Max Pacioretty Watch

[Commandant]

Why is he signing 6 x 7.5?

 

He's rejected 6 year deals from other teams already in his extension talks

[alfredoh2009]

Let's hope they just sign him. Period 

I want to see a line of Pacioretty-Kotkaniemi-Scherbak lite it up

[alfredoh2009]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Why is he signing 6 x 7.5?

 

He's rejected 6 year deals from other teams already in his extension talks

I think I may have suggested something like that. Thinking is:

1) he said many time he wants to play in Montreal

2) 6 years seem like a decent term, 2 great years, two ok years and two underwhelming years

3) 7.5M seems to be the concensus foing rate from many who have reported failed Patches deals and similar player deals. But to be honest, it is my uneducated, often wrong, pull-from-a-hat, best guess

 

Edited August 9, 2018 by alfredoh2009
Typos

[xXx..CK..xXx]

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.

[Habopotamus]

Did Pacioretty just put his house up for sale? 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

51 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

Did Pacioretty just put his house up for sale? 

He did. In Boca Raton, Florida.

[dlbalr]

1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

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.

 

 

They've had very quick contract talks as well.  Price's extension came together quite quickly, so did new deals for Drouin, Shaw, and Domi upon being acquired.  (Drouin's, in particular, was a pretty pricey contract.)

 

If the report of them wanting to move him ASAP is true, I don't think it's a matter of extension talks going sour over money but rather a decision that management has no desire to see him stay in Montreal which is something entirely different than squabbling over how much to pay him.

[Habopotamus]

55 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

He did. In Boca Raton, Florida.

O, ok. I was gonna say... 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

25 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

They've had very quick contract talks as well.  Price's extension came together quite quickly, so did new deals for Drouin, Shaw, and Domi upon being acquired.  (Drouin's, in particular, was a pretty pricey contract.)

 

If the report of them wanting to move him ASAP is true, I don't think it's a matter of extension talks going sour over money but rather a decision that management has no desire to see him stay in Montreal which is something entirely different than squabbling over how much to pay him.

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. 

[Commandant]

5 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I think I may have suggested something like that. Thinking is:

1) he said many time he wants to play in Montreal

2) 6 years seem like a decent term, 2 great years, two ok years and two underwhelming years

3) 7.5M seems to be the concensus foing rate from many who have reported failed Patches deals and similar player deals. But to be honest, it is my uneducated, often wrong, pull-from-a-hat, best guess

 

 

I want no part of a long term deal.

 

The 2 great years will be when the team is not in a position to compete...

 

The 2 underwhelming years will put us in a cap crunch when guys like Kotkaniemi and Poehling are up for their extensions. 

 

Trade him, get assets, rebuild the club.

[Habopotamus]

6 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

I want no part of a long term deal.

 

The 2 great years will be when the team is not in a position to compete...

 

The 2 underwhelming years will put us in a cap crunch when guys like Kotkaniemi and Poehling are up for their extensions. 

 

Trade him, get assets, rebuild the club.

Ya, time to go 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

10 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

I want no part of a long term deal.

 

The 2 great years will be when the team is not in a position to compete...

 

The 2 underwhelming years will put us in a cap crunch when guys like Kotkaniemi and Poehling are up for their extensions. 

 

Trade him, get assets, rebuild the club.

 

Indeed. MaxPac is precisely the kind of middle-aged asset which, when you are a bottom-feeding club, you trade for future assets. That's the only way out of perpetual mediocrity. What is the point of saying that MaxPac might be able to help the Habs when he is 34 and they're a competitive club again? Trade him for assets which can help us 3-4 years from now AND for the decade after that.

 

If you love Patches, then you need to recognize that his 'window' to contend with the Habs was sealed shut by Bergevin's incompetence. The Subban/Patches era was a wasted era, sacrificed to the ego and stupidity of one man and his ignorant flunky Therrien. There is no point in clinging to its remnants.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Indeed. MaxPac is precisely the kind of middle-aged asset which, when you are a bottom-feeding club, you trade for future assets. That's the only way out of perpetual mediocrity. What is the point of saying that MaxPac might be able to help the Habs when he is 34 and they're a competitive club again? Trade him for assets which can help us 3-4 years from now AND for the decade after that.

 

If you love Patches, then you need to recognize that his 'window' to contend with the Habs was sealed shut by Bergevin's incompetence. The Subban/Patches era was a wasted era, sacrificed to the ego and stupidity of one man and his ignorant flunky Therrien. There is no point in clinging to its remnants.

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? 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

49 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

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? 

 

It would depend on the state of the team. If we were in complete disarray, rebuild mode, as we are now, then the answer is: "probably."  One variable, however, is that Subban is a much rarer commodity and a much more valuable player overall than Patches is. I could see saying about him, as we're saying with Price, "well, the team is crap, but at least this guy can offer us an elite player to tide us over and prevent things from becoming Edmonton Oilers awful during the rebuild." At face value, though, trading him would be the right move. Imagine the return.

 

Also, a competent GM would never have traded Subban for Weber in the first place, and in this hypothetical parallel universe, the Habs would probably be contenders right now, given the strength of the core MB inherited; so the question would not come up.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

20 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

It would depend on the state of the team. If we were in complete disarray, rebuild mode, as we are now, then the answer is: "probably."  One variable, however, is that Subban is a much rarer commodity and a much more valuable player overall than Patches is. I could see saying about him, as we're saying with Price, "well, the team is crap, but at least this guy can offer us an elite player to tide us over and prevent things from becoming Edmonton Oilers awful during the rebuild." At face value, though, trading him would be the right move. Imagine the return.

 

Also, a competent GM would never have traded Subban for Weber in the first place, and in this hypothetical parallel universe, the Habs would probably be contenders right now, given the strength of the core MB inherited; so the question would not come up.

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.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

38 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

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.

 

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the team HAD to trade one of Subban or Patches. I don't accept this premise at all. Presumably you're referencing the supposed "tensions" between the two players. But even assuming those issues to have been more than media-spun bullcrap, they could have been addressed in other ways. E.g., fire Therrien, bring in a new coach, generate a "let's all agree to turn the page on 2016" movement within the roster; and rely on Price's return as team Alpha Male to keep the other dogs in line. These things should have been tried before shipping out core pieces.

 

As for your final paragraph, there is in fact little reason for rational optimism about the 'rebuild.' Our GM is a proven idiot. As long as he is overseeing the process, it has to be considered unlikely that the Habs will come out as contenders.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

56 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I'm not sure where you get the idea that the team HAD to trade one of Subban or Patches. I don't accept this premise at all. Presumably you're referencing the supposed "tensions" between the two players. But even assuming those issues to have been more than media-spun bullcrap, they could have been addressed in other ways. E.g., fire Therrien, bring in a new coach, generate a "let's all agree to turn the page on 2016" movement within the roster; and rely on Price's return as team Alpha Male to keep the other dogs in line. These things should have been tried before shipping out core pieces.

 

As for your final paragraph, there is in fact little reason for rational optimism about the 'rebuild.' Our GM is a proven idiot. As long as he is overseeing the process, it has to be considered unlikely that the Habs will come out as contenders.

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. 

[hab29RETIRED]

23 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

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. 

Pacioretty has 2 or 3 good seasons left in him.  We are going to suck for those years. Who cares if he does well than.  He will then regress when we are ready to compete.

 

Subban will be a better player in 5 years than Pacioretty just based on his position and style of play.  

 

I can but buy the Parise comparasion since he has a contract as bad and stupid as Weber’s and two years ago when healthy, he was still a good player.  Pacioretty was WAY better than Vanek two years ago and has been for at least the last 4 or 5 years, so that would have just been a dumb trade any way you look at it.

 

i also think in your hypothetical scenario, signing Subban would still make sense since he will probably still be an elite player for at least 5 more years and in 2 or 3 years if were ready to contend, he would contribute.  In 2 or 3 years, Pacioretty will be close to being washed up given his style of play, what he needs to succeed (speed) and age. 

 

Lastly an elite dman is always more valuable than a winger unless we are talking a true game changer like a ovechkin or Kane.

[DON]

3 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

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? 

Didn't realize that Max and that ex-hab are same age, both being 2007 draft should of been my 1st clue.

Just hope Max can bounce back and have a great year.

[DON]

38 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Pacioretty has 2 or 3 good seasons left in him. 

He will then regress when we are ready to compete.

Subban will be a better player in 5 years  

Holy...do you happen to also see some winning lottery numbers in that crystal ball 29?

[Commandant]

Defencemen age better than forwards typically.... while not a certainty, 29 is making a good bet here. 

[hab29RETIRED]

4 hours ago, DON said:

Holy...do you happen to also see some winning lottery numbers in that crystal ball 29?

Most goal scorers regress after they hit 29.  I remember reading a report that shows statiscally MOST players - even elite players  tend to have their best goal scoring years prior to age 28 or 29 (including Gretzky and Lemieux) and while the truly elite players may still put up big numbers, they tend to be lower than their career averages.  Players that rely on speed like Pacioretty are more suceptible to a drop off as they get older.  The old saying is that the hands and speed are usually the first

to go.

 

thats why I’d be good with giving radulov 5 years, but would be very hesitant on giving Pacioretty the same term, even though he is younger.  

 

Now if we were a top contender, I would absolutely give Pacioretty 5 or 6 years if the cap space was there, because if for 2 or 3 years he can help you win a cup, it’s wort it.  Given where we are Pacioretty should have been traded last year along with Weber and Price.  We are at least 3 years away from being a decent team - assuming MB doesn’t bungle away more assets and lose more trades before he eventually gets fired and I have zero confidence in MB not making further mistakes before he eventually gets fired.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

What I don't understand is why we think Patches will generate more value on the market now, or at this year's deadline, than at least year's deadline, when he still had a full year left on a dirt-cheap contract. Wouldn't teams have valued a top-line goal-scorer for 4.5 mil or whatever it is for two playoffs and a full season, plus whatever they can negotiate beyond that, more than they value a rental? So wouldn't last year's deadline have been the optimal time to move him? Water under the bridge, of course, but it still puzzles me somewhat.

[DON]

6 hours ago, Commandant said:

Defencemen age better than forwards typically.... while not a certainty, 29 is making a good bet here. 

Unless he wears #6 for Habs, then is opposite eh?

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Unless he wears #6 for Habs, then is opposite eh?

Yes - when he is acquired at 30 for a younger, better dman and is signed until he is 42.