|
Post by Tankdriver on Feb 19, 2020 17:12:43 GMT -5
On RDS, they brought up the idea of what if you had the second overall, what else would it take.....and the name brought up was Suzuki plus the 2nd overall. I'm not sure I'd be willing to do that for Laf. He'll be a good one but is still not proven. Assuming Byfield is the #2 you have your #1 and 2 centers for years to come.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 19, 2020 18:16:25 GMT -5
On RDS, they brought up the idea of what if you had the second overall, what else would it take.....and the name was Suzuki plus the 2nd overall. I'm not sure I'd be willing to do that for Laf. He'll be good but is still not proven. Assuming Byfielf is #2 you have your #1 and 2 centers for years to come. Suze shouldn't go anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 19, 2020 18:53:37 GMT -5
Here's a couple links: Cult of Hockey30 ThoughtsIt sounds like Subban's salary was the main factor preventing the deal from happening. Thanks. Seems to strengthen my argument. Draisaitl, the 4th overall, Nurse or Klefbom. That's nuts. And it doesn't take into account the salaries. If Bergevin takes back Hall instead of Draisaitl, it would have meant a $3MM extra CAP hit to Edmonton, which might have been manageable. Hall and one of the defensemen, or Hall and the 4th overall would seem to be a good deal for Montreal especially since Bergevin was trading PK come hell or high water. Instead, he got stuck with Weber. he could have had Hall (and whoever you could have gotten for Hall if you had to trade him later and the 4th overall, which could easily have been Tkachuk or Clayton Keller, or McAvoy. Yes, those are hindsight picks and I don't know what Timmins' list looked like, but right now Weber is looking over the hill.
|
|
|
Post by habsask on Feb 19, 2020 20:31:41 GMT -5
We got a "better return" but we still have a great big fat hole in that position. Essentially, Bbinz has finally given up on the season. Good. One can hope that he'll be able to trade Weber, Price (eating some remaining salary) Drouin etc for picks this year and in future years while keeping the good looking younger players. Almost forgot Kovalchuk. After the trade deadline passes Molson can fire MB & start looking fore someone who actually knows what they're doing, meanwhile letting Timmins run the draft. Here's hoping.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 20, 2020 12:23:11 GMT -5
The trade was very good. He converted a 4th rounder into a likely late 2nd rounder, for nothing, so that's good progress. Give me a pick 40 spots ahead of where I was and I'm in. Five more days to go. Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back. But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban, but we needed to get high-end talent for him, not a sideways move for another big-money defenseman. That would've meant accepting some risk since our blueline would've been thin once again, but a good GM can take a risk to take a step forward, and Berg doesn't seem to have that in his DNA.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 20, 2020 12:32:49 GMT -5
On RDS, they brought up the idea of what if you had the second overall, what else would it take.....and the name brought up was Suzuki plus the 2nd overall. I'm not sure I'd be willing to do that for Laf. He'll be a good one but is still not proven. Assuming Byfield is the #2 you have your #1 and 2 centers for years to come. I remember a HF discussion about our getting the #1 pick in 2012. It was agreed Subban was the legit cost. The main problem was that Edmonton fans thought it was Subban + #3 for #1, whereas Habs fans thought Subban straight up for #1 made sense.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 20, 2020 14:04:09 GMT -5
The trade was very good. He converted a 4th rounder into a likely late 2nd rounder, for nothing, so that's good progress. Give me a pick 40 spots ahead of where I was and I'm in. Five more days to go. Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back. But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban, but we needed to get high-end talent for him, not a sideways move for another big-money defenseman. That would've meant accepting some risk since our blueline would've been thin once again, but a good GM can take a risk to take a step forward, and Berg doesn't seem to have that in his DNA. Someone wrote an article recently citing golf pros as an example for how Bergevin makes trades. The conclusion of this golf study is that pros concentrate much more on not losing strokes (making par) than on gaining strokes (making birdies). They aren't willing to take the risks necessary to make birdies. Berg is very much like that as he does not like risk of any kind. He'd prefer a safe deal where he's the clear winner but doesn't move any needles, over a risky deal which may or may not pay off, but if it does, its a big time win. The Aho offer sheet reflects that clearly. He submitted an offer sheet that was completely safe. Not too expensive for the Habs in salary, and a real deal in compensation cost. Safe, safe, safe. And without a chance in hell Carolina wouldn't match it. BEcause it was great for them too! Compare that to submitting an offer sheet for $11MM. I believe that's the region requiring 4 first round choices, which could start in 2021. Expensive, perhaps, depending on how the team performs. Would Aho help us make the playoffs and turn those draft choices int picks between 16 and 31? He has 34 goals and 57 points in 59 games, and he's 22. It's risky, right? I'd do it, because between he and KK (Suzuki hadn't proved anything at the time), your centre spot would be set for years. You'd have some CAP work ahead, but moving Weber during the year and then Price in a couple of years would resolve much of that. Strength up the middle. You've got one of the key elements. Then, work on the defence. A risky move, which Bergevin came no where near to attempting. Always wanting guarantees that boy. He's guaranteed to never win a Cup, because there's always another GM or 5 who ARE taking chances and it will always pay off for one of them. It just won't be Bergevin.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Feb 20, 2020 14:59:46 GMT -5
The trade was very good. He converted a 4th rounder into a likely late 2nd rounder, for nothing, so that's good progress. Give me a pick 40 spots ahead of where I was and I'm in. Five more days to go. Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back. But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban, but we needed to get high-end talent for him, not a sideways move for another big-money defenseman. That would've meant accepting some risk since our blueline would've been thin once again, but a good GM can take a risk to take a step forward, and Berg doesn't seem to have that in his DNA. Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Feb 20, 2020 15:43:25 GMT -5
Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. Habs fans: We need to lose every game! Tank! Tank! Tank! <Habs lose>Habs fans:
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 20, 2020 15:57:01 GMT -5
Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back.But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban ... I wasn't okay with it back then, not at all ... but to be honest, I really don't miss him any longer and there are a number of reasons for that ... Marco Scandella will be a useful d-man to the St Louis defence corps, but I suspect the biggest trade of Marc Bergevin's tenure may not be too far off ... I'm not saying anything is going down, only that it wouldn't surprise me if it did ... I'll address it in the proper thread ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Feb 20, 2020 16:04:53 GMT -5
I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. The problem in Montreal right now is that there's more attention on the owner, GM, and coach than there is on the players and that can't be good for the dressing room ... I honestly didn't see this bad period coming and it's quite discouraging ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Feb 20, 2020 16:10:57 GMT -5
The core of the team is devoid of genuine difference makers and when you are a GM in year eight, that is on you.
A long-term strategic focus on drafting and developing is not dependent on whether or not Bergevin is Montreal's GM. Did the sky fall in Carolina or Philadelphia and the kids get traded when Hextall and Ron Francis lost their jobs?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 20, 2020 16:58:08 GMT -5
Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back. But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban, but we needed to get high-end talent for him, not a sideways move for another big-money defenseman. That would've meant accepting some risk since our blueline would've been thin once again, but a good GM can take a risk to take a step forward, and Berg doesn't seem to have that in his DNA. Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. I'd separate those from what I class as high risk moves. High risk involves making a deal without any other pressure on a guy to do so. Trading Weber or Price or Petry for some benefit down the road is a high risk move Subban - Everyone knew Bergevin was trading him. He imposed his own deadline. It wasn't any kind of a risk for him. HE probably didn't care if he got back a family pack of Timbits because PK was gone. Galchenyuk. Same situation except this time, the father was an issue, and Berge was probably convinced Chuck wasn't going to amount to anything worth keeping. That's not a risk. Thats just getting rid of a headache and potential problem. Pacioretty. Once again, there was never any decision to keep the guy. He was gone, gone, gone, like the song lyrics. It was simply what can you get for him. It turned out fine in this case. No....risk is offering 4 first round picks for Sebastian Aho. Or even 2 first rounders, a second and third. There's something to lose. Risk is trading SEth Jones for Ryan Johansen. Poile is hoping Johansen turns out to be the stud centre he needs. Instead, he turns out ordinary and Jones becomes the stud defenseman. It could have gone the other way too. That's risk. In the previous cases, Berg was gaining by subtraction in his mind. Anything you got back was gravy. They were sizeable trades, especially the Subban one, but not high risk ones for Berg.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Feb 20, 2020 17:22:32 GMT -5
Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. I'd separate those from what I class as high risk moves. High risk involves making a deal without any other pressure on a guy to do so. Trading Weber or Price or Petry for some benefit down the road is a high risk move Subban - Everyone knew Bergevin was trading him. He imposed his own deadline. It wasn't any kind of a risk for him. HE probably didn't care if he got back a family pack of Timbits because PK was gone. Galchenyuk. Same situation except this time, the father was an issue, and Berge was probably convinced Chuck wasn't going to amount to anything worth keeping. That's not a risk. Thats just getting rid of a headache and potential problem. Pacioretty. Once again, there was never any decision to keep the guy. He was gone, gone, gone, like the song lyrics. It was simply what can you get for him. It turned out fine in this case. No....risk is offering 4 first round picks for Sebastian Aho. Or even 2 first rounders, a second and third. There's something to lose. Risk is trading SEth Jones for Ryan Johansen. Poile is hoping Johansen turns out to be the stud centre he needs. Instead, he turns out ordinary and Jones becomes the stud defenseman. It could have gone the other way too. That's risk. In the previous cases, Berg was gaining by subtraction in his mind. Anything you got back was gravy. They were sizeable trades, especially the Subban one, but not high risk ones for Berg. I'm not sure we have that same definition of "risk". You seem to be saying that because he wanted to make those moves they weren't risky, which I would disagree with. Lots of people want to go sky-diving - doesn't mean it's not risky. Subban could have gone on to win multiple Norris Trophies as many (including myself) predicted. Weber could have turned into an "average" defenseman, as some were also predicting. Instead, Weber has outscored Subban in three out of four seasons since the deal, and the latter was recently traded for 7 used pucks and a "we-pay-the-taxes!" coupon to Arbies. That Bergevin's trades have worked out, or that he wanted to do them for whatever his reasons were, does not diminish the risk Bergevin took in making them. How many other GMs have traded their #1 defenseman, their captain, and the organization's highest draft pick in 32 years? In hindsight they have all worked out and seem logical, but they were risky moves nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by frozone on Feb 20, 2020 18:00:59 GMT -5
I'd separate those from what I class as high risk moves. High risk involves making a deal without any other pressure on a guy to do so. Trading Weber or Price or Petry for some benefit down the road is a high risk move Subban - Everyone knew Bergevin was trading him. He imposed his own deadline. It wasn't any kind of a risk for him. HE probably didn't care if he got back a family pack of Timbits because PK was gone. Galchenyuk. Same situation except this time, the father was an issue, and Berge was probably convinced Chuck wasn't going to amount to anything worth keeping. That's not a risk. Thats just getting rid of a headache and potential problem. Pacioretty. Once again, there was never any decision to keep the guy. He was gone, gone, gone, like the song lyrics. It was simply what can you get for him. It turned out fine in this case. No....risk is offering 4 first round picks for Sebastian Aho. Or even 2 first rounders, a second and third. There's something to lose. Risk is trading SEth Jones for Ryan Johansen. Poile is hoping Johansen turns out to be the stud centre he needs. Instead, he turns out ordinary and Jones becomes the stud defenseman. It could have gone the other way too. That's risk. In the previous cases, Berg was gaining by subtraction in his mind. Anything you got back was gravy. They were sizeable trades, especially the Subban one, but not high risk ones for Berg. I'm not sure we have that same definition of "risk". You seem to be saying that because he wanted to make those moves they weren't risky, which I would disagree with. Lots of people want to go sky-diving - doesn't mean it's not risky. Subban could have gone on to win multiple Norris Trophies as many (including myself) predicted. Weber could have turned into an "average" defenseman, as some were also predicting. Instead, Weber has outscored Subban in three out of four seasons since the deal, and the latter was recently traded for 7 used pucks and a "we-pay-the-taxes!" coupon to Arbies. That Bergevin's trades have worked out, or that he wanted to do them for whatever his reasons were, does not diminish the risk Bergevin took in making them. How many other GMs have traded their #1 defenseman, their captain, and the organization's highest draft pick in 32 years? In hindsight they have all worked out and seem logical, but they were risky moves nonetheless. If you want to add to the list, there's Sergachev for Drouin as well, possibly the weakest of all his trades. But I have my doubts that Sergachev would be a stud if we had kept him, whereas Drouin would probably be collecting 75+ points playing in TBay.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 20, 2020 18:21:59 GMT -5
I'm not sure we have that same definition of "risk". You seem to be saying that because he wanted to make those moves they weren't risky, which I would disagree with. Lots of people want to go sky-diving - doesn't mean it's not risky. Subban could have gone on to win multiple Norris Trophies as many (including myself) predicted. Weber could have turned into an "average" defenseman, as some were also predicting. Instead, Weber has outscored Subban in three out of four seasons since the deal, and the latter was recently traded for 7 used pucks and a "we-pay-the-taxes!" coupon to Arbies. That Bergevin's trades have worked out, or that he wanted to do them for whatever his reasons were, does not diminish the risk Bergevin took in making them. How many other GMs have traded their #1 defenseman, their captain, and the organization's highest draft pick in 32 years? In hindsight they have all worked out and seem logical, but they were risky moves nonetheless. If you want to add to the list, there's Sergachev for Drouin as well, possibly the weakest of all his trades. But I have my doubts that Sergachev would be a stud if we had kept him, whereas Drouin would probably be collecting 75+ points playing in TBay. ^^^^ This
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Feb 20, 2020 19:25:17 GMT -5
Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. I'd separate those from what I class as high risk moves. High risk involves making a deal without any other pressure on a guy to do so. Trading Weber or Price or Petry for some benefit down the road is a high risk move Subban - Everyone knew Bergevin was trading him. He imposed his own deadline. It wasn't any kind of a risk for him. HE probably didn't care if he got back a family pack of Timbits because PK was gone. Galchenyuk. Same situation except this time, the father was an issue, and Berge was probably convinced Chuck wasn't going to amount to anything worth keeping. That's not a risk. Thats just getting rid of a headache and potential problem. Pacioretty. Once again, there was never any decision to keep the guy. He was gone, gone, gone, like the song lyrics. It was simply what can you get for him. It turned out fine in this case. No....risk is offering 4 first round picks for Sebastian Aho. Or even 2 first rounders, a second and third. There's something to lose. Risk is trading SEth Jones for Ryan Johansen. Poile is hoping Johansen turns out to be the stud centre he needs. Instead, he turns out ordinary and Jones becomes the stud defenseman. It could have gone the other way too. That's risk. In the previous cases, Berg was gaining by subtraction in his mind. Anything you got back was gravy. They were sizeable trades, especially the Subban one, but not high risk ones for Berg. So you are mad at Bergevin over $872.00? .. You really think that $872.00 would have made Carolina not sign Aho? It wasn't the amount of cap hit, or the compensation that Bergevin was hoping would be an issue for Carolina (that's why his offer was $872.00 shy of 2 first, a second and a third compensation), it was the contract structure.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Apr 16, 2020 17:52:25 GMT -5
Looks like we get a fourth in 2021, to go with 2nd this year. Scandella just re-signed with Blues.
Which is good trading for Montreal as we only gave up a 4th for Scandella. Then git decent hockey out of him. Trading is Bergevin strong suit. But his drafting has been horrible.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 16, 2020 18:33:42 GMT -5
This trade worked out quite well. For me Scandella never became the player that Minnesota thought he would be, hence why else is a UFA 30 year old d-man taking a four year/$13.1 million deal when his last deal as a RFA was five years/$20 million.
I know that media harp on the left-hand defense issue for Montreal. But, in reality, Scandella is not better than Chiarot. Scandella is hard to compare to Mete since they are nothing alike. I will concede that Scandella is better than Kulak, but for me that is not saying much. And if Timmins and Bergevin knew that Romanov was coming over (perhaps with the guarantee that he would not play in Laval), then it would have made no sense to tie up three or four years in Scandella. Plus, as Romanov moves into a bigger role over time, there are plenty of good LHD prospects (Harris, Norlinder, Struble) who will looking to graduate to the big club.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 17, 2020 0:12:57 GMT -5
The second is the key, obviously. If you look back at our history of 4th round picks (a surprisingly small number. We seem to trade a lot of them away), outside of Mete, it's pretty bad. Do the names Alexander Avtsin, Brady Vail, Josiah Didier, Jason Missiaen mean anything? I could go on, but the 4th is just more spaghetti at the wall.
I'll take that second and run, however. That was a good return, which makes me wonder about Doug Armstrong. Scandella wasn't that good with the Habs and I gather Minny was looking to move him for quite some time. He's also 30 years old. Then you throw over $3MM a year at a 3rd pairing guy? Is Armstrong that worried about losing some of his D? Pietrangelo is probably gone, but Faulk and Parayko are solid RHD's so you just need to fill in with ok guys on the left. Dunn is pretty good. Gunnerson's ok and Bortuzzo is just a lug. Maybe he does need Scandella that badly. Perunovich is the only defense prospect (though he looks solid). A bit thin on D perhaps, explains the willingness to give up a 2nd rounder.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Apr 17, 2020 7:46:27 GMT -5
This trade worked out quite well. For me Scandella never became the player that Minnesota thought he would be, hence why else is a UFA 30 year old d-man taking a four year/$13.1 million deal when his last deal as a RFA was five years/$20 million. I know that media harp on the left-hand defense issue for Montreal. But, in reality, Scandella is not better than Chiarot. Scandella is hard to compare to Mete since they are nothing alike. I will concede that Scandella is better than Kulak, but for me that is not saying much. And if Timmins and Bergevin knew that Romanov was coming over (perhaps with the guarantee that he would not play in Laval), then it would have made no sense to tie up three or four years in Scandella. Plus, as Romanov moves into a bigger role over time, there are plenty of good LHD prospects (Harris, Norlinder, Struble) who will looking to graduate to the big club. I was thinking other day maybe able to trade Chiarot at trade deadline 2021 or 2022 for a first round pick. Got a 2nd and 4th for Scandella? Be a free first. Chiarot has worked out well in Montrela. Once some of the youth you mentioned matures of course. The 2021 and 2022 drafts are solid drafts. Like to acquire first picks in those drafts, at the trade deadline
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 17, 2020 8:43:21 GMT -5
Like I always say, Bergevin is a good middle manager. Gets the legwork done; moves a pick for a guy, gets a better pick back. But the big, high-risk moves, he seems to shy away from. I was always OK with moving Subban, but we needed to get high-end talent for him, not a sideways move for another big-money defenseman. That would've meant accepting some risk since our blueline would've been thin once again, but a good GM can take a risk to take a step forward, and Berg doesn't seem to have that in his DNA. Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. I wouldn't call the Subban trade a win for Bergevin, at best it's a draw. Nashville accomplished more with Subban in the lineup ( a Finals appearance and a Pesidents Trophy) than MTL has with Weber. And Subban had a Norris nomination while there. Yes, he had a poor season in NJ. So did the team. I'm willing to give him another season before declaring him washed up at 30. Weber will be 35 when and if the next season starts. Where have the Habs been the last 3 years with Weber, out of the playoffs. As for Pacioretty, I see this as a win for both teams. Vegas is a playoff team that wanted a 30 goal scorer that they could lock up long term. That's what they got. I've heard this before, that Bergevin wins trades. The team is bad and continues to be bad. That should be the measuring stick.
|
|
|
Post by drkcloud on Apr 17, 2020 10:55:58 GMT -5
I'm fine with a 2nd for Scandella, good asset management.
However, I find it interesting that yet another veteran free agent spurns Montreal when given the opportunity. A home town boy to boot. What are free agents seeing when they look at the organization
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 17, 2020 11:11:51 GMT -5
My best guess is that Bergevin did make Scandella an offer before he traded him, yet it was probably an offer without much term (probably two years) since management apparently knew that Romanov was coming. I actually think that Bergevin handled this case fine. Scandella is a good #5 d-man but that is a slot that should be reserved for younger, homegrown guys that need seasoning. And the third defensive pairing is not really a prudent place on the roster to invest big with term and money.
But your overarching point, Cloud, is well taken. If Bergevin had constructed a winning team, then it would be easier to get UFAs pick up the phone and listen.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Apr 17, 2020 12:03:14 GMT -5
Perhaps the best way to put it is that of all the skills required of a gm in the NHL, trading may be MB's least weakest. He would seem to be better at trading than drafting players, developing players, signing FAs and resigning current roster. And with that skill set one fully understands why after 8 years he has a .500 team and missed the playoff 4 out of 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Apr 17, 2020 17:57:15 GMT -5
Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. I'd separate those from what I class as high risk moves. High risk involves making a deal without any other pressure on a guy to do so. Trading Weber or Price or Petry for some benefit down the road is a high risk move Subban - Everyone knew Bergevin was trading him. He imposed his own deadline. It wasn't any kind of a risk for him. HE probably didn't care if he got back a family pack of Timbits because PK was gone. Galchenyuk. Same situation except this time, the father was an issue, and Berge was probably convinced Chuck wasn't going to amount to anything worth keeping. That's not a risk. Thats just getting rid of a headache and potential problem. Pacioretty. Once again, there was never any decision to keep the guy. He was gone, gone, gone, like the song lyrics. It was simply what can you get for him. It turned out fine in this case. No....risk is offering 4 first round picks for Sebastian Aho. Or even 2 first rounders, a second and third. There's something to lose. Risk is trading SEth Jones for Ryan Johansen. Poile is hoping Johansen turns out to be the stud centre he needs. Instead, he turns out ordinary and Jones becomes the stud defenseman. It could have gone the other way too. That's risk. In the previous cases, Berg was gaining by subtraction in his mind. Anything you got back was gravy. They were sizeable trades, especially the Subban one, but not high risk ones for Berg. We are going through each one of Bergevins moves. That is like going to university for four years, failing to graduate but reviewing each test and each answer on each test. Sure you got some answers on calculus 101 right but after 4 years you are still in first year and failing. In Bergevins case after 8 years, still no diploma, still in first year courses. We are not asking for valedictorian, Dean's list or cum laude. He isn't even passing. A couple of years he set records for futility. Meanwhile Dean Molson is relocating the fans bricks, cutting the number of seats, selling condos, avoiding the salary cap, adding expensive items to the menu and charging extra if fans want their tickets printed. I used to defend Molson but no more. He is milking the fan base!
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Apr 18, 2020 9:47:42 GMT -5
Actually, I think the 4th we traded for Scandella was the pick we got for trading down at draft. We were going to take Norlinder anyway. Not sure on that though.
Also, sounds like Blues odds of signing Pietrangelo are not good. He is going to hit the jackpot and they never hesitated on signing Scandella.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Apr 18, 2020 10:48:44 GMT -5
Yeah, Armstrong has been quite busy given the uncertainty surrounding the future. I believe that Pietrangelo ultimately decides to stay with the Blues. He is the captain, his wife's from St. Louis, the team is set up to contend.
Of course, getting the deal done may take some time because Pietrangelo is an elite guy and he is not signing for $7.5 or $8 per, but I see him living with something like 7 years/$63 million given the league's near term financial landscape. I would imagine that Armstrong is going to give someone something to take Allen and/or Bozak off their hands and they probably buy out Steen.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 18, 2020 17:53:05 GMT -5
Trading fan favourite Subban for a four year older Weber Trading former 30 goal scorer Galchenyuk for Domi who had 9 goals the season before (four empty netters was well pointed out on this board) Trading Pacioretty, captain and annual 30 goal scorer for Tartar who was a healthy scratch in the playoffs and an another undersized prospect I would say that all of these were pretty high risk moves that Bergevin won. If any of those had failed miserably he would have likely been fired by now. Also for everyone (here and media) that keeps saying Montreal needs to blow it up and trade Price, Weber, Petry, Gallagher and so on, would there still be calling for MB's head when they have missed the playoffs 5 of 6, 6 of 7? That is likely the outcome. I'm not advocating on MB's behalf but fans need to decide what way they want to see the team go and then be satisfied when it goes that way. Spot on ...
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Apr 19, 2020 5:33:52 GMT -5
Yeah, Armstrong has been quite busy given the uncertainty surrounding the future. I believe that Pietrangelo ultimately decides to stay with the Blues. He is the captain, his wife's from St. Louis, the team is set up to contend. Of course, getting the deal done may take some time because Pietrangelo is an elite guy and he is not signing for $7.5 or $8 per, but I see him living with something like 7 years/$63 million given the league's near term financial landscape. I would imagine that Armstrong is going to give someone something to take Allen and/or Bozak off their hands and they probably buy out Steen. I get opinion the way you speak maybe some room for a potential trade between Montreal and St. Louis? . With Allen's contract being a burden to signing Pietrangelo. Arpon Basu was on 690 this past week saying Canadiens need to spend more on a backup. Montreal, who just happens to have tons of caproom. Along with a good trade history with St. Louis. If season is done, Blues are sitting with the 30th pick in draft. Habs sitting with a cheap, NHL ready backup in Lindgren? Is a Lindgren for Allen and 30rd overall worth it?
|
|