Montreal vs. St. Louis | December 19th, 2013 | 8:00 EST

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Habs29 is spot-on as usual about:

1. The need to add to MaxPac rather than replace him. This is what makes a trade tough. The Gorges-Pleks idea is a real heart-stopper because those guys are SO essential to our core, but he's right, it's the sort of ballsy move that could allow us to add a bona-fide major asset in Kane while making Winnipeg better. If you want to contend, at some point you have to trust your youth. I can see trading Pleks and giving Eller the keys. Nervy but maybe that's what we will have to do. (As for Gorges, he is replaceable). I hope Bergevin has the vision to at least consider moves of this sort.

2. The need to avoid acquiring players who have already peaked. That is the trap that teams like the Leafs always fall into. We need a guy who is either looking at many prime years ahead or who has not yet hit his prime. What Dallas did when they stole Ribs is the ideal scenario. Kane fits the bill. He still has growing up to do? Fine, let him grow up with us.

3. Don't trade Tinordi. Don't trade Beaulieu. The end.

4. Yes. Contend within 2-3 years. That's the target. And all the moaning about this season's squad needs to be put within that context. Otherwise we lose the plot.

[JoeLassister]

My only concern is : Who plays against Crosby when Plex is gone ? Desharnais ? Brière ? Eller ? White ? Galchenyuk ?

Answer this question and you'll get my blessing for moving Plekanec. Until then...

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

My only concern is : Who plays against Crosby when Plex is gone ? Desharnais ? Brière ? Eller ? White ? Galchenyuk ?

Answer this question and you'll get my blessing for moving Plekanec. Until then...

Yep, trading Pleks would be an absolutely HUGE move. He is the key player for us up front. And moving him might well make us worse in the short-term. The assumption is that Eller can adjust and move into Pleks's role - which, come to think of it, is kinda what we did with Plekanec himself when we shipped out Ribs: "here's the #2 C job, now grow into it."

Habs29 brought this up in the context of acquiring Evander Kane, with an eye to contending in 2-3 years. Thinking ahead, will we be better with Kane and without a 34-year-old Pleks, or with a 34-year-old Pleks and no Kane? That's the sort of question that we should be asking if we're looking to become true contenders.

[PMAC]

I like the idea of trading for Kane, but--as I noted in another thread-- I believe: a. that Noel will be fired before Kane is traded; b. trading PLexs would be a huge mistake at this point; and c. given the relative lack of value associated with the players we want to move, that MB will make a relatively minor trade --in terms of our current roster--for a scorer near the deadline.

Also, I agree with the idea that Diaz is under-rated on the board-- he isn't overly physical, but in addition to the positive attributes noted by Commandant, he is also ranked approx. 7th in the NHL in terms of shots blocked.

[hab29RETIRED]

I'm a big fan of pleks and was in favour if signing him to a long term deal after his disasterous year and before he had his big breakout his UFA year - when everyone else wanted to trade the "little girl". But I really think we are in a position to move him and get a premium return now.

Losing pleks would be huge this year, but IMO, by next year I think Eller will be able fill that role. He is very good defensively, while he isn't as good right now as pleks and still needs to develop his hockey sense, he is improving on faceoffs much faster than pleks did, he is much more physical and has a lot more creativity than pleks.

In the short term I actually think the loss of Gorges would be more significant than pleks. Eller IMO can step into Pleks role. We'll have to wait Unilingual next year for Tinordi to step up.

Yep, trading Pleks would be an absolutely HUGE move. He is the key player for us up front. And moving him might well make us worse in the short-term. The assumption is that Eller can adjust and move into Pleks's role - which, come to think of it, is kinda what we did with Plekanec himself when we shipped out Ribs: "here's the #2 C job, now grow into it."

Habs29 brought this up in the context of acquiring Evander Kane, with an eye to contending in 2-3 years. Thinking ahead, will we be better with Kane and without a 34-year-old Pleks, or with a 34-year-old Pleks and no Kane? That's the sort of question that we should be asking if we're looking to become true contenders.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

It's pretty funny to me how often we treat Plekanec the same way Blackhawks fans treated Patrick Sharp. He was always called expendable. He was supposed to be the guy Chicago uses to acquire the player that would put them over the top. Instead, the organization appreciated his game and Sharp helped them win two Cups. They didn't need to move him. They needed to build around him and consider him like they considered Toews, Kane and Hossa.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I didn't say Pleks was expendable. Nor do I fail to appreciate him - I said he's our "key" guy up front. The analogy with Sharp fails inasmuch as Sharp was not 31 when the Hawks were 2-3 years from contending. If we think this team has all the organizational pieces to contend, or else can fill any holes via free agency, then we don't need to be trading Plekanec, obviously. If we're more skeptical that we have all the needed pieces, then Pleks becomes a part we could conceivably move in order to get back the kind of high-ceiling asset we otherwise could not get. None of this has to do with denying Plekanec's excellence; quite the reverse. And it's all premised on the idea that Eller could become Pleks Redux - not a crazy idea, IMHO.

[Commandant]

Re "Tanking" the Hawks have 2 top 5 picks in their lineup. The Habs have the same already. The key will be Galchenyuk developping into that elite player.