Trade Subban traded to Nashville

[Meller93]

They think Weber is the better player for their team so I believe Weber will be the better player for ours.

Although I think that might be true in this case, it's only because I think MT wants a similar system to team Canada. So normally I think that's pretty flawed logic, all it would take is MT's system to call for more dynamic skaters and suddenly Weber is not likely the better option. And it's certainly not because team canada said so.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I'm just trying to figure out why we are fixated on this one aspect of playing defence instead of looking at the bigger picture of total scoring chances. An area Subban is demonstrably superior.

It matters because giveaways are generally an individual statistic. If Weber is generally on the ice for more scoring chances then it can be because of other factors such as the offensive players he is playing with, his zone starts, etc. The reality is that when Subban is on the ice, he touches the puck more than any other player and therefore his turnovers become the direct reason for the scoring chance. Weber's turnovers may go up on the Habs but he was something like 175th in the league in that department last season so he won't come up that high.

Until Weber's turnover count increases it cannot be argued that he is any more responsible for these scoring chances against than Paul Gaustad or Roman Josi. When Subban makes an individual play at the offensive blue line and loses the puck, the 4 other players were not really the reason for that play. I've see instances where his teammates were moving their feet and/or wide open and he still makes a dangerous individualistic play that leads to a turnover in (once again) a dangerous part of the ice.

The best response could be that Weber can't catch a pass because he has a hole in his stick, or that he's so slow that he gets burned out wide 500% more than Subban and so other teams get their scoring chances that way as a result of Weber's deficiencies. I don't see it.

Better defensively? Maybe overall. But in all honesty some of his decisions only take 2 seconds to end up in the back of the net. I'm sure there will be turnovers by Weber that lead to goals but I've watched both play and the manner in which the turnovers are generally different.

Subban does a spin-o-Rama behind our net, gets rubbed off the puck by a second man and the puck squeaks out lose to an open player in the slot. Weber has the puck behind our net, tries to make an outlet pass to Beaulieu. Beaulieu gets pressured and returns the puck to Weber. Weber flips it hard off the boards to clear the zone but the puck hits a stanchion, takes a goofy bounce on to Krejci's stick and he's left all alone in front of Price.

Both those plays happened and both players looked goofy but regardless of skill, there's a higher percentage play between the two and it happened too often.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I suspect that if Subban hadn't had those two mortifying blow-outs in the last two weeks of his time in a Habs jersey, the myth of him as a free-wheeling loon would be harder to sustain.

[Commandant]

Of course you are right, they just sat at a big table, looking at eachother blankly. They then began speaking in juicy fruit comercial language and squeaked farts out from under there armpits for 3 weeks while they figured out their roster. Not a word was spoken about PK or anyone because commandant didn't see it in writing.

Give me a god damn break those men were in there picking PKs game apart, Doughty's, Weber's, all of them. And in the end whether you like it or not they chose Weber well before they would have chose PK. And at the end of the day all i'm saying is if I stand back and look at the situation I value they're opinion more than yours in this matter.

They think Weber is the better player for their team so I believe Weber will be the better player for ours.

All of them think that? It was a unanimous decision?

That is what was written after all, that every person on that staff from the head GM, to all the assistants, to the head coach, to all the assistant coaches... according to what was written every single person there thinks Weber is better than PK.

Its news to me that there were no dissenting views in the room.

Assuming that a bunch of GMs got together, picked the team, and all had the same opinion on every player is not how this works.

And thats ignoring the fact that a group of top tier GMs can get together and make mistakes, as many team Canada groups have in the past.

But sure... Jake Muzzin and Jay Bouwmeester are better than PK (and the whole righty/lefty argument went out the window as Pietrangelo is playing LD).

[Commandant]

I suspect that if Subban hadn't had those two mortifying blow-outs in the last two weeks of his time in a Habs jersey, the myth of him as a free-wheeling loon would be harder to sustain.

I suspect that if he was never traded, there would be little if any discussion on the matter. Now that he's gone in a trade, many are trying to justify it and believe that Bergevin knows what he is doing... cause the alternative is painful to consider, I know.

[Meller93]

I suspect that if he was never traded, there would be little if any discussion on the matter. Now that he's gone in a trade, many are trying to justify it and believe that Bergevin knows what he is doing... cause the alternative is painful to consider, I know.

Ding ding ding!

[habs rule]

I have said I don't like this trade because, we did not get enough, we should have gotten a 2nd draft choice to compensate for the contract. Other than that it is a reasonable trade in my opinion and I am a huge PK fan.

[illWill]

I suspect that if he was never traded, there would be little if any discussion on the matter. Now that he's gone in a trade, many are trying to justify it and believe that Bergevin knows what he is doing... cause the alternative is painful to consider, I know.

Of course if there wasn't a trade there wouldn't be much of a discussion about it, seems like a fairly obvious statement. But there was a trade so people educate themselves further on the players involved and come to their own conclusions based on that information. And it's not only about player vs player, it's how each player fits onto their new team. I'm perfectly fine if people think one player is superior, but to call the trade a loss before 1 game is played is just plain dumb. Hockey is a team game last time I checked

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Commandant, you've managed to spin any defense of the trade into just a different manner than necessary. If a fan loved the trade because they disliked Subban prior to the trade, they are biased because they already felt that way and if a fan attempts to justify the trade even though they liked Subban, they are only doing so because the alternative is painful. Because you are right.

Is that correct?

Of course any Habs fan should want the trade to work out. That seems normal to me.

I am, admittedly, the type of fan who defends players who wear our jersey and always try to remain positive about them when they are on our team. (Desharnais is kind of my scapegoat) I love players who wear our jersey. I admit that. With that being said, last season there wasn't a single player who I found myself more disappointed with than Subban. By disappointed, I mean finding myself commenting out loud at the TV after a play he made. I don't know how many times I would have to repeat that it wasn't in my thoughts to ever trade him but I was definitely having this conversation about his boneheaded plays last season even prior to the trade. A lot of those plays were indeed fancily attempted giveaways. Yes, he did succeed quite often as well.

As the months wear down, people may be somewhat forgetting the plays, but I remember them because I was negative about him in about 10 seperate games, specifically for individualistic plays that were unsuccessful or even drastic. This once again coming from someone who tries to remain positive about every one of our players.

I've always loved PK but the only problem with him is that because he is elite, the expectations of him are very high. When Emelin makes a similar play to Subban, I could see myself trying to defend Emelin. Subban is expected to not give the puck away like Emelin though so it's a comparison that shouldn't have to be made. That's where the difference in perception comes out between PK Subban, MaxPac, Price and the rest of the team. I'm not trying to justify the trade to feel better, but this is where I trust Weber more and one of the areas I think he can help us with.

My intention at the beginning was never to make any negative comments about Subban. The problem is that some people are commenting on the trade:

1) As though Subban is and I quote "vastly" superior than Weber.

2) As though Subban has no weaknesses whatsoever

I have issue with that and none of his defenders have still answered what Subban's weaknesses are. I've asked two or three times and it seems they cannot come up with anything. Look in the mirror because something is wrong with that picture.

The reaction to the trade by some was as though we traded Patrick Kane for Shane Doan. The point was that even if it does turn out to be a loss, it shouldn't be expected that the trade is so catastrophic because of the return. Those who do look at the return, say we should have gotten a draft pick to even it out. Sure, but let's not pretend that even in that scenario, Subban and Weber wouldn't still be the key pieces to the trade forever. Those are the only two we've really been discussing. People are upset because we lost PK Subban without even looking at the return. And I don't mean Weber, I just mean they are upset even before thinking about the fact we got a return. Subban for Larsson and I would be ripping my own head off.

[Link67]

All of them think that? It was a unanimous decision?

That is what was written after all, that every person on that staff from the head GM, to all the assistants, to the head coach, to all the assistant coaches... according to what was written every single person there thinks Weber is better than PK.

Its news to me that there were no dissenting views in the room.

Assuming that a bunch of GMs got together, picked the team, and all had the same opinion on every player is not how this works.

And thats ignoring the fact that a group of top tier GMs can get together and make mistakes, as many team Canada groups have in the past.

But sure... Jake Muzzin and Jay Bouwmeester are better than PK (and the whole righty/lefty argument went out the window as Pietrangelo is playing LD).

I am sure there was arguments made both ways, i am sure it was not a unanimous decision. But it was a majority decision, of that much i'm certain. With that said if the majority of that room and those guys deem Weber is a guy they want on their team before Subban, then i still feel as i expressed in my previous post.

They are looking beyond the scope of talent, because in that department PK cannot be touched. You have some of the best hockey guys in the world in there, some of the best at building teams and some of the best as coaching them. In the grand ensemble of things, they don't like PK as much as Weber for their team. So once again, I value their opinions, evaluations, and knowledge more than a spreadsheet and that is why I feel this trade could be good for us.

Make no mistake it is not some land slide victory I Am talking about, but possibly a good hockey trade. At the same time it is also why I strugle with people trying to call this the worst trade since yadi yada. It is also not a land slide loss if it is one. We traded a more talented player for a player who makes others better with his leadership, for a team guy who also specializes in scoring in an area we have struggled with for several seasons now, the pp.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

I have said I don't like this trade because, we did not get enough, we should have gotten a 2nd draft choice to compensate for the contract. Other than that it is a reasonable trade in my opinion and I am a huge PK fan.

Maybe they should have, but with the caliber and contracts of the players, that would be like complaining about a dealership fee for a Maybach.

[Commandant]

I am sure there was arguments made both ways, i am sure it was not a unanimous decision. But it was a majority decision, of that much i'm certain. With that said if the majority of that room and those guys deem Weber is a guy they want on their team before Subban, then i still feel as i expressed in my previous post.

They are looking beyond the scope of talent, because in that department PK cannot be touched. You have some of the best hockey guys in the world in there, some of the best at building teams and some of the best as coaching them. In the grand ensemble of things, they don't like PK as much as Weber for their team. So once again, I value their opinions, evaluations, and knowledge more than a spreadsheet and that is why I feel this trade could be good for us.

Make no mistake it is not some land slide victory I Am talking about, but possibly a good hockey trade. At the same time it is also why I strugle with people trying to call this the worst trade since yadi yada. It is also not a land slide loss if it is one. We traded a more talented player for a player who makes others better with his leadership, for a team guy who also specializes in scoring in an area we have struggled with for several seasons now, the pp.

Again the appeal to authority doesn't mean much because Canada has always, since 1972, assembled the best coaches and best managers at the time to pick their team

Didn't stop a majority of the group of the best managers/coaches at the time from thinking Rob Zamuner was a better player than Ron Francis in 1998

Chris Kunitz two years ago.

Ranford over Roy

Draper over Crosby

and a number of other questionable calls.

The idea that just because they are well respected hockey people means they are automatically right is not one I can support.

The best evaluator of defencemen in the last 30 years (David Poile) decided P.K. was his guy.

[Meller93]

I am sure there was arguments made both ways, i am sure it was not a unanimous decision. But it was a majority decision, of that much i'm certain. With that said if the majority of that room and those guys deem Weber is a guy they want on their team before Subban, then i still feel as i expressed in my previous post.

They are looking beyond the scope of talent, because in that department PK cannot be touched. You have some of the best hockey guys in the world in there, some of the best at building teams and some of the best as coaching them. In the grand ensemble of things, they don't like PK as much as Weber for their team. So once again, I value their opinions, evaluations, and knowledge more than a spreadsheet and that is why I feel this trade could be good for us.

Make no mistake it is not some land slide victory I Am talking about, but possibly a good hockey trade. At the same time it is also why I strugle with people trying to call this the worst trade since yadi yada. It is also not a land slide loss if it is one. We traded a more talented player for a player who makes others better with his leadership, for a team guy who also specializes in scoring in an area we have struggled with for several seasons now, the pp.

I wouldn't say it's a landslide for either side either, so we agree there.

I agree that Weber will help the power play. But it's also hard to know how much Muller is the difference and how much Weber will be the difference. I have no doubt Subban will excell on the PP with Nashville as well.

A lot of the reason I don't like this trade is the age difference. I hope it plays out far better than what I see happening. And to be clear, I don't think Weber is a bum. If we call Weber and Subban equal players even, Weber is 4 years older with approximately 4 years less of good hockey.

[illWill]

Again the appeal to authority doesn't mean much because Canada has always, since 1972, assembled the best coaches and best managers at the time to pick their team

Didn't stop a majority of the group of the best managers/coaches at the time from thinking Rob Zamuner was a better player than Ron Francis in 1998

Chris Kunitz two years ago.

Ranford over Roy

Draper over Crosby

and a number of other questionable calls.

The idea that just because they are well respected hockey people means they are automatically right is not one I can support.

The best evaluator of defencemen in the last 30 years (David Poile) decided P.K. was his guy.

So to sum this up, a large group of well respected hockey men who in the last 44 years have made a few mistakes, but one single man who, in your opinion, is the best evaluator of defensemen and his opinion is always the correct one. You usually have better arguments than this. And I'm not quite sure what 1972 has to do with Subban for Weber either. Weber is the better fit for team Canada, end of story.

I wouldn't say it's a landslide for either side either, so we agree there.

I agree that Weber will help the power play. But it's also hard to know how much Muller is the difference and how much Weber will be the difference. I have no doubt Subban will excell on the PP with Nashville as well.

A lot of the reason I don't like this trade is the age difference. I hope it plays out far better than what I see happening. And to be clear, I don't think Weber is a bum. If we call Weber and Subban equal players even, Weber is 4 years older with approximately 4 years less of good hockey.

And I suppose when the PP improves this season that many will point to Muller as being the reason and nothing to do with a 100mph clapper that actually hits the net.

I agree that the age difference may play a role down the road. But the thing with that is that we don't know how these player's careers will unfold. One of them might play at a high level for another decade and the other might fizzle out. So age is only a factor when evaluating what happens in the future, not at the present time. It's quite unfair to say that because one is 4 years older, therefore he has 4 less effective years of hockey. Nobody would have guessed a decade ago that Scott Gomez would be out of hockey by now, or that Marty St. Louis would have been so effective at 40 years old.

[Commandant]

So to sum this up, a large group of well respected hockey men who in the last 44 years have made a few mistakes, but one single man who, in your opinion, is the best evaluator of defensemen and his opinion is always the correct one. You usually have better arguments than this. And I'm not quite sure what 1972 has to do with Subban for Weber either. Weber is the better fit for team Canada, end of story.

And I suppose when the PP improves this season that many will point to Muller as being the reason and nothing to do with a 100mph clapper that actually hits the net.

I agree that the age difference may play a role down the road. But the thing with that is that we don't know how these player's careers will unfold. One of them might play at a high level for another decade and the other might fizzle out. So age is only a factor when evaluating what happens in the future, not at the present time. It's quite unfair to say that because one is 4 years older, therefore he has 4 less effective years of hockey. Nobody would have guessed a decade ago that Scott Gomez would be out of hockey by now, or that Marty St. Louis would have been so effective at 40 years old.

I never said Poile is always the correct one.

My point is that you can't appeal to authority and assume the guys on team canada are right, when there are experts on the other side who disagree. Perhaps you should evaluate and dig deeper.

As for what the last 44 years has to do, its just a point that having a lot of great hockey men in a room, doesn't make them infallible.

Of course you once again twist my words into something i didn't say. Read the words on the page, not what you assume them to be.

[Meller93]

And I suppose when the PP improves this season that many will point to Muller as being the reason and nothing to do with a 100mph clapper that actually hits the net.

I guess you didn't read my post? I said that it would be "hard to know". That's entirely true. We could have expected a better power play with Muller regardless of the trade. I even started by saying I expect Weber to improve the power play. I actually SAID I thought he would.

It's like some people in support of the trade are jamming their fingers in their ears shouting "lalalalalalalal" and refuse to see any reasoned out arguments why this is probably a bad trade.

No doubt at all there is stubbornness on my side of the argument, I'm not claiming to be a perfectly clairvoyant hockey God. I will be wrong on many of my hunches. But I've conceded in so many points ways Weber is a better player. Why he probably improves the team for at least a few years. But I see very little of that coming back the other way. It's like PK suddenly gained the personality of Evander Kane and the game of Marc-Andre Bergeron.

[illWill]

I never said Poile is always the correct one.

My point is that you can't appeal to authority and assume the guys on team canada are right, when there are experts on the other side who disagree. Perhaps you should evaluate and dig deeper.

As for what the last 44 years has to do, its just a point that having a lot of great hockey men in a room, doesn't make them infallible.

Of course you once again twist my words into something i didn't say. Read the words on the page, not what you assume them to be.

My apologies. David Poile is the best at evaluating defensemen in the last 30 years. He made a hockey trade for PK Subban, so because he is the best, it was a good move. Hockey Canada made mistakes in the past and selecting Weber over Subban is another one of them. If that's not what you mean I don't know what the hell you are talking about

I guess you didn't read my post? I said that it would be "hard to know". That's entirely true. We could have expected a better power play with Muller regardless of the trade. I even started by saying I expect Weber to improve the power play. I actually SAID I thought he would.

It's like some people in support of the trade are jamming their fingers in their ears shouting "lalalalalalalal" and refuse to see any reasoned out arguments why this is probably a bad trade.

No doubt at all there is stubbornness on my side of the argument, I'm not claiming to be a perfectly clairvoyant hockey God. I will be wrong on many of my hunches. But I've conceded in so many points ways Weber is a better player. Why he probably improves the team for at least a few years. But I see very little of that coming back the other way. It's like PK suddenly gained the personality of Evander Kane and the game of Marc-Andre Bergeron.

Not sure where this was directed to you " And I suppose when the PP improves this season that many will point to Muller as being the reason and nothing to do with a 100mph clapper that actually hits the net." I read your post, my statement was directed to a select group that will exist no matter how well Weber plays. I agree that both should have an impact on the PP, it can't be any worse right?

[Meller93]

My apologies. David Poile is the best at evaluating defensemen in the last 30 years. He made a hockey trade for PK Subban, so because he is the best, it was a good move. Hockey Canada made mistakes in the past and selecting Weber over Subban is another one of them. If that's not what you mean I don't know what the hell you are talking about

Not sure where this was directed to you " And I suppose when the PP improves this season that many will point to Muller as being the reason and nothing to do with a 100mph clapper that actually hits the net." I read your post, my statement was directed to a select group that will exist no matter how well Weber plays. I agree that both should have an impact on the PP, it can't be any worse right?

Apologies if I misunderstood, I thought because you were quoting me you were saying I would point to Muller alone and give Weber no credit.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Like I say...if another team had traded a 27-year old stud D man coming into his prime years (who also happens to be the single most charismatic and exciting player in all of hockey) for a 31-year-old stud, albeit one who has shown some signs of declining, on a 10-year contract (!!!), with relatively modest cap savings, we'd be laughing at them.

Either that, or - taking the most optimistic view of the relative merits and demerits of the players in question - we would be concluding that that team was going 'all in' on a Cup within the next three or four years, and damn the long-term.

I am surprised so many fans on this site are downright happy to have handcuffed the organization to a massive and ridiculous contract for the next decade, on the grounds that Weber is a marginal improvement on PK Subban. Even granting that (debatable) premise, it's strange that people who are generally very agitated about bad contracts (DD, Emelin) have suddenly forgotten all about basic contractual logic when it comes to this trade. And please don't tell me that the $1 mil difference between PK and Weber is some franchise-saving distinction. It ain't.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Weber is a beast as evidenced in these last 2 games against a very, very elite team....

hes canadas #1D and looks and plays very much like the part... CASE CLOSED

Team Canada HAS NOT got this one wrong... not in the least bit. if anything Pietrangelo Doughty burns and now Boumeester have taken up subbans spot on this roster and not Weber!

is PK better then burns or doughty or pietrangelo?

Weber led team canada in TOI and points at the last olympics while winning gold! say again how they messed this one up?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Weber is a beast as evidenced in these last 2 games against a very, very elite team....

hes canadas #1D and looks and plays very much like the part... CASE CLOSED

Team Canada HAS NOT got this one wrong... not in the least bit. if anything Pietrangelo Doughty burns and now Boumeester have taken up subbans spot on this roster and not Weber!

is PK better then burns or doughty or pietrangelo?

Weber led team canada in TOI and points at the last olympics while winning gold! say again how they messed this one up?

Talk to me again in 10 years.

[illWill]

I am surprised so many fans on this site are downright happy to have handcuffed the organization to a massive and ridiculous contract for the next decade, on the grounds that Weber is a marginal improvement on PK Subban. Even granting that (debatable) premise, it's strange that people who are generally very agitated about bad contracts (DD, Emelin) have suddenly forgotten all about basic contractual logic when it comes to this trade. And please don't tell me that the $1 mil difference between PK and Weber is some franchise-saving distinction. It ain't.

Through 61 pages of this thread the contracts have been brought up many times. To bring you up to speed:

- Weber's contract is heavily front loaded, meaning that it has value besides the cap hit

- Weber will not likely be playing out the entire contract. Do you really think he is going to hobble around the ice at 41 when he already earned most of his actual dollars for the contract?

- If Weber retires early, the Preds are on the hook, not the Habs.

- Subban is the highest paid defenseman in the league and will be for the next 3 years till Doughty and Karlsson are due. Is Subban the best defenseman in the league? If you answered no to that question then he is playing below his salary. The idea is to have players playing at or above their salary in a salary cap system.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Like I say...if another team had traded a 27-year old stud D man coming into his prime years (who also happens to be the single most charismatic and exciting player in all of hockey) for a 31-year-old stud, albeit one who has shown some signs of declining, on a 10-year contract (!!!), with relatively modest cap savings, we'd be laughing at them.

Either that, or - taking the most optimistic view of the relative merits and demerits of the players in question - we would be concluding that that team was going 'all in' on a Cup within the next three or four years, and damn the long-term.

I am surprised so many fans on this site are downright happy to have handcuffed the organization to a massive and ridiculous contract for the next decade, on the grounds that Weber is a marginal improvement on PK Subban. Even granting that (debatable) premise, it's strange that people who are generally very agitated about bad contracts (DD, Emelin) have suddenly forgotten all about basic contractual logic when it comes to this trade. And please don't tell me that the $1 mil difference between PK and Weber is some franchise-saving distinction. It ain't.

PK Subban is not coming into his prime... hes already in it! hes not gonna get faster, hes not gonna get quicker, he wont get stronger! all he can do is get better between the ears! he is extremely charismatic yes... but the most exciting in all of hockey? hes not better offensively then karlsonn... in fact the ott/montreal series of 2015 showed first hand how much better karlsonn actually is then him and they play the same game.

shea weber in the last 2 games against a stacked USA team showed zero signs of decline... What declineis everyone talking about? at 31? its a joke that we are even suggesting that a 31 year old is in decline... let alone arguably the #1D of the best assembled team in the world... who was playing against the best...

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Through 61 pages of this thread the contracts have been brought up many times. To bring you up to speed:

- Weber's contract is heavily front loaded, meaning that it has value besides the cap hit

- Weber will not likely be playing out the entire contract. Do you really think he is going to hobble around the ice at 41 when he already earned most of his actual dollars for the contract?

- If Weber retires early, the Preds are on the hook, not the Habs.

- Subban is the highest paid defenseman in the league and will be for the next 3 years till Doughty and Karlsson are due. Is Subban the best defenseman in the league? If you answered no to that question then he is playing below his salary. The idea is to have players playing at or above their salary in a salary cap system.

1. I'm aware that Weber can eventually be dealt to a team trying to meet the cap floor. I'm also aware that this scenario is floated far, far more often than it's actually realized. How often did we hear the same said about Gomez? So I'm not banking on it happening.

2. Many players do play out their contracts if they 'feel they can still play.' Look at Messier.

3. Subban is marginally overpaid - maybe by about a mil. Big shmeal. At least he's not on the books until age 41.

The basic problem is that this contract makes the Habs entirely dependent upon the good will of other GMs and Weber himself. That's very unwise. Like I say, if another team had traded for it, we'd be chortling at the inept cap management.

HEARTS, I'm glad that two exhibitions games have settled the question of a trade that will ramify for the next 10 years. That's some outstanding analysis.

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

Talk to me again in 10 years.

what does 10 years from now have to do with team canada today....

If weber is still on team canada in 10 years... we won this trade by a land slide