Jump to content

Retool or rebuild. That is the question?


titanfan

Recommended Posts

This team has way bigger problems than face offs.

 

I think Machine's wider point about the Habs' advanced stats being deceptive is well taken. We could come back with the exact same group next season and, if Price and Weber are healthy, probably vault all the way up to being a bubble team. No doubt Bergevin would hail this as proof of his surpassing managerial vision. But sensible people have to recognize that this bunch is nowhere close to being an elite, contending team and that the club has, in fact, taken significant steps backward since 2014. That's the basic fact a rational analyst has to cling to coldly, like death.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only stats that matter are wins and losses. 

 

They need a complete rebuild, they have been retooling for 20 plus years. 

 

Getting younger, faster bigger and more talented has to be the long term goal. 

 

Icing a team without a #1 or #2 center is on MB, having 5 bottom pair defenseman is on MB. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chris said:

They need a complete rebuild, they have been retooling for 20 plus years. 

 

Getting younger, faster bigger and more talented has to be the long term goal. 

 

Icing a team without a #1 or #2 center is on MB, having 5 bottom pair defenseman is on MB. 

 

Agreed. They lack a 1C, 2C, 1RW, 1LD, and 2LD if they wanted to compete for a Cup. Maybe if they play Drouin at RW that covers a spot, but lacking two top six centres is tough when you're not David Poile and know how to trade for them. They also have a depleted prospect base so they can't trade for one. Signing them is difficult when you're not very good either. They might only need a 1C if they move Galchenyuk to centre but that's not happening with Bergevin as GM.

 

But nah if they hit the jackpot with Tavares everything will fall into place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, Galchenyuk's numbers are better at center i believe. 

 

They have decent enough wingers if they had a legit 1 and 2 centers. 

 

They lack of any top end young talent is just pathetic, again MB. I believe he said he wanted to build through the draft, clearly an epic failure. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

I'll concede on faceoff percentage as there's only 26 centres with 35 points or more with a faceoff of 50% or better. Looking in the past it's usually about 30 or so centres with 45 points or more at a 50% faceoff percentage. I think if anything we got spoiled by Perreault, Koivu, and Gomez.

 

That said, it's not like we have guys who are good at getting pucks from the opposing team if they don't have it, so it's not like they are good at something that negates the need for good faceoffs. So until we got a McDavid or a Malkin or a Kuznetsov with a 43% faceoff but it doesn't matter they are good anyway, it's a silly point all around.

1

 

We have to acquire a centre... that is obvious to all involved. 

 

Faceoff percentage should not be a top criteria in evaluating the centres we need to acquire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DON said:

More than Corsi does...:D

 

 

 

No it doesn't.  

 

This is an actual fact.  Correlations are facts, they aren't opinions.  Its math. 

 

The correlation between Corsi and winning percentage is much stronger than the correlation between faceoffs and winning percentage. 

 

You are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to make up your own facts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would it be more benificial to go full seller, really tank, and really good chance of picking top 5? I feel as though the top 5 players are capable of being cornerstones of a franchise.

 

Beyond that, selling players like Pacioretty could give us back another first round pick this year or 2019, and potentially a top center prospect as well like a Robert Thomas or Morgan Frost. 

 

I realize this this is the best possible scenario but

 

We could potentially have one of Dahlin or Boqvist for D, or one of Svechnikov or Tkachuk or Zadina up front.Then pick up another Poehling level prospect with a later 1st.

 

Suddenly our prospect cupboard could look like Dahlin, Frost, Poehling, a late 2018 first (someone like Ryan merkley or Martin Kaut). To go with some other potential NHLers in Bitten, Brook, Fleury, etc.

 

Our young core in 2-3 years:

 

Forward: Gallagher, Drouin, Galchenyuk, Danault, Lehkonen, Hudon, Scherbak, Frost, Poehling, (maybe Kaut)

 

Defense: Dahlin (or Boqvist), Juulsen, Mete, (maybe Merkley)

 

I know this is all highly unlikely, but it is actually possible, and I’m just ready for a full rebuild. We can keep vets like Weber and Price to actually teach the kids how to play.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Meller93 said:

Would it be more benificial to go full seller, really tank, and really good chance of picking top 5? I feel as though the top 5 players are capable of being cornerstones of a franchise.

 

Beyond that, selling players like Pacioretty could give us back another first round pick this year or 2019, and potentially a top center prospect as well like a Robert Thomas or Morgan Frost. 

 

I realize this this is the best possible scenario but

 

We could potentially have one of Dahlin or Boqvist for D, or one of Svechnikov or Tkachuk or Zadina up front.Then pick up another Poehling level prospect with a later 1st.

 

Suddenly our prospect cupboard could look like Dahlin, Frost, Poehling, a late 2018 first (someone like Ryan merkley or Martin Kaut). To go with some other potential NHLers in Bitten, Brook, Fleury, etc.

 

Our young core in 2-3 years:

 

Forward: Gallagher, Drouin, Galchenyuk, Danault, Lehkonen, Hudon, Scherbak, Frost, Poehling, (maybe Kaut)

 

Defense: Dahlin (or Boqvist), Juulsen, Mete, (maybe Merkley)

 

I know this is all highly unlikely, but it is actually possible, and I’m just ready for a full rebuild. We can keep vets like Weber and Price to actually teach the kids how to play.

 

 

Tanking is going well right now, we should get a pick in the top 5 if the Canadiens do not trade a Pacioretty at the deadline for a stud LD, because that would hurt our chances of finishing lower in the standings.

I think that Drouin can replace Patches on LW, so traiding 67 in the summer for a Center would be the way I would do it.

 

At the trade deadline this week I would package Pleks with some sub-par players like Schlemko, DLR, Froese, etc to get an up-and-coming D or get more draft picks, but nothing that would improve the club this season: to tank all the way to the bottom.

 

Having Dahlin play with Weber next year would be awesome :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full on tanking doesn't work like it used to with the draft lottery now. Even with the old draft system tanking wasn't a guarantee of future success.

 

I think we can still be major sellers including Weber and Price without tanking or rebuilding. To me it is all about the return. If the focus of the return is all on draft picks then that is rebuilding with a 5-6 year window and hope to get lucky with your draft picks.

 

If the focus is getting young, high projection prospects in return for our player then that is a retool with a 2-4 year turn around. This is the route I want to take.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Full on tanking doesn't work like it used to with the draft lottery now. Even with the old draft system tanking wasn't a guarantee of future success.

 

I think we can still be major sellers including Weber and Price without tanking or rebuilding. To me it is all about the return. If the focus of the return is all on draft picks then that is rebuilding with a 5-6 year window and hope to get lucky with your draft picks.

 

If the focus is getting young, high projection prospects in return for our player then that is a retool with a 2-4 year turn around. This is the route I want to take.

 

I dunno...even 'high projection prospects' need some veteran support. Throwing rookie D out there with no safety net other than Petry (!) will still mean getting them lit up night after night, and that's probably not the way to develop players or a winning culture. 

 

I don't believe we can trade Weber/Price and be a good development organization, not with the way our back end is currently misconfigured. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I dunno...even 'high projection prospects' need some veteran support. Throwing rookie D out there with no safety net other than Petry (!) will still mean getting them lit up night after night, and that's probably not the way to develop players or a winning culture. 

 

I don't believe we can trade Weber/Price and be a good development organization, not with the way our back end is currently misconfigured. 

I agree, I think if we trade a guy like Weber, we’re risking an Edmonton Oilers situation, where we have all this young talent and no results because they don’t develop well. 

 

Also to the above posts, I agree tanking is not what it once was, but even if we don’t get the first pick, my point is if we finish bottom 3 we have a very good chance of picking one of the bluechippers in Svecnikov, Tkachuk, Zadina, or Boqvist.

 

The talent falls off a bit after that, save Merkley who has top 3 pick talent, but severely lacks defensive ability and stands at 5’11. I love merkley as a high risk high reward pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big name to trade is Patches. If we play our cards right, we could leverage him into important young assets, with an eye to contending in, say  three years. The FW unit already has lots of young pieces.

 

After moving Patches, you focus on gradually recontructing the blueline. I see that as a project that will take a couple of years of smart, focused decisions. 

 

There won't be much margin for error, but Patches + further lesser moves could retool us into a serious team over a couple of years IMHO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Meller93 said:

The talent falls off a bit after that, save Merkley who has top 3 pick talent, but severely lacks defensive ability and stands at 5’11. I love merkley as a high risk high reward pick.

 

Might be time to stop worrying about size; Brayden Point is yet another example, he is 5'10" 166lber, because of size fell to 3rd round and now has 92pts in 128 games in Tampa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, DON said:

 

Might be time to stop worrying about size; Brayden Point is yet another example, he is 5'10" 166lber, because of size fell to 3rd round and now has 92pts in 128 games in Tampa.

Agreed. That being said Merkley could be more of a Anthony deangelo type, and the verdict is still out on him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DON said:

 

Might be time to stop worrying about size; Brayden Point is yet another example, he is 5'10" 166lber, because of size fell to 3rd round and now has 92pts in 128 games in Tampa.

In today's Nhl you don't need size, just speed and skill. Or problem is we need more Playmakers. To many two way players on this team with no skill or vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I dunno...even 'high projection prospects' need some veteran support. Throwing rookie D out there with no safety net other than Petry (!) will still mean getting them lit up night after night, and that's probably not the way to develop players or a winning culture. 

 

I don't believe we can trade Weber/Price and be a good development organization, not with the way our back end is currently misconfigured. 

 

I'm not sure what the right answer is but I do know that even if we get max value out of a Patches trade it will not be enough to fix this mess. We need 3 or 4 high end players and in a perfect world we need a #1 centre, a #2 centre,  and if we keep Weber then one top defence. Patches isn't going to get us that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I'm not sure what the right answer is but I do know that even if we get max value out of a Patches trade it will not be enough to fix this mess. We need 3 or 4 high end players and in a perfect world we need a #1 centre, a #2 centre,  and if we keep Weber then one top defence. Patches isn't going to get us that.

Overkill, simply add the #2 d-man & #1 centre and more players can play in proper roles. And even that is likely as much as could ever hope for and maybe all that's needed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, DON said:

Overkill, simply add the #2 d-man & #1 centre and more players can play in proper roles. And even that is likely as much as could ever hope for and maybe all that's needed. 

 

I think this is enough to make us competitive but not enough to make us a winner. We need a #1 and #2 centre - let Drouin play wing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I'm not sure what the right answer is but I do know that even if we get max value out of a Patches trade it will not be enough to fix this mess. We need 3 or 4 high end players and in a perfect world we need a #1 centre, a #2 centre,  and if we keep Weber then one top defence. Patches isn't going to get us that.

 

The point is not to contend instantly. That's more or less impossible for this bunch. What I say is that we could trade Max for assets that would fill 1-2 key holes. From there, you take the next 2-3 years to build on that foundation and hopefully emerge as a bona-fide contender at the end of that process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

The point is not to contend instantly. That's more or less impossible for this bunch. What I say is that we could trade Max for assets that would fill 1-2 key holes. From there, you take the next 2-3 years to build on that foundation and hopefully emerge as a bona-fide contender at the end of that process.

 

With that in mind, I'm going to have an anxious 5 days till the trade deadline and when Patches doesn't get traded because the market is flooded I will have an anxious few months until July!

 

I really hope MB doesn't screw this up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

 

 

I really hope MB doesn't screw this up

 

I don't think he'll be traded at the deadline. As for MB not screwing it up, don't hold your breath. He'll probably trade Max for Brent Seabrook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I think this is enough to make us competitive but not enough to make us a winner. We need a #1 and #2 centre - let Drouin play wing

Why cant he play wing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I want him to play wing. If we only get one centre then who plays centre for us? I don't want Danault as #2 and I don't think they will allow Galchenyuk to play centre under any circumstances.

Because of the unrealistic nature of acquiring every single player we need, I’ve come to grips with Danault being our second line center, if need be, and I’ve been against that notion for two years already. In that scenario, however I feel as though it would be fine as long as we had a true number one center on the first line.

 

It’s been a common acceptance on here that we don’t really need that first line center, we just need a top 6 center but if we get a top line center, our other centers are fine, in my opinion.

 

Pacioretty- Thornton-Gallagher

Galchenyuk-Danault-Drouin

 

(Thornton for 1 or 2 years only, unfortunately)

 

or 

 

Pacioretty-Tavares-Drouin

Galchenyuk-Danault-Gallagher

 

Would be fine for me.

 

I understand those are “pipe dreams” but perhaps there are one or two more options available that could keep us similarly effective. The point wasn’t that it need to be Thornton or Tavares specifically, but an actual top line center who can play responsibly and drive possession.  I chose those centers because they are free agents and so we wouldn’t have to lose any of those other players in order to acquire them. 

 

The point was also that Danault can be a top 6 in my books but only if our first line center has no question marks. We, for now, have a lot of wingers to work with to still have him play on an effective line. Of course we still may have depth issues if Thornton or Tavares get injured, but you can’t do it all. If I were GM, that would be my first avenue of choice. If unrealistic, sure we start trying to trade some players for our need at center and defense. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...