HFBoards

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

All Encompassing Tanking/Rebuilding/Selling at Deadline Thread 2.0

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-15-2013, 02:45 AM
  #951
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'm of the view players sign wherever there is the most money, first and foremost. With the exception of Marian Hossa, winning team doesn't matter that much.
Money is the biggest factor, but the other ones are not neglible. We were rumored to have offered more money for Richards, Briere. Didn't Philly offer more money for Suter then Minnesota? There are tons of examples every year. And arguably the creme-de-la-creme tend more towards the other factors because they are going to be getting huge money regardless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Have we not been through this?
The point I was making was that building a playoff team is not easy whether you have top picks or not. There are lots of teams out there that can't even build an 8th place team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Our prospect pool was once ranked 2nd, this summer it was ranked 8th.

We used to have a very deep lineup. Koivu-Plekanec-Metropolit down the middle was not crap, and Koivu-Lang-Plekanec was even better. Remember the excitement when we had tow Kostitsyns, Higgins, Kovalev on our top-6? Remember the excitement of a Tanguay-Koivu-Latendresse second line?

We also have less high-end performance talent now. We don't have any forwards with gamebreaking ability like Kovalev had. Galchenyuk will have that one day, but he doesn't now. Even if he did, that would only support the tanking methodology.
I guess to each his own. I much prefer the current group, I think as a whole it has a better balance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
False statistics. You can't just remove the points you don't like unless you have a very, very good reason to do so.

The 2008 team might not have been a 1st place team, but it was a good team. Similarly, the 2012 might not have been a 15th place team, but it was a bad team. Neither was a bubble team.

I really doubt that this would hold out statistically.
The reason being is they were the result of extremely good and extremely bad luck. I haven't gone through every season but we see teams that are considered locks for the playoffs end up in the basement with some regularity. Usually one or more very important players get injured and the team crumbles. How often do teams that are expected to be in the basement jump up into 1st? I can't think of any. Usually the surprise teams moves up 5-6 places at most, so teams that are bubble might win their division, or teams not expected to make the playoffs might get up to 5th or 6th.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You mean trading away Cammalleri and Kostitsyn? Lateral moves in replacing Cammalleri with Bourque and Kostitsyn with Gallagher.
These are players that no longer fit the team I have no problems trading them for picks. Not to mention it's a clear downgrade in scoring ability if everyone plays to their abilities.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
That was but one of my arguments. I also stated that:
- clearing cap space would allow us to nail the UFA market.
- The additional top-60 picks could be helpful in a deep draft.
- We should let out prospects dominate in junior and in the ahl rather than rush them so as to make the playoffs. This would help their development.
You can only do this if you have veterans that are equal or better than the prospects are at the moment. If we could sign UFAs, trade them at the deadline, and then sign some equally good ones next year then I'm all for it. But it's not going to happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Because I greatly respect Timmins' judgment. Bergevin has not earned that respect, and neither has Dudley.

My suspicion of Bergevin, which may be paranoia from the Carboaching era, is that he overvalues "grit" and "character" over talent. For me, talent is what wins championship. Malkin was the Pittsburgh MVP in 2009, not Talbot. I worry about Bergevin. He preferred Shane Doan to Alexander Semin. He didn't want to lock up Subban long-term. I might be wrong, I hope I'm wrong, but I have a hard time seeing this guy rock the trade or UFA market. They also hired Sylvain Lefebvre to coach Hamilton.
I'm not sold on MB mostly because of how he handled Subban. But at the end of the day if he's a bad GM he will find a way to ruin it whether we grab another top pick or not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I also think he took a lot of heat for trading away Huet in 2008 (which was not a bad move imo) and he didn't want to tank during the Habs 100th season. He bought Tanguay, Laraque, and Lang at the start of the year, winning the cup was the goal. It takes a lot of mental acuity to be able to switch gears midseason, as was necessary in 2009, and maybe he lacked it.
The thing about the 2009 rebuild is at the start of the season he clearly felt we were contenders. It was only sometime after he stepped behind the bench that he realized the problem was with the team he built. Trade deadline had already passed so what do you do? Re-up with guys who you don't think you can win with or roll the dice on newcomers. It's a tough spot. If only he had figured it out earlier (If it was in fact the case).


Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There's a huge difference between 8% and 1.5%, about a factor of five. Basically, if the Habs tanked for eight years and became a Pittsburgh for only 2 years (beyond worst case scenario) they would be doing as well as being the bubble Habs for those 10 years.
Nothing is preventing you from being stuck at the 1.5% you will still make moves to try and improve the team. The NYR were a bubble team much like us for a number of years, but then they unloaded Gomez and have made better trades/ufa signings and now are no longer a bubble team with a 1.5% chance at the cup. Buffalo was a bubble team for a long time, and then for a couple of years were contenders, had they been willingly to pay Drury, Briere it would have lasted longer.

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 04:34 AM
  #952
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I've explained it repeatedly.

There is no risk.

We aren't winning anything now with those vets anyway. Just like we weren't going to win anything five years ago with Koivu and we should've done it then... This is the part that you can't accept. Once you do, you'll see that what I'm saying makes sense.
The risk is in stunting the development of the young players in the NHL. Giving sheltered minutes for Galchenyuk and Gallagher is better for them then throwing them to the wolves. Just because it didn't hurt Yzerman and Lemieux doesn't mean it won't hurt our guys.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
There will always be exceptions to the rule. Absolutely you'd be better off with more 1sts in 2003 (or 1979 for that matter) but most years that's not the way it works.
So for a normal draft you think a top 5 pick is worth 5 picks spread out from 11-30. I think you're alone on that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We did waste our time. And we wasted a LOT of assets too. There was no reason to let everyone go and then re-up with Gomez and co. It made absolutely no sense at all. Not only that but we exacerbated the problem by giving away McD. That set us back a fair bit as well.

If we'd rebuilt back then we'd be a hell of a lot better off now. Instead we did things the hard way and wasted three or four years where we could've been rebuilding. Subban, Max and Price were already in the system anyway dude. We could've just held onto McD and dealt vets. But we weren't smart enough to do this and let them walk for nothing.
I didn't agree with what Gainey did but if we are in the same situation now then it hardly set us back. If we had sold everyone in 2009 the prospects we would've gotten would just now be entering the nhl, assuming they weren't rushed. Would 1-2 more Louis Leblanc's make us a better team?

One of the reasons Gainey went after Gomez, Gionta, Moen, Gill was because of their leadership and stanley cup experience. He felt the young players didn't develop well once they got to the NHL, they tended to look good and then plateau and stop developing. So he wanted to change the culture/leadership to address that. It might of even worked. Subban and Pacioretty have both developed well with the new leadership core. Hell even Price was having problems, if the locker room was filled with clique's like it was before, would Price have matured as well after losing the starting job to Halak? How much of that is the players and how much is the leadership/culture is anyone's guess. But pretending it doesn't have any effect is ridiculous. And I'm willing to take the opinion of a guy who played, coached and managed stanley cup teams over yours.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
And the worst part of it was that a good portion of posters here defended those moves. My favourite argument was... "If it weren't for us getting Gomez, Gionta and Cammy wouldn't have come, so it's a good move."
And people also claim trading Thornton for scraps was a good move because it freed up cap space to sign Chara.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I was talking about team culture as well. We were in the mindset where 8th place was good enough. And the team still feels this way now. All we have to do is make 8th and it's all good...
Unless you are in the room or talking with the players then you are just speculating. I highly doubt Gionta is thinking let's just make the playoffs, and then I'll just coast in the 1st round because it's mission accomplished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Yes, every team needs luck. But you can't plan for luck, you can only take advantage of it when it comes knocking.

Boston created their own luck by dealing with a bad team. They knew what they were doing just like Polloch did when he used to make deals with bad teams desperate to make the playoffs.
So now Boston knew that they were getting two top 10 picks. Please. They made a good trade and it turned into an amazing trade. Picking up picks looks great when those picks end up working out, they look bad when they don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You and I have different definitions of what 'rebuilding' is. All we did was replace our mediocre core with more mediocre guys who were paid double the cap hit and we gave up McD in the process. That's not rebuilding.
Clearly, maybe check any online dictionary
Rebuild: build (something) again after it has been damaged or destroyed

We tore down one team and rebuilt a new one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't give a **** about 8th place. If we're coming in this year and we have a shot at 8th, I'd rather mgmt start thinking long term. The whole playing it by ear season by season has gotten us nowhere.
Playing it by ear means selling at the right times and buying at the right times. Last year was the right time to sell and we did. Now we have Price, Pacioretty, Subban, Galchenyuk and others along with a great veteran cast that can show them how to be winners.

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 07:38 AM
  #953
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
The risk is in stunting the development of the young players in the NHL. Giving sheltered minutes for Galchenyuk and Gallagher is better for them then throwing them to the wolves. Just because it didn't hurt Yzerman and Lemieux doesn't mean it won't hurt our guys.
Nodoby's growth will be stunted... Subban has developed just fine without Markov. Nobody is suggesting a scorched earth where we deal away every last player. There will still be vets on the team man.

There's no risk here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
So for a normal draft you think a top 5 pick is worth 5 picks spread out from 11-30. I think you're alone on that one.
Actually, you're wrong. I'll show you a study that Seventieslord made a few years back on the draft. It's really cool dude. Superstars are much harder to find outside the top five than anywhere else.

I was talking about it last week with somebody. Go look at 2007 for example. There's two or three great players in the top five (with Erik Johnson being hurt otherwise it could've been four) and then there's Claude Giroux at 18. It's uncommon to have that many great players out of the top five all at once but there's a good example of five players being better than the remaining 25.

Your odds of getting a superstar in the top five is about 25%. Odds of getting a good player are much higher than that. Your odds of finding a superstar with 5 picks from 11-30 are much less than 25%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
I didn't agree with what Gainey did but if we are in the same situation now then it hardly set us back. If we had sold everyone in 2009 the prospects we would've gotten would just now be entering the nhl, assuming they weren't rushed. Would 1-2 more Louis Leblanc's make us a better team?

One of the reasons Gainey went after Gomez, Gionta, Moen, Gill was because of their leadership and stanley cup experience. He felt the young players didn't develop well once they got to the NHL, they tended to look good and then plateau and stop developing. So he wanted to change the culture/leadership to address that. It might of even worked. Subban and Pacioretty have both developed well with the new leadership core. Hell even Price was having problems, if the locker room was filled with clique's like it was before, would Price have matured as well after losing the starting job to Halak? How much of that is the players and how much is the leadership/culture is anyone's guess. But pretending it doesn't have any effect is ridiculous. And I'm willing to take the opinion of a guy who played, coached and managed stanley cup teams over yours.
The results speak for themselves.

And the whole, 'he's Bob Gainey' so he knows better just doesn't wash. You don't have to be Sam Polloch to see that he, Gauthier and Houle were terrible GMs. We got Price via fluke and Galchenyuk unintentionally tanking. That's not good.

You are defending the indefensible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
And people also claim trading Thornton for scraps was a good move because it freed up cap space to sign Chara.

Unless you are in the room or talking with the players then you are just speculating. I highly doubt Gionta is thinking let's just make the playoffs, and then I'll just coast in the 1st round because it's mission accomplished.
I think you're wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
So now Boston knew that they were getting two top 10 picks. Please. They made a good trade and it turned into an amazing trade. Picking up picks looks great when those picks end up working out, they look bad when they don't.
They made a trade with a team that had a horrible roster and a starting goalie by the name of Vesa Toskala. So yeah, they had an inkling that the picks were going to be pretty high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Clearly, maybe check any online dictionary
Rebuild: build (something) again after it has been damaged or destroyed

We tore down one team and rebuilt a new one.
As I said, you and I have different definitions of what rebuilding is. And rebuilding is NOT adding a bunch of mediocre vets with double the cap hit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Playing it by ear means selling at the right times and buying at the right times. Last year was the right time to sell and we did. Now we have Price, Pacioretty, Subban, Galchenyuk and others along with a great veteran cast that can show them how to be winners.
We did a terrible job of selling assets last year. It's great that we got some 2nd rounders and maybe those picks will work out. Inexcusable for us not to have gotten a first along the way and doubly stupid to have traded for Kaberle and Bourque.

We're not in terrible shape by any stretch man... but again, look at the players on that list you just gave. Of those four players three were gotten via top pick or rebuild trade. So I'm not sure why you are so set against doing this.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 08:23 AM
  #954
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,379
vCash: 500
The big development problem with trading all the veterans is not just on the leadership side, but the coach loses the depth to bring long young players slowly, not throwing them in the deep end. Plus if you trade Markov it gets really hard to "train" PK because he has to play 25 minutes a night regardless of if he follows the gameplan or not. Against TB Pk sat a lot late in the 3rd and OT after his giveaway, it wasn't all on him but they were trying to send a message that he needs to be "safer" in his own end, especially up 3-0, that goal essentially gave TB life. PK can still be explosive and flashy but needs to pick his spots a bit more. If you have no Markov you have no choice but to play PK a ton 4 on 4.

Monctonscout is online now  
Old
02-15-2013, 10:07 AM
  #955
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Nodoby's growth will be stunted... Subban has developed just fine without Markov. Nobody is suggesting a scorched earth where we deal away every last player. There will still be vets on the team man.

There's no risk here.
Here's a study by the IIHF, it's mostly about european players coming over to NA and how it hurts their development. However many of the topics apply to NA players being rushed to the NHL. Essentially it's important for them to be in a place where they can develop their skills, if they are struggling for ice-time, or barely treading water because too much is being asked of them then they aren't developing like they could.

http://www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_u...Times_10_6.pdf

If you want to believe rushing players who aren't ready doesn't hurt them than go ahead it doesn't make you right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Actually, you're wrong. I'll show you a study that Seventieslord made a few years back on the draft. It's really cool dude. Superstars are much harder to find outside the top five than anywhere else.
Yes or no do you think the value of a top-5 pick is more or less than 5 1st round picks spread evenly from 11-30 in a normal draft year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
The results speak for themselves.
What results? We know how it worked out Gainey's way, we have no idea what would've happened if he followed your idea.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
And the whole, 'he's Bob Gainey' so he knows better just doesn't wash. You don't have to be Sam Polloch to see that he, Gauthier and Houle were terrible GMs. We got Price via fluke and Galchenyuk unintentionally tanking. That's not good.
We saw tons of young players come in do well initially, get a big head, and stop developing. It's still early to tell but so far Price, Pacioretty and Subban seem much more level headed then guys like Ribeiro, Latendresse, Higgins, Komisarek were at the same age/experience. Maybe it's just those particular players but everyone who has any responsibility in developing players for the NHL says the environment has a big impact. Every other professional field also thinks it's helps in their field as well.

We traded arguably our best goal scorer, a depth scorer, and a defenceman who the year before was in the top-4. In return we got one roster player of lesser quality and several picks/prospects. How is that unintentionally tanking? Gauthier sold all the UFAs he could and a player with a big contract. Even if I were to believe you in thinking he coulda got more how does that change whether it was intentional or not?

Why does Price get dismissed as a fluke but Kopitar dropping to 11th is proof that LA had the best idea of all time. They both required their teams to get lucky and make the most out of that luck.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I think you're wrong.
I'm not losing sleep over that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
They made a trade with a team that had a horrible roster and a starting goalie by the name of Vesa Toskala. So yeah, they had an inkling that the picks were going to be pretty high.
No one had T.O. at the very bottom of the league but believe what you want.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
As I said, you and I have different definitions of what rebuilding is. And rebuilding is NOT adding a bunch of mediocre vets with double the cap hit.
That's because I didn't make up my own definition for word to include 'must be done via a draft'

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We did a terrible job of selling assets last year. It's great that we got some 2nd rounders and maybe those picks will work out. Inexcusable for us not to have gotten a first along the way and doubly stupid to have traded for Kaberle and Bourque.
Kaberle was traded for before Gauthier decided to sell so I'm not sure why you are bringing him up. The Cammalleri trade was a sell, but you're fixated on Bourque so I don't want to get into that again with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We're not in terrible shape by any stretch man... but again, look at the players on that list you just gave. Of those four players three were gotten via top pick or rebuild trade. So I'm not sure why you are so set against doing this.
Because it's very risky to do it when you're a team in MTL's position. You want to pretend that risk doesn't exist, I don't.

Would it make you feel better if I told you Calgary should rebuild by selling off vets and sitting in the bottom for a number of years? Because it makes sense for them but not us.

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 10:11 AM
  #956
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The big development problem with trading all the veterans is not just on the leadership side, but the coach loses the depth to bring long young players slowly, not throwing them in the deep end. Plus if you trade Markov it gets really hard to "train" PK because he has to play 25 minutes a night regardless of if he follows the gameplan or not. Against TB Pk sat a lot late in the 3rd and OT after his giveaway, it wasn't all on him but they were trying to send a message that he needs to be "safer" in his own end, especially up 3-0, that goal essentially gave TB life. PK can still be explosive and flashy but needs to pick his spots a bit more. If you have no Markov you have no choice but to play PK a ton 4 on 4.
Good point. Last year Subban would go from 25min, to scratch, to 25min because the coaches couldn't/wouldn't cut back his ice-time when the game is on the line, but they still wanted him to learn stuff.

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 10:58 AM
  #957
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Here's a study by the IIHF, it's mostly about european players coming over to NA and how it hurts their development. However many of the topics apply to NA players being rushed to the NHL. Essentially it's important for them to be in a place where they can develop their skills, if they are struggling for ice-time, or barely treading water because too much is being asked of them then they aren't developing like they could.

http://www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_u...Times_10_6.pdf

If you want to believe rushing players who aren't ready doesn't hurt them than go ahead it doesn't make you right.
Who said we should rush prospects? I said you do it on a case by case basis... that's just common sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Yes or no do you think the value of a top-5 pick is more or less than 5 1st round picks spread evenly from 11-30 in a normal draft year.
Given our situation, I'd rather have a top five pick than 5 11-30 picks. Add one more potential superstar to our team and I think we're in great shape. Like I said we might have enough already but I think we need a little more top end talent up front.

I'll post the study for you later today or this weekend. It's very, very cool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
What results? We know how it worked out Gainey's way, we have no idea what would've happened if he followed your idea.
We know it couldn't have been any worse. Like I said we had nothing to lose. Those guys left for nothing dude... And we know that we gave up McD for Gomez.

Why do you need to keep asking me for arguments as to why water is wet? It's self evident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
We saw tons of young players come in do well initially, get a big head, and stop developing. It's still early to tell but so far Price, Pacioretty and Subban seem much more level headed then guys like Ribeiro, Latendresse, Higgins, Komisarek were at the same age/experience. Maybe it's just those particular players but everyone who has any responsibility in developing players for the NHL says the environment has a big impact. Every other professional field also thinks it's helps in their field as well.

We traded arguably our best goal scorer, a depth scorer, and a defenceman who the year before was in the top-4. In return we got one roster player of lesser quality and several picks/prospects. How is that unintentionally tanking? Gauthier sold all the UFAs he could and a player with a big contract. Even if I were to believe you in thinking he coulda got more how does that change whether it was intentional or not?

Why does Price get dismissed as a fluke but Kopitar dropping to 11th is proof that LA had the best idea of all time. They both required their teams to get lucky and make the most out of that luck.
We saw tons of guys who were picked 15th overall not turn into stars. Not surprising at all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
I'm not losing sleep over that

No one had T.O. at the very bottom of the league but believe what you want.
Dude... come on. Everyone knew that TO was a weak club. Toskala as your starter? That alone should've told you what was up there. The Leafs were an 83 and 81 point team the respective seasons before (finishing last in one of the worst Divisions in the league) and were DEAD LAST in goals given up. If you didn't know this...

Trying to argue that the Bruins couldn't have known that TO was going to be bad is silly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
That's because I didn't make up my own definition for word to include 'must be done via a draft'

Kaberle was traded for before Gauthier decided to sell so I'm not sure why you are bringing him up. The Cammalleri trade was a sell, but you're fixated on Bourque so I don't want to get into that again with you.
I'm bringing up Kaberle because it was a short term move. You don't add him if you're building towards a cup. The Cammy trade was a kneejerk reactive stupid move where we got less for an asset than we should've. We benched Kostitsyn rather than showcased him before trading him off...

It was a disaster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Because it's very risky to do it when you're a team in MTL's position. You want to pretend that risk doesn't exist, I don't.

Would it make you feel better if I told you Calgary should rebuild by selling off vets and sitting in the bottom for a number of years? Because it makes sense for them but not us.
Because we're contenders and they aren't right?

And I really don't understand how you can see it for Calgary but can't see how it made sense for us with an aging group led by Koivu four years ago.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 11:03 AM
  #958
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The big development problem with trading all the veterans is not just on the leadership side, but the coach loses the depth to bring long young players slowly, not throwing them in the deep end. Plus if you trade Markov it gets really hard to "train" PK because he has to play 25 minutes a night regardless of if he follows the gameplan or not. Against TB Pk sat a lot late in the 3rd and OT after his giveaway, it wasn't all on him but they were trying to send a message that he needs to be "safer" in his own end, especially up 3-0, that goal essentially gave TB life. PK can still be explosive and flashy but needs to pick his spots a bit more. If you have no Markov you have no choice but to play PK a ton 4 on 4.
PK is our best defenseman. He's done it with very little help from Markov and played huge minutes.

Nobody is suggesting we trade away ever last vet. So as usual you are making strawman arguments.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 11:04 AM
  #959
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Here's a study by the IIHF, it's mostly about european players coming over to NA and how it hurts their development. However many of the topics apply to NA players being rushed to the NHL. Essentially it's important for them to be in a place where they can develop their skills, if they are struggling for ice-time, or barely treading water because too much is being asked of them then they aren't developing like they could.

http://www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_u...Times_10_6.pdf

If you want to believe rushing players who aren't ready doesn't hurt them than go ahead it doesn't make you right.



Yes or no do you think the value of a top-5 pick is more or less than 5 1st round picks spread evenly from 11-30 in a normal draft year.



What results? We know how it worked out Gainey's way, we have no idea what would've happened if he followed your idea.



We saw tons of young players come in do well initially, get a big head, and stop developing. It's still early to tell but so far Price, Pacioretty and Subban seem much more level headed then guys like Ribeiro, Latendresse, Higgins, Komisarek were at the same age/experience. Maybe it's just those particular players but everyone who has any responsibility in developing players for the NHL says the environment has a big impact. Every other professional field also thinks it's helps in their field as well.

We traded arguably our best goal scorer, a depth scorer, and a defenceman who the year before was in the top-4. In return we got one roster player of lesser quality and several picks/prospects. How is that unintentionally tanking? Gauthier sold all the UFAs he could and a player with a big contract. Even if I were to believe you in thinking he coulda got more how does that change whether it was intentional or not?

Why does Price get dismissed as a fluke but Kopitar dropping to 11th is proof that LA had the best idea of all time. They both required their teams to get lucky and make the most out of that luck.



I'm not losing sleep over that



No one had T.O. at the very bottom of the league but believe what you want.



That's because I didn't make up my own definition for word to include 'must be done via a draft'



Kaberle was traded for before Gauthier decided to sell so I'm not sure why you are bringing him up. The Cammalleri trade was a sell, but you're fixated on Bourque so I don't want to get into that again with you.



Because it's very risky to do it when you're a team in MTL's position. You want to pretend that risk doesn't exist, I don't.

Would it make you feel better if I told you Calgary should rebuild by selling off vets and sitting in the bottom for a number of years? Because it makes sense for them but not us.

dont know why you bother mate, LG regurgitate the same stuff over and over and over and over...

and as soon as you'll show him how silly his arguments are and how wrong he is seeing all this, he'll put you on ignore.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 11:45 AM
  #960
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Who said we should rush prospects? I said you do it on a case by case basis... that's just common sense.
So after you trade some vets who takes their roster spots


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Given our situation, I'd rather have a top five pick than 5 11-30 picks. Add one more potential superstar to our team and I think we're in great shape. Like I said we might have enough already but I think we need a little more top end talent up front.
So now we are talking habs in the right here right now, whereas before you were talking about rebuilding in general. Where did those goalposts go

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
We know it couldn't have been any worse. Like I said we had nothing to lose. Those guys left for nothing dude... And we know that we gave up McD for Gomez.
Yah nothing could be worse then a trip to the Eastern Finals

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Why do you need to keep asking me for arguments as to why water is wet? It's self evident.
If it's self evident why does no one who actually is a GM do it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Dude... come on. Everyone knew that TO was a weak club. Toskala as your starter? That alone should've told you what was up there. The Leafs were an 83 and 81 point team the respective seasons before (finishing last in one of the worst Divisions in the league) and were DEAD LAST in goals given up. If you didn't know this...
Most people had them somewhere between 10-20th in the league.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I'm bringing up Kaberle because it was a short term move. You don't add him if you're building towards a cup. The Cammy trade was a kneejerk reactive stupid move where we got less for an asset than we should've. We benched Kostitsyn rather than showcased him before trading him off...

It was a disaster.
Kaberle was done before he decided to sell so has no bearing on whether we tanked intentionally. 10-20 games of showcasing Kostitsyn would have little impact on his trade value. Most people would look at the last couple years not the last couple of games. If he had a hat trick the game before the deadline do you think he could've gotten us a 1st

A disaster then ended up with a top-5 pick something you've always wanted. It was clearly his aim by trade deadline to sink as far/fast as we could.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Because we're contenders and they aren't right?

And I really don't understand how you can see it for Calgary but can't see how it made sense for us with an aging group led by Koivu four years ago.
We're not contenders just yet but we're pretty close.

4 years ago we were 1 year removed from a 1st place finish. If Gainey knew at the deadline that he was going to let most of the team go that summer then fine that's a terrible decision. I suspect it was only after he stepped in behind the bench which was after trade deadline

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 11:47 AM
  #961
Sorinth
Registered User
 
Sorinth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
dont know why you bother mate, LG regurgitate the same stuff over and over and over and over...

and as soon as you'll show him how silly his arguments are and how wrong he is seeing all this, he'll put you on ignore.
Because some innocent young habs fan might get tricked into thinking he's right.

Won't someone think of the children!

Sorinth is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 12:04 PM
  #962
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
So after you trade some vets who takes their roster spots
We can take a vet at the end of his contract back to help balance out cap space, we can call up guys from the farm... There's always options man, you don't have to throw in an 18 year old rookie in there.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
So now we are talking habs in the right here right now, whereas before you were talking about rebuilding in general. Where did those goalposts go
Nowhere. I'd still take the top five no matter what. It's just that I think it makes more sense for us to do it that way than ever. We already have a bunch of prospects coming up on the blueline. What we need is a top prospect forward to go alone with Gally and Max.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Yah nothing could be worse then a trip to the Eastern Finals
Okay, we made the Eastern Finals (with Halak turning into Ken Dryden) and what happened the year after? We barely made the playoffs and let everyone walk away.

I don't care about 1st, 2nd or 3rd round exits man... I care about us building towards a REAL contending team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
If it's self evident why does no one who actually is a GM do it?
Their owners care more about short term profits than championships. Look at the Leafs...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Most people had them somewhere between 10-20th in the league.
Like I said, the team was dead last in GA the season before. And had back to back seasons where they were at 83 and 81 points respectively with unproven goaltending.

It wasn't a surprise in the least. And please don't call this hindsight because most of us knew this was a disaster in the making for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Kaberle was done before he decided to sell so has no bearing on whether we tanked intentionally. 10-20 games of showcasing Kostitsyn would have little impact on his trade value. Most people would look at the last couple years not the last couple of games. If he had a hat trick the game before the deadline do you think he could've gotten us a 1st

A disaster then ended up with a top-5 pick something you've always wanted. It was clearly his aim by trade deadline to sink as far/fast as we could.
Yeah... sure it was.

If we'd actually focused on getting picks and prospects instead of chasing for 8th I might beleive you. That's not what happened man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
We're not contenders just yet but we're pretty close.

4 years ago we were 1 year removed from a 1st place finish. If Gainey knew at the deadline that he was going to let most of the team go that summer then fine that's a terrible decision. I suspect it was only after he stepped in behind the bench which was after trade deadline
Dude... we wasted our time and let assets walk for nothing. No point in rehashing this or trying to pretend it was anythign but a disaster.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
Because some innocent young habs fan might get tricked into thinking he's right.

Won't someone think of the children!
I hate to break this to you but... I have been right. And if the club had rebuit instead of re-upping with Gomez and co. we'd be a hell of a lot further ahead than what we are now.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 12:17 PM
  #963
Franked
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 258
vCash: 500
Wow, this thread could be so much more. Maybe you guys could stop with the megaposts that don't make sense anymore (are you guys discussing the Kessel trade? Wtf?) and we could all discuss strategies to make the team better?

Franked is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 01:14 PM
  #964
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
dont know why you bother mate, LG regurgitate the same stuff over and over and over and over...

and as soon as you'll show him how silly his arguments are and how wrong he is seeing all this, he'll put you on ignore.
Yeah... I don't get the point of repeating the same stuff over and over when we've known and understood the arguments from the beginning. We just don't agree with most of them (not all - LG's revisitionist theory does make a few valid points).

Fozz is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 01:55 PM
  #965
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
PK is our best defenseman. He's done it with very little help from Markov and played huge minutes.

Nobody is suggesting we trade away ever last vet. So as usual you are making strawman arguments.
Not with Markov in the lineup for sure, he still has stuff to learn. The best thing for his development is to have the option to cut his minutes if he isn't playing the way you want him to.

So which would you trade this year and who would step into their roles?

Monctonscout is online now  
Old
02-15-2013, 03:30 PM
  #966
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Not with Markov in the lineup for sure, he still has stuff to learn. The best thing for his development is to have the option to cut his minutes if he isn't playing the way you want him to.
Pk is our best dman. No doubt about it.

As for him having stuff to learn... sure. And he could learn some things from Markov I don't doubt it. That doesn't mean we shouldn't trade Markov though. There's more to gain from dealing him than hanging onto him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
So which would you trade this year and who would step into their roles?
Kaberle, Webber, whoever else we have on the farm, maybe the return we get in the deal... There's lots of options.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 02-15-2013 at 10:25 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 08:14 PM
  #967
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
I don't think anyone's suggested palyoffs at any cost. But there is a whole lot of middle ground between playoffs at any cost, and tanking.
Trying to surf the middle ground is what the gainey approach could best be described as, and exactly why it failed so poorly.

Having a clear plan in mind, and being willing to take the nexessary calculated risks to make it happen, is what I'd like to see.

People get too caught up with words like "tanking"... Leads to emotional reactions.

Either you have the core group you want in place, and you methodically build around them (be it by trading away, or trading for, established NHL talent or prospects/picks) or you're number 1 priority should be to assemble the necessary core group, even if it means missing the playoffs or moving fan favourites.

Gainey basically did that in 09, problem is that his/gauthiers pro scouting evaluations were horrendous, and they had been blowing valuable assets in building around the core they decided to dump that summer.

If MB views Cole, Gionta, Bourque, Markov & Kaberle as important pieces to build with, so be it. Personally, Markov is the only one from that group that I'd really try to hang on to, the rest, for both cap and performance reasons, are probably more useful as trade bait for other assets to use in building around galch/subban/price/maxpac/gorges/Gally (and hopefully we'll soon add 1-2 of tinordi/beaulieu/kristo/collberg to that list.

Miller Time is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 10:19 PM
  #968
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fozz View Post
Yeah... I don't get the point of repeating the same stuff over and over when we've known and understood the arguments from the beginning. We just don't agree with most of them (not all - LG's revisitionist theory does make a few valid points).
only in habs land do you find a thread as stupid as this one is.

haburger is offline  
Old
02-15-2013, 10:32 PM
  #969
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
only in habs land do you find a thread as stupid as this one is.
I find it kind of useful actually.

Anytime I can't sleep...

Ozymandias is offline  
Old
02-16-2013, 12:16 AM
  #970
mayday199
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 59
vCash: 500
Thoughts

I've read through about one half of this "new" version of the thread and vaguely remember this "rebuilding" type thread has a really long life so I just wanted to bring up a couple thoughts.

I'm not sure what camp I would fall into in this discussion, I see the appeal of trying for as many top 60 picks as we could get for certain veterans on the roster but I think a couple important points need to be brought up.

First, Markov has come back and shown his top 3 attributes are still intact, being he's still solid defensively, gives us a top 5 powerplay and makes his defensive partner look like gold (And probably is one of the reasons Emelins progression into a solid NHL'er has visbily improved), I can't visualize getting enough of a return for him to trade, even as a path to rebuilding.

Second, most of our other veterans as stated but many other posters (Cole, Gionta, Boullion, Kaberle, Bourque) only have decent trade value at or near the trade deadline which requires the proper dance partner and is difficult find. This year being so short and the change for how draft picks works for non-playoff bound teams decreases their draft pick potential in a trade. Barring a perfect fit trade which we'd be crazy not to take even at playoff bubble status, only Gionta or Cole are likely to get a 2nd round pick or higher. Boullion and Kaberle are likely untradable and I have no idea on Bourque cuz his play is impossible to predict.

Third, Pleckanec is likely the best player for a trade deadline rebuilding trade. He's worth a 1st and potentially a prospect but his ceiling is a 1a centre at most. We don't have a first line centre; Desharnais is likely a 2nd liner tops and Gally is 2-3 years from that potential level and is not a guarantee. My suggestion would be to pull the trigger on Pleks trade if the assets back are a combination of young 1st line potential player or decent pick(s) combination.


We have a weak trading hand unless some of our "future" is added in to some high risk type trades for young assets and picks. Which makes you hope Bergevin has a solid poker face and pro scouting staff because there will likely be plunder attempts on a first time GM by the rest of the league.

Fourth We have solid D-man potential coming through the pipeline in the next 2-3 years and when have 2 youngish improving value d-men in Emelin and Diaz. If you can flip one or two of these assets for similar or better prospects/young players the this trade makes sense as we could use UFA to fill one veteran top 4 dman in during the offseason and 3rd pairing d-men players tend not to be too expensive. We need more Grit/Size/Scoring style player for 2nd-3rd line duty and 1st if at all possible. Young players or picks with good potential would work if a trade for some of our defensive depth is possible. (My suggestion would be to sell high on Diaz as a suggestion.)

Fifth for all the Pollock talk research is required in that. Not only did he realize that 1st round picks were valuable he realized he had marginal players in his system that a desperate GMs in expansion locations would trade for because they were run by business minds not hockey minds. It helped that the expansion draft was a joke for getting access to the dregs of the existing teams players. The fact that no one had researched quebec players heavily due to Montreals control of the Quebec as their "Development Territory". I cant remember but I think this control didn't change until the late 60's I think and pollock was plundering in the early 70's.

Lastly team psychology and development always comes into play building a contender, players need time to develop at varying rates and they do need solid veterans to learn the little and the big things on the ice from examples. Best Player available is always the best way to draft so if you end up with 5-6 top 60 picks by emptying all your veterans a teams drafting mindset tends to move to "draft by need" see columbus as a perfect example of where this gets you. You also need space in your farm teams to develop all these new picks and some could take awhile to show their full value so what happens when your top 2 lines are full of youngsters in the AHL? Learning from veterans is also a necessary aspect of farm teams as well.

P.S. Montreal has to pay more for UFAs due to 2 aspects and pays less due to 2. We pay more cuz of the high top end tax rate and the pressure of playing in a hockey mad city. We pay less for certain players because of the history of the team and because its a hockey mad city lol. My hypothesis is that we pay 10-20% more for UFAs cuz of this. For example a player getting offered 9 million to play in New York as a UFA works out to 9.5-10.5 million a year to play in Montreal for many players. The only guarantee to be in the mindset of an agent/player in UFA status is the tax rate so take that into consideration when talking about signing Getzlaf and Perry quality players.

mayday199 is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 09:15 PM
  #971
Prendan Brust
Registered User
 
Prendan Brust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,500
vCash: 500
Are we there again?

Prendan Brust is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 09:30 PM
  #972
Pigems*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 545
vCash: 500
Can't this thread be closed at this point in the season?

Pigems* is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 09:34 PM
  #973
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayday199 View Post
I
Third, Pleckanec is likely the best player for a trade deadline rebuilding trade. He's worth a 1st and potentially a prospect but his ceiling is a 1a centre at most. We don't have a first line centre; Desharnais is likely a 2nd liner tops and Gally is 2-3 years from that potential level and is not a guarantee. My suggestion would be to pull the trigger on Pleks trade if the assets back are a combination of young 1st line potential player or decent pick(s) combination.
if Plekanec is a 1a center (i think you meant "1b")
&
Gally is 2-3 years away from being a #1 centre
&
plekanec is signed for 3 more seasons

wouldn't that be exactly why you DON'T trade plekanec?

giving us the opportunity to, in 2-3 years time, have that perfect combination of a true #1 center, backed-up by a 1B caliber center?



of all the vets we have, the fact that Plekanec would likely be the most valuable to trade is, far from being the reason TO trade him, precisely the reason why it would FOOLISH to do so.

we have 6 picks in the top-90 of a reputed deep draft.
we have one of, if not the best, scouting/drafting departments in the league
we have some elite young talent in place
we have solid cap room to work with over the next 2 seasons
the team is playing very well, exceeding expectations

if MB were to get an absolutely insane offer for a Gionta or Markov, then maybe he has to consider it, but otherwise, with Cole already moved and Bourque out with a concussion, I don't think any major "building for the future" type moves are in the cards this season

Miller Time is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 09:34 PM
  #974
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmony View Post
Are we there again?
No. I think the official rebuild is over (despite tonight's game.)

Galchenyuk and Gallagher have seen to it that this club won't tank again. We're a good two years ahead of where I thought we'd be.

Only thing we can do now (and should still look at) is dealing for some extra picks in this year's deep draft.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
03-02-2013, 09:35 PM
  #975
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pigems View Post
Can't this thread be closed at this point in the season?
Selling at the deadline is still pertinent even if tanking no longer is.

DAChampion 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 06:56 AM.

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.