GDT Game 4, Flyers vs Habs, 3 PM

[GHT120]

3 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

... And this gets to something I've long said about Drouin. He needs to be the 6th FW on a good team, an "added bonus" weapon to a club that doesn't rely on him to be more than that. Sadly, Montreal cast him as our Most Talented Player and a guy who was expected to drive the offence ...

 

 

Similar to what I said, although I think that an elite centre could unlock more than 6th forward production ... sadly, he wasn't cast as lour most talented player, he has been The Habs most talented player since he arrived ... just not anywhere near productive

[Commandant]

12 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

My main contention with the Petry deal is simply that it was the going rate for a player of his stature at the time. It's not like it was some kind of brilliant fleecing. It's turned out extremely well, yes. But do you really think they anticipated him becoming this good? No way. It's like calling Vegas drafting William Karlsson brilliant. It was luck!  Both Vegas and Columbus thought Josh Anderson was the better player and it took a 1st rounder to convince them to settle for Karlsson, mediocre 4th liner to that point.

 

In what world did Tatar outscore Pacioretty this year? Pacioretty's 32g and 34a is more than Tatar's 22g and 39a last time I checked. You are literally making things up now. Even so, it's still too early for me to call it a home run. I need more than one 60 point season and a promising rookie year before I can make that call. If Pacioretty was for sure not going to re-sign, then yeah, we can already call it a home run. But it felt more like him getting run out.

 

Pacioretty in Vegas 106 pts

Tatar in Montreal 119 pts

[Commandant]

6 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Petry was a HUGE win ... but it isn't quite fair to compere that deal with Pacs ... Max signed an extension hours after he trade was made ... seems likely that Vegas was allowed to talk to Max's agent about the parameters of a deal before the deal was made ... increasing what GKs were willing to pay ... b it I do count that deal as a win

 

If I recall, MB waited until almost the last minute before making the Petry deal ... BEAUTIFULLY played ... but at the time of the deal there was no guarantee that Petry would re-sign ... 

 

Both those trades are Huge Wins.... Tatar alone has replaced Pac at a cheaper price, while still adding Suzuki and Struble. 

 

Petry is a clear win as well. 

[GHT120]

12 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Both those trades are Huge Wins.... Tatar alone has replaced Pac at a cheaper price, while still adding Suzuki and Struble. 

 

Petry is a clear win as well. 

 

Don't think I ever said either trade wasn't ... 

[Fanpuck33]

17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Pacioretty in Vegas 106 pts

Tatar in Montreal 119 pts

 

That doesn't prove your point... You said Tatar outscored Pacioretty in each of the last two seasons. That means that he was better both last year and this year, not that the entire two year body of work was better. Tatar had a far superior season last year, but his career year this year did not beat an average year from Pacioretty. It's 1 and 1, not 2 and 0.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

2 hours ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

You are over-rating our players so much. The fact that the team sucks without Byron says more about the team than it does about Byron. I love the guy and it's great having 20 goal guys, but you're not in a good place if you're relying that hard on him. Kulak being in our top 4 doesn't mean he's a top 4 guy. We just have no depth on the left side! This is the first time Tatar has topped 60 points and he's never netted 30 goals. Don't try telling me he's as good as Pacioretty. Yes, Suzuki is looking good and is a huge reason why I felt hope with this team for the first time in the last five years. But he's still young. Last year people were thinking Domi was going to be a #1 center and now people are running him out of town. Petry has half the player back then that he is now. We got him at such a low price because that was his value at the time! Not being MB is brilliant.

 

If not for a pandemic, this team would have missed the playoffs for the 4th time in 5 years. That is not acceptable if you are not rebuilding, which this team has never had the courage to do. Some successes along the way does not excuse his failure to put together a winning team. We seem to be at least angling in the right direction, but we need a GM who will do more than provide glimmers of hope from time to time. In 8 years, they've won three and a half playoff series (the play-in round being the half). In what world is that resume worthy of keeping your job?

I think your missing the point actually... Im not over rating anybody.

 

We all understand the habs would have missed the playoffs if not for the lockdown...2nd chances are exactly that... a 2nd chance!

 

Byron was a steal relative to how we got him... on the waiver wire not because I think he's Alexander Ovechkin... MB scooped up a multi 20 goal scorer off the waiver wire. Im pretty sure that's a steal anyway you want to look at it.

 

Kulak was traded for nothing and he's currently in our top 4... maybe it took him a little longer to find his role on the team but he doesn't look out of place, not one bit. So yes another steal relative to how we got him. VALEV and Taramioa.

 

Do we really need to revisit the Petry deal Again?

 

Keep in mind this was brought on because I believe MB got burned with the Sergachev deal. But has made up for it since... That is fact!

 

[Sir_Boagalott]

7 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

We did very well indeed, I think, getting Suzuki and Tatar for MaxPac. As much as Domi has struggled this month, he has been much better than Galchenyuk. We stole Armia from Winnipeg. Kulak and Byron were excellent finds. Both Shaw trades were good.

 

 

 

Ya, I sorta feel sorry for Calgary on the Habs stealing Byron off waivers.  That must have sucked for them.  🤣

 

I was happy with the Paccioretty trade when I heard Habs got Tatar because I knew he was almost as good of player and we would have him longer.  I wasnt sure who Suzuki was at that time, but then saw him play WJ and was impressed.  Plus 1 of my buddy's friends watches a lot of OHL and told me Suzuki was really good.  Apparently MB told Vegas when then called about Pacc that he wanted Suzuki or no deal and Tatar was a throw in to get it done.

 

Oddly, I wasnt sure how Pacc would do once he left the Habs.  In the last 10 years or so it seems that a lot of ex-Habs trail right off after they leave so I kinda figured that would happen to Pacc.    Surprisingly, Pacc has done really for Vegas, but the Habs have 2 players that worked right out that they will have for years.  I tend to think the Habs fleeced Vegas in that trade. 

[Fanpuck33]

21 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Ya, I sorta feel sorry for Calgary on the Habs stealing Byron off waivers.  That must have sucked for them.  🤣

 

I was happy with the Paccioretty trade when I heard Habs got Tatar because I knew he was almost as good of player and we would have him longer.  I wasnt sure who Suzuki was at that time, but then saw him play WJ and was impressed.  Plus 1 of my buddy's friends watches a lot of OHL and told me Suzuki was really good.  Apparently MB told Vegas when then called about Pacc that he wanted Suzuki or no deal and Tatar was a throw in to get it done.

 

Oddly, I wasnt sure how Pacc would do once he left the Habs.  In the last 10 years or so it seems that a lot of ex-Habs trail right off after they leave so I kinda figured that would happen to Pacc.    Surprisingly, Pacc has done really for Vegas, but the Habs have 2 players that worked right out that they will have for years.  I tend to think the Habs fleeced Vegas in that trade. 

 

I doubt Vegas feels fleeced. I feel like both teams got what they wanted out of the deal, at least after Pacioretty's injury hampered first season. Vegas was a top contender with a player who did not fit in in the team and a prospect who may or may not have helped them at some point in the future. In return, they got one of the league's most consistent goal scorers and a proven commodity. We got an adequate replacement winger and a much needed C prospect. I think both sides are plenty happy after two years, especially if Vegas wins the Cup.

 

21 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Keep in mind this was brought on because I believe MB got burned with the Sergachev deal. But has made up for it since... That is fact!

 

Now if only he also hadn't made so many other bad moves that have to be made up for... How many bad moves have there been for every Byron and Kulak? Karl Alzner. David Shlemko. Douglas Murray. Ben Scrivens and most of the other attempted backup goalies. Telling Markov to get lost after all he put into this team and while we had lousy depth on the left side. The Subban trade. Not to take anything away from Weber, but if you're going to trade your best player, fill your biggest hole in the process! That failure directly led to the failure of the Sergachev trade, and the need to pull off a third blockbuster to hopefully finally fill that hole in Suzuki.

[Sir_Boagalott]

44 minutes ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

I doubt Vegas feels fleeced. I feel like both teams got what they wanted out of the deal, at least after Pacioretty's injury hampered first season. Vegas was a top contender with a player who did not fit in in the team and a prospect who may or may not have helped them at some point in the future. In return, they got one of the league's most consistent goal scorers and a proven commodity. We got an adequate replacement winger and a much needed C prospect. I think both sides are plenty happy after two years, especially if Vegas wins the Cup.

 

 

 

 

You are right, it wasnt a complete bust of a trade for Vegas, but I say they were fleeced in the sense that they gave up way more talent than they got in return.  Suzuki and Tatar are likely capable of getting 25-30g/yr (50-60g combined), and Pacc would be lucky to get 40g in a season.  Vegas is likely in a position that they didnt have space for Suzuki, or soon wouldnt be able to afford him due to their other guys (similar situation with the Jets and Armia), and Pacc is an upgrade to Tatar, so the trade did improve their team - in the short term anyway.  The trade improved the Habs in the short and long term. 

 

Like I was saying, a lot of players the Habs draft dont seem to do well post Habs, so I wasn't sure how Pacc would do, but he has done well for Vegas.   There seems to be a lot of ex Habs that arent in the NHL 2-4 years after the Habs trade them.   I didnt expect Pacc would be out of the league by any means but I sorta figured his numbers would go down.

 

btw, didnt Markov leave?  I think the huge mistake was protecting Markov from Vegas instead of Emelin.  Vegas likely would not have taken an aging Markov, and then he left anyway, and a year later wanted to come back. 

[alfredoh2009]

46 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

You are right, it wasnt a complete bust of a trade for Vegas, but I say they were fleeced in the sense that they gave up way more talent than they got in return.  Suzuki and Tatar are likely capable of getting 25-30g/yr (50-60g combined), and Pacc would be lucky to get 40g in a season.  Vegas is likely in a position that they didnt have space for Suzuki, or soon wouldnt be able to afford him due to their other guys (similar situation with the Jets and Armia), and Pacc is an upgrade to Tatar, so the trade did improve their team - in the short term anyway.  The trade improved the Habs in the short and long term. 

 

Like I was saying, a lot of players the Habs draft dont seem to do well post Habs, so I wasn't sure how Pacc would do, but he has done well for Vegas.   There seems to be a lot of ex Habs that arent in the NHL 2-4 years after the Habs trade them.   I didnt expect Pacc would be out of the league by any means but I sorta figured his numbers would go down.

 

btw, didnt Markov leave?  I think the huge mistake was protecting Markov from Vegas instead of Emelin.  Vegas likely would not have taken an aging Markov, and then he left anyway, and a year later wanted to come back. 

Seems like you missed a couple of good threads on Markov.

 

Lets see... 🤔 MB is a dumb GM because he let Radulov walk and not securing an alternative to an aging Markov... plus not signing him (Markov) was solely due to MB’s enourmous ego

or something like that 😁

Edited August 21, 2020 by alfredoh2009

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

I doubt Vegas feels fleeced. I feel like both teams got what they wanted out of the deal, at least after Pacioretty's injury hampered first season. Vegas was a top contender with a player who did not fit in in the team and a prospect who may or may not have helped them at some point in the future. In return, they got one of the league's most consistent goal scorers and a proven commodity. We got an adequate replacement winger and a much needed C prospect. I think both sides are plenty happy after two years, especially if Vegas wins the Cup.

 

 

Now if only he also hadn't made so many other bad moves that have to be made up for... How many bad moves have there been for every Byron and Kulak? Karl Alzner. David Shlemko. Douglas Murray. Ben Scrivens and most of the other attempted backup goalies. Telling Markov to get lost after all he put into this team and while we had lousy depth on the left side. The Subban trade. Not to take anything away from Weber, but if you're going to trade your best player, fill your biggest hole in the process! That failure directly led to the failure of the Sergachev trade, and the need to pull off a third blockbuster to hopefully finally fill that hole in Suzuki.

Agree.  Did Dallas lose the deal when they traded Iginla for Neiwendyk?  Neiwendyk did not score as much in Dallas, as iginla diD in Calgary, but they were looking for missing pieces for a cup:  Tatar was a healthy scratch for the majority of their trip to the finals and was not a fit. As far as the playoffs go, he hasn’t been much better here, only having one good game, but has been solid in the regular season.

[hab29RETIRED]

26 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Seems like you missed a couple of good threads on Markov.

 

Lets see... 🤔 MB is a dumb GM because he let Radulov walk and not securing an alternative to an aging Markov... plus not signing him (Markov) was solely due to MB’s enourmous ego

or something like that 😁

Yes it was a brilliant decision not signing Markov for 4 years and keeping Sergechev, than signing that bum Alzner and trading for another bum in Drouin.

[alfredoh2009]

51 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Yes it was a brilliant decision not signing Markov for 4 years and keeping Sergechev, than signing that bum Alzner and trading for another bum in Drouin.

There you go Sir_Boagalott , I think I got it right since hab29RETIRED seems to confirm it

 

Basically Ego and self-interest drove the Habs franchise into the ground.

 

I do not know how that is reflected in game 4 and how that will play out on game 6

[hab29RETIRED]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

There you go Sir_Boagalott , I think I got it right since hab29RETIRED seems to confirm it

 

Basically Ego and self-interest drove the Habs franchise into the ground.

 

I do not know how that is reflected in game 4 and how that will play out on game 6

Umm, I guess you’re not very good at recognizing obvious sarcasm.  And yes, he was dumb in letting Radulov walk.  I would have preferred the extra year of Markov, the longer radulov contract and Sergechev to Alzner and Drouin.

[alfredoh2009]

6 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Umm, I guess you’re not very good at recognizing obvious sarcasm.  And yes, he was dumb in letting Radulov walk.  I would have preferred the extra year of Markov, the longer radulov contract and Sergechev to Alzner and Drouin.

I guess I can blame that also on Mr. Potato Head  🙃 😄

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

-It is more increasingly likely we recieved the best player in that deal (Nick freakin Suzuki) and replaced Pacioretty's production at a fraction of the cost... Its a huge win any bloody way you look at it.

Hindsight 20/20...I loved the General and was Radulovs biggest fan. However, losing both Radulov and Markov (TO FREE AGENCY) is probably the single biggest factor in us busting and being able to aquire Suzuki and draft  Kotkaniemi and Caufield and Romanov etc today. And for this reason I'm grateful 🙏 

 

 

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

14 hours ago, Fanpuck33 said:

 

I doubt Vegas feels fleeced. I feel like both teams got what they wanted out of the deal, at least after Pacioretty's injury hampered first season. Vegas was a top contender with a player who did not fit in in the team and a prospect who may or may not have helped them at some point in the future. In return, they got one of the league's most consistent goal scorers and a proven commodity. We got an adequate replacement winger and a much needed C prospect. I think both sides are plenty happy after two years, especially if Vegas wins the Cup.

 

 

Now if only he also hadn't made so many other bad moves that have to be made up for... How many bad moves have there been for every Byron and Kulak? Karl Alzner. David Shlemko. Douglas Murray. Ben Scrivens and most of the other attempted backup goalies. Telling Markov to get lost after all he put into this team and while we had lousy depth on the left side. The Subban trade. Not to take anything away from Weber, but if you're going to trade your best player, fill your biggest hole in the process! That failure directly led to the failure of the Sergachev trade, and the need to pull off a third blockbuster to hopefully finally fill that hole in Suzuki.

There is NO way Vegas doesn't reverse this deal if they had a DO over, no way! Especially in light of Suzuki.... 

 

 Douglas Murray and Ben Scrivens? Talk about grasping for straws