, something he had been wanting to do for a long time, perhaps the off season the Habs had made Bergevin feel as though a shake up was necessary. Who comes to mind for a huge shakeup? Therrien, Subban, Pacioretty, Price. Who are the replacements for Therrien, Pacioretty or Price?

I agree that trading Subban did not have to be that something, but it doesn't mean he was out to get him. If we didn't have a terrible year, sure he may not have traded Subban but it wouldn't be because he "couldn't" do it. Even cup champions have to make decisions to keep everyone under the cap and often lose players after being forced to offload them as a result of not being able to pay them. More importantly, if he's worried about fan reaction, well then he wouldn't have traded him either way.

What you are saying is plausible and I agree that a clear shake up could have come as a result of Therrien being fired. What some are saying is that it had to be one or the other though. I'd like to believe that they are not connected because personally, and I hope management agrees, I don't place the blame on either Therrien or Subban for last year's results. I know so many blame the coach and yes, we did trade Subban but we all know it was mainly Price's injury that caused the outlier of a season and I don't believe that it had to be either Therrien or Subban. That's just something interesting to discuss over a campfire.

[dlbalr]

Guys guys guys...

We have been overlooking one crucial aspect here.

Shea Webers rating in NHL 16 is higher than Subbans

It's also higher in NHL 17. Weber is tied for 1st overall with Doughty at a 94, Subban is tied for 8th with Vlasic and Byfuglien at 91.

https://mtlsport.com/2016/08/19/shea-weber-tied-for-highest-rated-defenseman-in-nhl-17/

[Scott462]

It's also higher in NHL 17. Weber is tied for 1st overall with Doughty at a 94, Subban is tied for 8th with Vlasic and Byfuglien at 91.

https://mtlsport.com/2016/08/19/shea-weber-tied-for-highest-rated-defenseman-in-nhl-17/

Well how about that,

Thanks for the link man

[Commandant]

Bergevin uses his playstation to make trades... CONFIRMED

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Bergevin uses his playstation to make trades... CONFIRMED

We already knew that. Smith-Pelly was only 1 overall better than Matteau. Must have been hoping for a better rating in NHL17.

[Robert Ethan]

Well, there you go, the ultimate "analytics geeks" have spoken. I guess we can safely conclude that the Habs won the trade and close this thread.

[Commandant]

Please take your insults and run along.

Mature adults are trying to have a conversation.

[BCHabnut]

Grown folks are talking.

[Meller93]

Oh at long last I finally feel good about this trade! NHL 17 has spoken and Weber is clearly the better player!

Looking forward to a good nights sleep tonight.

[Scott462]

Oh at long last I finally feel good about this trade! NHL 17 has spoken and Weber is clearly the better player!

Looking forward to a good nights sleep tonight.

I actually slept like a log last night after seeing that link.

Put me right out

[dlbalr]

Well, there you go, the ultimate "analytics geeks" have spoken. I guess we can safely conclude that the Habs won the trade and close this thread.

And what exactly does this contribute to the conversation? EA NHL ratings have nothing to do with analytics yet you've chosen once again to take a shot at those who pay attention to them despite there being no correlation. You've been asked nicely to stop with these insults (some other posters have been stronger in their disdain towards them too) but clearly the message isn't getting through. So, maybe a few days away from the site will get the message across.

[illWill]

It's also higher in NHL 17. Weber is tied for 1st overall with Doughty at a 94, Subban is tied for 8th with Vlasic and Byfuglien at 91.

https://mtlsport.com/2016/08/19/shea-weber-tied-for-highest-rated-defenseman-in-nhl-17/

I wonder if that is with or without intangibles