Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

#15 P.A. Parenteau


NewfoundlandHab

Recommended Posts

More and more I don't like this deal. We had extra 4 million to spend next year, maybe on a legit first line winger. Is he really THAT much better than Briere? He's better but not by much. He's just another "top 6" guy. We needed a first line winger.

Briere wasn't going to fit into our top 6, not with Desharnais and Gallagher already there. So we may as well have traded an underused asset for one that could potentially help us. We haven't seen what PAP can do here yet, so I'm willing to give him a chance in a top 6 role and see if he can produce. Cole put up 30+ goals here and I wouldn't say he was legit number one RW when he showed up here either. That being said, this is exactly why I advocated for making an offer to Thomas Vanek. There are just so few opportunities to sign or keep legit first-line players, and if he was willing to take a 3-5 year deal, it would have been worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the trade, it not only gets rid of one of our smaller players but provides hopefully a little more upside in offense. To me this was a great trade it addressed the size issue as well as we get a younger player and a draft pick to boot. Cannot see why anyone would not like this trade. Way to go MB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the last four years out of the fowards he has the 55th most points with 196. Briere on the other hand has the 109th most with 158. Just a little something to think about.

Over 4 years that's less than 10 points a year. We traded a 40 point guy we should never have signed for a 50 point guy but added an extra year... which will stop us from getting the 70 point guy we need!

Yes its marginally better this year (and no even for the production, but with the loss of Gionta and Briere, we're no longer the smurfs) but we made things so much worse for next year. PAP is what he is, he's like 31, he's not going to be much better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 4 years that's less than 10 points a year. We traded a 40 point guy we should never have signed for a 50 point guy but added an extra year... which will stop us from getting the 70 point guy we need!

Yes its marginally better this year (and no even for the production, but with the loss of Gionta and Briere, we're no longer the smurfs) but we made things so much worse for next year. PAP is what he is, he's like 31, he's not going to be much better.

Where exactly do you think we are getting this 70 point guy?

These guys dont exactly grow on trees. On the FA market for next year, Patrick Kane and Bobby Ryan are the only wingers with that kind of potential. What are the chances of us landing one if them. Kane likely resigns with CHI and then theres 30 teams gunning after Ryan.

We have guys we can move to make cap room. Bourque, Moen, Prust, etc can all be fairly easily replaced by cheaper players.

I;d love to add a 70+ point RW to our roster. But barring a trade (where we will likely be moving some salary back), it will be hard to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He might be a very good fit with Max and DD. He would get close to 70 points.

I would say that depends on if he is playing "with" them, or "beside" them. If DD doesn't go on another slump, and they use him as much as they use each other, all three could hit 70. If not, Patches and DD will probably top out around 60, while Parenteau gets 40ish.

They have a bit of tunnel vision, and tend to more or less ignore their other winger a lot of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More and more I don't like this deal. We had extra 4 million to spend next year, maybe on a legit first line winger.

Eh. 1 year of Parenteau is moveable if a deal comes up, holding on to dead cap space isn't a good idea if we're just vaguely hoping something falls into our lap. Kane, St.Louis, and Ryan are really the only 3 available that fit the bill next year. We can't just throw a year away hoping for Kane in 2015 either, there's a lot of very nice pieces on this team and Parenteau makes us a better team at little cost. It's doubtful that we'd come out ahead in the aggregate by moving valuable assets for a Bobby Ryan type versus moving our 4th line C for Parenteau.

Is he really THAT much better than Briere? He's better but not by much. He's just another "top 6" guy. We needed a first line winger.

Yes. Briere is an exploitation forward who has no spot on this team besides the 4th line with its current makeup. He can't play against tough competition, and Desharnais already takes all of the sheltered minutes and is a better player in that role. He can't play well on the wing, so his only remaining spot was 4th line C. Before this trade the only legitimate scoring winger we had was Gallagher, we've now added a second and don't have an urgent need to make a trade for an upgrade on the wing. We needed a top 6 winger and we got a top 6 winger, and all we gave up was a 4th line center.

Parenteau isn't a star but 50 point wingers don't grow on trees. He's a legitimate top 6 winger and we needed one, it's all well and good to hope for a better player but that's easier said than done. Teams aren't handing out 30 goal scoring 1st line wingers and other than Vanek there wasn't anyone available in free agency. It would have been better to trade Briere for a pick or prospect and sign Vanek for 3 yearsX6.5M, but we really have no idea how practical that would be or if he'd accept 3 years here. The alternative is if you don't make the trade for Parenteau you go into July 1st, miss out on Vanek, and end up chasing after Hemsky, Michalek, Vrbata, or someone else and end up overpaying to bring someone in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the last two years, PAP was 50-60th in the league in even strength points per 60. That's technically top line production, on a good team maybe not, but still second line at worst. He'll fit nicely into the top 6 if that's where we decide to play him there.



Just double checked, Parenteau was 52nd, Briere was 227th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the last two years, PAP was 50-60th in the league in even strength points per 60. That's technically top line production, on a good team maybe not, but still second line at worst. He'll fit nicely into the top 6 if that's where we decide to play him there.

Just double checked, Parenteau was 52nd, Briere was 227th.

I think the issue is people haven't mentally adjusted what point totals are good with how scoring's dropped. Only 7 players broke 80 points last year, and only around 90 players (including defensemen) broke 50 points. But people talk about "50 point forwards" as if they're meaningless and not worth anything. It's like how there's an idea of what a "true" #1 D is that only applies to like 10 guys in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would probably break it down to (in terms of points / game):

> 0.7 = 1st line

0.5 - 0.7 = 2nd line

0.2 - 0.5 = 3rd line

< 0.2 = 4th line

Those would be the definitive production numbers that identify a player's rank on a depth chart league wide. Meaning a 0.7 p/g player on our team as a first liner, would be considered a first liner on any team. Team's aren't normally going to get the right level of production balanced through the lineup. Using a player as a first liner, doesn't make him so, it is the point production that matters.

For the Habs last season (Including Parenteau): (red = gone | green = best potential)

1st: Vanek (.83) Pacioretty (.82)

2nd: Desharnais (.66) Parenteau (.60) Plekanec (.53) Gallagher (.51)

3rd: Gionta (.49) Galchenyuk (.48) Briere (.36) Eller (.34) Bourque (.25) Prust (.25) Weise (.24) Bournival (.23)

4th: Malhotra (.19) Moen (.18) White (.12)

As it stands, we currently have 1 legitimate first-liner in Pacioretty.

We have 4 legitimate second-liners (Parenteau being one), 6 legitimate 3rd liners, and 2 fourth-liners.

We are weak in top 6 production, but we have bottom 9 depth.

Desharnais has produced at a 1st line rate once in his career, Parenteau has done it twice. Unless they are somehow able to elevate each other's game, as part of some magic combination, we shouldn't expect their production to improve significantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would probably break it down to (in terms of points / game):

> 0.7 = 1st line

0.5 - 0.7 = 2nd line

0.2 - 0.5 = 3rd line

< 0.2 = 4th line

Those would be the definitive production numbers that identify a player's rank on a depth chart league wide. Meaning a 0.7 p/g player on our team as a first liner, would be considered a first liner on any team. Team's aren't normally going to get the right level of production balanced through the lineup. Using a player as a first liner, doesn't make him so, it is the point production that matters.

For the Habs last season (Including Parenteau): (red = gone | green = best potential)

1st: Vanek (.83) Pacioretty (.82)

2nd: Desharnais (.66) Parenteau (.60) Plekanec (.53) Gallagher (.51)

3rd: Gionta (.49) Galchenyuk (.48) Briere (.36) Eller (.34) Bourque (.25) Prust (.25) Weise (.24) Bournival (.23)

4th: Malhotra (.19) Moen (.18) White (.12)

As it stands, we currently have 1 legitimate first-liner in Pacioretty.

We have 4 legitimate second-liners (Parenteau being one), 6 legitimate 3rd liners, and 2 fourth-liners.

We are weak in top 6 production, but we have bottom 9 depth.

Desharnais has produced at a 1st line rate once in his career, Parenteau has done it twice. Unless they are somehow able to elevate each other's game, as part of some magic combination, we shouldn't expect their production to improve significantly.

Wow, Ricochetll, you really did your homework (A+,,you passed :P ). There's only 1 thing missing,,,chemistry, and you can never figure out if players on a line have it, until you try different players on the same line. MT will have his work cut out for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, Ricochetll, you really did your homework (A+,,you passed :P ). There's only 1 thing missing,,,chemistry, and you can never figure out if players on a line have it, until you try different players on the same line. MT will have his work cut out for him.

Thank you professor kinot! :D

I did account for chemistry, sort of. I said DD and Par might be some magic combination. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...