If we were to throw in the towel ...

[alfredoh2009]

1 hour ago, Habsfan89 said:

Oh and in case you were wondering we have zero 1st round picks playing on this team under Bergevin, and he had 2 number 3picks over all under his belt. 

I thought Drouin and Suzuki were 1st rounders, Armia too 

 

?! confused  confused ?!

[Habsfan89]

2 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I thought Drouin and Suzuki were 1st rounders, Armia too 

 

?! confused  confused ?!

No one that was drafted in the first round and develop  by Montreal. Canfield would be the first and only one in 10 years. Under Bergevin. 

[alfredoh2009]

2 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:

No one that was drafted in the first round and develop  by Montreal. Canfield would be the first and only one in 10 years. Under Bergevin. 

But Caufield has not finished his development yet?! How could he count?

 

Let the kid continue developing, he is not Brett Hull yet

[tomh009]

5 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:

No one that was drafted in the first round and develop  by Montreal. Canfield would be the first and only one in 10 years. Under Bergevin. 

Why does it matter whether we draft or trade? What's so special about having players you drafted on your roster, in today's NHL? Trading is Bergevin's strength in any case.

 

Drafted by Habs: Price, Caufield.

Drafted by others, acquired by Habs: Armia, Drouin, Suzuki

[Habsfan89]

14 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Why does it matter whether we draft or trade? What's so special about having players you drafted on your roster, in today's NHL? Trading is Bergevin's strength in any case.

 

Drafted by Habs: Price, Caufield.

Drafted by others, acquired by Habs: Armia, Drouin, Suzuki

This post is about tanking and getting a higher draft pick. I'm pointing out that might not be a great idea since under Bergevin we have zero 1st round picks playing on this team. Which has included 3 top 10 picks 2 of which were 3rd overall picks.  Not a good track record. 

[GHT120]

25 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Why does it matter whether we draft or trade? What's so special about having players you drafted on your roster, in today's NHL? Trading is Bergevin's strength in any case.
 

Drafted by Habs: Price, Caufield.

Drafted by others, acquired by Habs: Armia, Drouin, Suzuki

In the broader context it matters because your own draft picks cost you no other assets while you have to give up other player(s)/pick(s)/prospect(s) to trade for a player.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

58 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

This post is about tanking and getting a higher draft pick. I'm pointing out that might not be a great idea since under Bergevin we have zero 1st round picks playing on this team. Which has included 3 top 10 picks 2 of which were 3rd overall picks.  Not a good track record. 

 

If MB has a poor track record of drafting and development, which I believe to be the case, then he should not be the GM to lead a retool or rebuild.

 

48 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

In the broader context it matters because your own draft picks cost you no other assets while you have to give up other player(s)/pick(s)/prospect(s) to trade for a player.

 

That's a good point. Much better than wheeling and dealing to acquire prospects is to just draft them in the first place.

[tomh009]

19 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

That's a good point. Much better than wheeling and dealing to acquire prospects is to just draft them in the first place.

But if you make decent picks (eg Sergachev) you can also trade them to get value. Now, it turns out that Sergachev has beecome a better player than Drouin, but conceptually there is nothing wrong with this trade. We would (at least in theory) have an equivalent value player on the roster, it's just not the one we drafted. It doesn't lose you any picks or waste any assets, if you trade reasonably well (which Bergevin has done in general, this particular trade notwithstanding).

 

The advantage of trading over drafting is that you have a much better idea of the player's potential, with drafting the percentages are much lower. Many first-rounders never establish themselves as NHL players.

[Habsfan89]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

But if you make decent picks (eg Sergachev) you can also trade them to get value. Now, it turns out that Sergachev has beecome a better player than Drouin, but conceptually there is nothing wrong with this trade. We would (at least in theory) have an equivalent value player on the roster, it's just not the one we drafted. It doesn't lose you any picks or waste any assets, if you trade reasonably well (which Bergevin has done in general, this particular trade notwithstanding).

 

The advantage of trading over drafting is that you have a much better idea of the player's potential, with drafting the percentages are much lower. Many first-rounders never establish themselves as NHL players.

But the reason Bergevin has been unable to add a superstar without giving up a top player on his roster is because he can't draft and develop players that would give him trade value to pull off such trades. 

 

I'm okay with trading a top prospect to get help to win now. But we just can't do that because our drafting and developing of players are bad. 

[hab29RETIRED]

8 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Why does it matter whether we draft or trade? What's so special about having players you drafted on your roster, in today's NHL? Trading is Bergevin's strength in any case.

 

Drafted by Habs: Price, Caufield.

Drafted by others, acquired by Habs: Armia, Drouin, Suzuki

So you are saying Sergechev for Drouin was a good trade that shows that strength?

[hab29RETIRED]

6 hours ago, tomh009 said:

But if you make decent picks (eg Sergachev) you can also trade them to get value. Now, it turns out that Sergachev has beecome a better player than Drouin, but conceptually there is nothing wrong with this trade. We would (at least in theory) have an equivalent value player on the roster, it's just not the one we drafted. It doesn't lose you any picks or waste any assets, if you trade reasonably well (which Bergevin has done in general, this particular trade notwithstanding).

 

The advantage of trading over drafting is that you have a much better idea of the player's potential, with drafting the percentages are much lower. Many first-rounders never establish themselves as NHL players.

Didn’t Bergevin himself say that you have to draft elite centres?

[DON]

On 10/31/2021 at 11:41 AM, tomh009 said:

What would you do? Reset or rebuild? And with which players?

I wouldnt do anything till after x-mas and take stock how team sits in new year.

Then, most likely look to deal Chiarot & Lehkonen and spare parts like Kulak/Wideman before/at deadline.

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Then, most likely look to deal Chiarot & Lehkonen and spare parts like Kulak/Wideman before/at deadline.

So, that would leave us with only the following D 😧

• Defensive type: Edmundson, Savard, Romanov
• Offensive type: Petry, Niku, (maybe) Norlinder

That means we might need to bring up someone like Ouellet, and really have no depth beyond that. Kulak and Wideman would have little trade value anyway, nor would we save much salary on them.

[GHT120]

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

So, that would leave us with only the following D 😧

• Defensive type: Edmundson, Savard, Romanov
• Offensive type: Petry, Niku, (maybe) Norlinder

That means we might need to bring up someone like Ouellet, and really have no depth beyond that. Kulak and Wideman would have little trade value anyway, nor would we save much salary on them.

But at that point the goal would not be to have a strong defence THIS season ... the goal would be to get what you can in picks (and/or decent prospects) 

[GHT120]

1 hour ago, DON said:

I wouldnt do anything till after x-mas and take stock how team sits in new year.

Then, most likely look to deal Chiarot & Lehkonen and spare parts like Kulak/Wideman before/at deadline.

Doubt they would be willing/able to move any of the top 9 wingers, so I would include Armia in the list of players "for sale" ... he and Lehkonen are expensive 4th liners, but players with value to playoff teams as 3rd/4th liners depending on the team ... Armia might be a challenge to move at the deadline with 3 more yrs on his deal, but worth checking his value ... if not traded in-season I see him moving before the draft (unless a top 9 winger gets moved and JA pencils in on the 3rd line going forward) ... I would also include Paquette, Perreault and Byron (assuming he has come back and played for 10-15 games) in the deadline auction, MAYBE even Evans for the right return (same challenge as Armia). 

[tomh009]

If Molson decides on a reset/retool/rebuild, I do expect that some of the top-nine wingers will be on the block: Gallagher, Hoffman and Toffoli are possibilities. Lower down, Armia, Byron and Lehkonen could also have value for a playoff-bound team.

[Habsfan89]

2 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

If Molson decides on a reset/retool/rebuild, I do expect that some of the top-nine wingers will be on the block: Gallagher, Hoffman and Toffoli are possibilities. Lower down, Armia, Byron and Lehkonen could also have value for a playoff-bound team.

If Molson decides on a reset/retool/rebuild I don't want our scouting staff and Timmins part of it. Time to let them all go a start fresh with a whole new scouting staff.  Someone new to head it. 

[DON]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

If Molson decides on a reset/retool/rebuild, I do expect that some of the top-nine wingers will be on the block: Gallagher, Hoffman and Toffoli are possibilities. Lower down, Armia, Byron and Lehkonen could also have value for a playoff-bound team.

Kinda doubt Hoffman, Toffoli, Armia going anywhere, recently signed, useful players and not old.

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

But at that point the goal would not be to have a strong defence THIS season ... the goal would be to get what you can in picks (and/or decent prospects) 

What this fella said.

Who cares if have depth on d for last 6-7 weeks (March- and 1/2 of April).

Wideman and Kulak both suck defensively (no not worth much at all, i agree), so no real loss and easy to replace with Oulette or the like.

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Kinda doubt Hoffman, Toffoli, Armia going anywhere, recently signed, useful players and not old.

 

What this fella said.

Who cares if have depth on d for last 6-7 weeks (March- and 1/2 of April).

Wideman and Kulak both suck defensively (no not worth much at all, i agree), so no real loss and easy to replace with Oulette or the like.

Hoffman is 31, Toffoli 29. The question is how long the retool/rebuild will be.

 

Wideman, Kulak and Niku tend to have easier assignments than, say, Petry and Chiarot, but not so much different from Romanov. Yet Wideman and Niku have allowed less than 1.0 GA/60 while Romanov is 2.31 and Savard is 2.67. (GA/60 is the average number of goals against per 60 minutes of TOI.) So, while neither Niku or Wideman is a defensive stalwart, I would argue that neither are they disasters.

[DON]

3 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Hoffman is 31, Toffoli 29. The question is how long the retool/rebuild will be.

 

Wideman, Kulak and Niku tend to have easier assignments than, say, Petry and Chiarot, but not so much different from Romanov. Yet Wideman and Niku have allowed less than 1.0 GA/60 while Romanov is 2.31 and Savard is 2.67. (GA/60 is the average number of goals against per 60 minutes of TOI.) So, while neither Niku or Wideman is a defensive stalwart, I would argue that neither are they disasters.

Niku i dont mind yet and just turned 25.

Kulak is scary when has puck on his stick (hockey IQ lacking seems) and Wideman simply is a pushover and very soft d-man, on the PP he is fine and Kulak is fine, but as a 6th/7th d-man.

[Dalhabs]

Looking at the Oilers lineup and started thinking that maybe Id prefer us stinking for ten years and have their current lineup instead of being a bubbleteam for 30 years.

[hockeyrealist]

This thread is pointless and premature.

 

[GHT120]

39 minutes ago, hockeyrealist said:

This thread is pointless and premature.

 

So is most of Al Gore's Internet ... general rule ... if something seems pointless, ignore it

[alfredoh2009]

3 hours ago, hockeyrealist said:

This thread is pointless and premature.

 

🤡 🤡 🤡

if we were to throw the towel at the Habs net, would Savard stop it?

  🤡 🤡  🤡

[GHT120]

I have just realized that (if my "math" is correct) the Habs need to finish 25th-32nd (i.e., no better than 8th worst) to guarantee that the "protected pick" clause in the Dvorak trade is triggered ... there will be two lottery draws, one for each of the first and second picks ... this year teams can only move up 10 spots ... if the Habs finish with the 9th worst record and two of the teams behind them win the two lottery draws, those teams move ahead of the Habs and the Canadiens pick 11th (similarly, if they finish 10th, don't win one of the lottery draws and one of the teams behind them does) the Habs drop to 11th) ... as a result they lose their first round pick to the Yotes (assuming, as now seems fairly certain, that the BlowHards won't end up with a top 10 pick) ... or have I missed something

 

NOTE: admittedly there are various permutations and combinations of the lottery, including the Habs ending up picking in the top 10 even if they finish 16th (by winning one of the lottery draws).