Acquiring assets that could legitimately be considered "building blocks" is NOT taking a shortcut. It's developing the core you want to build around; i.e. the opposite of a shortcut.
So it wasn't a shortcut when Burke traded for KEssel?
2008 #3 Zach Bogosian: $2.5 million cap hit ELC
2009 #3 Matt Duchene: $3.2 million cap hit ELC
2010 #3 Eric Gudbranson: #3.2 million cap hit ELC
2011 #3 Jonathan Huberdeau: $3.225 million cap hit ELC
Regardless of what happens during the season, the team has to build the organization in the preceding off season (i.e. the period we're entering now and discussing) with these cap hits in mind. And if the cap goes up, this "minimum" cap hit for top 3 picks can go up accordingly. Players already signed to contracts do not get scaled up accordingly. Something else to keep in mind.
Before last year(CBA year) teams didn't have to keep the bonus amounts under the cap and could have it applied the following year IF they went over.
"Exactly"? You expect a 23 year old Staal to drop off immediately like Gomez, do you?
In no way am I insinuating that Staal will become like Gomez. But I am insinuating that the 3rd overall pick could easily become another McDonogh situation wherein we all end up salivating at what could've been had the Habs been patient.
And it's not the only time it's happened. We did it with Latendresse; Ribeiro; Robidas; Sergei Kostitsyn; Leclerc; Desjardins; Chelios, etc. Be patient. Quick fixes rarely solve anything in the longterm. Unless, you're on the brink of being a Stanley Cup winner there's no need to trade great prospects for immediate help.
So it wasn't a shortcut when Burke traded for KEssel?
We're in a lot better situation now then Burke was when he traded for Kessel.
I think the point is moot unless we are purposely going to tank for next season because Staal will probably just as much a useful addition as any of the players we're going to be drafting at #3rd overall. It's easier to tank with our draft pick in junior instead of having Staal in the lineup.
When healthy, the kid is a horse (literally and figuratively).
You've got a well unknown prospect at #3 -- and not anywhere near a lock in terms of being a bona-fide NHLer.
On the other side, you have a hulking center w/tremendous skill and lockdown ability.
Throw me in the Staal camp. If the Isles get this offer put forth, I take it and run.
I don't think anyone hates Jordan Staal, we just hate the idea of trading the 3rd overall pick FOR Jordan Staal. Under most other scenarios I'd happily welcome Staal to the Habs. It's that I personally am convinced that our 3rd overall pick will surpass Staal in terms of production especially if that pick is Gally or Forsberg. I know that it's a risk but it's a risk I'm willing to take.
I don't think anyone hates Jordan Staal, we just hate the idea of trading the 3rd overall pick FOR Jordan Staal. Under most other scenarios I'd happily welcome Staal to the Habs. It's that I personally am convinced that our 3rd overall pick will surpass Staal in terms of production especially if that pick is Gally or Forsberg. I know that it's a risk but it's a risk I'm willing to take.
Me too. Shortcuts aren't the way to building a consistent contender. Whether it's a shortcut trading for a 36 year old or a 23 year old.
We're in a lot better situation now then Burke was when he traded for Kessel.
/QUOTE]
Irrelevant.
Was it or was it not a shortcut when Burke traded for Kessel?
Burke had a few free agents the summer of the Kessel trade who he thought were going to sign with him and when they didn't he was hung out to dry. So, to answer your question Kessel was part of a rebuild that was stillborn.
I'm neutral on the trade for Staal for our 3rd. I'm okay with it either way and I don't have a problem trading our pick for a 23 year old.
Burke had a few free agents the summer of the Kessel trade who he thought were going to sign with him and when they didn't he was hung out to dry. So, to answer your question Kessel was part of a rebuild that was stillborn.
I'm neutral on the trade for Staal for our 3rd. I'm okay with it either way and I don't have a problem trading our pick for a 23 year old.
You're misremembering things.
Burke had signed Beauchamin and Komisarek and also brought Gustavvson over from Europe. This all happened in early July
Expecting Staal to score more just because of power play time is misguided IMO. He's gotten plenty of power play time in his career (remember that the Penguin's winger depth has been very week during his time there) he's just been really bad at scoring with the man advantage.
However he is an absolute monster on even strength on both sides of the puck that every team should like to have. However, he's largely similar to Plekanec in that regard so this doesn't fill a pressing need. He's also only a one year guaranteed asset whereas whoever drafted 3rd has 7 cost contained years ahead of him. Its not really an unfair deal but I don't think it suits MOntreal at this present time.
Burke had signed Beauchamin and Komisarek and also brought Gustavvson over from Europe. This all happened in early July
The Kessel trade took place in September.
You're quite correct. For some reason I thought they made the trade before July 1st. That explains why our line of reasoning was going off in different directions.
In no way am I insinuating that Staal will become like Gomez. But I am insinuating that the 3rd overall pick could easily become another McDonogh situation wherein we all end up salivating at what could've been had the Habs been patient.
And it's not the only time it's happened. We did it with Latendresse; Ribeiro; Robidas; Sergei Kostitsyn; Leclerc; Desjardins; Chelios, etc. Be patient. Quick fixes rarely solve anything in the longterm. Unless, you're on the brink of being a Stanley Cup winner there's no need to trade great prospects for immediate help.
Almost all of those players were already Montreal Canadiens when traded, lol. You don't even know who the 3rd overall pick IS yet, let alone what he's going to look like on NHL ice playing against the top players in the world. It's not even a prospect yet... it's a draft pick.
Instead of drooling over the unknown, how about drooling over one of the most well-rounded and difficult to play against centres in the league? I'm fine with picking Gally or Grigs, but I have to chuckle at the guarantees flying around that either will be better than Staal - short OR long term.
I think that Staal would be a very welcome addition to the Habs. If we can get away without giving up our first round pick it would be even better - say a package involving Eller and one of our 2nd round picks instead.
The problem is that you might be able to get a guy that has more upside than Staal at #3 while costing less in salary.
exactly... we "might" be able to get a guy that has more upside.
Staal is a known commodity, the pick is much more of a risk to underwhelm.
odds are that the #3 will become a solid player, but I'd say the odds are slightly more favorable that Staal remains a superior contributor for at least the next 3-5 years.
with our core, it's a gamble that would make sense at this time, imo, though obviously keeping the pick should also turn out well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
It's not just about being able to re-sign the player...if you give somebody enough money they WILL re-sign, it's getting signed at a reasonable rate. The guy you can get at the #3 pick will cost a lot less the first 3-6 years in the NHL.
Plus what Staal brings, what he is known for(strong 2 way play) is not a big need. We have the top(or 2nd best) PK in the NHL and Plekanec plays a huge part in that. Eller is a big strong guy not affraid to get his nose dirty and will grow into a #2 or #3 2 way role. LeBlanc could also play a #2-3 center role if needed.
We need a potential high end forward, not another solid 2 way guy.
Staal produced at a 37 goal/71pt 82-game pace (through 68 games) this year, with Dupuis/Cooke/Kennedy as his primary wingers AND while being relied heavily for defensive match-ups.
i'd call that "high end production".
this "solid 2 way guy" is a perception that doesn't fit with the reality of the season the 23 year old Staal just had (this after 3 straight 20 goal/50pt pace seasons as a 20-21-22 year old).
besides, barring a pretty drastic rule change in the near future, the playoffs are once again showing that come playoff time, two-way physical play is at a premium. While one of the top forwards in the draft might end up offensively superior to Staal (and that's far from a given), none of them project to be as versatile as he is.
I'd agree with that. Do I think Kessel was/is worth the price, though? Completely different story.
The problem with the Kessel trade wasn't giving up two firsts for a 35-goal forward, even one that doesn't drive the play. The problem with the Kessel trade was Burke grossly overrating his team, so that those picks turned out to be very high firsts. If the Leafs had been even a bubble team it was a good trade. But Burke failed to provide the Leafs with any kind of decent goaltending, which led to those picks being very high picks.
The problem with the Kessel trade wasn't giving up two firsts for a 35-goal forward, even one that doesn't drive the play. The problem with the Kessel trade was Burke grossly overrating his team, so that those picks turned out to be very high firsts. If the Leafs had been even a bubble team it was a good trade. But Burke failed to provide the Leafs with any kind of decent goaltending, which led to those picks being very high picks.
exactly... we "might" be able to get a guy that has more upside.
Staal is a known commodity, the pick is much more of a risk to underwhelm.
odds are that the #3 will become a solid player, but I'd say the odds are slightly more favorable that Staal remains a superior contributor for at least the next 3-5 years.
with our core, it's a gamble that would make sense at this time, imo, though obviously keeping the pick should also turn out well.
Staal produced at a 37 goal/71pt 82-game pace (through 68 games) this year, with Dupuis/Cooke/Kennedy as his primary wingers AND while being relied heavily for defensive match-ups.
i'd call that "high end production".
this "solid 2 way guy" is a perception that doesn't fit with the reality of the season the 23 year old Staal just had (this after 3 straight 20 goal/50pt pace seasons as a 20-21-22 year old).
besides, barring a pretty drastic rule change in the near future, the playoffs are once again showing that come playoff time, two-way physical play is at a premium. While one of the top forwards in the draft might end up offensively superior to Staal (and that's far from a given), none of them project to be as versatile as he is.
By the same token you can trade your picks for "known commodities" every year but that's not the formula to build a winner.
There are definitely worst places to trade the pick than a guy like Staal, but with Plekanec and Eller already here you end up adding to an area of strength instead of shoring up one of need.
Unless you think Staal can be a top 15 NHL center(75-90 points normal year) I don't really see a good fit for the Habs. For Toronto it makes all the sense in the world.
I don't think that it is the time for Montreal to trade a third overall pick for help. We have a new GM who will want to build a stable team for a long time.
Something that I am excited about, is that Bergevin is coming from Chicago and it is clear that they highly value draft picks. Looking at the time that Bergevin was with Chicago, they accumulated draft picks and built the team from the draft. Even when they were winning they were still accumulating draft picks (partly due to salary cap issues).
I would be very surprised if that did not leave an impression on Bergevin. I hope that Montreal fans can start getting used to having extra first and second round picks going forward.
Back to the OP, Staal is a good player but his injuries worry me. At this point in the Canadiens re-build, re-tool, whatever you want to call it...I don't think it really makes sense.
In all honesty, I am rooting for one or two veterans to be shipped out to accumulate two or three more picks over the next 2 years.
By the same token you can trade your picks for "known commodities" every year but that's not the formula to build a winner.
There are definitely worst places to trade the pick than a guy like Staal, but with Plekanec and Eller already here you end up adding to an area of strength instead of shoring up one of need.
Unless you think Staal can be a top 15 NHL center(75-90 points normal year) I don't really see a good fit for the Habs. For Toronto it makes all the sense in the world.
sure, but we aren't talking about trading pickS for known commodities "every year", we're talking about one isolated move, that given the context for both teams, could fit both teams long-term needs quite well.
with 6 top-60 picks in the next two seasons, I'd say now is the perfect time to be able to leverage a first round pick into a cornerstone type player, which I think Staal could be (at least more so than the players available at the top of this year's draft). We'd still have 5 more top-60 picks in the next two years, with Timmins running the draft, that should lead to at several quality young players/prospects to continue building our organization into a consistent winner.
doesn't make any sense to use blanket statements as an argument against a specific move.
also, why does he need to score "75-90 pts" to be a top-15 C? Toews has only surpassed the 70pt mark once thus far (granted he was on pace for 79 this year), and yet I'm sure you'd consider him a top 15 #1C...
but besides that, yes, I do think Staal, used as a #1C, could legitimately put up 75-80pts regularly, with perhaps the odd 80+pt season if everything goes right for him & the team in a given year.
sure, but we aren't talking about trading pickS for known commodities "every year", we're talking about one isolated move, that given the context for both teams, could fit both teams long-term needs quite well.
with 6 top-60 picks in the next two seasons, I'd say now is the perfect time to be able to leverage a first round pick into a cornerstone type player, which I think Staal could be (at least more so than the players available at the top of this year's draft). We'd still have 5 more top-60 picks in the next two years, with Timmins running the draft, that should lead to at several quality young players/prospects to continue building our organization into a consistent winner.
doesn't make any sense to use blanket statements as an argument against a specific move.
also, why does he need to score "75-90 pts" to be a top-15 C? Toews has only surpassed the 70pt mark once thus far (granted he was on pace for 79 this year), and yet I'm sure you'd consider him a top 15 #1C...
but besides that, yes, I do think Staal, used as a #1C, could legitimately put up 75-80pts regularly, with perhaps the odd 80+pt season if everything goes right for him & the team in a given year.
None of those 5 other top 60 picks will have anywhere near the value, or the likeliehood of becoming an impact player that this years 3rd overall will.
I've said it before, I'll say it again, and i imagine between now and June 24th I'll say it several more times.
Taking shortcuts is not the way to build a consistent c ontender in the NHL and I really hope Bergevin realizes that as well.
sure, but we aren't talking about trading pickS for known commodities "every year", we're talking about one isolated move, that given the context for both teams, could fit both teams long-term needs quite well.
with 6 top-60 picks in the next two seasons, I'd say now is the perfect time to be able to leverage a first round pick into a cornerstone type player, which I think Staal could be (at least more so than the players available at the top of this year's draft). We'd still have 5 more top-60 picks in the next two years, with Timmins running the draft, that should lead to at several quality young players/prospects to continue building our organization into a consistent winner.
doesn't make any sense to use blanket statements as an argument against a specific move.
also, why does he need to score "75-90 pts" to be a top-15 C? Toews has only surpassed the 70pt mark once thus far (granted he was on pace for 79 this year), and yet I'm sure you'd consider him a top 15 #1C...
but besides that, yes, I do think Staal, used as a #1C, could legitimately put up 75-80pts regularly, with perhaps the odd 80+pt season if everything goes right for him & the team in a given year.
That's where I disagree with you, Staal is a good player but not a cornerstone player. He's been solid as a #2 the last 2 years, but still didn't face the opposition's top checking lines and shutdown pairs. The extra ice time may be offset by tougher opposition.
At the end of the day there is nothing to prove Staal is any more a #1 than Desharnais or Plekanec have shown so far in their careers. Being "big" doesn't automatically make you a #1 center.
