HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Elite talent in the draft

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2012, 11:09 AM
  #201
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
Yes he did. Just a crappy year for him. Classic case of a great player who slips down in the rankings and some lucky team will get him without having to tank.

This could be 1987 all over again when Joe Sakic was drafted 15th with a similar pattern of a couple of quality forwards at the top of the draft followed by a glut of D.

Maybe we can trade down and still land him. That would take balls and the right GM.
Except Sakic didn't get injured, he had an amazing season in the WHL.
Galchenyuk benefited from playing along side Yakupov last year, this year he was injured all season with a big knee injury, and now once again injured except on his shoulder in only his 2nd game back. It is absolutely normal for him to drop in the draft and it is far from a sure thing that he'll be a steal.
He'll represent a great risk unless his injury is minor and can come back soon for the POs. If not, then everything for him will be based on the combine and his medical report. He could still go early, but everything will need to be positive at the Combine.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:10 AM
  #202
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullsmith View Post
He might be, and at that point I go BPA and take a D, but I know many would disagree with that. Best solution is to finish low enough to get a better forward than Gaunce.
Not getting a quality forward after this miserable season would be quite frustrating. Our depth on D looks good. I say trade down if that's the only option and pick a "dark horse" forward.

Fortunately, the calendar for the rest of March is significant for our opponents. However, the three games in April will kill us (TBL, CAR, TOR).

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:14 AM
  #203
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
That's why I don't like BPA. I prefer "BPA at their position" and you fill your greatest need. You milk their best years on ELC and before UFA. The Flyers are the only successful example of youth-for-youth trades to fill organizational needs that I've seen in recent memory.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:25 AM
  #204
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Except Sakic didn't get injured, he had an amazing season in the WHL.
Galchenyuk benefited from playing along side Yakupov last year, this year he was injured all season with a big knee injury, and now once again injured except on his shoulder in only his 2nd game back. It is absolutely normal for him to drop in the draft and it is far from a sure thing that he'll be a steal.
He'll represent a great risk unless his injury is minor and can come back soon for the POs. If not, then everything for him will be based on the combine and his medical report. He could still go early, but everything will need to be positive at the Combine.
If we pick another forward and Galchenyuk is still hanging out there later on, then we should go out and try to trade for a 2nd pick in the draft.

Of course we could've done this by getting one for Cammy and AK but that's another story...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
That's why I don't like BPA. I prefer "BPA at their position" and you fill your greatest need. You milk their best years on ELC and before UFA. The Flyers are the only successful example of youth-for-youth trades to fill organizational needs that I've seen in recent memory.
Unfortunately though, you're kind of a slave to the draft year. No point in taking a forward if you know he's not going to be as good as one of the blueliners out there. I mean seriously, you can't pass up a stud defenseman if the forwards are underwhelming. Imagine you draft a good but not great forward and pass up on the next Chris Pronger because you HAD to have a forward. That would suck even worse.

That's why I'd say that dealing for an offensive prospect in that case might be the solution to the problem.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:39 AM
  #205
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
If we pick another forward and Galchenyuk is still hanging out there later on, then we should go out and try to trade for a 2nd pick in the draft.

Of course we could've done this by getting one for Cammy and AK but that's another story...

Unfortunately though, you're kind of a slave to the draft year. No point in taking a forward if you know he's not going to be as good as one of the blueliners out there. I mean seriously, you can't pass up a stud defenseman if the forwards are underwhelming. Imagine you draft a good but not great forward and pass up on the next Chris Pronger because you HAD to have a forward. That would suck even worse.

That's why I'd say that dealing for an offensive prospect in that case might be the solution to the problem.
I agree with that. I even have reservations about Grigorenko. Yakupov is about the only forward I'd truly be interested in. I'm not as high as most are about Grigorenko for some reason. If we end up with the 2nd overall, I wouldn't be opposed to trading it for a later, perhaps mid-range 1st pick (and risking it on Galchenyuk, or Faksa, or Girgensons) + prospect. Or perhaps an even bigger trade where we'd package the pick with prospects/players for strong top end talent from active player or prospect.
If that can't be done, then yea, I'd still be inclined to draft Murray or Dumba over Grigs.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 11:55 AM
  #206
Bullsmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I agree with that. I even have reservations about Grigorenko. Yakupov is about the only forward I'd truly be interested in. I'm not as high as most are about Grigorenko for some reason. If we end up with the 2nd overall, I wouldn't be opposed to trading it for a later, perhaps mid-range 1st pick (and risking it on Galchenyuk, or Faksa, or Girgensons) + prospect. Or perhaps an even bigger trade where we'd package the pick with prospects/players for strong top end talent from active player or prospect.
If that can't be done, then yea, I'd still be inclined to draft Murray or Dumba over Grigs.
You can also draft the stud D and then trade him for the right forward prospect down the line. The odds are an 18 year old D will take a while to get the NHL even if he is a very high pick.

Bullsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:17 PM
  #207
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I agree with that. I even have reservations about Grigorenko. Yakupov is about the only forward I'd truly be interested in. I'm not as high as most are about Grigorenko for some reason. If we end up with the 2nd overall, I wouldn't be opposed to trading it for a later, perhaps mid-range 1st pick (and risking it on Galchenyuk, or Faksa, or Girgensons) + prospect.
There will be riots downtown if we have 2nd overall and don't pick him. I see the trade down scenario more likely in the 6-10th range.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:22 PM
  #208
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullsmith View Post
You can also draft the stud D and then trade him for the right forward prospect down the line. The odds are an 18 year old D will take a while to get the NHL even if he is a very high pick.
If you look at that bit of research posted by Lafleurs Guy, there are virtually no league-leading forwards ever acquired via trades. Teams simply don't trade them. That's why that proposal by Marinaro to get Huberdeau via trade will never happen.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:33 PM
  #209
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 20,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Just noticed but... why did somebody delete Seventies' post? He was laughing about the assertion that TO didn't know what it had in Rask. Absolutely no reason for it to be removed.
FWIW, Site Rules are that you can't post a smiley-only response.

"One or two word responses such as "Me Too", "I agree", "great post!", smileys not accompanied by content, and similar responses may be considered spam. Creating large blank areas in posts is spam. These are not allowed on the hockey forums."

I should have infracted him for it. And you for mod abuse. But it's sunny today, so I'll let you guys off with a snarl.


Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:44 PM
  #210
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
FWIW, Site Rules are that you can't post a smiley-only response.

"One or two word responses such as "Me Too", "I agree", "great post!", smileys not accompanied by content, and similar responses may be considered spam. Creating large blank areas in posts is spam. These are not allowed on the hockey forums."

I should have infracted him for it. And you for mod abuse. But it's sunny today, so I'll let you guys off with a snarl.


Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:44 PM
  #211
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Ooops, I mean uh... Oh okay. I get it now.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:48 PM
  #212
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
If you look at that bit of research posted by Lafleurs Guy, there are virtually no league-leading forwards ever acquired via trades. Teams simply don't trade them. That's why that proposal by Marinaro to get Huberdeau via trade will never happen.
Well what I've said actually is that it's harder to get established stars instead of picks and prospects. So you probably have a better chance at Huberdeau than an established star. (Reason being he hasn't shown what he can do at the NHL level yet and once he does... they won't want to trade him.) But you're right, they probably wouldn't let him go. I'd definitely enquire about him though. Maybe a vet and our pick gets him... we should at least ask.

You want to target clubs that are impatient and looking to get into the playoffs no matter what. Look at what happened with LA this year. Toronto HAS to get into the playoffs next year or Burke is gone. If you believe in say... Luke Schenn, then now would be the time to try to trade for him. Philly looks like it's willing to deal JVRD, so he might be a guy to look at. Younger players who you can build around or at least can be part of the future...

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:49 PM
  #213
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,368
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
There will be riots downtown if we have 2nd overall and don't pick him. I see the trade down scenario more likely in the 6-10th range.
That all depends on the return.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:53 PM
  #214
MM425
Registered User
 
MM425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
That's why I don't like BPA. I prefer "BPA at their position" and you fill your greatest need. You milk their best years on ELC and before UFA. The Flyers are the only successful example of youth-for-youth trades to fill organizational needs that I've seen in recent memory.
2005- The Habs brass drafted goaltender Carey Price with their post-lockout lottery #5 pick. Their reasoning was that Price was the best player available when it came their time to draft.

This pick was widely criticized by folks on these boards as well as the media (youtube Pierre McGuire freaking out on the pick). Mostly because it didn't fill a "need" like a center ... most wanted Brule or Kopitar.

In summary: BPA BPA BPA

If our scouts think Dumba is the BPA, than they will draft him.

Don't get me wrong as a fan I would prefer we draft a forward but if as far as making the best decisions for the franchise it is BPA every time.

MM425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 12:56 PM
  #215
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MM425 View Post
2005- The Habs brass drafted goaltender Carey Price with their post-lockout lottery #5 pick. Their reasoning was that Price was the best player available when it came their time to draft.

This pick was widely criticized by folks on these boards as well as the media (youtube Pierre McGuire freaking out on the pick). Mostly because it didn't fill a "need" like a center ... most wanted Brule or Kopitar.

In summary: BPA BPA BPA

If our scouts think Dumba is the BPA, than they will draft him.

Don't get me wrong as a fan I would prefer we draft a forward but if as far as making the best decisions for the franchise it is BPA every time.
That's cool, I think everyone understands that reasoning. But at some point (and it's been forever) we need to try to get elite forwards on the team. That's where maybe trading for a prospect comes in.

Someone above mentioned Huberdeau. I think you go to Florida with your pick and some vets and see if you can get him. If the BPA isn't addressing your needs, I think we need to look outside the box (or in this case outside the draft) to satisfy our needs.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 01:13 PM
  #216
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Well what I've said actually is that it's harder to get established stars instead of picks and prospects. So you probably have a better chance at Huberdeau than an established star. (Reason being he hasn't shown what he can do at the NHL level yet and once he does... they won't want to trade him.) But you're right, they probably wouldn't let him go. I'd definitely enquire about him though. Maybe a vet and our pick gets him... we should at least ask.
The way I interpret that research is that EVEN before they become bona fide stars, those players are not traded.

The proponents of BPA seem to think all we have to do is go for BPA and then use that player as trade bait for the elusive elite forward that we need but the research shows that almost never happens. Unless, of course, we're not talking about super elite level forward.

If you look at trades, forwards tend to weigh more in trades and D more than G. So would it not make sense to do like the Flyers and always stack the team with forwards since their value is higher? You could of course argue that it's the opposite of building from the back end but they have been able to trade to fill those other positions. Plus, I could live with a tough, high-scoring team who seems to be a legit contender every year.

For example, they have so much depth on offense that they can think of trading JVR to acquire a solid D. Value-wise, that strategy just seems better.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 01:38 PM
  #217
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
The way I interpret that research is that EVEN before they become bona fide stars, those players are not traded.
(Edit: I'm assuming you're talking about the Score article I posted recently and not 70s study)

That's true in some cases but you have a better chance of getting picks and prospects before they start producing.

Those players can get traded... but it's before the teams know what they're giving away. Sometimes clubs overrate their own rosters and don't know that they'll be trading away a top five pick. Toronto has done this a couple of times and it's resulted in them dealing away Niedermayer and Seguin. Dealing away Rask also looks like a big mistake. Look at the Isles, they dealt away picks and prospects that turned into Redden, Luongo, Spezza, Chara... that's a whole whack of future stars that were traded because their GM was too stupid to know what he had. Do you think Mad Mike deals away Chara and Spezza if he knows what he has? Of course not. But he's impatient so you seize on it.

And this happens all the time. LA dealt away Schenn, Simmons. Blue Jackets dealt Vorachek and their 8th overall (Coutourier)... Not all those players will be superstars (maybe none will) but it shows you that you can get prospects that might become superstars easier than trying to get superstars in their prime.

Also keep in mind that this 'research' is just the top ten scorers for the past few years. It won't show goalies and blueliners and it's a very small sample size. Look at Rask, he was dealt away and was a great prospect. But he's not going to show up on this list.

And the more picks (esp 1st rounders) you trade for the better you are. We did it once and got Gorges and MaxPac. Washington traded for the pick that turned into Mike Green. Joe Sakic was a pick that was traded for when they rebuilt... It happens a lot more than you think.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
The proponents of BPA seem to think all we have to do is go for BPA and then use that player as trade bait for the elusive elite forward that we need but the research shows that almost never happens. Unless, of course, we're not talking about super elite level forward.

If you look at trades, forwards tend to weigh more in trades and D more than G. So would it not make sense to do like the Flyers and always stack the team with forwards since their value is higher? You could of course argue that it's the opposite of building from the back end but they have been able to trade to fill those other positions. Plus, I could live with a tough, high-scoring team who seems to be a legit contender every year.

For example, they have so much depth on offense that they can think of trading JVR to acquire a solid D. Value-wise, that strategy just seems better.
That would be great except that this is a defense heavy draft. We may not really have a choice here. If Timmins feels that none of the forwards are all that great but Murray could be the next Pronger... well, what do you do? Kind of crazy to draft the forward isn't it?

Best thing we could do in that situation might be to see what prospects we can trade for. And maybe the way we do it is by trading a vet like Pleks for JVRD or something along that route and take Murray as well. Bottom line is that we have to start getting younger players instead of building our team with retreads like Bourque and Kaberle.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-19-2012 at 02:26 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 01:48 PM
  #218
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
How come Forsberg gets no love around here? I know he's a bit thin but he's got sick moves. ISS rank #4. If we're taking BPA then let's not be prejudiced AGAINST forwards...

Wasn't Karlsson a tough sell because of his size as well? Look at him now.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 01:55 PM
  #219
Slew Foots
Haters gonna hate
 
Slew Foots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
That would be great except that this is a defense heavy draft. We may not really have a choice here. If Timmins feels that none of the forwards are all that great but Murray could be the next Pronger... well, what do you do? Kind of crazy to draft the forward isn't it?

Best thing we could do in that situation might be to see what prospects we can trade for. And maybe the way we do it is by trading a vet like Pleks for JVRD or something along that route and take Murray as well. Bottom line is that we have to start getting younger players instead of building our team with retreads like Bourque and Kaberle.
Agreed for the most part. If we end up picking 6th or 7th overall for example, and Grigorenko, Galchenyuk and Forsberg are already gone, then we should take the BPA and go with a defenseman (e.g. Rielly, Reinhart, Murray, Dumba or whoever) as opposed to taking a guy like Faksa or Gaunce just for the sake of drafting a forward.

There are a number of other ways a GM (preferably not Gauthier) could go about shoring up our current lack of offensive talent. I'd rather not trade Plekanec to acquire a guy like JVR, because I don't think it makes us better in the short run (Habs don't need a full long-term rebuild because they are rich and can afford to spend to the cap). Plekanec is also young enough to give us another 3-4 years of top-end play (provided he has wingers that are a tad more skilled than Geoffrion or White).

Option 1: If your targeted forward is no longer on the draft board, you could trade your 1st round pick to a team with a wealth of offensive talent (and a dearth of defensive prospects) in return for a good young forward prospect or player.

Option 2: You could keep the 1st round pick and select a young defenseman stud (e.g. Murray), then trade any one of your defenseman prospects (e.g. Beaulieu, Murray, Tinordi) to acquire a good young forward prospect or player.

Slew Foots is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:04 PM
  #220
Connor McJesus
Praise
 
Connor McJesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverHabsFan View Post
That's why I don't like BPA. I prefer "BPA at their position" and you fill your greatest need. You milk their best years on ELC and before UFA. The Flyers are the only successful example of youth-for-youth trades to fill organizational needs that I've seen in recent memory.
Thanks god you're not a scout

Connor McJesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:07 PM
  #221
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vsevolod Bobrov View Post
Thanks god you're not a scout
Thanks for your great contribution to this discussion.

DenverHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:19 PM
  #222
Lafleurs Guy
Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,943
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NRG87 View Post
Agreed for the most part. If we end up picking 6th or 7th overall for example, and Grigorenko, Galchenyuk and Forsberg are already gone, then we should take the BPA and go with a defenseman (e.g. Rielly, Reinhart, Murray, Dumba or whoever) as opposed to taking a guy like Faksa or Gaunce just for the sake of drafting a forward.

There are a number of other ways a GM (preferably not Gauthier) could go about shoring up our current lack of offensive talent. I'd rather not trade Plekanec to acquire a guy like JVR, because I don't think it makes us better in the short run (Habs don't need a full long-term rebuild because they are rich and can afford to spend to the cap). Plekanec is also young enough to give us another 3-4 years of top-end play (provided he has wingers that are a tad more skilled than Geoffrion or White).
Well, we're rich now and we were rich three years ago. Back then we decided to spend a bunch of cash to improve the team and now we sit in last place in the East. All that cash has meant is that we've been able to buy the cast-offs from other clubs. The Leafs are the richest team in the league and are going on year 8 of missing the playoffs.

Being rich doesn't really mean much if you aren't able to attract the best players to begin with. As I said above, superstars rarely become UFAs in their prime and when they do, they don't come here. I'd rather we attract elite young talent and then pay them what they're actually worth down the line rather than overpay for FAs to come here and not really do anything for us in terms of winning championships. If we're going to put that money to use in the short run, I think a better way to do it would be to trade for prospects from a team that is hamstrung by the cap and take a bad contract (provided it's short) off their hands as a means of getting our hands on that pick. It may sound a little crazy now but we need to think outside the box if we want to get high picks. Pollock did all kinds of crazy things and that's what made him the best. You've got to be creative.

I think we need to be single minded in our approach in that we should only make moves if they move us closer to a cup. The short run really shouldn't mean much to us. We won't win a cup in the next two years anyway and Pleks will never be better than he is right now. We've got DD who can handle the first line well enough and Eller and Leblanc can develop with more icetime. The return on Pleks could be good enough to help us down the road. Maybe JVR isn't the guy but I think we should be looking at younger players who can develop with us and help us down the road. Hence, I'm all in favour of dealing Pleks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NRG87 View Post
Option 1: If your targeted forward is no longer on the draft board, you could trade your 1st round pick to a team with a wealth of offensive talent (and a dearth of defensive prospects) in return for a good young forward prospect or player.

Option 2: You could keep the 1st round pick and select a young defenseman stud (e.g. Murray), then trade any one of your defenseman prospects (e.g. Beaulieu, Murray, Tinordi) to acquire a good young forward prospect or player.
Yeah, I think we should consider both these options if the players we want aren't there.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-19-2012 at 02:34 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:42 PM
  #223
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,147
vCash: 500
What I find comforting about the upcoming drafts is that as a result of the trades of Gill, Cammalleri, and Andrei Kostitsyn the Habs have three extra second round picks in addition to their own first rounders and second rounders. The odds of landing at least one good prospect look bright. Getting back their fifth rounder from Nashville is the icing on the cake. That's the good news. The bad news is that the Habs didn't get nearly enough for AK in that particular trade. They would have been better off re-signing him.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:46 PM
  #224
WeThreeKings
DJ Nikita
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 39,182
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
What I find comforting about the upcoming drafts is that as a result of the trades of Gill, Cammalleri, and Andrei Kostitsyn the Habs have three extra second round picks in addition to their own first rounders and second rounders. The odds of landing at least one good prospect look bright. Getting back their fifth rounder from Nashville is the icing on the cake. That's the good news. The bad news is that the Habs didn't get nearly enough for AK in that particular trade. They would have been better off re-signing him.
2 of those second round picks are spoken for, for a pp defenceman and a 3rd line center.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 02:47 PM
  #225
DenverHabsFan
Registered User
 
DenverHabsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Highlands Ranch, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
What I find comforting about the upcoming drafts is that as a result of the trades of Gill, Cammalleri, and Andrei Kostitsyn the Habs have three extra second round picks in addition to their own first rounders and second rounders. The odds of landing at least one good prospect look bright. Getting back their fifth rounder from Nashville is the icing on the cake. That's the good news. The bad news is that the Habs didn't get nearly enough for AK in that particular trade. They would have been better off re-signing him.
Technically speaking, they can still sign him as a UFA this summer and they get to keep the 2nd pick. This is where I don't get how other teams pull off those kind of moves and we don't. Do they really always burn bridges when a player leaves the Habs? I would have said to him: "Season is over here, go play with your brother and enjoy the playoffs. We'll send you an offer in the summer."

Why does that never happen here??

DenverHabsFan 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 02:24 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.