Where are they now? News on past Habs prospects and players

[alfredoh2009]

24 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Well, Armia has had a much more successful NHL career than Lessio. Presumably Armia is a much better player overall…

you are right, I hesitated on the "good-Armia" versus "plain-Armia". There was a small stretch where he looked like he could become a regular 4th liner or bottom-6, to just revert to fringe NHLer.

 

I guess I have accepted that the current version of Armia == able to take regular shifts --> is a good version or the best version of Armia we could expect. As long as Armia is winning puck battles he is "good", but if he disappears he becomes "bad"... such low expectations from me.

 

So, yes, Lessio would take on Armia's spot on today's roster, IMHO. 😬

[Commandant]

Armia has 9 points in 8 games in Laval this year.

 

Lessio isnt even playing in the top German League, hes in the second division and has 5 points in 9 games.  He was never close to a PPG player in the AHL even when he was there.

 

The idea that hes equivalent to even the current crap version of Armia is absolutely insane.

 

If the guy was any good he wouldnt be playing in the 2nd division in a country that isnt even a hockey power... and their top league is clearly below Sweden, Russia, Finland, and Switzerland in terms of quality.

 

Stop with the delulu.

[alfredoh2009]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

you are right, I hesitated on the "good-Armia" versus "plain-Armia". There was a small stretch where he looked like he could become a regular 4th liner or bottom-6, to just revert to fringe NHLer.

 

I guess I have accepted that the current version of Armia == able to take regular shifts --> is a good version or the best version of Armia we could expect. As long as Armia is winning puck battles he is "good", but if he disappears he becomes "bad"... such low expectations from me.

 

So, yes, Lessio (then) would take on Armia's spot (now) on today's roster, IMHO. 😬

clarified to calm down the peanut gallery.

[alfredoh2009]

seems like KK is struggling again. Habs dodged a bullet there (according to this post)

 

Kotkaniemi has 1g 0a 1pts in the last 11 games. 16 pts in 32 games which is a 41 pts projection season. There isn’t a single person that can say this is a 2nd line center with this kind of production. He’s barely a 3rd line center. Maybe Bergevin made the right decision? 🤔

— PKhabs (@habs_phoenix) December 21, 2023

[BCHabnut]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

seems like KK is struggling again. Habs dodged a bullet there (according to this post)

 

Letting KK walk was never a concern for me. Danault and Lehkonen both bothered me. Still do. They were young enough to be part of the future. I'd much rather have Danault and Lehkonen than Barron and Dvorak.

[tomh009]

3 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Letting KK walk was never a concern for me. Danault and Lehkonen both bothered me. Still do. They were young enough to be part of the future. I'd much rather have Danault and Lehkonen than Barron and Dvorak.

Danault was lost long before the Kotkaniemi debackle happened. so not really an option. Arguably Bergevin should have signed Danault rather than Gallagher, though.

 

As for Barron and Lehkonen, I do love Lehkonen but Barron may yet turn out to be a shrewd acquisition. And there is still a second-rounder for next year's draft, too.

[hab29RETIRED]

6 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Not sure why these lines from 2016 game are being reposted on twitter but holy beans what a lineup 

 

 

MB inherited Patches and Pleks. Don’t remember traded for Eller. Aside from the the Danault and Byron pickups and the galchenyuk draft pickup, that is a garbage roster construction!

[hab29RETIRED]

15 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Letting KK walk was never a concern for me. Danault and Lehkonen both bothered me. Still do. They were young enough to be part of the future. I'd much rather have Danault and Lehkonen than Barron and Dvorak.

The issue was the idiotic trade for Dvorak after letting KK walk.

[hab29RETIRED]

10 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Danault was lost long before the Kotkaniemi debackle happened. so not really an option. Arguably Bergevin should have signed Danault rather than Gallagher, though.

 

As for Barron and Lehkonen, I do love Lehkonen but Barron may yet turn out to be a shrewd acquisition. And there is still a second-rounder for next year's draft, too.

I would have preferred signing Lekhonan to Armia’s contract and letting Armia walk. But after MB made that mistake, I think HuGo probably made the best deal out there. I really like Lekhonan, but in two years when we are hopefully ready to compete, I doubt Lekhonan will be the same player.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

14 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I would have preferred signing Lekhonan to Armia’s contract and letting Armia walk. But after MB made that mistake, I think HuGo probably made the best deal out there. I really like Lekhonan, but in two years when we are hopefully ready to compete, I doubt Lekhonan will be the same player.

 

I agree that the Dvorak trade was a bad one but have no problem with the Lehkonen trade. I think everyone here liked Lehkonen but he is not the player you need on a rebuilding team. 

[alfredoh2009]

7 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

Letting KK walk was never a concern for me. Danault and Lehkonen both bothered me. Still do. They were young enough to be part of the future. I'd much rather have Danault and Lehkonen than Barron and Dvorak.

I like Barron, it was a win-win trade for both teams. Habs needed RDs

Danault had checked out of Montreal when he started eating his pizza during press conferences. If I remember correctly, negotiations had stalled by that time. They couldn’t had saved that once they got to that point 

I liked that trade for Danault, if Dach turns out to be as good I will be happy 

[Commandant]

He ate pizza after the game when the Habs won a playoff series.  That wasnt checking out.  He was a huge part of winning those series and helping the team to the cup final.

 

Checked out?  Thats completely revisionist history.

 

Your boy Bergevin made a huge mistake not re-signing him.  The player never checked out.  Yet another one of your Bergevin and DD could do no wrong posts... jesus christ.

[Commandant]

And yes players eat pizza and other carbs immediately after a game.  Its part of recovery.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

9 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 Arguably Bergevin should have signed Danault rather than Gallagher, though.

 

 

So easy to say that now. Gallagher was coming off back to back 30 goal seasons and was the heart and soul of the team. We can argue about the term (too long) and amount but what GM would not have signed Gallagher? 

[BCHabnut]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

He ate pizza after the game when the Habs won a playoff series.  That wasnt checking out.  He was a huge part of winning those series and helping the team to the cup final.

 

Checked out?  Thats completely revisionist history.

 

Your boy Bergevin made a huge mistake not re-signing him.  The player never checked out.  Yet another one of your Bergevin and DD could do no wrong posts... jesus christ.

Ya. The pizza thing was far from checking out. It was quite the opposite. It was him clowning around, expressing his joy at shutting down the games best centres night after night. 

[Sir_Boagalott]

I think numerous posters are taking @alfredoh2009's comments way too literally.  I'm pretty sure when he says "checked out of Montreal" he means Danault had decided he was leaving.  Plus, Danault eating pizza has nothing to do with the checking out, alfredo believes the pizza started around the same time Phil knew he wasn't resigning.  

 

I fully agree with alfredo on that Danault and MB's relationship got to a point of no return.   I'm pretty sure that by the end of all that he was so pissed off and felt so undervalued by MG that only a completely absurd amount of $ (that would never be offered) might have got him to stay.  Danault wanted $6 ml/yr, and I think if MB had came around and offered him that he wouldn't have said yes.  I have the impression that if MB had offered him $6mil/yr and LA had offered him $5.5 mil/yr that he'd still be with the Kings.  Danault likely would have taken less from any other team just to get away from MB.  

[alfredoh2009]

6 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

I think numerous posters are taking @alfredoh2009's comments way too literally.  I'm pretty sure when he says "checked out of Montreal" he means Danault had decided he was leaving.  Plus, Danault eating pizza has nothing to do with the checking out, alfredo believes the pizza started around the same time Phil knew he wasn't resigning.  

 

I fully agree with alfredo on that Danault and MB's relationship got to a point of no return.   I'm pretty sure that by the end of all that he was so pissed off and felt so undervalued by MG that only a completely absurd amount of $ (that would never be offered) might have got him to stay.  Danault wanted $6 ml/yr, and I think if MB had came around and offered him that he wouldn't have said yes.  I have the impression that if MB had offered him $6mil/yr and LA had offered him $5.5 mil/yr that he'd still be with the Kings.  Danault likely would have taken less from any other team just to get away from MB.  

thank you. You understood what I wrote

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

I think we can only speculate on how bad the relationship was between MB and Danault. Obviously MB wasn't prepared to give Danault what he wanted so it was not that great. I do remember a lot of discussion on this board at that time and I don't think many here would have been happy if MB had signed Danault to a long term deal at around 6M/year. 

[Commandant]

9 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

I think numerous posters are taking @alfredoh2009's comments way too literally.  I'm pretty sure when he says "checked out of Montreal" he means Danault had decided he was leaving.  Plus, Danault eating pizza has nothing to do with the checking out, alfredo believes the pizza started around the same time Phil knew he wasn't resigning.  

 

I fully agree with alfredo on that Danault and MB's relationship got to a point of no return.   I'm pretty sure that by the end of all that he was so pissed off and felt so undervalued by MG that only a completely absurd amount of $ (that would never be offered) might have got him to stay.  Danault wanted $6 ml/yr, and I think if MB had came around and offered him that he wouldn't have said yes.  I have the impression that if MB had offered him $6mil/yr and LA had offered him $5.5 mil/yr that he'd still be with the Kings.  Danault likely would have taken less from any other team just to get away from MB.  

 

When you accuse a player of "checking out"... you are saying they are unprofessional and not giving full effort for the team.  

 

That is unfair to Danault as he was a warrior in that playoff.

 

There is also an assumption here that the team and Danault were actively negotiating as the playoffs went on, which just doesnt happen.  If they were talking extension in the season, fine, they reached an impasse and set things aside until the playoffs were over, but the final decision wasnt made until after the playoffs were  done.

 

Its all revisionist history and its completely unfair to the player to suggest he was giving less than 100% effort in those playoffs when we all watched them and can plainly see it wasnt true.  

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

When you accuse a player of "checking out"... you are saying they are unprofessional and not giving full effort for the team.  

 

That is unfair to Danault as he was a warrior in that playoff.

 

There is no doubt that Danault was a warrior in the playoffs and "checking out" was not the right phrasing. I think a better phrasing might have been that "Danault had resigned himself to the fact that he likely wouldn't be back with the Habs" but it certainly didn't affect his play.  I think alfredoh had mentioned before (please correct me if I am wrong) that french is his first language so I will give him a break when it comes to the interpretation of some phrasings. 

[alfredoh2009]

8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

When you accuse a player of "checking out"... you are saying they are unprofessional and not giving full effort for the team.  

 

That is unfair to Danault as he was a warrior in that playoff.

 

There is also an assumption here that the team and Danault were actively negotiating as the playoffs went on, which just doesnt happen.  If they were talking extension in the season, fine, they reached an impasse and set things aside until the playoffs were over, but the final decision wasnt made until after the playoffs were  done.

 

Its all revisionist history.

 

stop it. Put me on ignore and be gone.

 

You don't read what I write, you spew hate for whatever reason that fuels you without reading.

 

I don't know why you have it against me, Commandant. I just don't get it.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Can this board avoid descending into drama every six months, please?

 

On the wider theme, I would add that, if I remember correctly, nearly everyone on this board preferred that Danault walk rather than command a cap hit of 5.5 until 2027. 🤷‍♂️ It seems a bit rich for us now to be acting like we knew all along that the Habs should have kept him.

 

My own thought was, we have KK to develop into his replacement, so let him go. Maybe this wasn’t a crazy idea in theory…but then we lost KK. And that is when the wheels really came off.

 

In fact, that is probably the moment when, if MB had been really, really smart, he would have pivoted to a rebuild. Instead, of course, he tried yet another patch up job with Dvorak. And the rest is history.

 

If the Habs had kept Danault and Lehkonen both, it is possible we’d have been enough of a bubble team to avoid going full rebuild. And that’s another point…if you’re a tanquiste, a believer in full rebuild, you can’t really lament that we don’t have those guys locked up to long-term deals. We dealt Lehks for a significant prospect: exactly what tankologists want. 

 

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

Just now, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

There is no doubt that Danault was a warrior in the playoffs and "checking out" was not the right phrasing. I think a better phrasing might have been that "Danault had resigned himself to the fact that he likely wouldn't be back with the Habs" but it certainly didn't affect his play.  I think alfredoh had mentioned before (please correct me if I am wrong) that french is his first language so I will give him a break when it comes to the interpretation of some phrasings. 

 

checking out was the term I used, I've seen it in other places. Those that are at a job waiting for a confirmation from their nest employer to leave. Still doing a good job in case they need to stay, but also to leave on good terms.

 

He still loved the logo and the city, he was cloning around with journalists. But it is very rare a player does interviews after a Stanley cup playoff while munching on pizza. Once maybe, but every time to become a running gag... that spoke volumes about where his mind was at the time

[alfredoh2009]

1 minute ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

I would add that, if I remember correctly, nearly everyone on this board preferred that he walk rather than command a cap hit of 5.5 until 2027. 🤷‍♂️ It seems a bit rich for us now to be acting like we knew all along that the Habs should have kept him.

 

My own thought was, we have KK to develop into his replacement, so let him go. Maybe this wasn’t a crazy idea in theory…but then we lost KK. And that is when the wheels really came off.

 

In fact, that is probably the moment when, if MB had been really, really smart, he would have pivoted to a rebuild. Instead, of course, he tried yet another patch up job with Dvorak. And the rest is history.

 

If the Habs had kept Danault and Lehkonen both, it is possible we’d have been enough of a bubble team to avoid going full rebuild. And that’s another point…if you’re a tanquiste, a believer in full rebuild, you can’t really lament that we don’t have those guys locked up to long-term deals. We dealt Lehks for a significant prospect: exactly what tankologists want. 

 

 

 

 

yes, the cap hit was too much given how many bad contracts the Habs had at the time. It was poor management by MB but he knew he was doomed

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

11 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

On the wider theme, I would add that, if I remember correctly, nearly everyone on this board preferred that Danault walk rather than command a cap hit of 5.5 until 2027. 🤷‍♂️ It seems a bit rich for us now to be acting like we knew all along that the Habs should have kept him.

 

My own thought was, we have KK to develop into his replacement, so let him go. Maybe this wasn’t a crazy idea in theory…but then we lost KK. And that is when the wheels really came off.

 

In fact, that is probably the moment when, if MB had been really, really smart, he would have pivoted to a rebuild. Instead, of course, he tried yet another patch up job with Dvorak. And the rest is history.

 

 

Agreed. I don't want to get into the MB debate again as I was happy to move forward once Hughes came in. Some on this board liked MB, many despised him, I was somewhere in between.  My biggest complaint with MB was that he didn't recognize that a full rebuild was required or he couldn't sell it. He tinkered with it (ie Suzuki trade was great), he acquired some extra draft picks but just didn't go far enough. Maybe he couldn't sell Molson on a rebuild, I don't know. 

 

Hughes recognized that a rebuild was required which meant some short term pain for long term gain. I am absolutely on board with that. We can already see some results with a young mobile defense that is only going to get better. We just need another shooter or two, a healthy Dach and we can cause some damage.