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

2017-18 The Rumors Thread


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Windoe said:

Its time to get over Subban, his teammates didn't like his personality.  It got to a point where he had to be moved.  

The idiot teammates that sleep with their teammates' wives also all eventually get moved.  

As GM, what are you supposed to do when your room won't accept them anymore?

If MB could have gotten a #1C for Subban, he would have, but it wasn't an available option at the time, so we ended up with Weber and a harmonious room.    

1. Subban has a big personality. We've had players like Markov, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gill, DSP, Weise, Gallagher, etc. come out publicly supporting Subban after the trade, even though there was no need to do this with their not being on the same team anymore. They all said Subban's personality differences were blown out of proportion and that he got along with everyone in the room. I do believe there were a couple of players (Plekanec for example) who didn't care for Subban's antics, but there are guys who don't like each other on any team. I think more players liked Subban than didn't. I think MB and MT were the two guys who didn't like Subban because he undermined their plan to play boring defensive grinder hockey. But no, I don't believe Subban was traded because of his teammates, I believe he was traded because of his GM and coach's attitudes towards him.

2. Comparing Subban to "idiots who sleep with their teammates' wives" is pretty low. Since when is being vocal and liking attention the same thing as sleeping with your teammates' wives? Subban has never been found to have done anything illegal or even immoral. He has always publicly supported his teammates and cheers loudly for them when they score goals and have success. I can't even think of a time when he called out a teammate in the media, unlike his ex-coach Therrien who did it all the time. Subban was loved by the community, he's done a lot of charity work, and he continues to support the Children's Hospital despite the fact he doesn't even live here any more. He's become an ambassador for the team in Nashville too. So where is the proof of Subban being a bad person and why do people continue to drag his name through the mud without evidence?

3. With Subban here, when we were winning games, Therrien and the media and the fans talked about how great the room was all the time. When did that stop? When we started losing. How good the room is has more to do with team success than the other way around. Subban and his supposed issues took the Preds to a Cup final with the same team Weber couldn't get anywhere with. Phil Kessel and his "baggage" have won two Cups in two years with Pittsburgh. So was Kessel really the problem in Toronto all these years or was it the fact they had bad talent and bad coaching? I'll vote for the latter. Talent wins you games. No, you don't want criminals and you don't want guys fighting each other off the ice and getting arrested, but Subban was none of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, I'm sure Bergevin and the organization would absolutely love it if fans would ignore the hideous mistake they made in giving Subban away. But I'd rather it wasn't forgotten so similar awful decisions aren't made in the future. As it is, this core's realistic window is essentially closed. If wise choices aren't made soon, we're going to have a protracted, painful rebuilding process more difficult than it need be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, habs_93 said:

Oh, I'm sure Bergevin and the organization would absolutely love it if fans would ignore the hideous mistake they made in giving Subban away. But I'd rather it wasn't forgotten so similar awful decisions aren't made in the future. As it is, this core's realistic window is essentially closed. If wise choices aren't made soon, we're going to have a protracted, painful rebuilding process more difficult than it need be.

:2008122810303:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, habs_93 said:

Oh, I'm sure Bergevin and the organization would absolutely love it if fans would ignore the hideous mistake they made in giving Subban away. But I'd rather it wasn't forgotten so similar awful decisions aren't made in the future. As it is, this core's realistic window is essentially closed. If wise choices aren't made soon, we're going to have a protracted, painful rebuilding process more difficult than it need be.

I don't think MB views it as a mistake. I think he really believes he won the trade, which is what's even more troubling. Further proof of this is how they've marginalized the young and talented Galchenyuk, akin to what they did to Subban. This organization either doesn't recognize or doesn't appreciate talent. Under Bergevin, it places the emphasis on grit instead of skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

1. Subban has a big personality. We've had players like Markov, Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gill, DSP, Weise, Gallagher, etc. come out publicly supporting Subban after the trade, even though there was no need to do this with their not being on the same team anymore. They all said Subban's personality differences were blown out of proportion and that he got along with everyone in the room. I do believe there were a couple of players (Plekanec for example) who didn't care for Subban's antics, but there are guys who don't like each other on any team. I think more players liked Subban than didn't. I think MB and MT were the two guys who didn't like Subban because he undermined their plan to play boring defensive grinder hockey. But no, I don't believe Subban was traded because of his teammates, I believe he was traded because of his GM and coach's attitudes towards him.

- For a mid-talented team to win, they must be a high-chemistry team.  That is MB.  That's his life, that's his experience, that's what he's implementing and that's the hill he will die on.  He wants to win the Cup, that is his goal, and he believes he can win with a mid-talent and high-chemistry team.  In the absence of high-talent, high-chemistry is the only option to even have a shot at the Cup, which MB sees as getting into the playoffs and you never know what will happen.  Before PK was traded, when that team was winning, they were a mid-talent team with a high-chemistry.  When they started losing, the fair weather chemistry broke down, and this time, management believed that it was either irreparable or it would be an inevitable liability down the road.  Rightly or not, he was traded because enough of his teammates had enough of him, the positive chemistry that he created the past had turned to negative chemistry, and management had to stabilize the chemistry because the players were unable to themselves, which they later identified as a leadership void.

2. Comparing Subban to "idiots who sleep with their teammates' wives" is pretty low. Since when is being vocal and liking attention the same thing as sleeping with your teammates' wives? Subban has never been found to have done anything illegal or even immoral. He has always publicly supported his teammates and cheers loudly for them when they score goals and have success. I can't even think of a time when he called out a teammate in the media, unlike his ex-coach Therrien who did it all the time. Subban was loved by the community, he's done a lot of charity work, and he continues to support the Children's Hospital despite the fact he doesn't even live here any more. He's become an ambassador for the team in Nashville too. So where is the proof of Subban being a bad person and why do people continue to drag his name through the mud without evidence?

- That would be low, as Subban is really quite an amazing person.  I'm comparing Subban to players that also have ended up not being liked by many of their teammates after time or an event.  

-Try to imagine a fair weather room that was used to winning, that is now losing, and that has a leadership void.  Who do you think might try to step into fill that void in that team's time of need?  That's got PK written all over it.  The team didn't want PK as their leader.  To strengthen the necessary element of high-chemistry, management concluded that though PK used to have a positive effect on chemistry, he was now having a negative effect on chemistry, and they were willing to sacrifice his talent.   

3. With Subban here, when we were winning games, Therrien and the media and the fans talked about how great the room was all the time. When did that stop? When we started losing. How good the room is has more to do with team success than the other way around. Subban and his supposed issues took the Preds to a Cup final with the same team Weber couldn't get anywhere with. Phil Kessel and his "baggage" have won two Cups in two years with Pittsburgh. So was Kessel really the problem in Toronto all these years or was it the fact they had bad talent and bad coaching? I'll vote for the latter. Talent wins you games. No, you don't want criminals and you don't want guys fighting each other off the ice and getting arrested, but Subban was none of that.

- When adversity arrived, and persisted, that team's talent was not high enough to win, and that team's chemistry crumbled.  If you're MB, 24/7, you're trying to add talent, and you're trying to improve chemistry.  MB is one of the hardest working GMs in the league.  The PK-Weber deal was a chemistry deal, not a talent deal.  The Penguins, a high-talent and high-chemistry team, can integrate a high talent player like Kessel because his personality won't be a problem.  They're winning more often than not because of their talent, and they have other leadership sources to get through periods of adversity.  A mid talent team like Montreal and a low talent team like Toronto (then) live and die to a much greater extent by team chemistry to compensate for lower levels of talent.    

Additional comment: This is not criticism of management or of PK.  It just was what it was.  Big positive personalities can lose the room over time.  It happens with coaches, and it happened with PK.  We're fans of a team that is managed by someone that places team chemistry just ahead of team talent, and sometimes we lose an elite talent, usually those with big personalities that have reached their expiration date.  Carey works so well here because he is both an elite talent and has a compatible personality for the long run.  PK will fit right in to most new rooms, and provide both talent and chemistry when he's new to the room, as he did in Montreal. Based on Nashville's playoff run, you could argue that PK's fresh new big personality was welcomed in that room and I wouldn't be surprised if he elevated and challenged his teammates.  

Paradoxically, we need talent and we traded away an elite talent.  I get it.  It was a tough trade for everyone, and in isolation it seems like we gave up exactly what we needed more of, talent.  And that would be true if chemistry stayed fixed, but it didn't.  Management did the right thing, and they are now doing the right thing, namely they have stabilized chemistry, they have stabilized leadership, and they are doggedly hunting for talent.

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Who wins this playoff series, and how often:

High-talent and medium-chemistry (ex: WAS) vs. Medium-talent and high-chemistry (ex: MTL)

MB believes he wins this more times than not, though in reality its probably a coin toss.

2) Who wins this playoff series, and how often:

Medium-talent (ex: PIT w/ key injury, or NYR healthy) and high chemistry vs. Medium talent and high chemistry (ex: MTL)

This is a coin toss.  In a league with parity, MB accepts this is reality.

3) But the problem is the good times stop when we encounter this matchup:

High-talent and high-chemistry (PIT healthy) vs. Medium-talent and high-chemistry (ex: MTL)

And we're out, looking for more talent and chemistry

So yes while its possible and anything can happen once you're in the playoffs, the fans are tired of trying to fluke our way into a Cup.  

Here's the problem though: Its our only option.  The Canadiens brand has never tanked.  Its never been the laughing stock.  We're a victim of good management actually.  We consistently put together a pretty good team.  We range between middle and upper-middle class.  We never go destitute, so we never become elite.  You either tank and get in line for potential greatness down the road, or you try to build and fluke your way into a Cup.  We're going in the latter direction for the foreseeable future, so enjoy winning more games than not and maybe just maybe one spring will be our year to win it all, but probably not.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Windoe said:

1) Who wins this playoff series, and how often:

High-talent and medium-chemistry (ex: WAS) vs. Medium-talent and high-chemistry (ex: MTL)

MB believes he wins this more times than not, though in reality its probably a coin toss.

2) Who wins this playoff series, and how often:

Medium-talent (ex: PIT w/ key injury, or NYR healthy) and high chemistry vs. Medium talent and high chemistry (ex: MTL)

This is a coin toss.  In a league with parity, MB accepts this is reality.

3) But the problem is the good times stop when we encounter this matchup:

High-talent and high-chemistry (PIT healthy) vs. Medium-talent and high-chemistry (ex: MTL)

And we're out, looking for more talent and chemistry

So yes while its possible and anything can happen once you're in the playoffs, the fans are tired of trying to fluke our way into a Cup.  

Here's the problem though: Its our only option.  The Canadiens brand has never tanked.  Its never been the laughing stock.  We're a victim of good management actually.  We consistently put together a pretty good team.  We range between middle and upper-middle class.  We never go destitute, so we never become elite.  You either tank and get in line for potential greatness down the road, or you try to build and fluke your way into a Cup.  We're going in the latter direction for the foreseeable future, so enjoy winning more games than not and maybe just maybe one spring will be our year to win it all, but probably not.

 

 

 

 

For the last 24 years the only thing Habs management has been good at is that torch ceremony on opening night, trying, and succeeding, in suckering the fans into spending their money on the Habs for one more year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ But this is my point: the idea of "chemistry" is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. We like to say that teams have "great chemistry" when they win. The Pens have won two straight Cups, so we talk about how they must have excellent team chemistry. But we're just saying that because they were winners. The exact same Penguins roster struggled to start the 2015-16 season, fired its coach, and then went on to win the Cup. So were all those players bad-chemistry players or were they good-chemistry players?

You called the Caps a mid-level chemistry team. Why? The Capitals have had a very talented roster and they haven't been able to make deep runs in the playoffs. But is that bad chemistry or is that just bad luck or is it that other teams just figured out the Caps' system or that they are too fatigued by the time the playoffs came around? But there's no way of telling that the Caps have a chemistry problem. You're assuming that. But I have no clue whether the Pens' players like their teammates more than the Caps' like theirs. People claimed Markov didn't like Subban and that Markov wanted Subban off the team, yet Markov invited Subban to his wedding and Subban attended... in Russia. Doesn't sound like two guys who dislike each other.

Phil Kessel, whom I mentioned before, was labeled a "cancer in the room" in Toronto yet the Pens were able to win with him, and he was an integral part of their last two Cup runs, especially the first one. Your narrative is that the Pens were able to overcome his negative effect, but maybe we could just accept that he helped the Pens win rather than that they overcame his negative impact. The same can be said about Subban. We won more with him than without him, and he was a boon on the ice both here and in Nashville. My point is that if you have a player who's so skilled that he improves your team's performance that much, you deal with the personality. We're not talking about a guy who has been arrested three times for drug possession or a guy who burned down his GM's office or so on. The fact Subban likes talking to the media isn't anything. It's nothing. It was only made into something by Bergevin and Therrien and the goonies on Antichambre. IMO, MB and MT were the problem in this situation. The whole "it's too hard to find skilled players" bit Bergevin has cried to us about indicates he's a problem. If you can't find skill, you don't try to replace it with grit and character. Dale Weise and John Scott and George Parros and Francis Bouillon might all have character up the ying-yang, but none of them are helping you win Cups more than Subban, Galchenyuk, Pacioretty, and Kessel. You don't dump the skill you do have. You build around it. Bergevin has failed at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, habs1952 said:

For the last 24 years the only thing Habs management has been good at is that torch ceremony on opening night, trying, and succeeding, in suckering the fans into spending their money on the Habs for one more year. 

I'll take that one step further... even the torch ceremony is played out. It's the same bit every year, with the handing over of the torch and the lighting the ice on fire. Time to think of something new, instead of recycling the things that used to work 20 years ago (sound familiar?)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

^^ But this is my point: the idea of "chemistry" is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. We like to say that teams have "great chemistry" when they win. The Pens have won two straight Cups, so we talk about how they must have excellent team chemistry. But we're just saying that because they were winners. The exact same Penguins roster struggled to start the 2015-16 season, fired its coach, and then went on to win the Cup. So were all those players bad-chemistry players or were they good-chemistry players?

- Chemistry is not fixed.  Players are not good chemistry or bad chemistry in the same way that they are high talent and medium talent.  The Pens players do have good chemistry and they've had it for years.  Maybe as time went on, they didn't like their coach.  

You called the Caps a mid-level chemistry team. Why? The Capitals have had a very talented roster and they haven't been able to make deep runs in the playoffs. But is that bad chemistry or is that just bad luck or is it that other teams just figured out the Caps' system or that they are too fatigued by the time the playoffs came around? But there's no way of telling that the Caps have a chemistry problem. You're assuming that. But I have no clue whether the Pens' players like their teammates more than the Caps' like theirs. People claimed Markov didn't like Subban and that Markov wanted Subban off the team, yet Markov invited Subban to his wedding and Subban attended... in Russia. Doesn't sound like two guys who dislike each other.

- The Caps' chemistry is fine, but its not high level like the Pens.  The Pens have first class people and first class talent with positive chemistry.  PK is definitely a first class person with a first class talent and it sure looks like he had positive chemistry in Nashville last year.  In Montreal, PK was a first class person with a first class talent, that unfortunately turned from a positive to a negative chemistry in the room.  This changing nature of chemistry is part of the rationale that players often benefit from a change in teams.  

Phil Kessel, whom I mentioned before, was labeled a "cancer in the room" in Toronto yet the Pens were able to win with him, and he was an integral part of their last two Cup runs, especially the first one. Your narrative is that the Pens were able to overcome his negative effect, but maybe we could just accept that he helped the Pens win rather than that they overcame his negative impact. The same can be said about Subban. We won more with him than without him, and he was a boon on the ice both here and in Nashville. My point is that if you have a player who's so skilled that he improves your team's performance that much, you deal with the personality. We're not talking about a guy who has been arrested three times for drug possession or a guy who burned down his GM's office or so on. The fact Subban likes talking to the media isn't anything. It's nothing. It was only made into something by Bergevin and Therrien and the goonies on Antichambre. IMO, MB and MT were the problem in this situation. The whole "it's too hard to find skilled players" bit Bergevin has cried to us about indicates he's a problem. If you can't find skill, you don't try to replace it with grit and character. Dale Weise and John Scott and George Parros and Francis Bouillon might all have character up the ying-yang, but none of them are helping you win Cups more than Subban, Galchenyuk, Pacioretty, and Kessel. You don't dump the skill you do have. You build around it. Bergevin has failed at that.

- Kessel, a natural talent, did become a cancer in Toronto's room, plus Toronto's room was messed up for other reasons (eluded to in another post).  He brought added talent to the Pens that helped them win and he did not have a negative effect on the Pens' chemistry.  That's less about Phil, and more about the Pens.  Toronto has suffered to get into their current position.  Not as much as Edmonton, but they still suffered.  Are we up for that?  If we are, we'll need to fire MB, because he's too good at getting us into the playoffs.

- Subban is an exceptional citizen and gave everything he had to the Canadiens.  None of his teammates are incented to say anything poorly about him, they are all professionals.  PK is also a natural leader, and I'm sure he's a leader in Nashville.  It just didn't work out here.  The team didn't want to follow him. 

- Yes its time for a new opening ceremony.  This one's been first class, but its getting old and as we're entering the Drouin era it might be time to switch it up.

- I agree that Management is largely selling hope to the fanbase, and pumping in new blood helps obfuscate the prior years' shortcomings.  But I also know that they will win more games than they lose, they'll make the upcoming Canadian winter better, and who knows, if they make the playoffs...they might...just...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't understand how you're measuring "chemistry" though. You're saying the Caps are "mid-level chemistry" and the Pens are "high-level chemistry" but I don't know how you're making that distinction. The only difference, really, is that the Pens have won Cups and the Caps have not. But how do we know that's because of differences in chemistry? What's the chicken and what's the egg here? What's the cart and what's the horse? I'll guarantee you that whatever team wins the Cup this year, fans and media will say they had good chemistry.

Take the Rangers-Habs series last year and if you replay it ten times, it's extremely unlikely the same team would have won it each time. Ditto for the Preds-Pens final. Ditto for some of those Caps-Pens clashes in the past or for the Preds-Hawks first round last year. There's some amount of luck that goes into who wins. A team can be really good and can appear to have "great chemistry" and a "tight-knit group" but that doesn't guarantee you win. Look at the Hawks this past season... same core group as what's led them to the Cup a couple of times. Same coach. Same fans. Same successful regular season. And they couldn't win in the playoffs. It doesn't mean the Hawks need to trade Kane or Toews or Keith. It doesn't mean they need to fire Quenneville. It means they had a bad run over a 4-game stretch. That could be due to fatigue, injuries, a couple of bad bounces, a timely powerplay or two that goes one way instead of another, a goalie who flubs a save he was supposed to make, and so on... in short, factors that won't necessarily be reproducible. I've said this for a few years now, but the salary cap induces a certain amount of parity in the league whereby any team can get hot enough to ride a streak at the right time towards the Cup. Even the best teams in the league are given something like a 5-8% chance of winning the Cup when you look at oddsmakers' predictions.

Point being, if the Habs had not traded Subban and had addressed their lack of scoring and the fact their coach at the time (Therrien) had no system, I think you would have seen more drastic improvements than what you got by dumping Subban and Eller and trying to fix "character." You build a team that wins games, people will say you have chemistry. You play on a team that wins and it's pretty unlikely players will rock the boat. Players get dissatisfied when the team loses and they feel they can do more than the guy next to them. In the end, it's just a giant mistake to trade away your best talents to try and shake things up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team that wins the Cup this year, probably will look alot like teams that have won recently, namely they will likely have high chemistry AND have high talent, AND as you say will have luck.  All three are needed, its hard to put together, that's partly why MB thinks once you're in anything can happen.  

He shored up his chemistry and now he is trying his best to get talent.  I thought the Radulov get last year was an excellent example of MB getting it done, and unfortunately we could not keep Radulov.  I think getting Drouin was also the right move.

Just to be clear, I'm not at all saying the Caps have chemistry problems.  They were just less tight a group compared to the Pens.  I'm going on info from about 2-3 years ago on that statement so use that info more as an example.

Winning creates chemistry, and losing tests chemistry.  You'll often hear team leaders saying they welcome a stretch of adversity during the regular season, because it helps to build a stronger team in preparations for the playoffs.  CJ is definitely an upgrade on MT, I think we can all agree on that.  

I think the PK trade was very heavily deliberated and was good for Nashville, Montreal, and PK and was intensely more than just an attempt to shake things up.

I guess you have to decide for yourself what is more likely: a) PK was traded for chemistry reasons, or b) MB believes Weber is a higher talent than PK.

 

    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I don't think MB views it as a mistake. I think he really believes he won the trade, which is what's even more troubling. Further proof of this is how they've marginalized the young and talented Galchenyuk, akin to what they did to Subban. This organization either doesn't recognize or doesn't appreciate talent. Under Bergevin, it places the emphasis on grit instead of skill.

I don't think you're wrong, and that's part of why I'm unwilling to let it drop. Look, mistakes happen. If Bergevin had traded for Weber and had acted in a fashion that suggested he was legitiamtely going all in to win last season, I could've understood it. I would have disagreed with it, and I would've criticized it, but at the end of the day he would've done something serious and it would've deserved to be taken seriously.

That wasn't what happened, though. Bergevin threw the superior player away, kept his awful coach until literally the last possible second, and made panic moves. Perhaps he hasn't comprehensively demonstrated himself incapable of operating as a GM in the modern NHL, but it's close. Until the organization starts taking this situation seriously and properly allocutes to the fans, it deserves no benefit of the doubt. I will happily move on from all this when Molson cleans house, lays it all out on the table, and starts a proper rebuild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habs_93 said:

I don't think you're wrong, and that's part of why I'm unwilling to let it drop. Look, mistakes happen. If Bergevin had traded for Weber and had acted in a fashion that suggested he was legitiamtely going all in to win last season, I could've understood it. I would have disagreed with it, and I would've criticized it, but at the end of the day he would've done something serious and it would've deserved to be taken seriously.

I agree.  If the deal had been Subban for Weber + a veteran 1st line centre (not that nashville had one, but you take my point) then you could say "ok, MB is trading the better player but getting 2 key elements in an effort to win now."   But he didnt do that. He make this huge move and then tinkered. 


And like both of you, I fully agree that MB still believes he won that trade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habs_93 said:

I don't think you're wrong, and that's part of why I'm unwilling to let it drop. Look, mistakes happen. If Bergevin had traded for Weber and had acted in a fashion that suggested he was legitiamtely going all in to win last season, I could've understood it. I would have disagreed with it, and I would've criticized it, but at the end of the day he would've done something serious and it would've deserved to be taken seriously.

That wasn't what happened, though. Bergevin threw the superior player away, kept his awful coach until literally the last possible second, and made panic moves. Perhaps he hasn't comprehensively demonstrated himself incapable of operating as a GM in the modern NHL, but it's close. Until the organization starts taking this situation seriously and properly allocutes to the fans, it deserves no benefit of the doubt. I will happily move on from all this when Molson cleans house, lays it all out on the table, and starts a proper rebuild.

Excellent post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Windoe said:

The team that wins the Cup this year, probably will look alot like teams that have won recently, namely they will likely have high chemistry AND have high talent, AND as you say will have luck.  All three are needed, its hard to put together, that's partly why MB thinks once you're in anything can happen.  

He shored up his chemistry and now he is trying his best to get talent.  I thought the Radulov get last year was an excellent example of MB getting it done, and unfortunately we could not keep Radulov.  I think getting Drouin was also the right move.

Just to be clear, I'm not at all saying the Caps have chemistry problems.  They were just less tight a group compared to the Pens.  I'm going on info from about 2-3 years ago on that statement so use that info more as an example.

Winning creates chemistry, and losing tests chemistry.  You'll often hear team leaders saying they welcome a stretch of adversity during the regular season, because it helps to build a stronger team in preparations for the playoffs.  CJ is definitely an upgrade on MT, I think we can all agree on that.  

I think the PK trade was very heavily deliberated and was good for Nashville, Montreal, and PK and was intensely more than just an attempt to shake things up.

I guess you have to decide for yourself what is more likely: a) PK was traded for chemistry reasons, or B) MB believes Weber is a higher talent than PK.

 

    

I like Radulov and Drouin as well, but I like them for their skill not because I think they fit into the team concept or because they are character players. In fact, both guys were labeled problem players for character reasons in the past (Radulov was kicked off the Preds essentially, and Drouin was suspended by TB for not reporting to the minors). Their reputations are/were actually worse than Subban's. Yet I'd be happy to have all three guys on my roster because they have skill.

You take a guy like Mike Ribeiro, who was rumored to have been using drugs or having an alcohol problem or whatever it was while he was here, and that's an issue to me. You take a guy like Sergei Kostitsyn who repeatedly showed up late for practices and missed flights because he was out partying the night before, and that's more of an issue to me. But those types of things affect on-ice performance.

 

5 hours ago, habs_93 said:

I don't think you're wrong, and that's part of why I'm unwilling to let it drop. Look, mistakes happen. If Bergevin had traded for Weber and had acted in a fashion that suggested he was legitiamtely going all in to win last season, I could've understood it. I would have disagreed with it, and I would've criticized it, but at the end of the day he would've done something serious and it would've deserved to be taken seriously.

That wasn't what happened, though. Bergevin threw the superior player away, kept his awful coach until literally the last possible second, and made panic moves. Perhaps he hasn't comprehensively demonstrated himself incapable of operating as a GM in the modern NHL, but it's close. Until the organization starts taking this situation seriously and properly allocutes to the fans, it deserves no benefit of the doubt. I will happily move on from all this when Molson cleans house, lays it all out on the table, and starts a proper rebuild.

There's no doubt MB traded Subban for off-ice reasons. He didn't like Subban. Subban was getting too much attention and taking away from the idea that they were building an anonymous team of guys with no personality and only a team concept. Subban didn't get along with the coach (or more, the coach didn't get along with Subban if we're going to be honest). MB definitely feels like he won the trade because he values playing tough and not rocking the boat and things that Weber possesses. He lost the on-ice product trade-off, but I don't think he cares about breakout ability or skating or puck skill as much because he really feels that grit and character win you games.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You make a good distinction with the substance abusing players, those players are usually bad for chemistry and they will be bad anywhere as long as they are using and their teammates are aware of it, which they are pretty quickly.  That is often why these players are involved in many trades.  I remember a friend (player at the time) telling me when Fleury was traded to the Rangers, the big city of New York was going to eat him.  That is putting a player with substance abuse challenges in a position to fail.  

Another subset of bad chemistry players are situational.  This is where PK, Kessel, Drouin and Radulov were.  The situation they were in just was not working and they added to bad chemistry.  A change in scenery may help these players. It helped PK, Kessel and Radulov, and MB suspects it will help Drouin as well.  

When MB acquired Radulov, which was an amazing move out of left field that worked out, many people laughed at MB because Radulov was a selfish party animal.  And maybe he was.  But people change, especially kids in their 20s.  He was not a substance abuser, and he was worth taking a one year flier on.  Now that we see he has talent and that he cleared the chemistry test, I wish we would have been able to sign him, but the taxes did us in on that one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Windoe said:

This Lupul thing could get pretty interesting ;)

IMO it will  be forgotten by end of week

He has 72 hours to file a grievance...if he does and wins he  faces the risk of being bought out or spending the season with the Marlies if he 'did' win the Grievance

$5 m to sit at home and keep quiet or ride a bus in the ECHL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Regis22 said:

IMO it will  be forgotten by end of week

He has 72 hours to file a grievance...if he does and wins he  faces the risk of being bought out or spending the season with the Marlies if he 'did' win the Grievance

$5 m to sit at home and keep quiet or ride a bus in the ECHL

Problem is, Lupul isn't the only one. Robidas and Jared Cowen are also question marks as to how they were treated. Something seems fishy in hog town.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many media pundits seem to think that MB is going to wait with his cap space now.  If a deal falls in his lap (there are purportedly some of his famous "take it or leave it" offers out there) then he will make a move but he's more than content to go into the season with the roster we have and use that cap space if he needs it for a trade during the season and up to the trade deadline.   Certainly it could be very useful (if we were to acquire a high priced player that we can then fit under our cap) but unless he uses it, it wont do us any good.  More importantly, we seem to have a couple of pretty big holes that Im not sure we can fill internally, but maybe we'll be ok during the season as is. I think they need to be addressed before the playoffs though. 

Interesting to see what happens as the season progresses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Many media pundits seem to think that MB is going to wait with his cap space now.  If a deal falls in his lap (there are purportedly some of his famous "take it or leave it" offers out there) then he will make a move but he's more than content to go into the season with the roster we have and use that cap space if he needs it for a trade during the season and up to the trade deadline.   Certainly it could be very useful (if we were to acquire a high priced player that we can then fit under our cap) but unless he uses it, it wont do us any good.  More importantly, we seem to have a couple of pretty big holes that Im not sure we can fill internally, but maybe we'll be ok during the season as is. I think they need to be addressed before the playoffs though. 

Interesting to see what happens as the season progresses. 

dude we could get FOUR 2 million dollar players. 

so much DEPTH!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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