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

Recommended Posts

I’ve probably been one of the biggest “cheerleaders” for trading Domi for Anderson over that past six weeks. But acquiring Anderson was only phase one of my “if I were GM” plan. Phase two was to acquire Virtanen, phase three was to sign Hoffman. And if phases one through three were done correctly (move out Byron, Weal and one of our D), a possible phase four would have been to at least take a serious crack at signing Krug.

But man, this Anderson contract is a little rich. Basically handcuffs us. Maybe we can get Hoffman still, but IMO, we needed to check at least three of those four boxes to significantly move the needle. Will be interesting to see how the next couple of days pan out, but I’m less optimistic than I was 24 hours ago :/

Link to post
Share on other sites

How anybody can defend/like this trade and subsequent contract is beyond me.

Domi ... 0.667 PPG, 0.216GPG, 0.451APG

Anderson 0.431 PPG, 0.243GPG, 0.188APG

So first off, Anderson barely scores more often than Domi (to the tune of 3 more goals over 82 games).   He also has about 1/3 rd the assists.   So he's not helping line mates out either.     He is also coming off a season where before he was injured he had 1 goal and 3 assists over 26 games.

So Domi plus a pick for Anderson?   Ummmm what?   Based on value, it should have been Anderson and a pick for Domi.

Contract?  5.5 average cap hit? for a guy with one good season and coming off a horrible season, in the midst of a panademic where we don't even know what hockey will loo like in the future?   Even in a normal year, Anderson based on recent performance should not have been offered a 5.5 cap hit contract, where some years he is paid 8m/year.

We got fleeced by CB in the trade and MB got fleeced again by Anderson's agent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

I’ve probably been one of the biggest “cheerleaders” for trading Domi for Anderson over that past six weeks. But acquiring Anderson was only phase one of my “if I were GM” plan. Phase two was to acquire Virtanen, phase three was to sign Hoffman. And if phases one through three were done correctly (move out Byron, Weal and one of our D), a possible phase four would have been to at least take a serious crack at signing Krug.

But man, this Anderson contract is a little rich. Basically handcuffs us. Maybe we can get Hoffman still, but IMO, we needed to check at least three of those four boxes to significantly move the needle. Will be interesting to see how the next couple of days pan out, but I’m less optimistic than I was 24 hours ago :/

You made the mistake of thinking that MB can follow through on more than one "phase" a year. :P   Its like a lof of his moves;  Good, but what comes next?  and then..there's no next. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
59 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Too bad we couldn’t get the win, but one game in, Anderson looks pretty much as advertised.

He's a beast. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

In an otherwise putrid game, Anderson was our best player.  The thing that really struck me as we came close at the end, is how Anderson seemed to take over the game and - nearly - got us a point too.  

Contrast that with Domi, whom i really liked - but when games were stinkers like last night, tended to do something... dumb.  How do you think he would have reacted to the cross check?  He would have gone out & taken a stupid penalty.  Anderson took a number (there'll be chance for payback in the season) and went to work, scoring a goal and almost another late in the game.  

I have to feel like if we didnt take that (pretty cheap) penalty we might have tied it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/9/2020 at 9:41 AM, HabsAlways said:

How anybody can defend/like this trade and subsequent contract is beyond me.

Domi ... 0.667 PPG, 0.216GPG, 0.451APG

Anderson 0.431 PPG, 0.243GPG, 0.188APG

So first off, Anderson barely scores more often than Domi (to the tune of 3 more goals over 82 games).   He also has about 1/3 rd the assists.   So he's not helping line mates out either.     He is also coming off a season where before he was injured he had 1 goal and 3 assists over 26 games.

So Domi plus a pick for Anderson?   Ummmm what?   Based on value, it should have been Anderson and a pick for Domi.

Contract?  5.5 average cap hit? for a guy with one good season and coming off a horrible season, in the midst of a panademic where we don't even know what hockey will loo like in the future?   Even in a normal year, Anderson based on recent performance should not have been offered a 5.5 cap hit contract, where some years he is paid 8m/year.

We got fleeced by CB in the trade and MB got fleeced again by Anderson's agent.

So? still feel the same way?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2021 at 10:35 AM, ramcharger440 said:

So? still feel the same way?

Yes, despite his performance ... at the time of the trade, Domi had produced more and therefore it should have been Domi for Anderson + 2nd, not Anderson for Domi + 2nd

And coming off a 1 goal in 26 games to get 5.5million?   Still a bit high, and Domi's overall point production was better.    Yes hindsight is great and Anderson is performing well, but the trade at the time was ridiculous ... we gave up the proven player and a 2nd round pick for a question mark.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

Yes, despite his performance ... at the time of the trade, Domi had produced more and therefore it should have been Domi for Anderson + 2nd, not Anderson for Domi + 2nd

And coming off a 1 goal in 26 games to get 5.5million?   Still a bit high, and Domi's overall point production was better.    Yes hindsight is great and Anderson is performing well, but the trade at the time was ridiculous ... we gave up the proven player and a 2nd round pick for a question mark.

Fwiw, it was a 3rd not a 2nd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/6/2021 at 10:24 AM, HabsAlways said:

Yes, despite his performance ... at the time of the trade, Domi had produced more and therefore it should have been Domi for Anderson + 2nd, not Anderson for Domi + 2nd

And coming off a 1 goal in 26 games to get 5.5million?   Still a bit high, and Domi's overall point production was better.    Yes hindsight is great and Anderson is performing well, but the trade at the time was ridiculous ... we gave up the proven player and a 2nd round pick for a question mark.

I totally understand this reasoning and i do agree that at the time I also felt that it should have been them throwing in the pick (or at worst a 1 for 1) but you have to look at it from the team's perspective. If you are putting full faith in your scouts and you're certain the player you are acquiring will be as good as you think, then you make the deal.  If Mb balked at the deal because of the pick he'd be kicking himself now.


It was risky, no doubt, but a calculated risk that seems to have paid off very very well (small sample size)

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, maas_art said:

I totally understand this reasoning and i do agree that at the time I also felt that it should have been them throwing in the pick (or at worst a 1 for 1) but you have to look at it from the team's perspective. If you are putting full faith in your scouts and you're certain the player you are acquiring will be as good as you think, then you make the deal.  If Mb balked at the deal because of the pick he'd be kicking himself now.


It was risky, no doubt, but a calculated risk that seems to have paid off very very well (small sample size)

I have to agree with this reasoning. I too, thought the give was too much. But, so far, so good, and, I would do it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, don't get me wrong ... happy with the outcome.    But I assess trades by what they looked like at the time, not how they worked out in hindsight.

On paper, regardless of scouts, we gave up the more proven player and a pick.   To me it's no different than MB doing Subban for Weber straight up.    On paper we took on the older, longer contract and should have gotten a sweetener back from Nashville.    You can't keep getting "lucky" with trades in hindsight and claim competence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes I think Bergevin builds up a pipeline of mid-round picks just so he can send them somewhere when he sees something he wants. The Anderson trade is a good example of that. We ditched a third rounder in the trade, but... we still have three third rounders in the 2021 draft. I don't mind adding a sweetener to the mix (even if it feels like an overpayment) to get the player management wants. It's fine when you've been able to consistently flood your pipeline with mid-rounders to replace those you're giving away. I remember some people reporting there were multiple teams interested in Anderson. Sometimes it's better to bite the bullet and "lose" the trade to get it completed. In this situtation, what may have looked like a deal that favored Columbus now looks like a deal that favors us!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2021 at 11:07 AM, HabsAlways said:

Yeah, don't get me wrong ... happy with the outcome.    But I assess trades by what they looked like at the time, not how they worked out in hindsight.

On paper, regardless of scouts, we gave up the more proven player and a pick.   To me it's no different than MB doing Subban for Weber straight up.    On paper we took on the older, longer contract and should have gotten a sweetener back from Nashville.    You can't keep getting "lucky" with trades in hindsight and claim competence.

Except that he keeps doing it.  

Maybe its not luck, maybe its just a really good Pro scouting staff.   I wholeheartedly agree with you about evaluating a trade at the time of the deal but like i said, lets say you KNOW that the player you're going after is going to be better than the one you're giving up - you're just so confident in it, you cant let that guy slip through your fingers.  Its not that MB starts off offering PLayer X + picks Im sure he originally wanted anderson for domi straight up or even for CLB to include a pick but at a certain point you have to decide "do i walk away because of a pick?"

There's been enough examples of MB's deals at first appearing an overpayment and later turning out to be a steal that you have to wonder if he was on to something from the very beginning.

I felt like Galchenyuk > Domi   and Domi > Anderson and Subban > Weber etc - but in all these cases MB was right in the long run... at a certain point, coincidence becomes pattern... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, maas_art said:

Except that he keeps doing it.  

Maybe its not luck, maybe its just a really good Pro scouting staff.   I wholeheartedly agree with you about evaluating a trade at the time of the deal but like i said, lets say you KNOW that the player you're going after is going to be better than the one you're giving up - you're just so confident in it, you cant let that guy slip through your fingers.  Its not that MB starts off offering PLayer X + picks Im sure he originally wanted anderson for domi straight up or even for CLB to include a pick but at a certain point you have to decide "do i walk away because of a pick?"

There's been enough examples of MB's deals at first appearing an overpayment and later turning out to be a steal that you have to wonder if he was on to something from the very beginning.

I felt like Galchenyuk > Domi   and Domi > Anderson and Subban > Weber etc - but in all these cases MB was right in the long run... at a certain point, coincidence becomes pattern... 

Even a blind squirrel,,, etc. etc. etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maas_art said:

yes but a blind squirrel doesnt find the nuts over and over. Only sometimes.  Sort of doesn't apply at all here but carry on... :4224:

I have got to agree with you on this point I often don't like what MB does but I think the team he has that evaluates trade talent is spot on he may not always do what they recommend but the bigger deals seem to have worked out. the only one I am on the fence about is the Sergachev for Drouin deal it looks good right now but I don't know if I would have made that deal. the smaller stuff can be a bit of a pain the Weal's and some of the low level D men have been busts but the big trades have mostly been good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...