|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 14, 2022 10:25:15 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now!
On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package.
The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway.
Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 14, 2022 11:54:06 GMT -5
Yeah that hurts. I think we would of had to trade or sign a defenceman that summer because we had Emelin, Markov, Petry, Bealieu, Patyern/Barberio/Redmond/Benn/Nesterov/Davidson/Hanley/Lernout/Johnston as 5 and 6. Sergachev only played 4 games that year.
FA's that summer:
Hamhuis
Demers
Campbell
Yandle
Polak
Russell
Schenn
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 14, 2022 12:27:25 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now! On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package. The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway. Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team. The other one that stings is the rumor of Subban to the Oilers. Could we have acquired Draisaitl if the ask were lesser? In the 30 thoughts column, Friedman claimed: www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-couldnt-edmonton-montreal-make-deal/ |
|
|
|
Post by drkcloud on Jun 14, 2022 22:55:58 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now! On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package. The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway. Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team. I'm confused. Doesn't it seem likely that if the Dubois selection by Columbus at #3 killed the deal, Berg wanted the big french Canadian center and not Tkachuk? Definitely would have allowed us to keep Sergachev though. He sure got killed on that one |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 15, 2022 0:24:40 GMT -5
One never knows how much of those to believe. I'm having trouble believing that Bergevin would ask for the #4 pick, Draisaitl, and Nurse or Klefbom. C'mon now, even Chiarelli isn't that dumb. Draisaitl wasn't the beast he is now, but he and the #4 pick would have been enough for me. Or LD and one of Klefbom or Nurse. At least he'd be getting a replacement defenseman back with that move. I can see Edmonton not wanting to move the d-men, but at the #4 pick, Habs could have taken Sergachev because Bean, Chychrun and McAvoy were available at 9. That way, they improve the future defense and get the #1 centre they always needed.
But Bergevin always was one to have to win a trade big time. He was not happy if both teams improved. He had to look good, and yet not many of his trades really panned out. The Danault and Petry deals made him look good and they were excellent trades, but there were as many or more that went sideways on him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 15, 2022 16:45:58 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now! On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package. The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway. Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team. I'm confused. Doesn't it seem likely that if the Dubois selection by Columbus at #3 killed the deal, Berg wanted the big french Canadian center and not Tkachuk? Definitely would have allowed us to keep Sergachev though. He sure got killed on that one Bergevin DID want Dubois. He couldn’t get a deal with Edmonton. And he believed Dubois might be around at #5, so he had a deal ready to go with Vancouver. He didn’t pull the trigger, because the trade would be announced when it was Vancouver’s turn to pick, and Dubois was still on the board. What I mean is that even after Dubois was selected. Bergevin should have done the deal with Vancouver. He was hell bent on trading Subban that year. With the #5 pick, and Dubois not available , I believe Bergevin selects the next best forward on the board , who was Tkachuk. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 15, 2022 17:24:56 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now! On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package. The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway. Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team. There was also a deal with Edmonton, though. Subban for Draisatl, one of Nurse or Klefbom, and #4. And there was another piece coming. Unknown if we were giving up #9. It all fell apart when it was clear Columbus was taking Dubois. Getting Dubois was central to the whole idea. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 15, 2022 17:55:48 GMT -5
But I'd want to be at Chiarelli's tarring and feathering.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 15, 2022 18:31:02 GMT -5
Ohhhhh to redo the 2016 draft, knowing what we know now! On Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Podcast, he states that Bergevin and Benning had a trade finalized that would send Subban to the Vancouver Canucks and Montreal would receive the #5 pick in the package. The trade got nixxed by Bergevin when Columbus selected Pierre-Luc Dubois at #3. Bergevin eventually found a trading partner that draft day in Nashville. BUT … what if they proceeded with the trade anyway. Montreal likely selects Matthew Tkachuk at #5. Then selects Sergachev at #9. As well, it’s likely the Sergachev for Drouin trade then never occurs with Tkachuk on the team. There was also a deal with Edmonton, though. Subban for Draisatl, one of Nurse or Klefbom, and #4. And there was another piece coming. Unknown if we were giving up #9. It all fell apart when it was clear Columbus was taking Dubois. Getting Dubois was central to the whole idea. But there wasn't a deal with Edmonton, because Edmonton said Bergevin asked for too much . |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 15, 2022 20:13:39 GMT -5
It was too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 16, 2022 7:14:24 GMT -5
I’d like to know the rest of the particulars of this alleged Vancouver deal. If the Edmonton ask is true, what else was asked from Vancouver. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 16, 2022 17:05:39 GMT -5
There was also a deal with Edmonton, though. Subban for Draisatl, one of Nurse or Klefbom, and #4. And there was another piece coming. Unknown if we were giving up #9. It all fell apart when it was clear Columbus was taking Dubois. Getting Dubois was central to the whole idea. But there wasn't a deal with Edmonton, because Edmonton said Bergevin asked for too much . Yeah, I didn't realize the Vancouver deal was a backup plan to the Edmonton one, but it's a logical explanation. I'd also like to know the details of that Vancouver deal. With hindsight of course, Draisatl would've made us win this deal. A Dubois-Draisatl top 2 C would've been as good as Suzuki-Wright is likely to be... |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 18, 2022 15:06:47 GMT -5
But there wasn't a deal with Edmonton, because Edmonton said Bergevin asked for too much . Yeah, I didn't realize the Vancouver deal was a backup plan to the Edmonton one, but it's a logical explanation. I'd also like to know the details of that Vancouver deal. With hindsight of course, Draisatl would've made us win this deal. A Dubois-Draisatl top 2 C would've been as good as Suzuki-Wright is likely to be... It would have. But we still would not have drafted Dubois. Dubois was selected #3. The Edmonton deal for the #4 pick Bergevin got greedy, and the Vancouver pick at #5 he nixxed when Dubois was selected at #3. Bergevin should have traded Subban straight up for Draistl OR straight up for the #5 pick IMO. The landscape of the team would have changed for years with either deal. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 18, 2022 17:37:54 GMT -5
Greedy. Couldn’t have both teams win.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 19, 2022 16:59:56 GMT -5
Yeah, I didn't realize the Vancouver deal was a backup plan to the Edmonton one, but it's a logical explanation. I'd also like to know the details of that Vancouver deal. With hindsight of course, Draisatl would've made us win this deal. A Dubois-Draisatl top 2 C would've been as good as Suzuki-Wright is likely to be... It would have. But we still would not have drafted Dubois. Dubois was selected #3. The Edmonton deal for the #4 pick Bergevin got greedy, and the Vancouver pick at #5 he nixxed when Dubois was selected at #3. Bergevin should have traded Subban straight up for Draistl OR straight up for the #5 pick IMO. The landscape of the team would have changed for years with either deal. I get it, I just mean I can see what Berg was going for, just that he couldn't know Dubois would climb and Puljujarvi slip. Clearly Columbus scouts had done their homework. I agree that Subban for the Oilers' best offer would have been best. The only worry being if we got Puljujarvi... who was still a highly-rated prospect. We'd still be ahead at this point, though |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 19, 2022 19:58:13 GMT -5
I agree that Subban for the Oilers' best offer would have been best. The only worry being if we got Puljujarvi... who was still a highly-rated prospect. I wonder who we would have picked if we had that 4th pick? Oilers took Puljujarvi, but Juolevi (yikes!) was available as was Matt Tkachuk, Clayton Keller and further down, Charlie McAvoy. If we had gone with Keller (we needed a centre) and then Sergachev later on (provided Arizona didn't take him), that would have been a good draft. To digress, Anderson for Puljujarvi today. Would we do that? 36 points, but in only 65 games and no injury history I think. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 19, 2022 22:45:05 GMT -5
I agree that Subban for the Oilers' best offer would have been best. The only worry being if we got Puljujarvi... who was still a highly-rated prospect. I wonder who we would have picked if we had that 4th pick? Oilers took Puljujarvi, but Juolevi (yikes!) was available as was Matt Tkachuk, Clayton Keller and further down, Charlie McAvoy. If we had gone with Keller (we needed a centre) and then Sergachev later on (provided Arizona didn't take him), that would have been a good draft. To digress, Anderson for Puljujarvi today. Would we do that? 36 points, but in only 65 games and no injury history I think. Nope. Edmonton Oilers fans pretty much hate him - I think he has the tools, not much of a toolbox... he's a B version of Lehkonen. A useful player, no doubt, but not a centerpiece for a better player. IMO, Edmonton has to offer up Bourgault, Holloway or a 1st rounder, and the trades gets rounded out with a contract like Foegele and maybe a minor futures from Montreal. (ie, 4th rounder). |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jun 20, 2022 6:44:41 GMT -5
So......who wants to trade to Subban now?
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 20, 2022 18:05:22 GMT -5
For $1.5MM, sure. Mind you, with David Savard as his competition, PK might be our best RD. 😄. The key would be the contract. At a low price, though, a team like Vancouver would fit much better.
|
|
