|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 10, 2018 13:43:33 GMT -5
The end of the season opens a new window for speculation about where Pacioretty will be playing hockey in 2018-19.
It is interesting this week how hockey pundits like Pierre McGuire are continuing to connect Pacioretty to the Florida Panthers, though McGuire and Lebrun both have said the Panthers are not trading Borgstrom. Florida is a revenue poor franchise and even with the winning in 2018 the crowds were relatively sparse. I may be wrong, but it would not surprise me if the salt of coming close and falling short (they really craved playoff dollars) and missing might prompt ownership to once again impose a $65 million de facto cap on the club. So how would acquiring Pacioretty and supposedly signing him actually add up economically for them?
For me it is hard to see it. Would Dale Tallon be allowed push for deal that adds Pacioretty and his salary (4.5 million next season and perhaps in Florida tax haven 6 or 6.25 per thereafter) while only subtracting a pick and a non-NHL ready prospect? Let us call this scenario one. I kind of think ownership would veto that. I envision it being more likely that Tallon would have to subtract an important piece/contract from his team. Let us call this scenario two.
Just for fun what might these two scenarios look like? Scenario one: Florida sends Montreal the 15th overall pick in first round and Aleksi Heponiemi for a signed Pacioretty and Winnipeg's fourth rounder. Scenario two: Montreal sends Florida the 6th overall pick (we are all in tears on 28 april and I assume Dahlin, Svechnikov, Zadina, Boqvist, and Wahlstrom are gone) and Pacioretty while receiving the 15th overall and Huberdeau.
|
|
|
|
Post by duster on Apr 10, 2018 14:36:24 GMT -5
Option 2 would be interesting if the team drafts Joe Veleno at center 15th overall and Ducharme takes over from Sly in Laval.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 10, 2018 19:07:53 GMT -5
Wherever he goes, the value changes. He was a three asset return player before the deadline. Now, he's like a two asset return. I'd like a conditional pick if he re-signs with the team.
I don't see Florida as a fit, from the Panthers POV. They've got a strong top six. It's their defense that needs attention. IMO, that starting six is what kept them from the playoffs this year.
FWIW, Max was interviewed this week and one question was whether or not he could see himself back in Montreal next season without the captaincy. He said "no" emphatically.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 10, 2018 19:56:22 GMT -5
I know every one is different but didn't Dustin Brown & Joe Thornton lose their captaincies & still continue with their teams?
I would have thought he might welcome it. Frankly, there were times when he didn't look like much of a leader.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 10, 2018 20:48:42 GMT -5
I know every one is different but didn't Dustin Brown & Joe Thornton lose their captaincies & still continue with their teams? I would have thought he might welcome it. Frankly, there were times when he didn't look like much of a leader. Yep, and Brown had a huge rebound year. his best season in 10 years. Being that unwilling to discuss it would be reason #1 to trade him for me. It likely means Bergevin will give him an extension this summer for showing the right "attitude". |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 10, 2018 22:16:50 GMT -5
Duster, I like Veleno too. I have a suspicion that he is coming off the board in the 9-11 range because he is a good prospect and looks like a very safe bet to develop into a quality second line centreman. I also think some club is likely to need a centre for their prospect pool and Veleno may benefit from being the top centre prospect in a strong draft class that just happened not to have any great centre prospects.
It is true, Florida does have a strong top six, blny. That is why it has been a little odd how insistent Lebrun and McQuire have been that Tallon and Bergevin were talking and may explore the subject again in the near future. And moreover last summer a number of insiders like McKenzie suggested that Florida's indifference to losing Marchessault in the expansion draft and eagerness to trade Reilly Smith were economic moves related to adhering to ownership's self-imposed $64-65 million cap. So where does Pacioretty fit in and why?
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 10, 2018 22:29:17 GMT -5
Duster, I like Veleno too. I have a suspicion that he is coming off the board in the 9-11 range because he is a good prospect and looks like a very safe bet to develop into a quality second line centreman. I also think some club is likely to need a centre for their prospect pool and Veleno may benefit from being the top centre prospect in a strong draft class that just happened not to have any great centre prospects. It is true, Florida does have a strong top six, blny. That is why it has been a little odd how insistent Lebrun and McQuire have been that Tallon and Bergevin were talking and may explore the subject again in the near future. And moreover last summer a number of insiders like McKenzie suggested that Florida's indifference to losing Marchessault in the expansion draft and eagerness to trade Reilly Smith were economic moves related to adhering to ownership's self-imposed $64-65 million cap. So where does Pacioretty fit in and why? One thing to keep in mind - Berg will be moving Pacioretty for immediate help, not for the kind of futures most of us would want. I think not moving him at the deadline for the best C prospect is going to hurt us. Come draft time, there will be more teams interested, but they will prefer to give their kid a chance rather than move him... so any C we get will be one year farther from the NHL. ie, instead of Borgstrom or Thomas, we'll be looking at a guy one year younger, and likely a lesser prospect since the "pièce de résistance" will be a current NHLer. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 11, 2018 6:05:57 GMT -5
Duster, I like Veleno too. I have a suspicion that he is coming off the board in the 9-11 range because he is a good prospect and looks like a very safe bet to develop into a quality second line centreman. I also think some club is likely to need a centre for their prospect pool and Veleno may benefit from being the top centre prospect in a strong draft class that just happened not to have any great centre prospects. It is true, Florida does have a strong top six, blny. That is why it has been a little odd how insistent Lebrun and McQuire have been that Tallon and Bergevin were talking and may explore the subject again in the near future. And moreover last summer a number of insiders like McKenzie suggested that Florida's indifference to losing Marchessault in the expansion draft and eagerness to trade Reilly Smith were economic moves related to adhering to ownership's self-imposed $64-65 million cap. So where does Pacioretty fit in and why? One thing to keep in mind - Berg will be moving Pacioretty for immediate help, not for the kind of futures most of us would want. I think not moving him at the deadline for the best C prospect is going to hurt us. Come draft time, there will be more teams interested, but they will prefer to give their kid a chance rather than move him... so any C we get will be one year farther from the NHL. ie, instead of Borgstrom or Thomas, we'll be looking at a guy one year younger, and likely a lesser prospect since the "pièce de résistance" will be a current NHLer. If you believe what was being tossed around, Charlie Coyle might have been the closest thing to a center coming back. Kings weren't willing to part with Vilardi, etc. The immediate help pile was pretty slim pickings. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 11, 2018 12:07:07 GMT -5
Just for fun what might these two scenarios look like? Scenario one: Florida sends Montreal the 15th overall pick in first round and Aleksi Heponiemi for a signed Pacioretty and Winnipeg's fourth rounder. Scenario two: Montreal sends Florida the 6th overall pick (we are all in tears on 28 april and I assume Dahlin, Svechnikov, Zadina, Boqvist, and Wahlstrom are gone) and Pacioretty while receiving the 15th overall and Huberdeau. I thought about the team dropping positions in the draft only as a cherry on top of this horrendous season ... would be right up there with Carey Price's season-ending whiff  ... those are two reasonable scenarios, folatre ... just for kicks and giggles ... To Montreal: Pierre-Luc Dubois C, David Savard D, conditional 2019 2nd-rd pick should Pacioretty re-sign with CBJ, To Columbus: Max Pacioretty RW, Alex Galchenyuk ?, Brent Lernout D |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 11, 2018 13:07:24 GMT -5
Duster, I like Veleno too. I have a suspicion that he is coming off the board in the 9-11 range because he is a good prospect and looks like a very safe bet to develop into a quality second line centreman. I also think some club is likely to need a centre for their prospect pool and Veleno may benefit from being the top centre prospect in a strong draft class that just happened not to have any great centre prospects. It is true, Florida does have a strong top six, blny. That is why it has been a little odd how insistent Lebrun and McQuire have been that Tallon and Bergevin were talking and may explore the subject again in the near future. And moreover last summer a number of insiders like McKenzie suggested that Florida's indifference to losing Marchessault in the expansion draft and eagerness to trade Reilly Smith were economic moves related to adhering to ownership's self-imposed $64-65 million cap. So where does Pacioretty fit in and why? One thing to keep in mind - Berg will be moving Pacioretty for immediate help, not for the kind of futures most of us would want. I think not moving him at the deadline for the best C prospect is going to hurt us. Come draft time, there will be more teams interested, but they will prefer to give their kid a chance rather than move him... so any C we get will be one year farther from the NHL. ie, instead of Borgstrom or Thomas, we'll be looking at a guy one year younger, and likely a lesser prospect since the "pièce de résistance" will be a current NHLer. DanlesCoulisses.com has a possible trade between Montreal and Minnesota going down this summer ... the Wild are looking to free up some cap space and they've speculated which players might be available; Charlie Coyle and Jonas Brodine ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 11, 2018 13:31:13 GMT -5
Everything has been so discouraging this season, it really would feel disappointing if Montreal drops in the lottery. But I suppose we have to brace ourselves because picking 6th is statistically the most likely outcome.
Regarding Dubois, he is exactly what the Habs need but he exceeded expectations in a major role as a 19 year old. He really opened eyes around the league with his development.
The whole Charlie Coyle thing has been floating around for at least two years now. It is not that Coyle is not a good hockey player. But he is 26 years old and with over 400 games in the league he is a .5 ppg type producer. If he plays centre, I see him more as a good third liner. If, as Minnesota has done over most of his career, he plays right wing then he can manage okay on the second line.
For me Coyle just does not make sense. But as PTH and others are saying the danger of having a GM who thinks he has constructed a competitive team and has no doubt promised his boss Montreal will make playoffs next season is that he is extremely likely to take back an established player (25-28 years old) for Pacioretty. In that age cohort, no one is giving Montreal a superstar. I would be scared it will be Coyle or Saad or Tanner Pearson or Killorn.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 11, 2018 16:01:35 GMT -5
Just for fun what might these two scenarios look like? Scenario one: Florida sends Montreal the 15th overall pick in first round and Aleksi Heponiemi for a signed Pacioretty and Winnipeg's fourth rounder. Scenario two: Montreal sends Florida the 6th overall pick (we are all in tears on 28 april and I assume Dahlin, Svechnikov, Zadina, Boqvist, and Wahlstrom are gone) and Pacioretty while receiving the 15th overall and Huberdeau. I thought about the team dropping positions in the draft only as a cherry on top of this horrendous season ... would be right up there with Carey Price's season-ending whiff ... those are two reasonable scenarios, folatre ... just for kicks and giggles ... To Montreal: Pierre-Luc Dubois C, David Savard D, conditional 2019 2nd-rd pick should Pacioretty re-sign with CBJ, To Columbus: Max Pacioretty RW, Alex Galchenyuk ?, Brent Lernout D Columbus fans on HF have balked at the notion of any trade involving PLD. They're not deep at center and their pleased with his progression. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 11, 2018 17:17:08 GMT -5
Yes, Columbus would be crazy to move him and they're not crazy. Wennberg they might, but even then, he makes a very good #2 centre for them. Its best to draft those centres. As mikeg has pointed out, Montreal uses very few of their picks on centres, mostly on D. If they shifted for a couple of years and drafted only centres, some of those will pan out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 11, 2018 19:07:29 GMT -5
I thought about the team dropping positions in the draft only as a cherry on top of this horrendous season ... would be right up there with Carey Price's season-ending whiff ... those are two reasonable scenarios, folatre ... just for kicks and giggles ... To Montreal: Pierre-Luc Dubois C, David Savard D, conditional 2019 2nd-rd pick should Pacioretty re-sign with CBJ, To Columbus: Max Pacioretty RW, Alex Galchenyuk ?, Brent Lernout D Columbus fans on HF have balked at the notion of any trade involving PLD. They're not deep at center and their pleased with his progression. Then a guy like Sonny Milano would be out of the question too ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 11, 2018 20:20:37 GMT -5
Seventeen, I think we talked about this 2-3 months ago, Wennberg is a possible target and his value is not in the clouds right now. Tortarella does not seem to like his game all that much. I do not love him, but I see a quality second line centre.
Pacioretty and Tortarella do not have a good relationship so that is not going to happen. Galchenyuk is probably not a Tortarella guy either but I suppose if Bergevin/Julien will not play him at centre then I suppose it would not hurt to explore a simple, no extras and add ins, player-for-player trade there.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 15, 2018 0:06:43 GMT -5
Seventeen, I think we talked about this 2-3 months ago, Wennberg is a possible target and his value is not in the clouds right now. Tortarella does not seem to like his game all that much. I do not love him, but I see a quality second line centre. Pacioretty and Tortarella do not have a good relationship so that is not going to happen. Galchenyuk is probably not a Tortarella guy either but I suppose if Bergevin/Julien will not play him at centre then I suppose it would not hurt to explore a simple, no extras and add ins, player-for-player trade there. Torts didn’t have much of an opinion of Tomas Vanek either, and that’s working out ok. |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 19, 2018 19:00:36 GMT -5
It is kind of interesting how three (Kings, Ducks, Blues) of the teams most associated with Paciroetty before the deadline did nothing to improve their clubs and won precisely zero playoff games between the whole lot of them.
I am not saying if I am Blake, Murray, or Armstrong that I would have given whatever Montreal was asking for Pacioretty. But those clubs were punchless when it counted and you have to wonder if the vets there hit the golf course thinking hey the guy upstairs did not give us a helping hand.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Apr 19, 2018 21:54:39 GMT -5
It is kind of interesting how three (Kings, Ducks, Blues) of the teams most associated with Paciroetty before the deadline did nothing to improve their clubs and won precisely zero playoff games between the whole lot of them. I am not saying if I am Blake, Murray, or Armstrong that I would have given whatever Montreal was asking for Pacioretty. But those clubs were punchless when it counted and you have to wonder if the vets there hit the golf course thinking hey the guy upstairs did not give us a helping hand. Good points. The Blues completely imploded in the second half. Allen was a big reason for that. Solid goal tending and they're in the show. The rest of the club is pretty darn solid. The Ducks and Kings lost primarily, imo, because they're slow. I heard some talking heads today stating that they felt the Ducks should blow up the core group and get what they can for Perry, Getzlaf, and Kesler. I'm not sure what they'd get. They're all signed to large deals for lengthy term. Getzlaf is the only one of the three that can skate anywhere near the pace of the modern game still afaic. Losing Theodore in the expansion draft process and losing Fowler to season ending injury severely hampered their defense. It was an issue against the Sharks. Their bottom six will likely be completely revamped this off season. Vermette, Kelly, Brown, and Chimera are either old, UFAs, or both. Beauchemin and Bieksa are UFA. That's likely addition by subtraction, but after Fowler and Lindholm, things get thin. Comtois is their most appealing prospect. On the surface, the rest is pretty suspect. Lots of 22-25 year olds that haven't made a dent. capfriendly.com/teams/ducksIf I'm a betting man, I suspect they take a run at trying to augment their D with the likes of De Haan. Comtois may make the club. The Kings are even more committed to their core group. Lots of term and money still owed to Kopitar, Carter and Brown. The first two can still play. Brown, without the C, had a resurgent year. IMO, guys like Toffoli and Pearson were expected to pick up the slack offensively. Toffoli scored 24 goals this year, but both have regressed or stagnated offensively. Clague and Vilardi are their blue chips. You'd think Pacioretty might fit better into the win now mode, but who knows. I'm not sure what Blake is strategizing. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 19, 2018 23:22:59 GMT -5
It is kind of interesting how three (Kings, Ducks, Blues) of the teams most associated with Paciroetty before the deadline did nothing to improve their clubs and won precisely zero playoff games between the whole lot of them. I am not saying if I am Blake, Murray, or Armstrong that I would have given whatever Montreal was asking for Pacioretty. But those clubs were punchless when it counted and you have to wonder if the vets there hit the golf course thinking hey the guy upstairs did not give us a helping hand. Of course, we can come up with the 180 degree opposite view: those 3 GMs realised their teams were going nowhere regardless, and they were proven right by their dismal failures. The 2-3 goals that adding Pacioretty might have given them (at best) wouldn't have made enough of a difference (the only thing gained would be 1 or 2 extra home games at the most. I don't think teams that got swept ever had a chance of winning a series). |
|
|
|
Pacioretty
Apr 20, 2018 17:28:27 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by seventeen on Apr 20, 2018 17:28:27 GMT -5
I think their GM’s thought odds were light that they’d go far. Ducks have Sam Steel at centre and Josh Mahura on defense coming. But they do need more scoring. Kase could take a jump with more ice tine. Of the Blues we know Thomas and Kyrou are almost ready.
LA has Vilardi and Clague but may need more to go further.
I think the Blues are the fastest of the 3 and have the best kids coming.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 21, 2018 11:06:19 GMT -5
The Ducks are in better shape than the Kings. I like that Swedish d-man Larsson and overall the Ducks are in good shape on blue line and Gibson is not a bad goalie for his age/contract. The mess is definitely up front. Getzlaf is still good. Rackell is a great young winger. Kase had a nice season and may consolidate as a top six guy. Henrique is a nice hockey player. But Murray is basically stuck with the expensive core vets up front, so he will not have an abundance of cap dollars with which to bring in the goal scoring they need. But if Anaheim bridges Montour rather than going big now on a long term deal, then Murray could get involved again for Pacioretty. Though I really doubt the conversation goes anywhere if Bergevin insists on a young piece with major upside who already cracked the roster or up and coming kids like Steel, Larsson, or Mahura. If Pacioretty signs, feeling good about his future there, then I could see something like Comtois, Morand and a second round pick for Montreal. Or maybe if they so high on Comtois’ development over the last twelve months it could be a 2018 first rounder, Morand, and a second rounder next season.
With the Ducks, it depends on how good they think they can be next season. If management expects to be competitive next season and they want to address a major roster need, then adding a high end sniper like Pacioretty makes sense. You put him on the first line with Getzlaf and Rackell and he will probably score you 100 goals over the next three seasons. Comtois looks like he will be a good NHL player but he probably needs to learn in the AHL next season and would probably be doing well to give you 35 goals total from 2019-2021.
|
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 24, 2018 21:52:16 GMT -5
I know it would be disappointing to trade Pacioretty and not directly acquire a sure bet top six centre in the process. But I think Bergevin needs to be careful about waiting and waiting until someone gives him a 19-20 year old blue chip centre prospect, a first round pick, and a serviceable roster player.
Ideally, if Pacioretty is on the move this summer, a blue chip centre prospect is coming back in return. To have a Robert Thomas, Gabe Vilardi, Morgan Frost, or Sam Steel would be huge for the Montreal Canadiens organisation. But we all know the likelihood of that is not great because blue chip centres and d-men who drive offense are the most coveted commodities in hockey.
For me it would not be terrible if Montreal picks up a first round pick, a very good 19-20 year old prospect regardless of position who is trending positively to profile as good NHL player, and another nice prospect with upside potential. What I really do not want is the centerpiece for Pacioretty being a guy like Saad, Toffoli, Pearson, Brodie, or Coyle.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 24, 2018 23:26:34 GMT -5
I know it would be disappointing to trade Pacioretty and not directly acquire a sure bet top six centre in the process. But I think Bergevin needs to be careful about waiting and waiting until someone gives him a 19-20 year old blue chip centre prospect, a first round pick, and a serviceable roster player. Ideally, if Pacioretty is on the move this summer, a blue chip centre prospect is coming back in return. To have a Robert Thomas, Gabe Vilardi, Morgan Frost, or Sam Steel would be huge for the Montreal Canadiens organisation. But we all know the likelihood of that is not great because blue chip centres and d-men who drive offense are the most coveted commodities in hockey. For me it would not be terrible if Montreal picks up a first round pick, a very good 19-20 year old prospect regardless of position who is trending positively to profile as good NHL player, and another nice prospect with upside potential. What I really do not want is the centerpiece for Pacioretty being a guy like Saad, Toffoli, Pearson, Brodie, or Coyle. I think the fan consensus is that we want a C prospect as the centerpiece, whereas Bergevin is going to be looking to a veteran who'll help save his job. Unfortunately, I think your list of possible veterans is precisely the kind of return management is looking for. |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 24, 2018 23:41:34 GMT -5
I know it would be disappointing to trade Pacioretty and not directly acquire a sure bet top six centre in the process. But I think Bergevin needs to be careful about waiting and waiting until someone gives him a 19-20 year old blue chip centre prospect, a first round pick, and a serviceable roster player. Ideally, if Pacioretty is on the move this summer, a blue chip centre prospect is coming back in return. To have a Robert Thomas, Gabe Vilardi, Morgan Frost, or Sam Steel would be huge for the Montreal Canadiens organisation. But we all know the likelihood of that is not great because blue chip centres and d-men who drive offense are the most coveted commodities in hockey. For me it would not be terrible if Montreal picks up a first round pick, a very good 19-20 year old prospect regardless of position who is trending positively to profile as good NHL player, and another nice prospect with upside potential. What I really do not want is the centerpiece for Pacioretty being a guy like Saad, Toffoli, Pearson, Brodie, or Coyle. I think the fan consensus is that we want a C prospect as the centerpiece, whereas Bergevin is going to be looking to a veteran who'll help save his job. Unfortunately, I think your list of possible veterans is precisely the kind of return management is looking for. What I find sad in all of this is that for many of Berg's moves, if he'd taken intelligent, reasonable gambles, maybe we'd be more forgiving if the moves didn't work out. Trade Subban for #5, Tanev and Horvat, and say whoever we pick doesn't pan out and Horvat plateaus at the Danault level, and maybe we can still accept that trying to add high-level forward talent was worth a try - same for an Edmonton package, or trading Pacioretty for a young C rather than proven talent. More and more I fear Bergevin is thinking like a former player who wants to add talent to the room, rather than add talent to the organisation. I want him to think like a manager rather than a former player. *sigh* |
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 25, 2018 20:14:15 GMT -5
PTH, I agree.
Bergevin showed no vision whatsoever in the two defining trades of his tenure. The club he is building desperately needs a high end centre, but he turns two d-men (a #1 d-man and likely #1 d-man) capable of driving offense (and under club control for many seasons) into an older #1 d-man who does not drive offense and a high end left wing. As you say, most people would be a little more understanding if he was following a discernible plan rather than engaging in endless improvisation.
I believe in comparison to Subban and Sergachev, Pacioretty with one year of contract remaining is far less likely to yield a high end centre or even a blue chip centre prospect. But nevertheless I think Bergevin needs to get the best future oriented assets deal that he can this summer and not wait until the 2019 trade deadline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 23, 2018 14:42:09 GMT -5
|
|
... those are two reasonable scenarios, folatre ... just for kicks and giggles ... 