View Single Post
Old
02-05-2013, 06:36 PM
  #81
Av-merican
@Av_merican
 
Av-merican's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Frozen Wasteland
Country: Scotland
Posts: 12,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frenchy View Post
Well alot of the players after a trade have immediate success. But after a while , "normal" always come up to the surface . i'm not arguing that we didnt need a guy like him on the D , just saying that the price was too high for a guy that the Habs would have traded for a bag of pucks , at one point. ROB was a scapegoat in Montreal and when they traded him , Thier fans couldnt believe the players they got in return when they saw the vid of MichaŽl Bournival's combine on Youtube . Add to that the fact that he was a guy from the Q league ( which itself is a point that adds value to a player that we trade to Montreal and all 29 other GMs should be aware of this ) . Bottom line is that we have given too much to acquire this player.
Maybe we did overpay, we'll see. Like the Shattenkirk deal, I like to think they did it because they felt they had the organizational depth to offset the loss. The Habs were dealing from a position of strength. They were in no hurry to deal O'Byrne, so they could wait until something better than a bag of pucks came along.

I don't think O'Byrne's success was simply the result of a new player going on a hot streak. His success has been far more sustained than that, especially when you consider he's really a depth defenseman who's had to play a top-four (and earlier, top-two) role since coming here. The fact that they've actually managed to exacerbate rather than address the defensive depth issue since acquiring him is on management. By this point, O'Byrne and Wilson should be the 6/7th guys on this team. Instead they're key cogs on a defense full of 6/7th guys.

Av-merican is offline   Reply With Quote