xXx..CK..xXx

If I were to beg the question of what exactly a puck moving defenseman is and how it is represented in the difference in skill level of Weber and Subban I would get a myriad of answers. Someone would say it’s someone who can make a nice first outlet pass outside of the zone. Another would chime in that it’s a defenseman who can skate the puck out of their blue line into the other team’s zone. Another would state that it’s something that is demonstrated by corsi; your team has more possession and shots when the given player is on the ice. Another would disagree and state that it’s really only something you can distinguish with your own eyes. The first one is something both Weber and Subban are capable of. The second one is something Subban rarely does anyway, despite people thinking he does. Of course Weber does not either. The only problem with corsi is that one can be tied down with a worse player or be brought up by another player. Weber has also had his rough share of partners while on the Habs. Subban has as well, this isn’t a competition between the two. But he has also had phases with very solid defensive partners as well as forward units. Finally, the eye test can have confirmation bias. People see what they want to see, or they only watch at the wrong times. What I see here is people clamoring for what they perceive we don’t have, and it leads to irrationality. First of all, Weber isn’t as terrible a puck mover as people say. Second of all, we need a left handed defenseman to be the brilliant puck mover. If Weber is indeed worse at moving the puck, we need to find someone to compliment him rather than complain that he isn’t one or even that we don’t have one. There are weaknesses in Subban’s game as well and one can be damn sure that Ekholm does things better than Subban as well as differently, and they compliment each other. Give Subban Nate Schmidt as a partner and id be quite interested in how things turn out. These Ekholms and Emelins have a contrast in style with Subban. As for Girardi and Weber as a top pair, it’s first of all impossible since they are both right defense. That’s the point, we need a left handed defenseman on our team. Second of all, last year we had Weber and Emelin on the top pair at times and while I hated it, it didn’t seem to hurt us in the standings. Again, the issue there was Emelin on the top pair. Not our top pair right handed defenseman.

The only difference between us is that I want the Habs to do well in the short term as well as the long term whereas you envision no plan available to be able to do well in the short term, but only the long term. Even though long term goals are always going to be more foggy than short term ones. When the Habs do well, it’s all on Price. When Price sucks in a given year, which literally happened this year, it’s because of everything outside of him. When Nashville does well, it’s because they should. When they lose in the second round after reaching the conference final in their prior season, it’s supposedly despite having gotten better. That credit would never be given to the Habs after a worse performance. I can’t help but see bias in some people’s perspective and it leads me to argue. I have strong opinions as well but I don’t see them as biased or “subliminal racism” because I loved Subban in the World Juniors as well as while he was a member of the team. I will admit that I didn’t think highly of Subban in his final year with us but that didn’t dampen my overall perspective of him. I do maintain that in a healthy year, the difference between Weber and Subban is marginal and I look forward to seeing what the future holds in that respect.

It’s fine. I’ve said enough to annoy without intending to do so, so I’m ready to personally move on from the topic. I hope. But when I see comments like the end of your post, the same can be once again said for Weber. Any of those teams would love to have Weber. My point is that as Habs fans, while I cannot force a viewpoint on anyone, we should be wreaking havoc at our lack of puck moving left handed defensemen, not right handed. People hate Petry but he’s also a right handed defenseman. While our team would still need much more, our defense would be more balanced if Petry was simply a left handed shot. Still not a top pair caliber, but definitely more balanced. Moving forward our team needs to find a puck mover, especially one that has a left handed shot. That’s a void caused by the loss of Markov, quite simply. After all, as the thread states, Markov is now a champion.

- This first point is blah. Nate Schmidt is better suited than Dustin Byfuglien for today’s NHL. I’d still rather have Dustin Byfuglien on my top pair. - Weber is elite in areas that our team would lack without him. - Perhaps he was. This can be twisted as a justification for the move or an outrage against the move depending on one’s position. - Signing Semin and Kassian shined a bright light on Bergevin’s lack of view and yet people home in on this. People always talk about puck moving defensemen but it’s on our left hand side that we really need one. At the time of the trade, we had Markov and Beaulieu. Not replacing either of them (though beaulieu turned out to suck) and then trading Sergachev is a bigger issue than having traded Subban. The Habs did well last year. - Weber can change the momentum of the game in one play. - It was already mentioned that Subban is “built for today’s NHL” and here’s the same argument again. Weber can play in the NHL today, trust me. Finally, let’s not forget that Subban truly has no apparent issues of his own on the ice according to some people. Absolutely none, whatsoever. Vegas has Brayden McNabb as their top pairing right defense. Tampa Bay has Dan Girardi as their top pairing right defense. Winnipeg has Josh Morrisey on their top pair. Washington has Michael Kempny on their top pair. ... and we’re complaining about having Weber? ”This trade was never about Weber” ”We’re not complaining about Weber” People sure are, when the most common angst against the trade is that Subban is an elite puck mover. That’s an indirect critism of an apparent weakness in Weber’s game. People can continue to hate the trade, but it’s not the issue with our team, nor is it even at the core of the issue. Weber wasn’t even here for most of this season, so it’s easy pickings right now.

One can make all the comments they want about how trading Subban created a void but at that point in time our power play was void of goals as well, which as was noted is something Weber generally excels at. Scoring goals on the power play. I see too dominant an opinion being created about Subban in the argument. Not only is Subban a better puck mover, he’s now also better at everything that Weber does well as well. If that’s the way some people think, then obviously their thoughts will never change, but it’s not entirely true. I’m personally more annoyed with the Sergachev for Drouin trade because of similar reasons that some people are upset with the Weber trade. I try to avoid even bringing it up though because obviously Drouin was a talented player to receive back. Just like Weber was. Sergachev for Drouin would have been solid if Drouin actually was a center. But it was a move that created a void at LD and didn’t address any other need. In the case of Weber and Subban, they are both legitimate 1st pairing right handed defensemen. One can talk about a void in stylistic play between the two but it certainly didn’t create a void in the strengths of our lineup by position. When anyone creates a post on here about team needs, we hear about needing centers as well as a top pairing LD. We never hear that the team is in desperate for a top pairing RD. Yet all hell breaks loose when people watch Subban on the TV. ”It’s not Weber’s fault. He never asked to be a Hab”. Exactly. It’s not Weber’s fault that the team is in the situation it finds itself. It’s the players surrounding him. Subban wouldn’t have helped this year’s version of the Habs succeed. Weber needs a better team. The argument has revolved completely around how the new age NHL revolves around speed and puck moving defensemen and yet it’s not the only factor in assessing the trade and it’s not necessarily the only formula for success. Some of the defensive cores that are left don’t have the greatest puck moving defenseman as a whole (Tampa’s is great). On the other hand, Nashville has one of the better D cores at moving the puck in the league and although it was a fine line between them lifting the cup and being eliminated this year, their offense got smothered in some games this post season despite having that great puck moving D.

I never wanted Weber and my head hurt the moment I heard Subban was traded for Weber. Ever since that moment, I’ve found myself defending the trade because of how blown out of proportion it’s been. There are trades out there that truly cripple an organization. Those who refer to the trade every so often feel as though this was one of those instances. Even if you think Weber is worse, he’s still a defenseman who puts up 50+ points in a given year and so this move isn’t one that exactly crippled an organization. Certainly not in isolation. If the Habs or predators do win a cup, I sincerely believe that Subban and Weber would have been mostly interchangeable on either of those cup winning teams. It’s also the rest of the team. Those who lament the trade, were the ones who initially stated that Weber sucked in game 7 against the Sharks in his final year with Nashville and that it was indicative that we now have a worse playoff performer. Someone said it here earlier in very simple terms. Perhaps there was something as simple as a toxic work environment and Bergevin considered this to be the best return he would get. Those who hate the trade then laugh out loud, refer to attitude and character and completely dismiss the possibility that Subban may have made some adjustments after getting a wake up call and being shown the door. That’s not a slag at Subban. I liked him ever since the World Juniors. Regardless, I revert to my initial point in that even if we miss Subban, the trade itself has been blown out of proportion. Just a few comments ago, we heard that this trade is on a parallel with Chelios for Savard. Soon after we hear a comparison of Tavares for Pavelski. There’s an inconsistency in the analysis of the trade. Tavares for Pavelski is not Chelios Savard and neither was Subban for Weber.

That’s your point when you comment about Weber in a negative manner in your most recent post? Markov won his championship and Subban didn’t. Let’s move on from this thread.

I’m not a prospect expert but judging by their performances at the World Juniors, Laine is probably ahead of Zadina. Remember that Laine went second overall though and a better comparison to him might be Svechnikov who’s predicted to go second overall this year. I still think Laine is better than both. Zadina, in my opinion could be more promising than Pierre Luc Dubois though, who went third overall in Laine’s draft.

You can compare 2015 with 2017 and in the meantime I’ll compare 2016 and 2018. The 2016 team with Subban stunk with the worst goaltending in the NHL and meanwhile Carey Price this year had some of the worst goaltending in the entire NHL. In 2016 he had 10 wins and this year he only had 16 wins. The key issue in both our seasons was Carey Price. In one season he was injured and in the other season he played no better than Ben Scrivens himself. We all know we had a terrible team on paper this season, but it would have been terrible with Subban in place of Weber as well. Furthermore, Carey Price’s own performance was not entirely due to the team in front of him. On many nights this season he looked like he was one of the worst players on the ice. It’s not letting our team off the hook but Carey Price had a .900 save percentage this year. Ben Scrivens has a .906 with us. It’s fair to say trading Subban for Weber did nothing to improve the team but there have been trades and players who have been let go for free which have been more costly to the team and have actually made us substantially worse, so I don’t see the reason to harp on a lateral move. Losing Radulov for free is worse. Even trading Sergachev for Drouin hurts simply because we did it before Sergachev ever had a shot with us. Markov was old but we also lost him for nothing in return, when we had available cap space. Trading Weber for Subban was a move that involved two quality players. Saying we were a bubble team during the second half of the season demonstrates Weber’s importance to the team and is finding a way to make the move look bad.

This is where the opinion loses all its merit. The team sucked in Subban’s final year with us and then improved last year. While the argument you may be trying to make is that the trade you speak of did nothing to improve our squad, it also makes it look like we were a good team the final year we had Subban. Which we weren’t. That season had me watch less games than this year by the end of it. I think the Habs have had good teams and bad teams under Bergevin and while Subban was great to have, him vs Weber has very little to do with why the squad finds itself where it is. We were 6th in the division in Subban’s final year with us and we were 6th in the division this year. We were also 1st in the division prior to both those seasons.

I don’t think the focus should be entirely on Bergevin even if there is a turn around. I’ll be happy if we make some noise next year in the playoffs but I can guarantee that even if we do, I’ll be praising the players as well as Julien more than obsessing about Bergevin. That’s even if he signs Stastny and Tavares, drafts Zadina and acquires a top pair LD.

Don’t back down, I agree there’s no logjam. Pacioretty-Stastny-Gallagher Galchenyuk-Drouin-Scherbak Byron-Danault-Lehkonen Hudon-Shaw-Deslauriers Nothing wrong with Hudon starting the season on the 4th line as a lot of players are interchangeable if someone starts cooling off or gets injured. First two lines are also interchangeable. This isn’t the lineup I’ve suggested before but I agree it’s not like we’re free to give up talented wingers at will. I hope I’m wrong but Lehkonen, Hudon, Byron, these players are often assumed to be more than capable to fill in high in the lineup but not in a million years will they be able to offset the offense lost by players like a Gallagher or Pacioretty. Galchenyuk and Scherbak I have more hope for although even Galchenyuk may never be as prolific a goal scorer as Pacioretty was a few years ago. I hope he is as he’s certainly more than capable of putting in 30+ goals under the right circumstances. Two side notes in this all is that first at first of all, some of the recent posts in this thread are why I have not wanted to see Pacioretty traded as well as why I will be surprised if he actually is any time prior to next year’s deadline. There have been claims that we should temper our expectations on the return for him and yet trade him anyway. This is precisely why I don’t want to see him gone. If he has low value due to whatever reason, why the heck not try to use someone else as trade bait. Perhaps we wouldn’t be able to work anything out but the point is that people are so focused in on Pacioretty. One of the first things I was told is that we need to give to get. I’d say that’s a valid reason for considering using Pacioretty as a trade chip. Now, we’re supposed to temper our expectations on a return, but just trade him anyway. Secondly, I’ve been one of those involved in penciling Stastny in as a potentially nice acquisition during the off season but the question is why would he leave Winnipeg at this point? Can Winnipeg not offer him enough? Will he even be as available as he is perceived?

I do know Byfuglien was a forward and I also know Burns has been a forward. How is the fact that these two players can play forward as well as defense not a positive thing? That makes them worse? Less value in a trade because of that? You’re not taking everything into consideration and I think Burns for Karlsson would actually be a steal for Ottawa considering Karlsson’s contract is up at the end of this season and Burns still has multiple years. “The final years of his contract will be an albatross” because he’ll be an old man but again, that’s something to worry about in 5 years. You still haven’t made it clear who wins the trade between Winnipeg and Washington and Carlson is not comparable to Hainsey because in addition to being a 1st overall pick, he also led the entire league among defensemen in scoring. He’s not great defensively? Well, wasn’t the hypothetical trade for Byfuglien who was originally a forward? When Sergachev does well, it’s because Tampa Bay has an elite team to boost his points. When Subban has the most elite defensive core to play with and good players around him, it seems his success is in spite of those players and people assume he would make an iota of a difference on a Habs team that has no one. On Montréal, Subban would have had to carry the load to an enormous extent and that’s where both his positives and negatives get amplified. You attribute his success to better coaching. I attribute it to being on a more balanced team than Subban had when he was here and so he doesn’t have to do as much on his own. All in all the point is to say that it does not suck to watch the better defenseman on Nashville because we do have Weber. It only sucks to watch him when Weber is not active. When Subban gets hurt and Weber is healthy, the opposite happens because Weber is a quality player. This was the case early last year.

This is where opinions will vary. Carlson is not in the same class as Subban and yet he was a first round pick and just led the league in scoring. Karlsson has been on the rumour mill and one can be damn sure they won’t receive a better return than Burns if he were ever traded. Byfuglien isn’t in the same class and yet he’s accomplished more in the NHL than the other’s listed, and did so as a contributing factor for the Hawks. He’s older now but seems to be an integral part of this jets team this year, with a defensive core that has arguably outperformed Nashville’s elite defensive core (so far). I’m sure there is a slight majority that would think Karlsson Burns is a win for whoever receives Karlsson but the point is that in these trades, an extremely respectable player is coming back both ways.

And does the good outweigh the bad with Weber? Doesn’t seem like much of a compliment to say the good outweighs the bad. Weber got injured this year but he’s still a fine player to have on the team in my books. One can say your post wasn’t about Weber at all but the initial comment was that Weber is worse than Subban. Think about how people would perceive a John Carlson for Dustin Byfuglien trade, or an Eric Karlsson for Brent Burns and this trade isn’t much different. In certain moments the trade will look better for one team than the other but it won’t be a trade that’s permanently bad for one team or the other. There’s the age factor in each of the trades but those impacts are felt years afterward.

I understand people saying we should not resign Plekanec but I’d like the Habs to do so. The problem I see is having Danault and Plekanec on the same team. It pretty much ensures at least one of them would be playing higher in the lineup than they should be.

Tavares doesn’t change a bottom dweller to a contender. Either we’re not a bottom dweller or we’re not winning a cup with him anyway. I’d love Tavares but he hasn’t proven to be a Crosby or Toews in the playoffs, and it’s also because he hasn’t had the supporting cast. He never pushed the Islanders over the top on his own, not should he have to. If the Habs can be a contender with Tavares, it will be because Price, Weber, Drouin, Galchenyuk, Pacioretty if he’s on the team, Gallagher, and perhaps even Zadina will have had solid seasons. That also leaves room for one of Hudon or Lehkonen to improve on their lackluster season this year or even Byron to maintain being the player he’s been. It’s not true that the chips are all in on Tavares. If we don’t land him, it’s a worse case scenario but we can still work on acquiring a more mediocre center (Stastny) or two for the same cost of Tavares, or a center and that additional left handed defenseman.

Yes, and if we didn’t have the cap space available, we wouldn’t be able to sign Tavares. And if Tavares does not sign with us, we are not cap restrained. Seems like there’s no problem here.

These trade proposals including our 3rd overall are terrible. Not only are we trading the 3rd overall, but we’re Adding Galchenyuks, Scherbaks and Paciorettys to sweeten the pot of our already sweet pot of 3rd overall. I’m not even huge into prospects but I want to keep the pick.

It’s not true that the top 2 are the only 2 in this draft. If that were the case, teams should also trade away their 4th, 5th, 6th picks, etc. Zadina could, and probably will end up a pretty darn good player. His release is a threat at all times.

We already knew heading into the draft that there wouldn’t be any top centers as high as we would be drafting. Let’s keep our pick, draft Svechnikov, Zadina or Tkachuk and then move on to free agency.

This is crazy. “Team x doesn’t score enough goals so they would be interested in Pacioretty”. What was the Habs problem again? I’m assuming our team won’t need to score goals until “the young kids are finally ready.” I’m actually even more against trading the top 3 pick because the returns listed there are not the likely return teams would offer. One of the reasons I’ve been constantly arguing against these trade proposals are because they are proposals that are either clearly better for us, or clearly better for the other team. I don’t believe Pacioretty, with one year left on his contract, would be of any enticement to the Oilers in a trade for Draisaitl. Some people argue that Montreal will not have even a chance at winning the cup next year. I see even a less of a chance for that Edmonton team, even with McDavid. They are not going to trade away Draisaitl for one year of Pacioretty, even if the 3rd overall is included. Edmonton also has the 10th overall pick so it’s not like they are drafting incredibly deep. In any case, a more likely trade between the teams would include a swap of draft picks along with a few less important pieces than Draisaitl and Pacioretty.

I’ll be surprised if we pick anywhere but where we landed and I expect the Habs to pick Zadina. Not very original, but it’s the way I see things playing out.

It’s a bit of semantics but he said “sign and trade”, not “trade and sign”. From my point of view that would mean that the Islanders would sign him prior to trading him to the Habs. It’s still too much and is part of my assumption that people totally devalue Pacioretty. Not that he wouldn’t be good to trade for Tavares, but to then throw in a Galchenyuk and Zadina. If Brooklyn signs him and then trades him, he doesn’t have a say in where he goes. Unless he has a no trade clause. Which a player of his caliber probably would.

Elite is a strong word but I think Mete can surprise people even more than he has already. There have been some claims that he is the best/quickest young skating defensemen in the league so in the future that will pay dividends. He didn’t do anything offensively this year but in 10 years, I could see him being one of the best defensemen in the league. I would agree that the Habs are slightly worse than some other teams in the recent past when it comes to what you’re talking about, but it doesn’t happen very often for any team, when one looks at it.