Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens

Poll of the Week - June 5


BigTed3

Trades  

22 members have voted

  1. 1. Which player would you be trying hardest to trade if you were Marc Bergevin?

    • Rene Bourque
      4
    • Alexei Emelin
      7
    • David Desharnais
      9
    • Travis Moen
      2


Recommended Posts

We've talked about who we'd like to see Marc Bergevin go after and which free agents we'd like to see back. But is is necessary for the GM to clear cap space or a roster spot? Or does he need to move someone on because they don't fit in here or because they're value is high right now? Let us know what you think!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RB for me with Moen a close second. RB because his value is probably as high as it will get at this point and Moen because we already have enough players like him, and younger.

Emelin had an off year, but i wouldn't give up on him just yet, and i don't see DD going anywhere, whether we want to trade him or not. He's the targeted French star that MB covets. He is on record saying he wants to increase the Francophone content on the team, and we saw that last summer when he added Briere,, despite him not meeting any actual needs at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear the Rene Bourque name coming up but in my opinion this player is one that can be a game changer for the Habs as we seen in the playoffs.

I know his value is high right now but we must look too the future & Rene Bourque is too talented too ship out.

Desharnais is one that is right too trade for speed & soft hands he has a good rep in the League & I think the Habs could get a good prospect back for sure.

When the Habs made the Bourque trade I was thrilled I wanted the Habs topick him up for a couple of years before the trade actually took place.

I know what Bourque can do & I also know & knew that Bourque suffers from a confidence problem so if the Habs can instill Bourque with the necessary confidence his ability too rush the net as a power forward will take shape his ability too dominate in the O Zone will transpire game to game.

Let me know fellow Habs fans what you think looking forward to your input;Thank You .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emelin because it's the most crippling contract from a roster perspective. Desharnais has utility in that he could very easily step down into an exploitation role much like Briere did in the playoffs. Bourque and Moen are overpaid but still useful in their roles and the contracts aren't too inflated.

The issue with Emelin is he's paid enough that it's very hard to keep him out of your top 4 but he isn't good enough to play there if you want to contend. Sure we could talk about him being better on the left side, but the issue there is that even on his good side it's a downgrade to move one of Markov or Gorges and replace them with Emelin, and there's nobody other than Subban on the right side. It's just a tough situation, maybe he has a rebound year with another summer to rehab his knee but the biggest issue in his game to my eyes is hockey sense. When the mistakes are upstairs, no amount of rehab to your knee will fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Emelin's contractis probably the hardest to swallow right now, but I also have a legitimate belief that he can step up his game, given that he played this year coming back from a serious injury (we saw how poorly Markov played in his first year back and he was better this past season) and that he was asked to play on the wrong side of the ice. If you get an extra year under the belt and you move him back to the left side, there's a reasonable chance his game improves. Right now, his value is not as high as it could be.

Desharnais on the other hand spent the season on the de facto number one line. His stats are not going to be any better than they've been the past few years and more than anything, we have depth down the middle and a need to create ice time for Galchenyuk and Eller, both of whom are better players than Desharnais in the long run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is on record saying he wants to increase the Francophone content on the team, and we saw that last summer when he added Briere,, despite him not meeting any actual needs at the time.

No top Francophone talent in the league is willing to play for Habs in his prime, not until end career stage when he's achieved whatever he could and there's a nice retirement cheque to cash in. That's the real issue management and especially the media, has to recognize. The pre-1990s era where Canadiens were the default club Francophone talents head to is OVER. It's a nice dream to imagine the likes of Bergeron, Giroux, St Louis, Letang et al assembled in MTL. But it's not going to happen in current times. I hope management can do something to improve club's "attractiveness", but nah, it's wishful thinking :rolleyes: .....

I hear the Rene Bourque name coming up but in my opinion this player is one that can be a game changer for the Habs as we seen in the playoffs.

I know his value is high right now but we must look too the future & Rene Bourque is too talented too ship out.

Bingo. We're the minority of Bourque supporters :) . I think Bourque is someone who constantly needs motivation and talking to. He just needs to channel his size, speed and shooting talents on a more consistent basis.

Emelin because it's the most crippling contract from a roster perspective.

Yes, I'm still hoping against all hope that if Markov ever gets shipped out, Emelin can go as well. This gives us the chance to look in the market for a stronger No. 2 D line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO Emelin is as good as you can get for that salary, IF (as BigTed3 said) he improves a little bit.

Agree with Bourque, for both aspects: could be a good trade IF some GM looks more at his playoff potential, or it could stay IF we're going to make the playoffs every year he's here, and hopefully he produces as he just did.

DD... I'm afraid his market value is down because of his size, obviously. But I guess he's OK for his salary.

Moen, well I would definitely trade trade him, BUT I doubt we can get something useful in return...

Tough choices... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mrsmarkov

I really want Bourque gone. I've had enough of him and his inconsistency. I don't like waiting for him and to show up when he feels like it. When he shows up everyone is wowed because he looks like a super star, but it's not enough.

I'm one of Davey's biggest supporters and I'm not capable of letting go of Davey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't win a Stanley Cup with a small undersized one-dimensional centre, just ask Chicago or LA. No Andrew shaw does not count he is good defensively and plays rough.

I don't think it's that you can't win with Desharnais in the line-up, it's that you can't have him as your #1 center and that you then necessarily need to surround him with other types of players. It's just hard to fit DD, Gio, Briere, and Gallagher into the top 9 at the same time, and as a result, we ended up pushing Briere to the 4th line, where we self-neutralized his ability. The other big issue is that we have young, capable players with bigger upsides waiting to replace Desharnais, and every game that we keep using DD, we're losing time and experience at developing Galchenyuk and Eller into bigger roles. If we had, say Bobby Ryan instead of Lars Eller, then yes, I'd be fine with Galchenyuk as the #1 center, Plekanec as the #2 shutdown guy, and DD as the #3 guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I picked RB, for a real lack of production in the regular season and reluctance to be motivated, but DD is so small that he has the puck stipped from many times by the 'longer sticks'. He does not shoot enough and if not with the right person does not produce numbers. Just my thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has to be Emelin for me; it's the worst contract on the books and he's probably still moveable because of his highlight real hits.

The other 3 can still contribute and I don't find their contracts are particularly crippling.

I should note, I do think Emelin will be better next year after a full offseason of rehab. But even after a full year of rehab, he isn't top 4 on the depth chart for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has to be Emelin for me; it's the worst contract on the books and he's probably still moveable because of his highlight real hits.

The other 3 can still contribute and I don't find their contracts are particularly crippling.

I should note, I do think Emelin will be better next year after a full offseason of rehab. But even after a full year of rehab, he isn't top 4 on the depth chart for me.

That's the thing; his contract isn't a problem yet. But it looks as though he may not be more than a #5-6 defenseman who can hit like a truck. Guys like that are over-valued by some GMs (Shero trading 2 second rounders for Murray) and it is probably a good idea to move him before it becomes a problem and we end up with a 4+ million a year 3rd pairing defenseman. It's not that I think he is unsalvagable, but I don't like the risk we'd be taking with him. Especially with the fact that our prospect pool is pretty deep on D, we can afford to shed a veteran.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing; his contract isn't a problem yet. But it looks as though he may not be more than a #5-6 defenseman who can hit like a truck. Guys like that are over-valued by some GMs (Shero trading 2 second rounders for Murray) and it is probably a good idea to move him before it becomes a problem and we end up with a 4+ million a year 3rd pairing defenseman. It's not that I think he is unsalvagable, but I don't like the risk we'd be taking with him. Especially with the fact that our prospect pool is pretty deep on D, we can afford to shed a veteran.

Not only can we afford to shed a veteran, I almost think we have to. Amongst your top 7, you need to have Subban and at least two of Beaulieu, Tinordi, and Pateryn. That means you have room for 4 other veterans at most. Obviously, if we don't re-sign Markov or Weaver, then we absolutely need to keep Gorges and Emelin. But if we do get Markov and Weaver back next season, the priority becomes finding a third right-handed defenceman and it allows us the flexibility of using Gorges or Emelin as a trading chip. However, I still feel like there are ways of working Emelin into the line-up even if we kept all of the above. You can play Gorges on the right, you can rotate the younger guys in and out of the line-up, and so on. With DD, I just don't feel like you have those options. Either he's the 1A offensive center or else his value takes a big hit. Emelin can still have value as a #5 defenceman back on the left side, maybe even more value than the 2nd pairing right-sided guy. But if we're going to sabotage DD's value, we may as well try to trade him first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD was definitely a close second on the list of players I would like to see shopped, but because he is on a pretty reasonable contract for the role we have him playing, I put him behind Emelin. It's just a frustrating situation to have because it's not like he hasn't been playing well for us. However, as you said, his presence handcuffs us at center. It is impeding the development of, potentially, that big de facto #1 centerman we have been talking about aquiring for years and forcing us to (IMO) mistreat our future #2 in Eller, despite his being consistently solid in every role he has been given.

Moving DD would take some courage from MB because it could possibly hurt us in the short term, offensively at least, but I also believe it would be the right move in the long run. Galchenyuk, after his return in the playoffs, looks about ready to start breaking out and Eller is ready to be a #2 and has been for a while.

I know we have not given Emelin a chance to play on the left side yet, so we can't be sure how much better he would look there, but I agree with some others that his hockey sense has looked terrible since coming back. Maybe playing the off-side is throwing him off, maybe not, but we may have a chance to fleece an unsuspecting GM who is desperate for "grit" on defense. All I know for sure is that if he plays next season the way he did in the playoffs, people will start noticing and no amount of highlight reel hits is going to keep his value from plummeting. I say sell high while we have the chance, but that's just me. Alot of it does rest on what happens with Markov and Weaver though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of those 4, its DD by a long-shot for me.

I like DD but I think he's just not the right fit for us any more. I believe we could get a decent winger prospect for him.

While I was frustrated beyond belief at Emelin this post-season, I would actually NOT move him. I cannot believe he is truly that bad, I think after a full summer of rehab he will be much better next year and I do not believe in trading from a position of weakness.

If I was going to move a defenseman, I would actually try to move Gorges. he's a little younger than Rivet was but a very similar player...and if you remember, we got Gorges and a 1st (Max Pac) for Rivet... I think we could pull off something similar & that would allow us to finally move Emelin back to his natural L side. I would be sad to see Josh go, but just like DD, I don't think he's the right fit for this team any more, and moving him now would make us stronger, imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of those 4, its DD by a long-shot for me.

I like DD but I think he's just not the right fit for us any more. I believe we could get a decent winger prospect for him.

While I was frustrated beyond belief at Emelin this post-season, I would actually NOT move him. I cannot believe he is truly that bad, I think after a full summer of rehab he will be much better next year and I do not believe in trading from a position of weakness.

If I was going to move a defenseman, I would actually try to move Gorges. he's a little younger than Rivet was but a very similar player...and if you remember, we got Gorges and a 1st (Max Pac) for Rivet... I think we could pull off something similar & that would allow us to finally move Emelin back to his natural L side. I would be sad to see Josh go, but just like DD, I don't think he's the right fit for this team any more, and moving him now would make us stronger, imho.

I'm actually really interested in something like DD and Gorges for Chiasson or something like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we do get Markov and Weaver back next season, the priority becomes finding a third right-handed defenceman and it allows us the flexibility of using Gorges or Emelin as a trading chip.

Im sure you know this, but Pateryn is a right-handed shot. All the more frustrating we didn't see him for a single game last season... when by all accounts he was possibly the most NHL-ready of all 3 of the youngsters in hamilton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure you know this, but Pateryn is a right-handed shot. All the more frustrating we didn't see him for a single game last season... when by all accounts he was possibly the most NHL-ready of all 3 of the youngsters in hamilton.

Rather odd, but by who's accounts was he possibly the most NHL-ready of all 3 of the youngsters in Hamilton? Surely not Bergevin and/or Therrien, it would seem. That said, he definitely should be given an opportunity to help balance the the left/right d-man conundrum the Habs have with their defense corps. I, therefore, selected Emelin (mainly because I don't feel he is deserving of the contract he was gifted by Bergevin... but also because I suspect his hockey sense may be wanting a little too much for a top-4). I think the continued build of the Canadiens needs to be with the defense corps. Briere was a mistake from the start, IMO, and should be moved any way possible. Desharnais could still be an asset, but he would be second on my list if something of value could be had (a left/right winger that could slot into the 3rd line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has to be Emelin for me; it's the worst contract on the books and he's probably still moveable because of his highlight real hits.

The other 3 can still contribute and I don't find their contracts are particularly crippling.

I should note, I do think Emelin will be better next year after a full offseason of rehab. But even after a full year of rehab, he isn't top 4 on the depth chart for me.

I voted for Emelin as well for the very reasons you have articulated. Thanks for saving me the typing ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure you know this, but Pateryn is a right-handed shot. All the more frustrating we didn't see him for a single game last season... when by all accounts he was possibly the most NHL-ready of all 3 of the youngsters in hamilton.

Yes he is, and I would take that into account except for one thing: I'm not a fan of having three rookie defencemen in the line-up at the same time. That's one of the reasons why it was such a failure to have not given one or two of the Young 3 more playing time in the NHL this year. If we had played a full season of Tinordi, for example, instead of Murray or Bouillon, then we'd have the luxury of bringing in Pateryn next year as well. As it stands, I think we need to look at two of the three getting in, and the third guy either being a 7th D man or being the first call-up from Hamilton. I'd like to find another right-handed option who can give us 20-22 minutes a night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he is, and I would take that into account except for one thing: I'm not a fan of having three rookie defencemen in the line-up at the same time. That's one of the reasons why it was such a failure to have not given one or two of the Young 3 more playing time in the NHL this year. If we had played a full season of Tinordi, for example, instead of Murray or Bouillon, then we'd have the luxury of bringing in Pateryn next year as well. As it stands, I think we need to look at two of the three getting in, and the third guy either being a 7th D man or being the first call-up from Hamilton. I'd like to find another right-handed option who can give us 20-22 minutes a night.

Even if you put all 3 in next season, wouldn't it still be better than Murray, Bouillon, and Emelin? I'd take that chance, rookies or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if you put all 3 in next season, wouldn't it still be better than Murray, Bouillon, and Emelin? I'd take that chance, rookies or not.

Sure, it's better, but just because Therrien managed his D poorly last year, it doesn't mean we need to put ourselves in a position to fail this year. We have a chance to contend for the East again next year, and while I'm all up for getting some young guys into the line-up, using 3 of 6 defence spots on rookies is just asking for disaster. We don't have enough experience with them to know how they'll do under pressure and how they'll hold up over a long season. If they start to tire or make mistakes, the team will then scramble to sign or call up a veteran, probably akin to Murray or Bouillon or Mara or so on. I'd rather have 4 solid veteran D men in the line-up, two rookies, and a veteran 7th guy who can fill in for short periods of time as needed. Ideally Weaver and two of Beaulieu, Tinordi, and Pateryn make up your 5, 6, and 7 guys. Subban's your number one, Markov is your number 3, and one of Gorges/Emelin is your number four, and it means MB needs to find a legit number two guy to put everyone in the right spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, it's better, but just because Therrien managed his D poorly last year, it doesn't mean we need to put ourselves in a position to fail this year. We have a chance to contend for the East again next year, and while I'm all up for getting some young guys into the line-up, using 3 of 6 defence spots on rookies is just asking for disaster. We don't have enough experience with them to know how they'll do under pressure and how they'll hold up over a long season. If they start to tire or make mistakes, the team will then scramble to sign or call up a veteran, probably akin to Murray or Bouillon or Mara or so on. I'd rather have 4 solid veteran D men in the line-up, two rookies, and a veteran 7th guy who can fill in for short periods of time as needed. Ideally Weaver and two of Beaulieu, Tinordi, and Pateryn make up your 5, 6, and 7 guys. Subban's your number one, Markov is your number 3, and one of Gorges/Emelin is your number four, and it means MB needs to find a legit number two guy to put everyone in the right spots.

I guess I don't see it as gloomy as you Ted. It is a long 82 game season. Starting with 3 rookies lets you know right away the direction your team will be taking with the younger players. Let Beau and Tinner play full time. They are ready now. Give Pateryn the 10 games to see how he does. I think it will be quite evident who has the drive, skill, smarts, and stamina to compete at the higher level. I'm more of the mindset that you have to crack a few eggs to make an omlette. We already had a successful year despite having the likes of Murray and Bouillon. I just don't see how it could be worse. I think if you keep/introduce more veterans you run the risk of MT mismanaging the development of our young players. I can see him trying to "send a message" everytime there is a small mistake made by a rooky. I think we really need to force MT's hand at the utilization of our younger crop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bruins did a pretty good job having Bartkowski, Miller and Krug get playing time last season. Mostly because of Seidenberg's injury, but still they did well with 3 rookie dmen. I would just have a hard time sending Pateryn down again after the season he had in the AHL. He really deserves a chance. This is a good position to be in though.

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...