Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Trizzak

Max Pacioretty traded to Vegas

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

He's not Lars Eller 2.0

He was number 5 on MacKenzie's list which is a survey of actual NHL scouts.  He wasn't that big of a reach.  And some of those actual NHL scouts had him rated 3rd. 

 

Zadina didn't get picked by the Sens, or the Coyotes. Less than half of the scouts surveyed by McKenzie had him at #3.  The idea that we passed up a player who everyone agrees is a better talent just isn't true.  There are a number of teams who would have passed on Zadina, and at least two more that actually did. 

 

Good post, thanks.

 

Personally, if I were going to pass on Zadina, I'd have gone with Hughes because of the high value I place on puck-moving defencemen, and I suspect that Special K will turn out to be better than Tkachuk, who gives me a "1990s player" vibe. I'm not trying to throw the K-man under the bus. But it remains an open question whether the Habs would have drafted him if not for the ridiculous gaping wound at C.

 

In any case, what is now clear is that we have excellent organizational depth at C. First time since the mid-90s.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

In any case, what is now clear is that we have excellent organizational depth at C. First time since the mid-90s.

 

Today the habs announce a trade of two C prospects....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really surprised by this return.  I thought the Habs would get less considering all that has transpired in the Pacioretty saga.  I wish the Habs could have gotten an additional 1st rounder in the 2019 draft (because of it's depth), but Suzuki and a 2nd will do (plus the Habs weren't getting a 1st and Suzuki in a trade like this).  I like Tatar as well.  He may not be as good as he was earlier in his career, but I still see him as a serviceable 2nd liner (maybe 1st liner on this team).  Hopefully he has a really good season and gets flipped for a good return (1st rounder 2019 ;)).  Overall, I'm fairly happy with deal.  I voted that I liked it on the home page (I would have voted that I loved it if that 2nd rounder was a 1st).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

 

The Habs did very well. Most media (who cares I guess) are calling this a win for Montreal. Suzuki is a beast, and will be a great player for SEVERAL years in Montreal. The 2nd could be anything. Pacs was GONE after this year. Walking away for Nothing. The ISLES would kill for this deal now for Tavares, and he's far better than Pacs.

 

Such negativity around here. MB crushed this one. Home run. Out of the park.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

For me it's because I thought the return was going to be worse.  Given the circumstances, I think the Habs did well to get this much.  Look at what Skinner netted for the Canes and he has similar stats to Pacioretty.  Suzuki is better than Pu, the 2nds cancel each other out.  Tatar is probably worth more than a 3rd and 6th if/when he gets dealt (unless he has a horrible year).

 

Ideally the Habs get a 1st rounder instead of the 2nd rounder, but with no guarantee that Pacioretty is going to resign with Vegas, I can see why they only gave a 2nd.  I see where you're coming from though.  I wanted a 1st in the worst way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

 

Tatar has 4 straight seasons of 20 goals. 

 

Someone will have to score goals on this shit team, it will probably be him, and then you flip him for more assets down the road. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 we probably should have Zadina or Tkatchuk in the system

Basically exact opposite of what you said after the draft. You said you were fine with the pick, happy not Tkatchuk, wont complain about pick.

 

Anyways, quite a surprise Pacioretty dealt now, assumed gong show speculation would drag on till new year at least.

Seems a good return in trade.

Team is getting younger.

 

Will Suzuki likely crack the roster this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My enthusiasm for the trade is tempered. Last year, the praises were sung of the Drouin/Sergachev trade, Habs getting an experienced legit young star player for an unknown in Sergachev. I guess one year isn't enough to evaluate that one, but it seems people have cooled on that one a bit.

 

Now, we're on the flip side of that type of trade. I won't pretend I'm some all knowing prospect follower, it's hard enough following the Habs even at just the NHL/AHL level to keep tabs on hundreds and hundreds of JR players and prospects. I HOPE the young C prospect works out. It seems the Habs should hit on at least ONE of the C prospects they have now.

 

Whatever Patches extension is, my guess is it'll look good for the first 4 years, then be buyout worthy the last 4. He's not a terribly physical player, so he may last a little longer than say, Erik Cole. But LVGK gets a good player for those 4 years to maybe get a cup. Good spend, there.

 

Now, who's the next "Attitude" to get sent packing? Who is left that pre-dates Bergevin? Plex, Gallagher and Price I think are it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

 

Skinner fetched Cliff Pu - a far cry from suzuki - a second, third and sixth.

 

Hoffman essentially fetched Boedker.

 

Given the value of these two similar (younger) wingers, I think we made out like absolute bandits.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, huzer said:

My enthusiasm for the trade is tempered. Last year, the praises were sung of the Drouin/Sergachev trade, Habs getting an experienced legit young star player for an unknown in Sergachev. I guess one year isn't enough to evaluate that one, but it seems people have cooled on that one a bit.

 

Now, we're on the flip side of that type of trade. I won't pretend I'm some all knowing prospect follower, it's hard enough following the Habs even at just the NHL/AHL level to keep tabs on hundreds and hundreds of JR players and prospects. I HOPE the young C prospect works out. It seems the Habs should hit on at least ONE of the C prospects they have now.

 

Whatever Patches extension is, my guess is it'll look good for the first 4 years, then be buyout worthy the last 4. He's not a terribly physical player, so he may last a little longer than say, Erik Cole. But LVGK gets a good player for those 4 years to maybe get a cup. Good spend, there.

 

Now, who's the next "Attitude" to get sent packing? Who is left that pre-dates Bergevin? Plex, Gallagher and Price I think are it.

 

I don't really think anyone was that high on the Drouin Sergachev trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Detroit got alot for Tatar when trading him to LV, if he go for a decent 20g 40pts season Im sure we can fetch a 1st rounder at the deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, DON said:

Basically exact opposite of what you said after the draft. You said you were fine with the pick, happy not Tkatchuk, wont complain about pick.

 

Anyways, quite a surprise Pacioretty dealt now, assumed gong show speculation would drag on till new year at least.

Seems a good return in trade.

Team is getting younger.

 

Will Suzuki likely crack the roster this year?

 

I think he gets max the 9 games this year (and i'm not sure he gets that).  Back to the OHL, go dominate. play for Canada at the World Juniors and join the Habs next season. 

I don't think he's ready, he can still add muscle.  I also think the Habs will be best served not to burn a year on his ELC while this team is not a cup contender.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

I think he gets max the 9 games this year (and i'm not sure he gets that).  Back to the OHL, go dominate. play for Canada at the World Juniors and join the Habs next season. 

I don't think he's ready, he can still add muscle.  I also think the Habs will be best served not to burn a year on his ELC while this team is not a cup contender.

Agreed. The 9 games will give him some good experience, but watch him return and dominate. It’ll be fun to see if he can have a 40 goal 100 point year despite missing time for the world juniors and NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Habopotamus said:

I don't really think anyone was that high on the Drouin Sergachev trade. 

 

Might want to read this thread, then. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max gets 4year @ $7m/yr deal with Vegas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

He's not Lars Eller 2.0

He was number 5 on MacKenzie's list which is a survey of actual NHL scouts.  He wasn't that big of a reach.  And some of those actual NHL scouts had him rated 3rd. 

 

Zadina didn't get picked by the Sens, or the Coyotes. Less than half of the scouts surveyed by McKenzie had him at #3.  The idea that we passed up a player who everyone agrees is a better talent just isn't true.  There are a number of teams who would have passed on Zadina, and at least two more that actually did. 

 

Arizona wanted a centre and reached for it. Had we taken Zadina, they likely would have taken Kotkaniemi. Ottawa is  bad example for anything right now.

 

Time will tell who ends up the better prospect. Way too soon to decide if Kotkaniemi was a bad pick, but I got the feeling early on too much stock was put into his second half last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last multiple season 40+ goal scorer in junior for Habs was Gallagher and that has turned out pretty well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dalhabs said:

Detroit got alot for Tatar when trading him to LV, if he go for a decent 20g 40pts season Im sure we can fetch a 1st rounder at the deadline.

 

Tatar had been Erat 2.0 for McPhee. He was a disaster in Vegas. Barely played on their run to the Cup, not that we need him for the playoffs. 

 

He needs a big year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

I also dont don’t get why with all the cap room we have, we wouldn’t have retained more than 10% of max’s Salary to try and get more.  

 

I dont hate this completely like  the Subban, Sergechev and Galchenyuk deals, but I don’t believe by any means it was a good or great return for a consistent 30+ goal scorer.

 

A large majority of the fan base would have been happy regardless of the return and so in all honesty there’s nothing out of the ordinary happening here. I actually have always liked Tatar but when comparing him to Pacioretty, they are on a different level. Suzuki’s future on the Habs will be the main determining factor. I look forward to hopefully liking him a lot. 

 

As for the Zadina/Kotkaniemi debate, one can argue all they want but the statistics clearly show that Svechnikov was on a higher level than the rest and Zadina is well above the expected statistical output of Kotkaniemi. If they were to have played last year, Svechnikov would have gotten roughly 40 points in the NHL, Zadina would have had slightly over 30, and Kotkaniemi would have had somewhere around 22. Sure, they play different positions and center is more valuable. What I don’t see is how one could ever argue that Kotkaniemi will be a better point producer than Zadina. Kotkaniemi will improve throughout his career, but Zadina and Svechnikov will as well. In terms of pure offensive threat, as well as statistical output, I see no reason why by the end of their careers the order won’t remain the same. Svechnikov > Zadina > Kotkaniemi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DON said:

Last multiple season 40+ goal scorer in junior for Habs was Gallagher and that has turned out pretty well.

Rychel 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t get all the love for this deal. Yes, we picked up a good a prospect.  But the blueprint for a maxpac caliber player is a good young player, a top prospect and a first.  We only got one of the three. The fact that we didn’t get more despite taking on Tatar, who was a healthy scratch for over half of the playoff games last year makes no sense.  

 

If he was dealt at the deadline, the first round pick we would get would be outside of the Top 15. The prospect would probably be a B prospect. We got a 19 year old, one year removed from his draft, 13th overall, right handed with experience at centre, who has a great pass and a great shot. He's better than what we could have drafted.

 

The B prospect is now a 2nd round pick from Columbus, who might trade Bobrovsky and Panarin and crash and burn this year, which gets that pick close to the 32-40 range where you get falling first round calibre players.

 

Tatar sucks but if he ends up not sucking, we might have a guy we can move for a 2nd round pick, maybe more. He was just moved for a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd recently. His playoffs sucked but do we care about the playoffs right now? If he pots 25 we got an asset that can be moved for more picks.

 

Suzuki is better than any player I thought we would get out of Pacioretty. He's better than what the Rangers got for McDonaugh and Miller. Better than what they got for Nash. Better than what Ottawa got for Hoffman, better than the best prospect in the Duchene deal, I can keep going. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DON said:

Basically exact opposite of what you said after the draft. You said you were fine with the pick, happy not Tkatchuk, wont complain about pick.

 

 

Yeah, I should not have brought Tkachuk into it. Based on the little I know about prospects, I'd have taken Hughes or K-Man before him, and still think that impulse was sound. Good corrective by you there.

 

My wider worry is that we are, or were, making too many decisions based on compensating for the holes at C. Hopefully, what with Special K, Suzuki, and Poehling, this phase is now behind us.

 

The commentary I'm hearing on Vancouver radio, which generally reflects standard opinion around the league on non-Canucks matters, is that Vegas "paid a steep price" for Patches. So the broader media opinion - whatever that's worth - seems to be that this is great value for #67. If we want to criticize the deal itself, it should probably be out of the belief that we could have gotten more at last year's deadline, or even at the 2017 draft, rather than waiting for the MaxPac situation to become a crisis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Yeah, I should not have brought Tkachuk into it. Based on the little I know about prospects, I'd have taken Hughes or K-Man before him, and still think that impulse was sound. Good corrective by you there.

 

My wider worry is that we are, or were, making too many decisions based on compensating for the holes at C. Hopefully, what with Special K, Suzuki, and Poehling, this phase is now behind us.

 

The commentary I'm hearing on Vancouver radio, which generally reflects standard opinion around the league on non-Canucks matters, is that Vegas "paid a steep price" for Patches. So the broader media opinion - whatever that's worth - seems to be that this is great value for #67. If we want to criticize the deal itself, it should probably be out of the belief that we could have gotten more at last year's deadline, or even at the 2017 draft, rather than waiting for the MaxPac situation to become a crisis.

 

Would we still have made the pick?  

I think we would have. 

WHY? 

 

Suzuki is the #28 prospect that i have.  He's a good bet to be a future top 6 centre.  But He's not a surefire #1 centre.   Suzuki is a number 2, who maybe if all goes right, becomes a number 1, but is no guarantee. 

 

Poehling is a number 3, who maybe if all goes right, becomes a number 2, but is no guarantee. 

 

Kotkaniemi is an elite prospect.  Top 10 in the World.  he is still no guarantee to be a number 1, cause outside of guys like McDavid, no one is really a guarantee to be that.  but he's the best chance we have. 

Without Kotkaniemi, I would look at our prospect pool and say.... we are still crossing our fingers and hoping and praying we have a number one in there.... with him, I say we should be able to develop this kid into a number 1, but there is work to do. 

 

So yes, I still think we needed to take the centre, especially when as I've said, the difference in talent with Zadina is not that big.  The only other person I would have considered is Hughes, but I liked Hughes a lot.  Still not upset at taking the centre though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Yeah, I should not have brought Tkachuk into it. Based on the little I know about prospects, I'd have taken Hughes or K-Man before him, and still think that impulse was sound. Good corrective by you there.

 

My wider worry is that we are, or were, making too many decisions based on compensating for the holes at C. Hopefully, what with Special K, Suzuki, and Poehling, this phase is now behind us.

 

The commentary I'm hearing on Vancouver radio, which generally reflects standard opinion around the league on non-Canucks matters, is that Vegas "paid a steep price" for Patches. So the broader media opinion - whatever that's worth - seems to be that this is great value for #67. If we want to criticize the deal itself, it should probably be out of the belief that we could have gotten more at last year's deadline, or even at the 2017 draft, rather than waiting for the MaxPac situation to become a crisis.

Why do you want to criticize the trade?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...