2020-21 State Of The Habs

[maas_art]

10 hours ago, ChiLla said:

No doubt about that, just like Gallagher scored 30 goals per season while earning $3.75M. To be fair though, these deals are outliers and can't really be used as a benchmark IMO. There's generally nothing wrong with a 50~point NHL forward earning around 5.5M per season, the problem is trying to build a team around that guy, especially if said player occasionally forgets how to play defense. I think Drouin has given us fair value on his contract so far and will certainly continue to do so. At this point in his career though, I don't expect him to magically put it all together and become the first-line winger we thought he could be. In a good year, he could easily crack the 70-point mark but eventually I think he is what he is, a guy with amazing skills and some consistency/defense issues good for around 50 points per season. Still hoping he proves me wrong though

This. Drouin is paid pretty much exactly at the rate he is producing. In fact, I think if he hit UFA right now, he'd probably find a GM to give him a slight raise.  Danault is obviously a much more complete player, although he does have a slightly lower PPG average over his career and GMs dont pay anywhere near as much for defensive prowess. 

2 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

Indeed, that is value! Doesn't mean Drouin isn't valuable as well.

Truth.  The fanbase has always had problems with players who have skill but never seem to reach potential - sometimes it just is what it is. Every year, for a stretch we get tantalized with the idea of Drouin finally "breaking through" but ultimately he'll probably always be a 50-60point player.  Still value in that. 

[ramcharger440]

On 11/13/2020 at 11:56 AM, maas_art said:

This. Drouin is paid pretty much exactly at the rate he is producing. In fact, I think if he hit UFA right now, he'd probably find a GM to give him a slight raise.  Danault is obviously a much more complete player, although he does have a slightly lower PPG average over his career and GMs dont pay anywhere near as much for defensive prowess. 

Truth.  The fanbase has always had problems with players who have skill but never seem to reach potential - sometimes it just is what it is. Every year, for a stretch we get tantalized with the idea of Drouin finally "breaking through" but ultimately he'll probably always be a 50-60point player.  Still value in that. 

and he is in a tough spot because of what we gave up for him! which player did we need more?

[maas_art]

On 11/14/2020 at 11:19 AM, ramcharger440 said:

and he is in a tough spot because of what we gave up for him! which player did we need more?

This cant be underlined enough.  Its not Drouin's fault we traded Sergachev for him.  It was a dumb move based on our needs but nothing Drouin can do anything about.

 

 

 

 

[26NCounting]

I agree, but with that said it doesn't help that everyone can see his potential and lack of drive.  The kid has the potential to be a top line forward that can dominate a game he just doesn't have the drive to do it, add to that his own sense of entitlement and you can see why he gets the fans abuse as much as he does

[arpem-can]

57 minutes ago, maas_art said:

This cant be underlined enough.  Its not Drouin's fault we traded Sergachev for him.  It was a dumb move based on our needs but nothing Drouin can do anything about.

 

 

 

 

I remember the needs of the team were multiple when Sergachev was traded for Drouin ....the one that sticks out the most was that the team couldn't score goals...Sergy  was an unknown quantity at the time and Drouin had just shown promise in a play-off run for Tampa ...Most fans would have made that trade based on the offensive up-side of Drouin filling a greater need  in the line-up as opposed to a player that would take longer to develop with no guarantee.....hindsight is always 20/20 .

[maas_art]

45 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

I agree, but with that said it doesn't help that everyone can see his potential and lack of drive.  The kid has the potential to be a top line forward that can dominate a game he just doesn't have the drive to do it, add to that his own sense of entitlement and you can see why he gets the fans abuse as much as he does

Agree- and I think that a lot of what has hurt Drouin has been his mouth. He's said a few things in soundbytes that dont endear him - the one that always sticks out for me was " I just need to get my feet wet more a little bit and get back to that elite winger I used to be."   First of all, were you ever an "elite winger?" and second, even if you were, dont refer to yourself that way.

I have always said that its really difficult to measure effort on the ice (positional players for example, use less energy to do the same thing) but in Drouin's case, because he has this history of saying some dumb things, when you combine that with what looks like lackadaisical passing or back checking, it doesnt look great to many fans. 
 

26 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

I remember the needs of the team were multiple when Sergachev was traded for Drouin ....the one that sticks out the most was that the team couldn't score goals...Sergy  was an unknown quantity at the time and Drouin had just shown promise in a play-off run for Tampa ...Most fans would have made that trade based on the offensive up-side of Drouin filling a greater need  in the line-up as opposed to a player that would take longer to develop with no guarantee.....hindsight is always 20/20 .

No doubt. It is always easier to look at a trade in hindsight.  The risk was 100% Yzerman's - we knew we were getting (at least) a 50 point winger.  Obviously MB hoped it was more but there was no risk of it being less.   In Sergachev they were getting a super prospect but someone who had proven nothing at NHL level.   Plenty of guys like that who have never made an impact. Olli Juolevi (drafted several places before sergachev) has still not played an NHL game as a defensman. 

The problem with the trade was that we traded from a position of weakness (LD) to acquire a player in a position of strength (LW) who we hoped could fill a position of weakness (C) - which is fine, you gotta take risks, but then you gotta follow up that trade by getting in another quality LD.  You dont add guys like Alzner and Schlemko and Streit and think you're going to fill that hole effectively. 

[ramcharger440]

On 11/16/2020 at 2:26 PM, arpem-can said:

I remember the needs of the team were multiple when Sergachev was traded for Drouin ....the one that sticks out the most was that the team couldn't score goals...Sergy  was an unknown quantity at the time and Drouin had just shown promise in a play-off run for Tampa ...Most fans would have made that trade based on the offensive up-side of Drouin filling a greater need  in the line-up as opposed to a player that would take longer to develop with no guarantee.....hindsight is always 20/20 .

Nah sorry but Segachev was a player we needed badly, Marky was on his last legs and Sergachev was the guy who was going to take up that ice time. Good to possibly great D men are harder to find than a 50 point winger which is what we ended up with, the whole idea that we could make a center out of him when he got here was just stupid! i will say we did screw him up a bit by playing him as one but he was not the guy we needed at all! I never would have made that trade it was the wrong guy to move for what we got, nothing against Drouin but what he brought was never going to outweigh what we lost. and anyone could see Sergachev was very good I think it set us back a couple of years.  Hope we don't get stupid and move Romanov for a hometown center.......

[maas_art]

19 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

Nah sorry but Segachev was a player we needed badly, Marky was on his last legs and Sergachev was the guy who was going to take up that ice time. Good to possibly great D men are harder to find than a 50 point winger which is what we ended up with, the whole idea that we could make a center out of him when he got here was just stupid! i will say we did screw him up a bit by playing him as one but he was not the guy we needed at all! I never would have made that trade it was the wrong guy to move for what we got, nothing against Drouin but what he brought was never going to outweigh what we lost. and anyone could see Sergachev was very good I think it set us back a couple of years.  Hope we don't get stupid and move Romanov for a hometown center.......

Sergachev wasnt ready to step into 1st pairing duties though.  Its been 3 years now & im still not sure he's a top paring guy (very clearly a top 4).

Considering how badly we seemed to botch defencemen, I think you could make a strong argument that if we had kept him he'd be in the minors right now, or playing back in Russia.  

[arpem-can]

27 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Sergachev wasnt ready to step into 1st pairing duties though.  Its been 3 years now & im still not sure he's a top paring guy (very clearly a top 4).

Considering how badly we seemed to botch defencemen, I think you could make a strong argument that if we had kept him he'd be in the minors right now, or playing back in Russia.  

   ....no doubt that Sergachev looks like a solid player but there are also teams that would take Drouin in a heartbeat . I think Romanov will fit in nicely and will be a Hab for a few years solidifying the left side . This is a big season coming up for all involved not the least of whom is either Bergevin or Julien or both . Drouin gets another year in my books to find chemistry again with Suzuki and perhaps Toffoli or Anderson .

[ramcharger440]

Sorry but that was a bad trade from my point of view. Drouin is alright nothing super special just another guy who has talent that we see from time to time i hope i am wrong but i think we have seen what he has he will have the odd good streak followed by soft play then he will get moved around and get frustrated then he will hurt himself again. you know the more i think about it the less i like the trade. i am sure he will have a better year but we would have and still would be a better team with Sergachev here. i don't buy for a minute that he would have been ruined here a lot of the players that did not pan out here were no good elsewhere either so that may just be bad drafting i can tell you all feel otherwise but i stand by my viewpoint. as for him not being ready to take up first pairing duties....well we signed Alzner for that LOL! i think i would have rather tried Sergachev i don't recall him not being in the NHL after the trade on a really good team too! for what Drouin gives us we could have paid another guy like Tuna.

[electron58]

2 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

Sorry but that was a bad trade from my point of view. Drouin is alright nothing super special just another guy who has talent that we see from time to time i hope i am wrong but i think we have seen what he has he will have the odd good streak followed by soft play then he will get moved around and get frustrated then he will hurt himself again. you know the more i think about it the less i like the trade. i am sure he will have a better year but we would have and still would be a better team with Sergachev here. i don't buy for a minute that he would have been ruined here a lot of the players that did not pan out here were no good elsewhere either so that may just be bad drafting i can tell you all feel otherwise but i stand by my viewpoint. as for him not being ready to take up first pairing duties....well we signed Alzner for that LOL! i think i would have rather tried Sergachev i don't recall him not being in the NHL after the trade on a really good team too! for what Drouin gives us we could have paid another guy like Tuna.

Not only did we waste an opportunity, dealing from a position of strength, we helped Tampa Bay out because they were in a bad cap situation then, and wouldn't have been able to sign Drouin for what he wanted. And we gave up on a stud in Sergachev.

[claremont]

15 hours ago, arpem-can said:

   ....no doubt that Sergachev looks like a solid player but there are also teams that would take Drouin in a heartbeat . I think Romanov will fit in nicely and will be a Hab for a few years solidifying the left side . This is a big season coming up for all involved not the least of whom is either Bergevin or Julien or both . Drouin gets another year in my books to find chemistry again with Suzuki and perhaps Toffoli or Anderson .

Agree on this. The fan base has to stop wallowing in the admittedly current lopsided trade for Drouin. Drouin has to deliver on some promise this year or the bait is cut on his $5.5 million salary for the two years after this. In fact with a shortened season, I could see mgmt. hanging on to him for the season after this one given his age. Bergevin gambled and lost the trade - simple as that. I would rather have a manager trying to make a difference than a lame duck. Bergevin has a bad habit of overpaying guys though for potential performance. Drouin should never have got $5.5 million and that term. Edmundson and Anderson should not have got the $ they did based on perfromance so far,  so I hope they can deliver performance for their values too. 

[maas_art]

13 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

Sorry but that was a bad trade from my point of view. Drouin is alright nothing super special just another guy who has talent that we see from time to time i hope i am wrong but i think we have seen what he has he will have the odd good streak followed by soft play then he will get moved around and get frustrated then he will hurt himself again. you know the more i think about it the less i like the trade. i am sure he will have a better year but we would have and still would be a better team with Sergachev here. 

I dont think anyone is disagreeing it was a bad trade for this team - especially in hindsight- but the trade in a vacuum (if the teams were in different positions/needs/builds) wasnt necessarily bad. In hindsight it was terrible because Sergachev did work out, Alzner and Schlemko did not, Drouin did not turn into a competent centre etc etc. 

 

13 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

 i don't buy for a minute that he would have been ruined here a lot of the players that did not pan out here were no good elsewhere either so that may just be bad drafting 

Its an unprovable argument either way obviously but once a player is ruined, they are ruined.  You can only look at potential vs. actual and based on league-wide results, we had a patch of about 5-7 years where our top prospects were not panning at anything close to the rate the rest of the league was. This directly correlated to Lefebre's tenure. 

 

3 hours ago, claremont said:

Agree on this. The fan base has to stop wallowing in the admittedly current lopsided trade for Drouin. Drouin has to deliver on some promise this year or the bait is cut on his $5.5 million salary for the two years after this. In fact with a shortened season, I could see mgmt. hanging on to him for the season after this one given his age. Bergevin gambled and lost the trade - simple as that. I would rather have a manager trying to make a difference than a lame duck. Bergevin has a bad habit of overpaying guys though for potential performance. Drouin should never have got $5.5 million and that term. Edmundson and Anderson should not have got the $ they did based on perfromance so far,  so I hope they can deliver performance for their values too. 

This. Especially the bold. 

I will agree that MB overpays at times (on depth players especially) although in Drouin's case, honestly $5.5 is not bad. He's still scoring within that range. 

 

18 hours ago, arpem-can said:

   ....no doubt that Sergachev looks like a solid player but there are also teams that would take Drouin in a heartbeat . I think Romanov will fit in nicely and will be a Hab for a few years solidifying the left side . This is a big season coming up for all involved not the least of whom is either Bergevin or Julien or both . Drouin gets another year in my books to find chemistry again with Suzuki and perhaps Toffoli or Anderson .

Yeah as I said earlier, I wouldnt just "throw" drouin away. Im sceptical he can improve on 50ish points but Im willing to give him a shot next to Suzuki.  I also think we could trade him - and ultimately, if thats the goal - then you're better off trying to bring up his value even higher. 

As it is, right now, I think you could probably pacakge Drouin + Mete for example & get an upgrade on LD. It may end up being a guy who is 27 or 28 but there are some options out there imho. 

[arpem-can]

1 minute ago, maas_art said:

I dont think anyone is disagreeing it was a bad trade for this team - especially in hindsight- but the trade in a vacuum (if the teams were in different positions/needs/builds) wasnt necessarily bad. In hindsight it was terrible because Sergachev did work out, Alzner and Schlemko did not, Drouin did not turn into a competent centre etc etc. 

 

Its an unprovable argument either way obviously but once a player is ruined, they are ruined.  You can only look at potential vs. actual and based on league-wide results, we had a patch of about 5-7 years where our top prospects were not panning at anything close to the rate the rest of the league was. This directly correlated to Lefebre's tenure. 

 

This. Especially the bold. 

I will agree that MB overpays at times (on depth players especially) although in Drouin's case, honestly $5.5 is not bad. He's still scoring within that range. 

 

Yeah as I said earlier, I wouldnt just "throw" drouin away. Im sceptical he can improve on 50ish points but Im willing to give him a shot next to Suzuki.  I also think we could trade him - and ultimately, if thats the goal - then you're better off trying to bring up his value even higher. 

As it is, right now, I think you could probably pacakge Drouin + Mete for example & get an upgrade on LD. It may end up being a guy who is 27 or 28 but there are some options out there imho. 

 yes ...I think Drouin's contract is reasonable for a .6 ppp player and certainly tradeable if that were to happen ... Bergevin could take his lumps and end the experiment and still get something decent back  ...He does overpay but not grossly eg. Petry's contract . Bergevin has managed to keep the forward's salaries at a reasonable level despite the lack of a game-breaker who would send the cap structure into the ozone  .Compared to other teams over-paying for their past mistakes  (..see as an example an unmoveable Lucic ) Bergevin has done a decent job  . This is the best the team has looked ( albeit on paper ) for quite a while .

[ramcharger440]

Well i hope one day Drouin proves me wrong.......wrong player at the wrong time.

[maas_art]

21 hours ago, arpem-can said:

 yes ...I think Drouin's contract is reasonable for a .6 ppp player and certainly tradeable if that were to happen ... Bergevin could take his lumps and end the experiment and still get something decent back  ...He does overpay but not grossly eg. Petry's contract . Bergevin has managed to keep the forward's salaries at a reasonable level despite the lack of a game-breaker who would send the cap structure into the ozone  .Compared to other teams over-paying for their past mistakes  (..see as an example an unmoveable Lucic ) Bergevin has done a decent job  . This is the best the team has looked ( albeit on paper ) for quite a while .

The problem are his secondary contracts. Paul Byron at $3.4m is not good, especially not at that term. Even guys like Weal are often double what they are likely to get on most teams. I understand why he does it at times (Weal was an insurance policy because many teams couldnt afford to pay a player that much to play in the minors so he could likely slip through waivers) and for the most part he hasnt handcuffed the team with too many of these contracts.  Overall MB has actually been quite good with contracts during his tenure. 

13 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

Well i hope one day Drouin proves me wrong.......wrong player at the wrong time.

100% agree with the bolded part. 

[claremont]

Regarding the Kraken Draft and future thoughts - this article is not bad

https://thehockeywriters.com/canadiens-kraken-expansion-draft-choices/?fbclid=IwAR1X-Fkbr-NSah8UAD4yEMNoCFEmwBxh2pfn28TZNh8JWqDUa-rvrDbEDk0

I just might be inclined to take the risk and not protect Weber but the writer makes a good case for MB to incentivize Seattle’s Francis to take Byron with a supplemental pick 

[26NCounting]

Not sure if Byron was hurt during the playoffs last year or what but he just looked slow and overwhelmed at times, would be all for buying him our or burying him in the minors to give Evans, Poehling or any other of the young Laval players a chance. 

 

 

[26NCounting]

11 hours ago, claremont said:

Regarding the Kraken Draft and future thoughts - this article is not bad

https://thehockeywriters.com/canadiens-kraken-expansion-draft-choices/?fbclid=IwAR1X-Fkbr-NSah8UAD4yEMNoCFEmwBxh2pfn28TZNh8JWqDUa-rvrDbEDk0

I just might be inclined to take the risk and not protect Weber but the writer makes a good case for MB to incentivize Seattle’s Francis to take Byron with a supplemental pick 

Interesting article.  Few points I can't agree with,  can't really see us just letting Tartar go in UFA and get nothing in return would make no sense but stranger things have happened.

 

I would be inclined to leave Weber exposed as well and make a deal for Seattle to take him to unload that contract.  He is still good don't get me wrong but he certainly isn't getting any younger and has a lot of miles on his body.

 

I would protect Chariot for sure, like what he brings to the team as far as a physical presence

[Larry-Launstein-Jr]

On 11/16/2020 at 2:26 PM, arpem-can said:

I remember the needs of the team were multiple when Sergachev was traded for Drouin ....the one that sticks out the most was that the team couldn't score goals...Sergy  was an unknown quantity at the time and Drouin had just shown promise in a play-off run for Tampa ...Most fans would have made that trade based on the offensive up-side of Drouin filling a greater need  in the line-up as opposed to a player that would take longer to develop with no guarantee.....hindsight is always 20/20 .

I thought it was Kucherov before. Look at where Sergachev is now. Sorry for getting those guys mixed up.

[maas_art]

On 11/19/2020 at 6:51 PM, claremont said:

Regarding the Kraken Draft and future thoughts - this article is not bad

https://thehockeywriters.com/canadiens-kraken-expansion-draft-choices/?fbclid=IwAR1X-Fkbr-NSah8UAD4yEMNoCFEmwBxh2pfn28TZNh8JWqDUa-rvrDbEDk0

I just might be inclined to take the risk and not protect Weber but the writer makes a good case for MB to incentivize Seattle’s Francis to take Byron with a supplemental pick 

While I like the idea, I just dont see it. I think we will have too many potential quality players available, i dont think they will be keen to take on Byron's salary. Remember that like the Knights, they will likely take on a number of players who are decent quality but overpriced, so there's a decent chance they wont have tons of cap space. 

 

On 11/20/2020 at 6:47 AM, 26NCounting said:

Not sure if Byron was hurt during the playoffs last year or what but he just looked slow and overwhelmed at times, would be all for buying him our or burying him in the minors to give Evans, Poehling or any other of the young Laval players a chance. 

Its definitely a conundrum.  On paper, there's no way you rank him in our top 10 forwards. Maybe not even top 12 and yet he's our 6th highest paid forward. Thats problematic.

 

On 11/20/2020 at 6:51 AM, 26NCounting said:

Interesting article.  Few points I can't agree with,  can't really see us just letting Tartar go in UFA and get nothing in return would make no sense but stranger things have happened.

With Tatar, Danault and Armia all UFA this upcoming summer, I suspect at least one will walk. Maybe MB will move one at the deadline although I could just as easily see him say 'he's our rental" and keeping a guy for the playoff run.    

A lot is up in the air. If Suzuki & JK can start strong,  maybe Danault gets moved.  If our wingers do well, maybe tatar gets traded or a guy like Drouin is moved.  Will be an interesting year (if we actually get to play during this pandemic). 

 

On 11/20/2020 at 6:51 AM, 26NCounting said:

I would be inclined to leave Weber exposed as well and make a deal for Seattle to take him to unload that contract.  He is still good don't get me wrong but he certainly isn't getting any younger and has a lot of miles on his body.

Its moot because there's zero chance MB lets his Man Mountain go for nothing - or even for a trade for that matter - i think MB would move just about anyone else before he'd move Weber (Price, Suzuki and JK excepted).   

That said, i dont disagree in terms of Weber as a declining asset. The smart thing would be to trade him.  Even if he only brought back a small return, it would be better than losing him to expansion or age - although I dont think it will happen.

[campabee82]

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

While I like the idea, I just dont see it. I think we will have too many potential quality players available, i dont think they will be keen to take on Byron's salary. Remember that like the Knights, they will likely take on a number of players who are decent quality but overpriced, so there's a decent chance they wont have tons of cap space. 

 

Its definitely a conundrum.  On paper, there's no way you rank him in our top 10 forwards. Maybe not even top 12 and yet he's our 6th highest paid forward. Thats problematic.

 

With Tatar, Danault and Armia all UFA this upcoming summer, I suspect at least one will walk. Maybe MB will move one at the deadline although I could just as easily see him say 'he's our rental" and keeping a guy for the playoff run.    

A lot is up in the air. If Suzuki & JK can start strong,  maybe Danault gets moved.  If our wingers do well, maybe tatar gets traded or a guy like Drouin is moved.  Will be an interesting year (if we actually get to play during this pandemic). 

 

Its moot because there's zero chance MB lets his Man Mountain go for nothing - or even for a trade for that matter - i think MB would move just about anyone else before he'd move Weber (Price, Suzuki and JK excepted).   

That said, i dont disagree in terms of Weber as a declining asset. The smart thing would be to trade him.  Even if he only brought back a small return, it would be better than losing him to expansion or age - although I dont think it will happen.

There is another scenario where we get to keep everyone. There are reports of large market teams being allowed a luxury tax over the cap as compensation for more profit sharing through the pandemic. This is to allow some of the smaller market teams to stay afloat if we have to go through 1 more season of no fans. IF that happens for this season I can see Danault and everyone being resigned on one or 2 year deals for their fair value then sorting it all out down the road. There were no reports on how much this luxury tax could be so it might work but it also might not.

[H_T_L]

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

While I like the idea, I just dont see it. I think we will have too many potential quality players available, i dont think they will be keen to take on Byron's salary. Remember that like the Knights, they will likely take on a number of players who are decent quality but overpriced, so there's a decent chance they wont have tons of cap space. 

 

Its definitely a conundrum.  On paper, there's no way you rank him in our top 10 forwards. Maybe not even top 12 and yet he's our 6th highest paid forward. Thats problematic.

 

 

When MB signed him to that deal i couldn't see the reasoning behind it. Why tie up borderline 3rd liners to lucrative long term deals? Just makes zero business sense to me. He was coming off a decent productive season but that doesn't justify the term he was given. If you want to reward him then fine,,,, give him a 1 or 2 year deal tops. Another example of MB overvaluing the bottom half of his lineup while playing hardball with the top half.

[maas_art]

1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

There is another scenario where we get to keep everyone. There are reports of large market teams being allowed a luxury tax over the cap as compensation for more profit sharing through the pandemic. This is to allow some of the smaller market teams to stay afloat if we have to go through 1 more season of no fans. IF that happens for this season I can see Danault and everyone being resigned on one or 2 year deals for their fair value then sorting it all out down the road. There were no reports on how much this luxury tax could be so it might work but it also might not.

That would be interesting for sure.  It gives the bigger market teams a bit of an unfair advantage (on ice) but if it means smaller markets wont have to close shop then i think they would accept it. 

 

27 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

When MB signed him to that deal i couldn't see the reasoning behind it. Why tie up borderline 3rd liners to lucrative long term deals? Just makes zero business sense to me. He was coming off a decent productive season but that doesn't justify the term he was given. If you want to reward him then fine,,,, give him a 1 or 2 year deal tops. Another example of MB overvaluing the bottom half of his lineup while playing hardball with the top half.

Agree. Its a very odd dynamic. Maybe because he himself was a journeyman he thinks that those guys need the help.  For the most part his top 6 and top 4d are signed to good, smart contracts but he almost always gives too much $$ and/or term to the bottom half. Its very odd. 

[BigTed3]

Decent amount of turnover in the Habs brass... first Shane Churla leaving to take a job in Florida as we lose a top scout, now Larry Carriere leaving the organization as well.