HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Trading Rivet cost us a playoff spot in 2007, would you still make the trade?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-11-2012, 07:22 AM
  #1
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Trading Rivet cost us a playoff spot in 2007, would you still make the trade?

At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume trading Rivet for future asset instead of trading Rivet+ for a short term D upgrade cost us the playoff. (Losing Rivet mean more ice time to Janne Niinimaa, Niinimaa was -5 over the 10 games he played after the trade (1 assist).) (Seller vs Buyer)

At the same time it was a required overpayment by San Jose required in order to convince a team fighting for the playoff to give up an asset.

Of course the canadiens got ''lucky'' to get a Pacioretty out of the 22th draft pick.


So if we go back to the past, do you still made that trade if we take for granted it cost us the playoff, Gorges become Gorges, but we replace Pacioretty for an average late draft pick lotery ticket.



Edit: I modified this post express more clearly my initial intention. And remove a mistake i made about the draft order.


Last edited by palindrom: 02-11-2012 at 12:36 PM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:28 AM
  #2
1UP
Registered User
 
1UP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,904
vCash: 500
Rivet for Gorges, straight up, no problem with that.

Rivet's play was going downhill, there seemed to be issues in the room, and Gorges seemed to have a lot of potential.

1UP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:34 AM
  #3
Mats NAslund
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 50
Trading Rivet DID NOT cost Montreal the playoffs! LOL
He was NOT a difference maker.

Mats NAslund is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:39 AM
  #4
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats NAslund View Post
Trading Rivet DID NOT cost Montreal the playoffs! LOL
He was NOT a difference maker.
In 2007, the difference between the playoff or not was 1 point in the ranking. (it could be one goal more or less in one single game).

I think rivet alone was enough to be this difference maker.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:44 AM
  #5
Captain Smurf
Naively Optimistic
 
Captain Smurf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Thornhill, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
In 2007, the difference between the playoff or not was 1 point in the ranking. (it could be one goal more or less in one single game).

I think rivet alone was enough to be this difference maker.
That's purely spec and isn't possible to verify. Still, I make that trade 10 times out of 10, especially since I am part of the group that thought Rivet wasn't the difference between the playoffs and not.

Captain Smurf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:45 AM
  #6
Toro
Registered User
 
Toro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume .[/B]
Ok what's with the ppl who can see on the dark and can see alternate timelines?

What if rivet stayed and cost us more than he helped? I mean he sucked and we wanted him out, sj's pro scout shat the bed there no?


I think I need a break from this board

Toro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:46 AM
  #7
The Kremelin Wall*
the krEMELIN wall
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
In 2007, the difference between the playoff or not was 1 point in the ranking. (it could be one goal more or less in one single game).

I think rivet alone was enough to be this difference maker.
Who's to say we don't finish 5 points out with Rivet in the lineup. He was -7 when we traded him.

The Kremelin Wall* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:46 AM
  #8
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
In 2007, the difference between the playoff or not was 1 point in the ranking. (it could be one goal more or less in one single game).

I think rivet alone was enough to be this difference maker.
Rivet wasn't liked by the coaching staff that year. He was borderline healthy scratch. Your premise for this thread is faulty.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:47 AM
  #9
Schooner Guy
Registered User
 
Schooner Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
In 2007, the difference between the playoff or not was 1 point in the ranking. (it could be one goal more or less in one single game).

I think rivet alone was enough to be this difference maker.
Rivet used to cost us games with those annoying point shots into the opponents shin pads that used to create odd man rush after odd man rush. Besides according to him, he was ecstatic to go somewhere where he didn't have to clean snow off his car.

Schooner Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:48 AM
  #10
Crimson Skorpion
Global Moderator
 
Crimson Skorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Lachine, Quebec
Country: Germany
Posts: 27,560
vCash: 50
Awards:
10 times out of 10, yes. I realize it may have cost us the playoffs and some may come in here and say, "Well if you make the trade, why are you against tanking. It's the same concept." but this trade was too good to pass up for the Habs.

__________________
"I really like the way Drew Doughty plays the game. He's like a defenceman version of Erik Karlsson."
-68
Crimson Skorpion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 07:53 AM
  #11
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Kremelin Wall View Post
Who's to say we don't finish 5 points out with Rivet in the lineup. He was -7 when we traded him.
Who's to say? The San Jose scouting staff obviously thought the difference between Gorges and Rivet at the time worth a late 1st.

At the time of the trade they sincerely thought the Rivet upgrade over Gorges would make more than a 1 point difference for them for the rest of the season + the playoff.

Im dont consider myself qualified enough to reverse the opinion of San Jose GM and Scouting. But yes, maybe they was wrong.

palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:00 AM
  #12
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Rivet wasn't liked by the coaching staff that year. He was borderline healthy scratch. Your premise for this thread is faulty.
As i say above, i just dont believe SJ would pay a first to upgrade Gorge to a borderline healthy scratch. If anything Rivet was probably underrated by fans at the time.

And they could had traded rivet for current NHL asset instead of future asset to help us make the playoff. It was a choice to go with future asset as Gorges and a 1st.

My premise could be instead: Being Seller instead of Buyer cost us the playoff, but did it worth it?


Last edited by palindrom: 02-11-2012 at 08:06 AM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:09 AM
  #13
MTL-rules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,208
vCash: 500
Man, I wanted Rivet gone asap... I was chocked by the return we got... I hope a GM will be as stupid with Gill.

Rivet wasn't helping this team at all. He complained outside the rink and he sucked on the ice... Mr. block shot from the point, how many turnovers he had shooting straight in the legs of the defenders ?

MTL-rules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:12 AM
  #14
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,335
vCash: 500
Rivet seemed to be struggling and he had that whole run with pneumonia or whatever, didn't he? I was a big Rivet fan, and I was really happy to see him rebound again subsequently in some of his other seasons. But I honestly think it's a faulty premise to distill the playoff miss to Rivet's absence.

I mean, even if you just want to go back to that final game against the Leafs, they blew the 5-3 lead or whatever, and Halak had his big hot streak, before that, so Huet coming back or some of the other games they picked Aebischer for before that or whatnot... there are just so many places that 1 point could have come from. Heck, they lost Game 1 of the whole season in a Shootout. So rewind all the way back there if you want.

I'm really happy with the trade. I think my preference would be to make the trade and make the playoffs too. I think that's what the Habs should try to do this year as well. I don't see guys like Gill and Moen and especially Campoli really contributing a lot to the game-in-game out success of the team at this point in the season, now that some of our younger players have started stepping up and can be relied on more. I'd trade them for futures right now. And still harbour the hopes of making the playoffs. I'd even consider making other trades to acquire players to help towards that goal. (While not being optimistic about finding any, given traditional deadline markups. Not rental players - retainable assets).

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:20 AM
  #15
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
As i say above, i just dont believe SJ would pay a first to upgrade Gorge to a borderline healthy scratch. If anything Rivet was probably underrated by fans at the time.

And they could had traded rivet for current NHL asset instead of future asset to help us make the playoff. It was a choice to go with future asset as Gorges and a 1st.

My premise could be instead: Being Seller instead of Buyer cost us the playoff, but did it worth it?
Well Georges wasn't the player he is right now at the time of the trade. Clearly, Rivet was an upgrade for the Sharks. And Georges played only 7 games with us after the trade, meaning that the management felt good with the D in place after the trade. That season, Rivet was a healthy scratch at some point. He wasn't as good FOR US as he was the year before.

So maybe the trade cost us the playoffs...maybe not...we don't know and we won't ever know. Like someone else said, maybe he would have hurt our chances...maybe he would have score a goal in his own net for a loss...

IMO, he needed to go...

Freaky Habs Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:21 AM
  #16
palindrom
Registered User
 
palindrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
But I honestly think it's a faulty premise to distill the playoff miss to Rivet's absence.
Well, i didnt express my premise well.

I wanted to mean: being seller instead of being Buyer cost us a playoff spot, but did it worth it?

For example we could had traded rivet + 1st for an short term upgrade on defense. Instead we go to the selling route...

Rivet is irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact that we traded him for future instead of present help.


Last edited by palindrom: 02-11-2012 at 08:29 AM.
palindrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:24 AM
  #17
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume this trade cost us a playoff participation.

At the same time it was a required overpayment by San Jose required in order to convince a team fighting for the playoff to give up an asset.

Of course the canadiens got ''lucky'' to get a Pacioretty out of the 22th draft pick. If SJ had made another round of playoff in 2007, the first choice they traded could have been somewhere between the 27-30


So if we go back to the past, do you still made that trade if we take for granted it cost us the playoff, Gorges become Gorges, but we replace Pacioretty for an average late draft pick lotery ticket.

Trading Rivet didn't cost us a playoff spot, losing Huet to injury did. He tried to come back for the last game but didn't look ready.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:42 AM
  #18
Habbadasher
Registered User
 
Habbadasher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My couch
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,642
vCash: 500
Given that IF we had made the playoffs, it would have been a distant memory for us now, and that Max and Gorges are now part of of our core, there is no question it was the right thing to do.

Habbadasher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:43 AM
  #19
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume this trade cost us a playoff participation.

At the same time it was a required overpayment by San Jose required in order to convince a team fighting for the playoff to give up an asset.

Of course the canadiens got ''lucky'' to get a Pacioretty out of the 22th draft pick. If SJ had made another round of playoff in 2007, the first choice they traded could have been somewhere between the 27-30


So if we go back to the past, do you still made that trade if we take for granted it cost us the playoff, Gorges become Gorges, but we replace Pacioretty for an average late draft pick lotery ticket.
Incorrect, back then the draft order was fixed by regular season standings. Only the cup winner moved down to 30th, the rest of the draft order was fixed at the end of the reg season. SJ winning around would have changed nothing.

CGG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:44 AM
  #20
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
Well, i didnt express my premise well.

I wanted to mean: being seller instead of being Buyer cost us a playoff spot, but did it worth it?

For example we could had traded rivet + 1st for an short term upgrade on defense. Instead we go to the selling route...

Rivet is irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact that we traded him for future instead of present help.
If Rivet is irrelevant, then... well, ok, never mind the preceding bit, then...

Your question is "is it better to be a seller and miss the playoffs or a buyer and make the playoffs"?

I'll take "make the playoffs". As the general goal. I'm thinking that's kinda what most teams try to do. They try to make the playoffs. It's the whole point of a competitive sport. And since we're throwing out the specific example of the case where we traded a specific non-contributing player for a pick that just happened to pan out big for us and a castaway player the other team didn't want who eventually turned into a core player for us... well, I agree that cherry-picked examples are irrelevant. You try to make the playoffs.

However, smart management walks the line as well, depending on the marketplace and its evaluation of the perceived odds of various outcomes. I think the Habs, save that winning streak by Halak in 2006 were perhaps in a situation not too much unlike our current one? Making the playoffs wasn't looking too good? Then Halak got them on the run. Then they ultimately muffed it in the last game anyway after Halak had already started to show some signs of pumpkin in previous games and Huet was back. It goes like that. This year, our odds of getting on a run and being within 1 point of a playoff spot don't look too good. But who knows.

I wouldn't go trading key assets like Plekanec or Cole or other guys who I think can make a big difference in whether we get back into the playoff race or not. But recognizing the odds, the free agent status of a few other lesser guys, I think it would be a low-risk proposition to move Gill and Moen. I think that they, like Rivet, *could* offer serious value to a playoff team, and make more of a difference once _in_ the playoffs than they do in terms of generating a late-season surge to compete for a playoff spot. If the deadline trade market was such that I could parlay that into some futures assets for us, I'd be ready to do it.

You can't turn a cherry-picked example that worked for us into a general rule to apply in all cases. And you can't apply a generalization to a specific situation either. In general, I want to see the team try to make the playoffs. In the specific case of this season, I want to see them "try", but would be willing to trade off whatever degree of contribution Gill and Moen might make towards that for a high enough futures payoff. Given that the odds of getting in the playoffs seem especially low at the moment, and that I perceive the impact of Moen and Gill (above whoever replaces their icetime in the lineup in particular) towards the goal of making the playoffs to be especially low as well.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:46 AM
  #21
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume this trade cost us a playoff participation.

At the same time it was a required overpayment by San Jose required in order to convince a team fighting for the playoff to give up an asset.

Of course the canadiens got ''lucky'' to get a Pacioretty out of the 22th draft pick. If SJ had made another round of playoff in 2007, the first choice they traded could have been somewhere between the 27-30


So if we go back to the past, do you still made that trade if we take for granted it cost us the playoff, Gorges become Gorges, but we replace Pacioretty for an average late draft pick lotery ticket.
QN
I see what you're trying to say but reading the tea leaves is very dangerous. No way of knowing we'd have missed the playoffs without rivet. What if he coughed up the puck in the 3rd of another game and we lost and were 3 points out and had a higher draft pick. Maybe we wouldn't have drafted Patches and drafted a dud instead. Who knows. Look to the future

shutehinside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:52 AM
  #22
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,006
vCash: 500
habs traded a vet, without replacing him, for futures, during a tight race for the playoffs, ultimately falling short by just 1 point.

The return was such that, especially in hindsight, it's very easy to rationalize that it was worth it.
But it's funny to see some of the same posters who passionately argue against so-called "tanking" trip over themselves to pretend that rivet's loss had no impact on such a tight PO race...


For me, no problem with the trade, but at the time and certainly in hindsight, I think it showed a serious lack of plan/vision/sense to make that trade and then not actively/aggressively shop Souray, whom they clearly had little intention to re-sign, making basically no serious attempt to do so post-season.

Hallmark of gainey's tenure IMO...

Miller Time is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:52 AM
  #23
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,679
vCash: 500
I remember that there was a stat of x games before the trade where Rivet had ridiculously low plus/minus numbers. He had cost us some games. Rivet was going one way, down.

Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 08:55 AM
  #24
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by palindrom View Post
At the 2007 deadline Montreal traded Craig Rivet to San Jose for Josh Gorges + a 1st (who become Pacioretty).

As Montreal finished the season 1 point out of the playoff, we can assume this trade cost us a playoff participation.

At the same time it was a required overpayment by San Jose required in order to convince a team fighting for the playoff to give up an asset.

Of course the canadiens got ''lucky'' to get a Pacioretty out of the 22th draft pick. If SJ had made another round of playoff in 2007, the first choice they traded could have been somewhere between the 27-30


So if we go back to the past, do you still made that trade if we take for granted it cost us the playoff, Gorges become Gorges, but we replace Pacioretty for an average late draft pick lotery ticket.

Ok well first of all, there is no proof that it cost the habs the playoff spot. Also, even if the trade is not made AND they do make it into the playoffs. How do you know they dont get smashed in the first round?

so you have Rivet and 2 Playoff home games VS Patches and Gorges. The correct move was made at the time. Same goes for this year, if teams who are "real" contenders are foaming at the mouth to get Gill and Moen, you give them up to help yourself down the line. Its called asset management.

IceDaddy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2012, 09:01 AM
  #25
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,679
vCash: 500
Maybe the OP can bring more numbers. What was the Habs Win-Loss record before and after the Rivet trade?

Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:03 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.