HFBoards

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

The case for a 1-year surgical tank for the Habs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-07-2012, 04:47 PM
  #676
jwolf
Registered User
 
jwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 574
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=bsl;53350647]8th finish and 12 are not different? They are very very different. That's 16th in the league vs. 22nd or so. The pick Habs get is top 8, not 15th. 7-8 picks better, and putting Habs in the top ten.

8th gives Habs one playoff round. Wow. And don't, please don't, bring up the Kings.

Give me top 4 in conference, or give me a good pick.QUOTE]



Where did I write anything about 8th and 12th being the same thing?

jwolf is offline  
Old
08-07-2012, 06:23 PM
  #677
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If their ownership is interfering then we could see what happened in Florida, when they failed to deal Bouwmeester at the deadline a few years back and lost him for nothing.

Without Bourque, a 2nd + Patrick Holland would be worth more than a 1st from a contender imo, as Holland is equivalent to a good 2nd, and Calgary 2nd will be 30-40. Patrick Holland's production exploded last year. I don't watch WHL games, but I'm intrigued by his 109 points in 72 games. He could be our 2nd line center two or three years down the line. He's one to watch in Hamilton this year.

Pierre Gauthier is a risk taker. See the Halak for Eller trade, he liked to trade for prospects. Trading for Holland is one of those nice risks.

If we trade Bourque for a 2nd, which is possible under my plan of deliberately padding the stats of veterans we want to trade, then we effectively get 3 2nd rounders for Cammalleri.
We should've got more for Cammy than we did. Saddling ourselves with Bourque didn't make sense. And now we have to hope that some other club out there will take a problem child from us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenice View Post
If we would've got a late 2012 1st for Cammy, we most likely would've of drafted Collberg and then with our 2nd round pick there's a good chance we draft Thrower, so a 1st would probably been the same as a 2nd. I'm not sure a team would trade a 2013 1st for Cammy last year, I think most teams would know better than to do that.
Not sure why they wouldn't. The day after Cammy's comments there were tons of speculation on teams trading for him and it was universally agreed that he'd land a good return.

Instead we went for a desperation move and rushed out to trade a player who PG had figured had mortally insulted him.

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
08-07-2012, 06:49 PM
  #678
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Technically this would be a two-year tank since we effectively tanked last year when Martin was fired.

My thread and my argumentation is rooted in a great optimism, what Alan Greenspan might call an irrational exuberance.

I believe that with just one additional stocking of great prospects like this year, and with a reasonable shuffling of veterans to clear cap space, this team will be in a position to transition to a perennial contender on the level of where the New York Rangers and the Los Angeles Kings are now.

Other people might look at the 3rd worst team in the NHL and think a 3-year rebuild might be necessary.
here we go again with the fictional terms.two year tank?perrenial contender?lmao.this is getting good.

haburger is online now  
Old
08-07-2012, 07:11 PM
  #679
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We should've got more for Cammy than we did. Saddling ourselves with Bourque didn't make sense. And now we have to hope that some other club out there will take a problem child from us.

Not sure why they wouldn't. The day after Cammy's comments there were tons of speculation on teams trading for him and it was universally agreed that he'd land a good return.

Instead we went for a desperation move and rushed out to trade a player who PG had figured had mortally insulted him.
My point is even if we got a 2012 1st we would of drafted Collberg with it, so how would that help us?

The purpose of getting the 1st would be to draft someone we couldn't get with a later pick.

With the way things worked out I'm happy having Collberg and a 2013 2nd rounder instead of Collberg and a later 2nd round pick in 2012 - assuming we would of drafted Thrower with our 2nd round pick - (33rd overall).

Frozenice is online now  
Old
08-07-2012, 07:33 PM
  #680
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We should've got more for Cammy than we did. Saddling ourselves with Bourque didn't make sense. And now we have to hope that some other club out there will take a problem child from us.

Not sure why they wouldn't. The day after Cammy's comments there were tons of speculation on teams trading for him and it was universally agreed that he'd land a good return.

Instead we went for a desperation move and rushed out to trade a player who PG had figured had mortally insulted him.
Let's analyze Gauthier's moves as a whole. I think there were four last year as a response to a failing team: Kaberle, Kostitsyn, Gill, Cammalleri. I apologized if I made a mistake by forgetting one.

Kaberle: A legitimate shot at reviving the power play early in the season when there was hope. The team had done well in the previous two playoffs. It did work out, the power play did improve, but the team turned out to be even worse than thought and that was not sufficient to form a playoff team.

I don't think it's a bad trade as I reject the general forum consensus that Kaberle sucks, is an untradeable player, and has negative roster value. I think he slumped in the first half of last season but he was OK with the Habs in spite of being on a horrible team. If he can play on the first PP with Markov this year he's going to fetch a good return at the deadline. Puck-moving defenseman are highly rated on the trade market every year.

Kostitsyn: We got a 2nd rounder, don't know if we could have had more. It's interesting that GMs don't seem to want him, even though we know from history that this is a player who doesn't expect huge paydays. I think this was a good move.

Gill: Geoffrion and a 2nd were a good return. Geoffrion helped give a week of positive press coverage which helps the team brand. The 2nd is a good return, maybe we could have had more, who knows?

Cammalleri: I'll take Holland and a 2nd over a random 1st rounder in the 16-30 range. I don't approve of Gauthier trading because his feelings were hurt and we would be better off without Bourque. Bourque has harmed Eller's development.

Gionta was untradeanble because he was injured and thus useless for the playoffs. There were rumours of 2nd rounders available for Moen but he had a concussion, and we resigned him anyway. There were rumours they tried to trade Darche and Weber but could not find any takers.

The overall direction was good but not great I think. We picked up a pair of 2nd rounders and Patrick Holland. We picked up two players, one useful (Kaberle), and one with negative value (Bourque). It could be better, but I don't know of many GMs who nail 4 moves out of 4. I was very satisfied to see the end of the Gainey-era philosophy of having UFAs leave for nothing.

With that said our starting roster for this year will be inferior. Half the point of dealing vets is to sign new UFAs with the cleared cap space. Cammalleri, Kostitsyn, Darche and Gill have been replaced by the inferior Bourque, Prust, Armstrong and Bouillon. That's a step down in size, in goal scoring ability, and we lose an elite PK specialist ... one of our few strengths is being compromised. The Kaberle-Spacek trade improves our offense, but downgrades our defense.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-07-2012, 10:53 PM
  #681
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Reports from last season were that their GM wanted to rebuild but ownership wanted to try to make the playoffs.

Such a shame we wasted Cammy for a 2nd with them. The 2nd will be nice if they finish low, but a 1st would've been so much better. And there's no way he wasn't worth a 1st to somebody out there. Plus we saddled ourselves with Bourque (a guy who's the same age and actually has a longer deal.) Totally stupid...
You say that Cammalleri could have been traded for a first rounder. Don't you think Gauthier tried to get one if he could? Now you say the same about Gionta. Not all possible things happen. We'll never know what Bergevin would have done with Cammalleri and we'll have to see what he has in mind for Gionta. So far he hasn't done anything controversial because he hasn't seen even one preseason game. AS predicted, he's signed some of the Habs' own UFAs and RFAs. He also signed some UFAs for the bottom lines and the third defense pairing. I hope to learn about his outlook on the personnel when he makes his first trade.

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-07-2012, 11:46 PM
  #682
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Let's analyze Gauthier's moves as a whole...
I just don't see a point to doing this. He was a bad GM who made some decent moves over his career. He's not the worst GM we've ever had, but he wasn't great. And we're better off without him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You say that Cammalleri could have been traded for a first rounder. Don't you think Gauthier tried to get one if he could?
No, I don't. It's painfully obvious that he was a control freak who was ridiculous about maintaining an image of an ideal that existed in his own mind. Cammy threatened that image and PG made a trade as quickly as he could.

Painfully obvious that this was the case and it's even more obvious now that we're learning just how batcrazy this guy really was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Now you say the same about Gionta. Not all possible things happen. We'll never know what Bergevin would have done with Cammalleri and we'll have to see what he has in mind for Gionta. So far he hasn't done anything controversial because he hasn't seen even one preseason game. AS predicted, he's signed some of the Habs' own UFAs and RFAs. He also signed some UFAs for the bottom lines and the third defense pairing. I hope to learn about his outlook on the personnel when he makes his first trade.
I have no idea what to expect from Bergevin or what he would've done. I know what we should've done though. And it didn't include giving away Cammy and saddling ourselves with a longer contract for a worse player. Nor would it have included signing Kaberle... Just like I know that we should probably rebuild now and continue on the path towards accumulating good young players to build with.

Will Bergevin make this move? I have no idea right now. I hope so, but I don't know anything about this guy.

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
08-08-2012, 08:18 AM
  #683
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
You quoted the wrong guy in your third quote :-)

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-09-2012, 07:02 PM
  #684
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
I have previously posted that I expected this team to finish in the range 11th-15th this upcoming season.

It now seems that a lockout-shortened season could be a possibility, as in maybe they would only play 40 games rather than 80. If that is the case it will add statistical noise to the standings.

I believe that a full lockout for the whole season would be detrimental to the Habs rebuilding prospects.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-09-2012, 10:50 PM
  #685
FF de Mars
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 42 rue Fontaine
Country: Martinique
Posts: 5,950
vCash: 500
I wish we still had Cammy, whether we might have received a slighter better deal or not. He made our team more dangerous. Bourque is no sniper.

FF de Mars is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 02:39 AM
  #686
Takashi
Registered User
 
Takashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You say that Cammalleri could have been traded for a first rounder. Don't you think Gauthier tried to get one if he could? Now you say the same about Gionta. Not all possible things happen. We'll never know what Bergevin would have done with Cammalleri and we'll have to see what he has in mind for Gionta. So far he hasn't done anything controversial because he hasn't seen even one preseason game. AS predicted, he's signed some of the Habs' own UFAs and RFAs. He also signed some UFAs for the bottom lines and the third defense pairing. I hope to learn about his outlook on the personnel when he makes his first trade.
I doubt he tried. The day after Cammy made his comments, he was traded during a game, and we received in return a guy who still had a 1 game suspension, I doubt PG was patient enough to get a better return. And I remember reading that many GMs didn't know that cammy was in the trade market.

Takashi is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:33 AM
  #687
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,127
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
I doubt he tried. The day after Cammy made his comments, he was traded during a game, and we received in return a guy who still had a 1 game suspension, I doubt PG was patient enough to get a better return. And I remember reading that many GMs didn't know that cammy was in the trade market.
You can say many things about Gauthier but he's not stupid or rashly impulsive. Perhaps you didn't consider that the Habs received a second rounder and a prospect in the deal.

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:37 AM
  #688
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You can say many things about Gauthier but he's not stupid or rashly impulsive. Perhaps you didn't consider that the Habs received a second rounder and a prospect in the deal.
I agree with you, I think it was likely to be a good trade.

This coming year Patrick Holland is making the transition to Hamilton. I expect he will be the first or second line center. I hope he does well.

If he does well a lot of people will change their tune on the Cammalleri trade.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:39 AM
  #689
jwolf
Registered User
 
jwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You can say many things about Gauthier but he's not stupid or rashly impulsive. Perhaps you didn't consider that the Habs received a second rounder and a prospect in the deal.
Really? We can't say that??

jwolf is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:40 AM
  #690
No Team Needed
Registered User
 
No Team Needed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 2,964
vCash: 500
Montreal traded a left winger for a right winger when they had only one left winger in the system and plenty of right wingers in the system. Then they played said right winger as a left winger and his numbers and confidence died. Now they have a stacked right wing and a glaring hole in the left wing.

It was a terrible trade even if Holland becomes a top six player. Why? Because it addressed nothing. As GM, your job is to get the team into the playoffs and succeed. The Cammalleri trade promised the team a ticket to the golf course. Bad trade. Period.

No Team Needed is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:44 AM
  #691
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Team Needed View Post
Montreal traded a left winger for a right winger when they had only one left winger in the system and plenty of right wingers in the system. Then they played said right winger as a left winger and his numbers and confidence died. Now they have a stacked right wing and a glaring hole in the left wing.

It was a terrible trade even if Holland becomes a top six player. Why? Because it addressed nothing. As GM, your job is to get the team into the playoffs and succeed. The Cammalleri trade promised the team a ticket to the golf course. Bad trade. Period.
The job of the GM is to maximize the team's long-term future, not to take each season one at a time like a myopic idiot and focus on 8th place year in and year out.

At the point of the Cammalleri trade they weren't making the playoffs, with or without Cammalleri. As GM, Gauthier's job is thus to move forward and sell where he can.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 10:54 AM
  #692
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Team Needed View Post
Montreal traded a left winger for a right winger when they had only one left winger in the system and plenty of right wingers in the system. Then they played said right winger as a left winger and his numbers and confidence died. Now they have a stacked right wing and a glaring hole in the left wing.

It was a terrible trade even if Holland becomes a top six player. Why? Because it addressed nothing. As GM, your job is to get the team into the playoffs and succeed. The Cammalleri trade promised the team a ticket to the golf course. Bad trade. Period.
I disagree. Holland + 2nd was fair return for a player like Cammalleri. Bourque was a glorified cap dump with the potential of partially replacing the production lost from Cammalleri. Lets not forget Cammalleri has a cap hit of 6 friggin millions. We couldn't just trade him for a 1st rounder.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 11:14 AM
  #693
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
here we go again with the fictional terms.two year tank?perrenial contender?lmao.this is getting good.
Thanks for your razor sharp contribution to the discussion.

bsl is online now  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:08 PM
  #694
Takashi
Registered User
 
Takashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You can say many things about Gauthier but he's not stupid or rashly impulsive. Perhaps you didn't consider that the Habs received a second rounder and a prospect in the deal.
And we gave a first liner (who is one of the best in the playoffs), a 5th rounder and a good goalie prospect. It still doesn't explain why he traded him during a game the day after cammy made his comments, to a guy who still had a 1 game suspension ...

Takashi is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:12 PM
  #695
Takashi
Registered User
 
Takashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
I disagree. Holland + 2nd was fair return for a player like Cammalleri. Bourque was a glorified cap dump with the potential of partially replacing the production lost from Cammalleri. Lets not forget Cammalleri has a cap hit of 6 friggin millions. We couldn't just trade him for a 1st rounder.
Don't forget we also gave a 5th rounder and a good goalie prospect. Yes if we waited we could, he's a first liner and a beast in the playoffs, in the trade deadline we could've receive more than a 1st rounder.

Takashi is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:14 PM
  #696
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
It still doesn't explain why he traded him during a game the day after cammy made his comments, to a guy who still had a 1 game suspension ...
The most plausible explanation is that Gauthier had been working on a Cammalleri trade for a while, he was considering the issue, and he lost his patience after Cammalleri had the audacity to say that he doesn't like losing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
And we gave a first liner (who is one of the best in the playoffs), a 5th rounder and a good goalie prospect.
Plagues be upon us. We lost a 5th rounder.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:20 PM
  #697
Takashi
Registered User
 
Takashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The most plausible explanation is that Gauthier had been working on a Cammalleri trade for a while, he was considering the issue, and he lost his patience after Cammalleri had the audacity to say that he doesn't like losing.
That's not a reason to trade him during a game.

Plagues be upon us. We lost a 5th rounder.
That's not a reason to trade him during a game.

With a 5th rounder we selected Gallagher (one of our best prospect), darren dietz (good prospect) and Charles Hudon (who is currently playing quite well in the Canada Russia challenge)

Takashi is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:49 PM
  #698
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
That's not a reason to trade him during a game.

With a 5th rounder we selected Gallagher (one of our best prospect), darren dietz (good prospect) and Charles Hudon (who is currently playing quite well in the Canada Russia challenge)
I'm sure a lot of 5th rounders become good prospects, but very few of them become impact players.

I think Grabovski is our only 5th rounder of the past decade to do anything, and he's a 2nd line center on the 5th worst team in the league.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:51 PM
  #699
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You can say many things about Gauthier but he's not stupid or rashly impulsive. Perhaps you didn't consider that the Habs received a second rounder and a prospect in the deal.
There's lots of evidence to support that the guy actually is stupid. As for him being impulsive, I'm not sure how else you'd describe the Cammy trade apart from maybe... stupid.

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
08-10-2012, 01:57 PM
  #700
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
I disagree. Holland + 2nd was fair return for a player like Cammalleri. Bourque was a glorified cap dump with the potential of partially replacing the production lost from Cammalleri. Lets not forget Cammalleri has a cap hit of 6 friggin millions. We couldn't just trade him for a 1st rounder.
We gave up the better player, we took on a contract that was longer, we had lots of time to make a trade and Calgary was desperate. We didn't shop Cammy around at all...

I don't mind us taking back a contract but at LEAST get a 1st rounder out of it.

Make no mistake, this was not a rebuilding deal. This was not about us trying to get a 2nd rounder. This was about PG ridding himself of a player who embarrassed him. It was about a desperation hope that Bourque would rediscover his form. A panic driven desperate move by a small petty man who had no concept of what a winning culture is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
Don't forget we also gave a 5th rounder and a good goalie prospect. Yes if we waited we could, he's a first liner and a beast in the playoffs, in the trade deadline we could've receive more than a 1st rounder.
We didn't even try. For some reason we went after a player nobody else wanted (again) and a player who's team couldn't wait to be rid of (again) and we did this because of some comments that caused a kerfuful... it was pathetic. And the explanation from PG was absolutely hilarious. We didn't make the trade earlier because Bourque was suspended and we're trying to make the playoffs and yet... we traded him while he was still suspended and we're in the MIDDLE of a game with a Division rival. How does that make any sense at all?

Hopefully it works out. Sometimes that happens but no, it was not a good trade.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 08-10-2012 at 02:02 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Closed Thread

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 11:54 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.