Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Chicoutimi Cucumber

What needs to happen for the Habs to have a successful trade deadline?

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Chris said:

I don't have a problem with his moves so far, with some high prices out there, i would have moved Petry and Tatar, if the deal made sense and maybe MB didn't get the return he wanted. 

 

Don'y have a problem building through the draft, i do have a problem with him saying other teams are bad at drafting too, so it's ok the habs suck at drafting because other teams do? That's not a plan, fix the problem 

 

I do have a problem with all his excuses and bad just bad luck excuses, give me a break. 

 

They have missed 4 out 5 years, what gives him any indication the core is good enough to make the playoffs? Replacing the plugs he traded this year for the plugs he will add next year does nothing. 

 

The coaching staff has no answers either, just we have to be better but they never are 

 

4 out of 5 years and hasn't changed the core just isn't true.  Why are we going back five years. ... its really 2 out of 2 years for the current core... not 4 out of 5. 

 

Not when 5 years ago.... PK Subban was our #1 Dman, Max Pacioretty was the top forward, Tomas Plekanec was the top C.  Andrei Markov was the #2 defenceman.  Alex Galchenyuk, David Desharnais, were core pieces.  There is more too. 

 

The change over really started at the trade deadline 2018, and continued in that summer.  So don't tell me the Core of this team is the same as the core was in 2016 when that 4 out of 5 years started. 

And while its 2 out of 2 for the current core, we have core pieces in Suzuki, KK, who are young and should be getting better.  We have Domi and Drouin who also are just at the bottom of their prime years now, and so they should be getting better too.  There are key prospects in Fleury, Caufield, Romanov, Harris, etc... who we hope will be part of the core too. 

Sot thats the plan.... you can disagree with the plan if you want... but the idea that he only has excuses and not a plan just isn't true. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

MB is a skilled trader but he lacks the vision to build a team to compete in today's NHL.

 

Where do you think his (really Molson's) vision is wrong?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

There is no confusion.

 

MB is a skilled trader but he lacks the vision to build a team to compete in today's NHL.

 

 

 

Given that its been 2 years since he started Building Bergevin Team 2.0.... how do we know that number 2 is true. 


Bergevin Team 1.0, the team that had previously made the final four and won the division multiple times, so yes he built a team that competed, crashed and burned in 2018.  At that point he started building 2.0.... its too early to say if 2.0 has failed or not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

winning games, making the playoffs, drafting and player development, coaching staff 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris said:

winning games, making the playoffs, drafting and player development, coaching staff

 

Are you answering my question, or something else? He may (or may not) have issues with those, but none of those are relating to the vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fair enough on core players, 

 

however the current core or whatever is gallagher, price, danuault, petry have been on the roster for years, they are what they are a 500 team 

 

jury is still out on drafting over the 2.0 version of drafting 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MB or Molson won't answer your question 

 

Im sure there vision is winning the cup, but they aren;t even close to a contender 

Share this post


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

 

Given that its been 2 years since he started Building Bergevin Team 2.0.... how do we know that number 2 is true. 


Bergevin Team 1.0, the team that had previously made the final four and won the division multiple times, so yes he built a team that competed, crashed and burned in 2018.  At that point he started building 2.0.... its too early to say if 2.0 has failed or not. 

 

I agree that it is too early and much of what I have said comes from frustration and disappointment - we will see what summer 2020 brings...

 

I consider you to be an incredibly well informed poster and you present your arguments in a clear way that makes me understand how anyone would support your position - even if i disagree with it. I do not consider you a MB supporter or a hater so your opinion is from a fairly neutral position. If you take MB's plan out of the equation, do you think yesterday was a win for us? or was it a missed opportunity?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

Where do you think his (really Molson's) vision is wrong?

 

Lack of vision in this context was about not seeing the incredible opportunity to springboard this reset and stock the cupboards with young talent that will impact the team for years. Instead he stuck to his plan that will give us the same team next year with likely the same results.

 

His plan in general is flawed as it makes no consideration for aging players that will naturally decline. We will be stuck in this endless loop of being a mediocre team - drafted players move up and replace the aging players. Our only hope in this method is to strike gold with the lottery or "get lucky" with a draft pick or have an unlikely reclamation project turn to gold.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Lack of vision in this context was about not seeing the incredible opportunity to springboard this reset and stock the cupboards with young talent that will impact the team for years. Instead he stuck to his plan that will give us the same team next year with likely the same results.

 

His plan in general is flawed as it makes no consideration for aging players that will naturally decline. We will be stuck in this endless loop of being a mediocre team - drafted players move up and replace the aging players. Our only hope in this method is to strike gold with the lottery or "get lucky" with a draft pick or have an unlikely reclamation project turn to gold.

 

OK, thanks, understand your point now.

 

We've had a few reclamation projects that have turned into at least silver: players that we acquired for very little but who have turned into key pieces in our puzzle. I would put Armia, Tatar and Byron into this category, at least -- and Kovalchuk, too. The full jackpot has still eluded us, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I agree that it is too early and much of what I have said comes from frustration and disappointment - we will see what summer 2020 brings...

 

I consider you to be an incredibly well informed poster and you present your arguments in a clear way that makes me understand how anyone would support your position - even if i disagree with it. I do not consider you a MB supporter or a hater so your opinion is from a fairly neutral position. If you take MB's plan out of the equation, do you think yesterday was a win for us? or was it a missed opportunity?

 

 

 

I see one big missed opportunity yesterday.  Brady Skjei.  25 years old.  Signed for a long time.  Traded for a single 1st round pick.  

 

I think we should have got involved there.   I wouldnt have traded the habs first round pick cause how high it could be... but id have tried to get in there and see what the rangers would take for him... 2 seconds in 2020 and a 2nd in 2021?  Would that have done it?  A prospect and a second?  What would have brought us this top 4 LHD?

 

So i call that a missed opportunity.

 

 

Tatar? Petry? Etc... without knowing the offers, I cant say for sure.  To me though it is much like Pacioretty at the 2018 deadline... you shop him and if you get what you want, trade him.  If you dont get a big enough package, then he can be dealt in the summer or next season.

 

The contracts werent up this year, so the deal wasnt necessary to be made now.

Share this post


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

MB or Molson won't answer your question 

 

Im sure there vision is winning the cup, but they aren;t even close to a contender 

The hope, wish, dream, prayer may be to win a cup, but I don’t see a clear vision or plan how to get there.  I don’t see a team that will be any better than 5th in the Atlantic next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont be for sure unless someone above them is unlucky 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

Lack of vision in this context was about not seeing the incredible opportunity to springboard this reset and stock the cupboards with young talent that will impact the team for years. Instead he stuck to his plan that will give us the same team next year with likely the same results.

 

His plan in general is flawed as it makes no consideration for aging players that will naturally decline. We will be stuck in this endless loop of being a mediocre team - drafted players move up and replace the aging players. Our only hope in this method is to strike gold with the lottery or "get lucky" with a draft pick or have an unlikely reclamation project turn to gold.

 

 

If I told my boss at work that well need to be lucky to succeed, I’d be shown the door immediately.  Some of his comments is where I have issues with the way stats are used today saying their is no statistical difference between a player drafted at 26 and  42 becoming an NHL player ignores what role the player is playing.  Is he a 1st/2nd liner or 4th line scrub????

 

i want more quality over quantity. Timmons has drafted a lot of NHL players, but very few truly elite players and outside of the one big draft (maxpac, Subban) draft has been pretty damn mediocre. 
 

pqrt of this is on player development, but part of it is having either hard working plugs, skilled guys with little hockey sense, or guys with good hockey sense, but limited skills, and I don’t even know how to classsify the McCarron pick, other than. Idiotic.

 

the caps have done a great job with late 1st round and second round pick, selecting elite players, ditto with TBL, ditto with the bruins.  But with MB all I’ve heard for 7 years how hard it is and now how lucky he has to be at the roulette wheel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brian Wilde on Global made some very good points on yesterdays lack of real action on the part of MB. In a nutshell this is what he said. 

 

He said MB missed a huge one time opportunity yesterday. He said that Petry and Tatar's values are probably at the max right now and MB could have gotten a first round pick for each of them plus some very good add-ons. In the 2020 draft, to have 3 first round picks, plus the 3 second round picks, added to the young guys we already have or are coming, Wilde said that would have been how to build for the future. We would have picked up some high, perhaps elite talent for the coming years. But we missed it.   

 

He said the current core has missed the playoffs 3 out for the past 4 years and if they improve next year,  MAYBE we make the playoffs but do we win a round? If MB had of made the trades yesterday we would be much much better positioned for the next 10 years instead of holding onto to them to make the playoffs next year. 

 

What he said sounded like a very good plan. But we missed it.

 

I've heard a few people say in the past 24 hours that MB can win a trade but he doesn't seem to know how to build a team. I think that may be true. We may have sunk a little bit deeper in the pat 24 hours. Ugh!   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took a peak at a couple of mock drafts, and to be honest, there are no potential Norris candidates in the bottom 10,  most forwards are "two-way top 9" or 3rd-line NHLers according to the different websites.

So, I do not understand what's the uproar

 

My humble proposal was to trade Petry or Tatar to get a second 1st round pick to package in order to get one top-5 1st round pick. Out of the top 5 this year, it seem iffy

 

Edited by alfredoh2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked earlier....who was throwing around first round picks other than Tampa yesterday? Where is this guarantee that other teams were offering a 1st + good prospects for Petry and Tatar? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

Where do you think his (really Molson's) vision is wrong?

I think Molson has no backbone, but besides that dunno what the master plan is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, REV-G said:

I've heard a few people say in the past 24 hours that MB can win a trade but he doesn't seem to know how to build a team. I think that may be true. We may have sunk a little bit deeper in the pat 24 hours. Ugh!   

Wouldnt that be sweet!

Down to two top-4 d-men and down their top scorer, for picks.

So next season will be looking for two top-four d-men and a couple top six forwards...smart plan. Those picks may one day, down the road, come close to the calibre of a Petry-Tatar, but till then will be gaping holes in lineup that should put the team battling Ottawa for basement seeding for next few years.

 

Last team i know that had three 1st round picks, 1 made the NHL and the other two never played 1 game in NHL.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understand why we should move petry or Tatar for a pick that we HOPE in 3-4 years becomes at least as good as the petry or Tatar we now have. Those are exactly the types of players we’d need to overpay to acquire next year if we didn’t have them. Losing them creates holes. Losing them guarantees we’ve thrown in the towel on next year already. Keeping them means we can go for it next year and still move them should we eventually throw in the towel next year. 
 

this was not poor asset management. What it was was not giving up on next season before it even started. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


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

I asked earlier....who was throwing around first round picks other than Tampa yesterday? Where is this guarantee that other teams were offering a 1st + good prospects for Petry and Tatar? 

 

 

NYI ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the thing

 

1) yesterday was not the last possible day to move petry or tatar.  It wasnt even the last possible day to move them for a first round 2020 pick.  If thats what you really want, you could move them right before the draft 

 

2) but why does it have to be a 2020 1st rounder.  Whats so magical about the mystery box?  On the pacioretty deal we took nick suzuki and a 2nd rounder instead of asking for firsts.  Getting a player a year or two older... having more evaluation time of the prospect and seeing where he is going can get you more of a blue chip then getting a mystery box pick in the 20s.

 

3) we keep hearing from some analysts how this is a great draft.   Ok what does that mean.

 

People like wilde who dont study the draft dont know what it means.  There are different definitions of great 

 

This year.. id say its great cause there are 10-12 guys who would be top 5 talents in most seasons. 

 

Number 1-2 are very good but not generational

Numbers 3-10 or 12 or so will be excellent prospects.

 

Beyond that... its average... not good... not bad... but the 25th pick or so is gonna get another Poehling level prospect.  And thats what you are trading for at the deadline... picks in the 20s... not picks in the top 10.  So this draft being great, its not great in the way that matters on trade deadline day.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

2) but why does it have to be a 2020 1st rounder.  Whats so magical about the mystery box?  On the pacioretty deal we took nick suzuki and a 2nd rounder instead of asking for firsts.  Getting a player a year or two older... having more evaluation time of the prospect and seeing where he is going can get you more of a blue chip then getting a mystery box pick in the 20s.

 

This. Trading for another team's prospect, rather than that fantastic-sounding first-round draft pick, is much lower risk. The prospect may have a year or two of additional experience and you can have higher confidence as to what he will be able to do in the NHL. You may have doubled the probability of him making the NHL, or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, huzer said:

I asked earlier....who was throwing around first round picks other than Tampa yesterday? Where is this guarantee that other teams were offering a 1st + good prospects for Petry and Tatar? 

 

 

 

Yeah, Tampa was really throwing them around. A first round pick for Barclay Goodrow???   That's was a head scratcher for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I heard Pierre McQuire say on TSN radio a few months back was that was the best and deepest draft in years. He said this was the year to not trade away draft picks and the more picks you had the better positioned you would be.  But from what some of you are saying, maybe that’s not the case. 

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...