Getting Pouliot in the first place is a big mistake.
And what happened to our big plan of making him our big Center?
Fail across the board on this dossier.
We traded him for Tender, he hasn't amount to much either. It was a gamble, it didn't work out so time to move on. Happen all over the league, not just with us. PS. we could be stuck with Tender for next season paying 2.5m.
Not disagreeing that it was terrible asset management, but the Lats deal and Gomez deal were seperate trades. S.Kostitsyn is in the same spot as Lats, he was traded for a guy that was also not qualified today. So you could have added him too if you're going to add Lats, because they are the same situation. Bad asset management.
When some of your assets get outplayed by other assets.../how exactly is that bad asset management? You make a trade..if that person outplays others and earns a spot great. If he doesn't and doesn't get offered another contract...how is that bad asset management? It's simply survival of the fittest...you make trades and you draft players..some will work out and some won't. There are 20 roster spots.... it is IMPOSSIBLE for every draft pick and every person traded for to make the team... there are only so many roster spots. Some of you apparently can't figure that very basic fact out. EVERY trade and EVERY high draft pick is supposed to be a first-line player according to some. It's really rather silly. :-)
Because this is today's result with Pyatt/Pouliot not qualified. They're the result of the bad trades of yesterday. That's why, it shows how bad Gainey was at managing the large number of assets the scouting staff (established by A.Savard) gave him.
Sadly for the Canadiens, I think that the following holds true.
Gainey = Gauthier
Carbonneau = Martin
It may be another 18 years before we get the next Cup.
What has tender done since that little spirt once traded - nothing
Higgins has bounced around from team to team - Nothing special
McDonaugh hasn't proven anything yet
By the way - how many play offs games has the Ranger played since that Gomez trade - Not as many as us.
McDonagh was better than Gomez last year. He's on the upswing while the other is in his prime.
Kostitsyn - Plekanec - Cammalleri
Pacioretty - Gomez - Gionta
? - Eller - ?
Moen - Desharnais - White
Markov - Emelin
Gill - Subban
Gorges - Spacek
So now we only have 10 forwards under contract.
And because Diaz will start in Hamilton, another D is needed. Lets speculate!
I guess : Hamrlik will sign for 2 years 2.5M$ (with Gill and Spacek leaving next year, I think its possible). Talbot signing (dont be fooled, Molsons are the new owner, and they'll want us to bring a player of that 'type'). And a top 6-9 forward (ex. Laich, Upshall, Gagne...)
Not tendering Pouliot I saw coming from a mile away. However I didn't see Pyatt getting let go. Im hoping this means that they might be looking for a guy like Rupp to fill out the bottom 6 or 13th forward. A policemen would be welcome.
Seriously?
You think that the tandem of Martin/Gauthier would actually consider a tough forward who can fight to play for the Habs?
not a GM in his right mind that would give up his #1 prospect for a player who had massively underperformed for 2 consecutive seasons... at least not one who understands the impact of a cap on managing a roster.
I object to McDonagh being called the #1 prospect. That may have been where he was ranked by Hockey Future but at the time Subban and maybe also Pacioretty were regarded by many as better, which is reflected by where each of the three are now. Not that McDonagh isn't a solid future D-man, but I think your use of that term to describe him is misleading.
Must admit I am a little surprised with Pyatt and Pouliot but in the end it is a business and I guess they feel there are better options in the system.
I will reserve judgement until I see how the Habs replace them in the lineup. I would have 8 defensemen on my 23-man roster, and that wasn't going to leave a lot of openings up front. Especially if the team was going to add a bit of extra sandpaper. Ordinarily, I would say Pouliot is decent despite all his warts, and Pyatt - as most others acknowledge - is a fearless forechecker with no hands at all. He's not useless for the league minimum.
*But*... if we upgrade on these two players, use their roster spots on some players that make the team better or give us new dimensions... it's fine. I won't miss them if that happens. Flip side, if we just end up with plugs who aren't as good, older guys who are broken down, whatnot, then I won't be too happy. It's a calculated gamble heading into UFAdom. I probably would have kept Pyatt at least, because $550k isn't that much, even if the player eventually gets put on waivers and assigned to the minors. But we'll see.
I object to McDonagh being called the #1 prospect. That may have been where he was ranked by Hockey Future but at the time Subban and maybe also Pacioretty were regarded by many as better, which is reflected by where each of the three are now. Not that McDonagh isn't a solid future D-man, but I think your use of that term to describe him is misleading.
and some still regarded Subban as a questionable defensive player heading into this season (and I bet some pundits would still try to make that claim, amazingly).
Short of a Sidney Crosby type player, it's always debatable whom the top prospect is for a team at any given time, so it's pointless to debate wether or not he actually was the #1, or #2 or #3...
point is more that he was a top prospect, he was a recent 1st round pick whose progression in 1 year after the draft, while perhaps not stellar, gave no indication that he was a bust or unlikely to live up to the high potential that made the team pick him.
at the time of the trade, he was widely considered a future top-4, if not top-2, NHL dman, not the kind of asset you trade away while taking on one of the worst contracts in hockey...
What third line winger can replace Pouliot? Replacing him with a stiff hardly seems worth it.He may develop as Leclair did at that age. Leclair's nickname was marmaduke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beowulf
Must admit I am a little surprised with Pyatt and Pouliot but in the end it is a business and I guess they feel there are better options in the system.
I will reserve judgement until I see how the Habs replace them in the lineup. I would have 8 defensemen on my 23-man roster, and that wasn't going to leave a lot of openings up front. Especially if the team was going to add a bit of extra sandpaper. Ordinarily, I would say Pouliot is decent despite all his warts, and Pyatt - as most others acknowledge - is a fearless forechecker with no hands at all. He's not useless for the league minimum.
*But*... if we upgrade on these two players, use their roster spots on some players that make the team better or give us new dimensions... it's fine. I won't miss them if that happens. Flip side, if we just end up with plugs who aren't as good, older guys who are broken down, whatnot, then I won't be too happy. It's a calculated gamble heading into UFAdom. I probably would have kept Pyatt at least, because $550k isn't that much, even if the player eventually gets put on waivers and assigned to the minors. But we'll see.
BG, don't you think that long-term success is about more than simple season-to-season roster stocking?
what I mean is that even if Pouliot's 3rd line spot gets taken up by a clear upgrade (which really shoulnd't be hard, the worry is at what UFA cost/overpayment), how does that excuse or justify losing the asset for nothing?
because of the cap, and the difficulty of building/maintaining a quality roster that it leads to, don't you think it's incumbent on the management team to ensure they, more often then not, create a net gain in their asset movement?
losing Pouliot, and to a lesser extent Pyatt, won't hurt this team very much... but with a limited amount of room to "spend your way" to a better roster, consistently giving up assets with little/no return makes the job of building a long-term contender so much more difficult.
When some of your assets get outplayed by other assets.../how exactly is that bad asset management? You make a trade..if that person outplays others and earns a spot great. If he doesn't and doesn't get offered another contract...how is that bad asset management? It's simply survival of the fittest...you make trades and you draft players..some will work out and some won't. There are 20 roster spots.... it is IMPOSSIBLE for every draft pick and every person traded for to make the team... there are only so many roster spots. Some of you apparently can't figure that very basic fact out. EVERY trade and EVERY high draft pick is supposed to be a first-line player according to some. It's really rather silly. :-)
I understand that, that's why I thought the D'Ago deal was a good one. He didn't have a place on the team (no openings/better players to fill the position etc.), but they traded him for someone younger, and the Habs still had time to develop that new player. Whether Palushaj pans out or not doesn't matter to me with regards to the deal because they made a move to get someone to develop for the future. With that said, can't really complain about the Pouliot acquisition I guess, at least he looked to have potential and they took the risk. But Boyd didn't seem to make much sense, seeing that he was older and you pretty much knew what you were getting, an AHLer/Fringe NHLer. At least a late round pick would give you the hope of developing a young raw talent.
I find it completely and utterly pathetic how much Martin never gave him a chance to succeed. Knock on him all you want for not being so smart at times out there, but he's got all the tools to succeed, just needs someone to get that into his head.
It was all about the confidence with Benny. When he believed in himself, he looked unstoppable out there. Whenever he made a mistake, that was that, and it was demotion. Never given the chance to learn from his mistakes, never given the chance to play on Gomez's line while Moen was up there for 30 games.
Also, I love how he never got any power play time, ESPECIALLY when he ripped it up and was scoring once every two games last year. Yet, Desharnais started getting in on the 2nd PP unit several games into his tenure here. Funny how that works.
So long. I'll root for you, hope someone handles you properly and you succeed.
BAM (Bad Asset Management) is the new buzzword. Sign Pouliot, give him sugar time and a shot on the top lines. If he clicks great if not make a deal before Christmas, get something back. Not impossible to deal a big young cheap top-four overall pick. This isn't rocket science...
If only Pyatt and Pouliot could've fused together. We'd get Pouliots size and fantastic hands, with Pyatt's tireless work ethic and fantastic skating!
Someone please upload a video onto Youtube of all the times Pouliot fell all by himself this season. I'm sure it would be no shorter than 5 minutes long. Once again people only remember the good parts, and forget everything else.
We traded him for Tender, he hasn't amount to much either. It was a gamble, it didn't work out so time to move on. Happen all over the league, not just with us. PS. we could be stuck with Tender for next season paying 2.5m.
You would think that 28 goals in 66 games is pretty good, especially with 2nd/3rd line ice time. That's a much better goal per minute ratio than anybody on the Habs in the last several years. Does anybody see Minn not bothering to give him an offer?
God, the continued hate for Lats is pathetic. That trade was yet another huge embarassing fail for this management team.
God, the continued hate for Lats is pathetic. That trade was yet another huge embarassing fail for this management team.
Get off your high horse. Latendresse had ONE exceptional run in his career, same as Pouliot did last year. As far as I'm concerned, until he shows he can do it again, it was no big loss.
You keep spewing this crap but I bet you saw him play no more than two or three times last year.
St. Louis fans are clueless and upset that he hasn't been qualified. Go read their threads, they loved him last year.
Whatever.
PS. This sport we are talking about all the time is called H-O-C-K-E-Y. Just saying.
Don't get your panties in a bunch. I would take the overwhelming majority of last years 20 goal scorers over him. If I wanted a hockey opinion, you'd be the last person I'd ask.
PS: I'd come to you if I wanted a good brand of cheesecake.
