We really want to win a cup and build a perennial contender. But we also seem convinced that the best way to get there is to sell all the vets and tank - expecting that the guy we pick 4-8 will be better than a Sean Monahan, picked in the same range, with 10 years of experience and actual proof that he can deliver at the NHL level.
Look at what happened last night:
Suzuki, Caufield, Slafkovsky held off the score sheet. Goals from Monahan, Gallagher, and Armia.
Look at NYR last night, one of the top teams in the league:
Lafreniere, Miller, Othmann held off the scoresheet. Goals from Panarin, Trochek, and Fox.
Buffalo, Ottawa, Anaheim, are all having a terrible time with their youth movements. Tons of growing pains. So many failures and false starts.
NYR: they are not winning because of their youth movement. They are winning IN SPITE of their youth movement.
Why do we only see the good in the tank and the youth movement? Tons of teams do not have success with this approach, and based on how the Habs have been able to draft the last 2 years: we will not be able to out gun our opponents. We need to build this team a different way.
We have a ton of young players coming up. There are also tons of NHL-ready prospects on other teams who cannot get ice time and a few players each year like Dach & Newhook who can be granted a "fresh start".
Eiserman, Demidov, Lindstrom will be great NHL wingers in 3-5 years, no doubt. But Suzuki, Caufield, Slafkovsky, Guhle, and Montembeau are all playing too well to have to wait 5 years to be "allowed to compete".
We CAN win enough games to make the playoffs (next season) with the team we have plus a few attainable additions, even if we have to overpay. Who cares about players who won't play a game in the NHL until 2025 or 2026?
Notes:
Roy, Farrell, Mailloux, Kidney, Reinbacher, Hutson, Beck, Mesar, Engstrom, Kapanen all start the season in the AHL next year. Let them cure down there until they force the Habs hands. So far none of them deserves to be handed a veteran's spot just because they are on an ELC and sub age 25.
Habs trade Ylonen's rights for whatever: He's interesting, but he's not getting it done. He's a serviceable NHL player with weak defense and not enough talent to take a top 6 role. Basically a shootout specialist if there is a such a thing.
I'm glad we have Heineman & Mesar, but I loved Toffoli and I hope we can convince him to come back.
Trading Monahan for anything less than a haul is a mistake. Draft picks are overrated as hell here. After the top 20 or so picks the odds of even finding an NHL regular aren't in your favour.
He's a great top6 center and only 29. Trading Monahan for a late 1st, you'd be lucky to find another Monahan. Their window in 3-5 years can still include him or at worst you trade him once he has fully built back his image with a few years of production in 50-60 pt range whom can win draws and be responsible defensively.
That gets you a ton like Elias Lindholm comparable return.
Trading Monahan for anything less than a haul is a mistake. Draft picks are overrated as hell here. After the top 20 or so picks the odds of even finding an NHL regular aren't in your favour.
He's a great top6 center and only 29.
I've been saying since the start to resign him.
I think you are one of the voices of reason amongst our rabid fanbase sir.
Obsession with a youth movement is very explainable in marketing terms:
“This old pro, a copywriter, a Greek named Teddy, told me the most important thing in advertising is ‘new’. It creates an itch. You simply put your product in there as a kind of calamine lotion.” –Don Draper
That's how we treat draft picks in Montreal. Soothing the itch!
I think you are one of the voices of reason amongst our rabid fanbase sir.
Obsession with a youth movement is very explainable in marketing terms:
“This old pro, a copywriter, a Greek named Teddy, told me the most important thing in advertising is ‘new’. It creates an itch. You simply put your product in there as a kind of calamine lotion.” –Don Draper
That's how we treat draft picks in Montreal. Soothing the itch!
Cause everyone wants the mystery box. Doing the math is hard!
Ppl online.. lets face it, are all about emotions and impulse instead of rational thinking.
It is, what it is.
Which is why everyone here should take breaks instead of being terminally online.
Were able to keep Doughty/Kopitar through them and sign Danault
Kept Zibanejad, Fox forced his way there and Panarin signed for free and somehow got an elite goalie to develop
Ironic that you bring up Danault.
Exactly why I think Monahan should be signed and Lehkonen, probably, he shouldn't have been let go!
You resign your good complementary players, lock up your young core long term. The rest is not just lottery luck but luck in general.
Ironic that you bring up Danault.
Exactly why I think Monahan should be signed and Lehkonen, probably, he shouldn't have been let go!
You resign your good complementary players, lock up your young core long term. The rest is not just lottery luck but luck in general.
Yes! Danault/Monahan are different players but comparable situationally.
what you are promoting is to be a a wild card team. yes we can do that, but then all the year of being bad are gonna be worth not much in the end.
we need superstarts to win cups. best way is to draft them.
Let's look at VGK. The whole team was great, but the 5 guys who brought it home were
Eichel (acquired through trade)
Pietrangelo (acquired via Free Agency)
Marchessault (undrafted, acquired in expansion draft, resigned in free agency)
Stephenson (3rd round pick)
Hill (5th string goalie playing above his head)
I would submit for consideration, though, that Montreal is not close to being a Cup contender. They are at least 2 years (very optimistically) from being there.
If you keep Monahan (with his injury history, which cannot be ignored) rather than getting a pick to replace him (which could be ready for that competitive window) you are only marginally improving the team and, in fact, pushing them further from the top end talent in the draft.
Also, if Monahan’s qualities (and there are qualities there, no doubt) are wanted so badly there are two options if he is traded to a contender: (1) trade him and try to er-sign him in the offseason or (2) try to sign a similar player in the off season after he is traded. Monahan is not a unicorn. There are other veteran players you can get that can fill a similar role in the next few years (a Matt Duchene, Adam Henrique, Chandler Stephenson etc). I think asset management is important to keep in mind too.
Let's look at VGK. The whole team was great, but the 5 guys who brought it home were
Eichel (acquired through trade)
Pietrangelo (acquired via Free Agency)
Marchessault (undrafted, acquired in expansion draft, resigned in free agency)
Stephenson (3rd round pick)
Hill (5th string goalie playing above his head)
Tell me again why we need to tank?
Not only that but because GMs are so hesitant to trade 1st round picks unlike the Knights there are fewer examples of teams winning through smart dealings instead of the draft because GMs are so risk averse in the old boys club. The GMs rather not embarrass each other and promote nepotism.
It's a shame there aren't more examples to dispel this notion that its the draft or bust in building a winner. Market inefficiencies have been available to exploit.
Is it easier to build through the draft? Of course, that is because it's a known path. The Knights took the other unknown path and profited.
In a league that continues to expand in the number of teams, expecting to be a lone winner in a group of 32-35 teams without being pro active is simply dropping coins in a wishing well.
Let's look at VGK. The whole team was great, but the 5 guys who brought it home were
Eichel (acquired through trade)
Pietrangelo (acquired via Free Agency)
Marchessault (undrafted, acquired in expansion draft, resigned in free agency)
Stephenson (3rd round pick)
Hill (5th string goalie playing above his head)
Tell me again why we need to tank?
i mean, if your solution is to sell the franchise and do an expention draft, sure..
what asset would you even have traded for eichel. Dach, +first rounder+ mesar +?
How many top pair dman or first line foward chose montreal? you need to attract these players first by being competitive, if you have a bad team, they wont come. Vegas had a buttload of playoffs succes when pietrangelo came.
Not only that but because GMs are so hesitant to trade 1st round picks unlike the Knights there are fewer examples of teams winning through smart dealings instead of the draft because GMs are so risk averse in the old boys club. The GMs rather not embarrass each other and promote nepotism.
It's a shame there aren't more examples to dispel this notion that its the draft or bust in building a winner. Market inefficiencies have been available to exploit.
Is it easier to build through the draft? Of course, that is because it's a known path. The Knights took the other unknown path and profited.
In a league that continues to expand in the number of teams, expecting to be a lone winner in a group of 32-35 teams without being pro active is simply dropping coins in a wishing well.
I feel vegas is a bad exemple thought. yes the have been agressive, but they were also given a stancup final team on day 1. They were already competitive and were atracting to a lot players. and then made a lot of agressive moves, but thats because they were already there.
i have nothing against being agressive, but lets buitd a team that's worth being agressive first.
i mean, if your solution is to sell the franchise and do an expention draft, sure..
what asset would you even have traded for eichel. Dach, +first rounder+ mesar +?
How many top pair dman or first line foward chose montreal? you need to attract these players first by being competitive, if you have a bad team, they wont come. Vegas had a buttload of playoffs succes when pietrangelo came.
So... We kind of have all the d-men we need. We just need to wait IMO, but also, we need to get them playoff experience ASAP.
As for Eichel... Whatever it takes I guess. I think we can pickup a center who is around 30 and as talented as Eichel in free agency or via trade. We'll see if Dach works out next season, but I would gladly add Elias Lindholm and argue that a center line of Suzuki, Lindholm, Monahan should be good enough to get it done, especially with center depth on the wings in Dach, Newhook, Evans.
I feel vegas is a bad exemple thought. yes the have been agressive, but they were also given a stancup final team on day 1. They were already competitive and were atracting to a lot players. and then made a lot of agressive moves, but thats because they were already there.
i have nothing against being agressive, but lets buitd a team that's worth being agressive first.
All true but they had the will! That is something I DONT see from many teams whom cant stomach any sort of risk. I mean who trades a Vezina Trophy winner for nothing but cap space? They were laughed at all offseason! Meanwhile you have Bergevin crying at his press conference after giving Gallagher 6.5M AAV long term because he's on good terms with him and felt pressure to be a 'good guy' and he owed him after underpaying Gally.
That isnt good business sense.
That, at least to me, was a mask off moment for Bergevin and his 'favourites'
Holland is notoriously risk averse. If you believe the rumours, he was not the decision maker in bringing Ekholm into the fold last season and actively fought against it but he's been a puppet GM since at least the offseason.
So... We kind of have all the d-men we need. We just need to wait IMO, but also, we need to get them playoff experience ASAP.
As for Eichel... Whatever it takes I guess. I think we can pickup a center who is around 30 and as talented as Eichel in free agency or via trade. We'll see if Dach works out next season, but I would gladly add Elias Lindholm and argue that a center line of Suzuki, Lindholm, Monahan should be good enough to get it done, especially with center depth on the wings in Dach, Newhook, Evans.
well our blue line had a lot and a lot of potential, but they are mostly unproven. They will only be competetive in a few years, and that is if they reach their potential ( its likely but still an if)
and yeah you can sign lindholm, but its his decesion too. if he doesnt want to come, you cant force him. players will come.once they feel Montreal is a winning team. So keeping monahan in case lindholm decide to sign is a pretty risky bet.
i think this team is still 2 years remove from being serious. we can try to trade for older players and get high end UFA then. in my opinion
I would submit for consideration, though, that Montreal is not close to being a Cup contender. They are at least 2 years (very optimistically) from being there.
If you keep Monahan (with his injury history, which cannot be ignored) rather than getting a pick to replace him (which could be ready for that competitive window) you are only marginally improving the team and, in fact, pushing them further from the top end talent in the draft.
Also, if Monahan’s qualities (and there are qualities there, no doubt) are wanted so badly there are two options if he is traded to a contender: (1) trade him and try to er-sign him in the offseason or (2) try to sign a similar player in the off season after he is traded. Monahan is not a unicorn. There are other veteran players you can get that can fill a similar role in the next few years (a Matt Duchene, Adam Henrique, Chandler Stephenson etc). I think asset management is important to keep in mind too.
They know the player though. Intimately. Letting Danault walk was a huge setback for this team. It was a mistake, and an example of poor player evaluation. Then they doubled that mistake by letting KK walk and tripled it by trading for Dvorak.
Monahan wants to be here, and is getting it done. He is far from a problem.
Yes they are not a cup contender. You get to be that by playing in the playoffs, not by drafting players in the 1st round and losing more often than they win for the next 2-3 season.
Guhle & Slafkovsky will become better after experiencing the pace and intensity of round 1 of the playoffs. They will understand the intensity of the next level.
Suzuki & Caufield played well in the playoffs the last time they were there, but was it a flash in the pan, or can they elevate their games to another level every time we make the postseason?
Why is Cayden Lindstrom more interesting to you than Sam Reinhart and Elias Lindholm? Why does that make any sense at all?
Let's look at VGK. The whole team was great, but the 5 guys who brought it home were
Eichel (acquired through trade)
Pietrangelo (acquired via Free Agency)
Marchessault (undrafted, acquired in expansion draft, resigned in free agency)
Stephenson (3rd round pick)
Hill (5th string goalie playing above his head)
Tell me again why we need to tank?
While I don't fully disagree with you, it really has to be acknowledged how much guys want to play and live in Vegas and how much most guys would rather not be in Canada, even Canadian born players.
Also pretty sure Stephenson was acquired for a 5th round pick by Vegas, I remember that trade thinking why didn't Chevy make that deal instead of waiver claiming Nick Shore... 🙄
I think a major issue for NHL teams is their GMs are just too damn complacent, they do their work at the draft, first few days of free agency and for a couple weeks around the TDL, other then that its perusing the waiver wire or Eric Robinson for a 7th rounder type deals, like whatever happened to the inseason player for player trade?
While I don't fully disagree with you, it really has to be acknowledged how much guys want to play and live in Vegas and how much most guys would rather not be in Canada, even Canadian born players.
Also pretty sure Stephenson was acquired for a 5th round pick by Vegas, I remember that trade thinking why didn't Chevy make that deal instead of waiver claiming Nick Shore... 🙄
I think a major issue for NHL teams is their GMs are just too damn complacent, they do their work at the draft, first few days of free agency and for a couple weeks around the TDL, other then that its perusing the waiver wire or Eric Robinson for a 7th rounder type deals, like whatever happened to the inseason player for player trade?
Agree wholeheartedly on the lack of movement in season. It's gonna heat up again next year I think.
On Stephenson I was more making a statement about the fact that a great player was found in the 3rd round and not in the top 10.
Yes I agree Vegas has numerous advantages on Montreal in acquiring talent. Let's lean into the guys that want to be here and let them be ambassadors for their budies around the league.
well our blue line had a lot and a lot of potential, but they are mostly unproven. They will only be competetive in a few years, and that is if they reach their potential ( its likely but still an if)
and yeah you can sign lindholm, but its his decesion too. if he doesnt want to come, you cant force him. players will come.once they feel Montreal is a winning team. So keeping monahan in case lindholm decide to sign is a pretty risky bet.
i think this team is still 2 years remove from being serious. we can try to trade for older players and get high end UFA then. in my opinion
I am not signing Monahan to get Lindholm. I am signing Monahan to get Monahan.
But I believe that is we signed Elias Lindholm for 6 years AND somehow drafted Cayden Lindstrom, for all of the next 6 years Lindholm will be a better producer at the NHL level than Lindstrom.
All true but they had the will! That is something I DONT see from many teams whom cant stomach any sort of risk. I mean who trades a Vezina Trophy winner for nothing but cap space? They were laughed at all offseason! Meanwhile you have Bergevin crying at his press conference after giving Gallagher 6.5M AAV long term because he's on good terms with him and felt pressure to be a 'good guy' and he owed him after underpaying Gally.
That isnt good business sense.
That, at least to me, was a mask off moment for Bergevin and his 'favourites'
Holland is notoriously risk averse. If you believe the rumours, he was not the decision maker in bringing Ekholm into the fold last season and actively fought against it but he's been a puppet GM since at least the offseason.
I think its kind of funny, because bergevin is shamed at the same time for the way he treated markov and when he did what fans wanted with gally, he also got shamed. But i get what you are saying and i agree with it.
as for risk, there have been many exemples of team trying it and it turning against them. Hawks when they got jones, flyers and risto, Sens and duchene. The common thread is that they made moved to try to be.contenders and it turned against them.
Teams like Vegas and tampa who are know for being agressive had success with their gambles because they were already contenders.
I am not signing Monahan to get Lindholm. I am signing Monahan to get Monahan.
But I believe that is we signed Elias Lindholm for 6 years AND somehow drafted Cayden Lindstrom, for all of the next 6 years Lindholm will be a better producer at the NHL level than Lindstrom.
Sure, what im saying is you cant decide who you sign. chanches are slim that lindholn sign here.
As for lindstrom, i wont go in the debate of saying a 17 years old guy will outproduce some guy or not, as we both dont have any clue.
They know the player though. Intimately. Letting Danault walk was a huge setback for this team. It was a mistake, and an example of poor player evaluation. Then they doubled that mistake by letting KK walk and tripled it by trading for Dvorak.
Monahan wants to be here, and is getting it done. He is far from a problem.
Yes they are not a cup contender. You get to be that by playing in the playoffs, not by drafting players in the 1st round and losing more often than they win for the next 2-3 season.
Guhle & Slafkovsky will become better after experiencing the pace and intensity of round 1 of the playoffs. They will understand the intensity of the next level.
Suzuki & Caufield played well in the playoffs the last time they were there, but was it a flash in the pan, or can they elevate their games to another level every time we make the postseason?
Why is Cayden Lindstrom more interesting to you than Sam Reinhart and Elias Lindholm? Why does that make any sense at all?
Name me one team who is a contender that outside of an expansion team that ''didnt draft first round players ''.
They know the player though. Intimately. Letting Danault walk was a huge setback for this team. It was a mistake, and an example of poor player evaluation. Then they doubled that mistake by letting KK walk and tripled it by trading for Dvorak.
Monahan wants to be here, and is getting it done. He is far from a problem.
Yes they are not a cup contender. You get to be that by playing in the playoffs, not by drafting players in the 1st round and losing more often than they win for the next 2-3 season.
Guhle & Slafkovsky will become better after experiencing the pace and intensity of round 1 of the playoffs. They will understand the intensity of the next level.
Suzuki & Caufield played well in the playoffs the last time they were there, but was it a flash in the pan, or can they elevate their games to another level every time we make the postseason?
Why is Cayden Lindstrom more interesting to you than Sam Reinhart and Elias Lindholm? Why does that make any sense at all?
On the Danault issue: it depends what you mean by “setback”. I think it would have been better asset management to trade him in his contract year than let him go for free. But I do not think we would be talking about Montreal being substantially closer to a Cup over the past few years (I.e. since he moved to L.A.) if Montreal kept him. Losing Price and Weber really did them in for competing, which is why the rebuild was necessary. The difference between Montreal over the past couple of years and returning to the Cup final is well beyond the value that Phillip Danault adds.
Kotkaniemi is on pace for 35 points in Carolina. He is not a major loss.
Trading for Dvorak was a mistake. No question.
I view the rebuild as having this year and next year as possibly being down years (good draft picks) and then adding players like Lindholm after 2025.
My point is that there will always be good veteran players in free agency or traded each year to supplement good young talent, but having the good young talent is important.
I like the idea of getting Cayden Lindstrom AND adding a “Sean Monahan” type of player when the team is closer to competing, rather than keeping this particular Sean Monahan, whose good play may keep the Habs from getting a Lindstrom and push them towards a lower pick.
One person can argue for the Vegas model and another person can argue the Lightning and Avalanche model where they endured years of losing (including losing years after Stamkos and MacKinnon were drafted) and their stars were not ruined by a few years of quite bad teams. So I am saying Caufield, Suzuki, Guhle etc can go through 1 to 2 more down years without them being irreparably damaged in the long term.
Youth is not THE answer, but it is a big part of it.
You get your stars through the draft. We've been unlucky with having high picks when the consensus top player(s) weren't "locks" that would come into the league and immediately excel.
We missed Bedard by a year. We took a need instead of BPA in Kotkaniemi. The 2012 draft consensus was simply wrong with the top 3 being "duds". Slafkovsky's draft class doesn't have any immediate impact players.
We've done okay in the 1st round with Caufield and Guhle outside the top 10, but we traded Sergachev (9th) and haven't had any gems emerge from our other picks.
Without high end talent infusion through the draft, we've been unable to reach the heights of teams that were able to secure multiple superstars.
Vegas is an exception to the norm. They acquired high end talent through trades and free agency. Their approach was more "reckless" as they moved their top drafted talent in the process.
It's fortunate for them that the players they moved didn't reach their full potential, with Suzuki being the only piece they might have any regret moving.
We will eventually have to trade for and sign high end talent, it's just a matter of time. We have to be competitive enough to attract UFA's and identify who we can afford to move in trades. We simply have so many "potential" NHL players that we need to sort through first. If we have the opportunity to acquire a big name through trade that is young enough and with team control for several years, we should take it, but we aren't in that position yet.
We need players that will be near the beginning of their prime in 2-3 years, not those that will be exiting their prime before then.
Those players aren't frequently available and will involve taking risks. We did that with Dach and Newhook, so it's not like we aren't trying to make the right moves.
We should be in on big name UFA's starting as early as next season.
With a solid foundation already in place we can zero in on specific targets and use our assets and cap wisely.
Name me one team who is a contender that outside of an expansion team that ''didnt draft first round players ''.
That's what you got out of that whole explanation. At no point did I say don't draft 1st round players... I am just saying, those guys will not be relevant for years.
jonh514 a aimé ceci.
Répondre
Slafkovsky,
CapFriendly
CapFriendly