I don't think we could've gotten more for Tatar. We got a quality pick and a top end prospect for Pacioretty, I think the Vegas made the trade thinking they were going to get a 40 goal scorer. It might've been a little less than what he was worth in previous seasons, but you don't trade a 40 goal scorer just for the sake of it. Bergevin waited until Pacioretty showed he was slowing down/complacent, and still got tons of good assets for him.
Subban - I guess this one was pure luck for Bergevin, he traded a norris caliber defensemen in his prime for an older more defensive defensemen. Again, why would you trade a Norris caliber defensemen in his prime unless you got a substantial return
With the 3rd round pick in the 2012 draft, Bergevin got the most points from the pick. Galchenyuks production + Domi's production in Montreal has given us more points than any other player from that draft.
I don't think it's smart to just trade players in their prime for the sake of trading them. He's proven time and time again that despite the players showing regression or having off years, he's still able to get good assets back for them.
For Pacioretty he waited too long. Yes the return he got was great but that is hindsight 1000%. No one saw Tatar lighting it up the way he has and why would you? Suzuki was by and large the less good prospect compared to the other 1st rounders Vegas chose in Glass and Brannstrom. Pacioretty was for all intensive purposes run out of town due to the whole Captaincy fiasco and the remarks made at the Habs golf tourny. I agree 100%, he got a good return despite all that. what annoys me is that he he made the trade for Weber, unanimously one of the more prominent captain figures in hockey right after Pacioretty was named captain. No player in likes getting demoted from being captain and everyone and their mother could foresee how that would have been a problem going forward. He waited until Pacioretty just about asked for a trade out of town as a result. Is value was at his lowest in his career as a prominent player in the league. That is what annoyed me. Yes I think the best teams know when its time to trade a star player and if happens to be in a prime, you do it. The team was faltering the past 3-4 years and was in clear need of a rebuild yet the held on to the idea of "just making it" and as a result when things didn't work out as many predicted, he sold Pacioretty off at his least valued state. They had to trade him because he was not reporting without the captaincy. Giving the other team much leverage
For Subban, the exact same thing happened. The minute Subban won the Norris was the time he needed to trade him. (This is speaking from his perspective not mine) he and Therrien knew he wasn't his type of player and knew that a huge pay raise was coming, likely with trade protection. Yet the decided to sign that contract knowing full well they had no intention of honoring it for the full length of the contract. So what do they do? They trade him right before his NTC kicked in, when the other team knows he has to trade Subban as a result. Not only that, there is the whole Pacioretty and Subban rift in the room which soured many peoples view on him. They had to trade him because his NTC was kicking in and his style of play wasn't what the Habs wanted. Giving the other team much leverage.
Galchenyuk was the exact opposite player that MB preached about and kept him despite Therrien numerously playing him on the 4th line, not at center and at times even scratching him. He waited for what exactly? To sign him to a contract that took him straight to free agency and in hopes of him turning his career around? he knew he didn't have the player he wanted and kept him all this time for what exactly? As for the production argument, who cares? Empty points IMO. He was the point producing forward that you had to shelter all the time. He started playing too young which gave him more games than the rest of his class in a year where many would argue would be the worst draft class in recent memory. Two of the top 4 draftees aren't even in the NHL anymore while the other remaining one (Murray) is a draft bust despite still playing in the NHL. Saying he's the top point-getter despite those facts isn't very flattering. Not too mention that it was defense heavy first round.
I'm in agreement with you though, MB despite those facts did very good with his acquisitions. I still fault him for having to put himself in that position to begin with. Especially with the writing on the wall for those players being crystal clear ahead of trade time and with their trade values being much higher. i am not advocating trading players for the sake of trading them. There has to be valid reason for trading them. In all 3 cases, MB knew he would have to trade these guys before he eventually did and held on way too long for nothing.