Forums/Montreal Canadiens

Playoffs

Feb 9 at 11:11
#1
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 5,539
Likes: 1,394
no team in the atlantic is going to get a wild card. that leaves the top 3 spots in the atlantic. the only teams that are gauranteed to get the 1st two spots are tampa and boston. that leaves the 3rd spot for florida, toronto and mtl. imo the teams that have the most chance to take that spot are in the following order: Panthers, Leafs and Habs. Should the habs make a run? considering that they're getting healthier now and the team has won 9 of the last 12
Feb 9 at 11:13
#2
Fire Lindy Ruff
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 3,932
Likes: 1,220
Bergevin should wait another week before making any moves... But it will be hard, considering that the teams in front of them have 2-3 games in hand
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 9 at 11:17
#3
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 576
Stand pat and re-evaluate at the deadline
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 9 at 12:00
#4
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 4,210
Likes: 1,455
I think that if they’re still in the race at the deadline, they don’t make any trades. And if they’re out of it they can maybe trade Thompson/Scandella, and only trade Kovalchuk if someone overpays for him (1st+).
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 9 at 12:20
#5
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 1,577
It's within reach. Wait another about a week out of the deadline and then decide. If we are close, keep the team and don't trade anymore. If it's unrealistic, trade Kovalchuk, Weise, Thompson, Scandella, and Folin.
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 11 at 2:22
#6
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 17,109
Likes: 4,600
I feel like MB operates on a bizarre method when it comes to trading assets.

-If the Habs are fighting for a playoff spot and have good assets playing well that would get solid returns. Tatar, Petry, Kovalchuk for example, he doesn't want to trade them.
-If the Habs are in the playoffs and have good assets playing well that would get solid returns, he doesn't want to trade them.
-If the Habs are a bottom 5 team and have good assets, they usually end up not playing well that year, hence the bottom 5 result. So he doesn't want to trade them. (For lower value then he knows they are worth.)

So when exactly is the right time to trade highly valued assets then? I feel like the only time MB wants to trade a good player is when they are absolutely in the trash already and other teams are undervaluing them.
MasterMatt23 liked this.
Feb 11 at 7:28
#7
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 1,577
Quoting: F50marco
I feel like MB operates on a bizarre method when it comes to trading assets.

-If the Habs are fighting for a playoff spot and have good assets playing well that would get solid returns. Tatar, Petry, Kovalchuk for example, he doesn't want to trade them.
-If the Habs are in the playoffs and have good assets playing well that would get solid returns, he doesn't want to trade them.
-If the Habs are a bottom 5 team and have good assets, they usually end up not playing well that year, hence the bottom 5 result. So he doesn't want to trade them. (For lower value then he knows they are worth.)

So when exactly is the right time to trade highly valued assets then? I feel like the only time MB wants to trade a good player is when they are absolutely in the trash already and other teams are undervaluing them.


When the time is right. Bergevin is one of the best GM's in the league when it comes to asset management. Look at the roster, 95% of them came from trades where we gave up little to no value in return. You don't trade them until there's the potential in losing them for nothing.
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 11 at 9:36
#8
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 17,109
Likes: 4,600
Quoting: HabsForEver
When the time is right. Bergevin is one of the best GM's in the league when it comes to asset management. Look at the roster, 95% of them came from trades where we gave up little to no value in return. You don't trade them until there's the potential in losing them for nothing.


I feel he waits too long sometimes. Waiting till the potential to lose them for nothing is what brings down the value of a trade. You want the other GM to think that keeping the player is an option.

While some of his latest trades have turned out well for him, which Im glad for, the reasoning behind trading them in the first place was forced upon him rather than knowing he had an asset that didn't fit and moved while that players value was highest.

Pacioretty - If he brought back Tatar, Suzuki and a 2nd rounder, Imagine what he would have brought back had he traded him just one season earlier?
Subban - This one worked out well in the short term but MB knew what he had in Subban and he and Therrien didn't like it. Had they been more proactive, Imagine the return they could have got.
Galchenyuk - It had become painfully obvious that Galchenyuk was not a Therrien or Bergevin type player way earlier than when they finally moved him. Although Domi worked out nicely, that ended up being a bit of a lucky streak also.

I wish he applied the same pro-activeness he had with the Plekanec, Armia, Danault trades as he does with his bigger assets.
Feb 11 at 10:12
#9
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 4,661
Likes: 1,577
Quoting: F50marco
I feel he waits too long sometimes. Waiting till the potential to lose them for nothing is what brings down the value of a trade. You want the other GM to think that keeping the player is an option.

While some of his latest trades have turned out well for him, which Im glad for, the reasoning behind trading them in the first place was forced upon him rather than knowing he had an asset that didn't fit and moved while that players value was highest.

Pacioretty - If he brought back Tatar, Suzuki and a 2nd rounder, Imagine what he would have brought back had he traded him just one season earlier?
Subban - This one worked out well in the short term but MB knew what he had in Subban and he and Therrien didn't like it. Had they been more proactive, Imagine the return they could have got.
Galchenyuk - It had become painfully obvious that Galchenyuk was not a Therrien or Bergevin type player way earlier than when they finally moved him. Although Domi worked out nicely, that ended up being a bit of a lucky streak also.

I wish he applied the same pro-activeness he had with the Plekanec, Armia, Danault trades as he does with his bigger assets.


Quoting: F50marco
I feel he waits too long sometimes. Waiting till the potential to lose them for nothing is what brings down the value of a trade. You want the other GM to think that keeping the player is an option.

While some of his latest trades have turned out well for him, which Im glad for, the reasoning behind trading them in the first place was forced upon him rather than knowing he had an asset that didn't fit and moved while that players value was highest.

Pacioretty - If he brought back Tatar, Suzuki and a 2nd rounder, Imagine what he would have brought back had he traded him just one season earlier?
Subban - This one worked out well in the short term but MB knew what he had in Subban and he and Therrien didn't like it. Had they been more proactive, Imagine the return they could have got.
Galchenyuk - It had become painfully obvious that Galchenyuk was not a Therrien or Bergevin type player way earlier than when they finally moved him. Although Domi worked out nicely, that ended up being a bit of a lucky streak also.

I wish he applied the same pro-activeness he had with the Plekanec, Armia, Danault trades as he does with his bigger assets.


Pacioretty
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

Galchenyuk

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.
Price_is_the_goat liked this.
Feb 12 at 10:56
#10
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 17,109
Likes: 4,600
Quoting: HabsForEver
Pacioretty
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

Galchenyuk

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.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Remove Option
Submit Poll