Confirmed with Link: [MTL/TB] Sergachev/Drouin II

[BaseballCoach]

If you're too close to the tree, you won't notice the forest.
The trade in and of itself is good, most have already said so. What some have issue with is the fact it didn't fill any need for us.
If we trade Gallagher for a slightly better top 6 winger, that trade will also be in and of itself good, but it does not really help us.

Some would have rathered use our best prospect to fill a void, instead of bulking our already strongest area. Don't skip leg day. We are running on chicken legs while our arms are jacked.

We say our biggest need is C, but actually it is "creative offensive player". Usually that is a center, but there are exceptions like Guy Lafleur was, like Patrick Kane is, and like Jonathan Drouin is (hopefully he peaks out at 75% or more of what they are/were).

So getting Drouin did fill a big need. He's not just a finisher who requires someone else to drive the play. He himself IS the driver.

 

[Fozz]

We say our biggest need is C, but actually it is "creative offensive player". Usually that is a center, but there are exceptions like Guy Lafleur was, like Patrick Kane is, and like Jonathan Drouin is (hopefully he peaks out at 75% or more of what they are/were).

So getting Drouin did fill a big need. He's not just a finisher who requires someone else to drive the play. He himself IS the driver.

Couldn't agree more. The whole center narrative is severely overblown.

 

[Kriss E]

We say our biggest need is C, but actually it is "creative offensive player". Usually that is a center, but there are exceptions like Guy Lafleur was, like Patrick Kane is, and like Jonathan Drouin is (hopefully he peaks out at 75% or more of what they are/were).

So getting Drouin did fill a big need. He's not just a finisher who requires someone else to drive the play. He himself IS the driver.

Dear god, do you never learn? You have repeated this nonsense for years now, every year showing a massive failure. Guy Lafleur had hall of famer centers, Pat Kane played on a team that always had Jonathan Toews.
You still cannot grasp this simple fact that those players all had legit centers on their teams.
Radulov could create his own plays or set up others, Drouin is similar although I'd say a better playmaker who has a higher ceiling. As it stands today though, their production is similar.

For years you have said that Galch as a premiere winger would be fine. Sure man. He would. But that was never the point, just like Drouin being a premiere winger is also not the point. Whether this happens or not, we will still need a top center.

I mean really dude, it's really not that complicated to observe. Why don't you tally up the list of cup winners over the past 10 years, or heck, do 20, better yet, last 50, whatever number of years you actually want, and look at the number of teams that has won it without a legit top center.
This idea that all we need is talent, it doesn't matter which position it plays is such an amateurish way of looking at pro sports. Positions matter.
We need a top center. You have been wrong every year about this. Time for you to get it.

 

[Habs Icing]

If you're too close to the tree, you won't notice the forest.
The trade in and of itself is good, most have already said so. What some have issue with is the fact it didn't fill any need for us.
If we trade Gallagher for a slightly better top 6 winger, that trade will also be in and of itself good, but it does not really help us.

Some would have rathered use our best prospect to fill a void, instead of bulking our already strongest area. Don't skip leg day. We are running on chicken legs while our arms are jacked.

Hey but you get a great look at the moss on the bark.

 

[Habs Icing]

We say our biggest need is C, but actually it is "creative offensive player". Usually that is a center, but there are exceptions like Guy Lafleur was, like Patrick Kane is, and like Jonathan Drouin is (hopefully he peaks out at 75% or more of what they are/were).

So getting Drouin did fill a big need. He's not just a finisher who requires someone else to drive the play. He himself IS the driver.

I think you're old enough to remember that The Flower played with Mahovlich and Lemaire as his centers. Who do we have that are half the players those two were?

Forget half. Try and find one player that is 25% of those two.

 

[Kriss E]

Couldn't agree more. The whole center narrative is severely overblown.

Pens: Crosby
Chicago: Toews
LA: Kopitar
Detroit: Datsyuk/Zetter
Bos: Bergeron/Krejci
Carolina: Staal/Brind'Amour
NJ: Arnott/Elias/Gomez
Col: Sakic/Forsberg
Det: Yzerman
Dal: Modano/Neuwendyk

And the list goes on and on..and on...you can only allude Jersey over the past couple decades as a team who won without a legit top center when they did it in 02-03 with John Madden as their top guy.
So ya, sure, it's been done before in a very very rare amount of time, but I don't see how anybody can claim the center narrative to be overblown.

We need a legit center. If Danault becomes a strong two way guy who puts up 60ish pts with Galch behind him as a 55pt guy, then hey, sure, maybe we can compensate.
But that simply isn't our reality as it stands today. So until this actually happens, people are absolutely right to worry about the situation at center.

 

[Saxon]

Yup. We can get by in the regular season without centres, but in the playoffs we will be toast again. If we don't improve the centre position and/or the organization decides that they are going to develop Chucky at centre.... because we have no other choice then it's another lost season before it's even started.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Dear god, do you never learn? You have repeated this nonsense for years now, every year showing a massive failure. Guy Lafleur had hall of famer centers, Pat Kane played on a team that always had Jonathan Toews.
You still cannot grasp this simple fact that those players all had legit centers on their teams.
Radulov could create his own plays or set up others, Drouin is similar although I'd say a better playmaker who has a higher ceiling. As it stands today though, their production is similar.

For years you have said that Galch as a premiere winger would be fine. Sure man. He would. But that was never the point, just like Drouin being a premiere winger is also not the point. Whether this happens or not, we will still need a top center.

I mean really dude, it's really not that complicated to observe. Why don't you tally up the list of cup winners over the past 10 years, or heck, do 20, better yet, last 50, whatever number of years you actually want, and look at the number of teams that has won it without a legit top center.
This idea that all we need is talent, it doesn't matter which position it plays is such an amateurish way of looking at pro sports. Positions matter.
We need a top center. You have been wrong every year about this. Time for you to get it.

Not that I have a horse in this race but I remember the same argument for pmd's before this year, and I think you were a huge proponent of that theory.

The trend is right until it's wrong. Big physical teams with MVP goaltending, skilled teams with poor goaltending, 2 franchise centers, all recipes for success.

 

[Habs Icing]

Not that I have a horse in this race but I remember the same argument for pmd's before this year, and I think you were a huge proponent of that theory.

The trend is right until it's wrong. Big physical teams with MVP goaltending, skilled teams with poor goaltending, 2 franchise centers, all recipes for success.

How many teams used the no top six centers recipe to win the cup? Wait, don't tell me. MB will start a new trend.

 

[Andrei79]

We do potentially have a top 6 center though. If he gains strength, faceoff skills and combativity without the puck, he'll be more than a top6 center, he might become a top 10-15 center in the league. He just needs to mature a bit and the organization to keep him there.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

How many teams used the no top six centers recipe to win the cup? Wait, don't tell me. MB will start a new trend.

The goal for any team looking to contend is simple, be better than you were the year prior.

Now, I'm definitely on the side that a top center is very important. I also believe there's more than one way to win.

That being said...I don't think we're better than last year and even if we were it's not enough. So if MB was planning on starting a new trend he has to start with rule 1, be better than you were when you failed. We aren't.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

We do potentially have a top 6 center though. If he gains strength, faceoff skills and combativity without the puck, he'll be more than a top6 center, he might become a top 10-15 center in the league. He just needs to mature a bit and the organization to keep him there.

Exactly. As well, I'm sure everyone on this board would have penciled AG as a top 6 center this time last year. The fact he had a terrible return from the knee was not a forseeable circumstance. Neither was Plekanecs sudden decline.

 

[Kriss E]

Not that I have a horse in this race but I remember the same argument for pmd's before this year, and I think you were a huge proponent of that theory.

The trend is right until it's wrong. Big physical teams with MVP goaltending, skilled teams with poor goaltending, 2 franchise centers, all recipes for success.

Yes, and we struggled to move the puck up. Not sure what you are referring to. The Penguins doing it without Letang? Sure, nobody ever said some teams couldn't compensate, that is precisely why I wanted us to go for Radulov. The Pens have insane firepower up front. Malkin, Crosby, Kessel, lead the charge. When you have such talent up front, you can add a skilled rookie to it and you might get something special like Guentzel's performance. Those 4 guys combined for 99pts over 25 games. If you have that, then ya sure man, it's possible to do it without a solid PMD.

So back to what I was saying about Radulov. I wanted him signed as this would have given us possibly the deepest group of wingers in the NHL. Radu, Galch, Drouin, Patches, that's some serious talent on the wings. If you have that, then ya, maybe we can do without a really good center. Maybe we can compensate for two 40 pts centers in Danault-Plek with having a lot of skills on the wing. We could even move Galch to center and still have a strong group of wingers.
But we decided to let Radu go, so we are essentially back to where we were last year, which is insufficient.

Certainly, there are many ways to win a cup, with weakenesses in different places.
If we want to retain our weak center line, then we better be seriously bulky on the wing. I don't think we are.

 

[Kriss E]

The goal for any team looking to contend is simple, be better than you were the year prior.

Now, I'm definitely on the side that a top center is very important. I also believe there's more than one way to win.

That being said...I don't think we're better than last year and even if we were it's not enough. So if MB was planning on starting a new trend he has to start with rule 1, be better than you were when you failed. We aren't.

If we had Kane, Kucherov, Benn, and Panarim, as a group of wingers, then sure man, there's a boat load of talent on the wing that we could maybe compensate a weak center line.
But as it stands today, Drouin, Patches, Galch, Lek, is not going to do this for us.

 

[Mrb1p]

If we had Kane, Kucherov, Benn, and Panarim, as a group of wingers, then sure man, there's a boat load of talent on the wing that we could maybe compensate a weak center line.
But as it stands today, Drouin, Patches, Galch, Lek, is not going to do this for us.

Patch, Rads, Drouin and Lekh with Danault and Chucks as C wouldve been a mighty fine top 6.

Its even better if Gally can go back to his pre injury play. If he does we probably have the strongest winger core in the leagur after Winnipeg and Chicago.

Sucks to lose Rads, sure, but we still have a very strong team down the wings. Galchenyuk with a full year at C could be good and Im down with Danault as 2C playing the matchup role with Pac.

What would be even better though, would be dealing Pac for a 1C.

Lekh, Gally, Chuck, Drouin, 1C (Tavares, Couture, Draisaitl, Carter, Mackinnon, Duchene..) And one of Hudon, Byron, Shaw, Scherbak... To fill the 6th spot. Would be perfect.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Patch, Rads, Drouin and Lekh with Danault and Chucks as C wouldve been a mighty fine top 6.

Its even better if Gally can go back to his pre injury play. If he does we probably have the strongest winger core in the leagur after Winnipeg and Chicago.

Sucks to lose Rads, sure, but we still have a very strong team down the wings. Galchenyuk with a full year at C could be good and Im down with Danault as 2C playing the matchup role with Pac.

What would be even better though, would be dealing Pac for a 1C.

Lekh, Gally, Chuck, Drouin, 1C (Tavares, Couture, Draisaitl, Carter, Mackinnon, Duchene..) And one of Hudon, Byron, Shaw, Scherbak... To fill the 6th spot. Would be perfect.

i think that's what we'll do. Pacioretty is going to score his 35 regardless. Put him with Danault and Gallagher and you've got a line that's going to score 75 goals and excel all over the ice.

Then you can load up the offensive exploitation line of Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Drouin. If those 3 can fulfill their promise and CJ can match them up well, that line can be incredibly dangerous.

The key to it working though is Galchenyuk needs to learn how to be adequate at face offs. It's one thing to be bad defensively but that's compounded when you lose possession as soon as the ref drops the puck.

 

[Kriss E]

i think that's what we'll do. Pacioretty is going to score his 35 regardless. Put him with Danault and Gallagher and you've got a line that's going to score 75 goals and excel all over the ice.

Then you can load up the offensive exploitation line of Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Drouin. If those 3 can fulfill their promise and CJ can match them up well, that line can be incredibly dangerous.

The key to it working though is Galchenyuk needs to learn how to be adequate at face offs. It's one thing to be bad defensively but that's compounded when you lose possession as soon as the ref drops the puck.

What you do after a faceoff is more important than whether or not you win the draw.
To be honest, nothing you described is all that exciting to me. Danault leading the way of a two way line with Patches and Gallagher, meh, I don't see them excelling all that much.
Danault scored 13 and Gallagher 10 last year, you expect them to put up 40 goals together. Patches putting up 35 playing with those two guys? In a strong two way line?..I'm not too sure about that. I'm not convinced about their strong defensive game, let alone be able to drive the play forward and have 35-20-20 goals split.
Just don't see it.

For the Galch line, if people complained about his terrible defensive awareness, boy are they going to get frustrated with Drouin. But hey, if we really just care about the offensive potential, then ya, that line could be strong. I just don't think Julien will put those two youngsters together as he strongly values a two way game and that trio would be terrible regarding that aspect.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

What you do after a faceoff is more important than whether or not you win the draw.
To be honest, nothing you described is all that exciting to me. Danault leading the way of a two way line with Patches and Gallagher, meh, I don't see them excelling all that much.
Danault scored 13 and Gallagher 10 last year, you expect them to put up 40 goals together. Patches putting up 35 playing with those two guys? In a strong two way line?..I'm not too sure about that. I'm not convinced about their strong defensive game, let alone be able to drive the play forward and have 35-20-20 goals split.
Just don't see it.

For the Galch line, if people complained about his terrible defensive awareness, boy are they going to get frustrated with Drouin. But hey, if we really just care about the offensive potential, then ya, that line could be strong. I just don't think Julien will put those two youngsters together as he strongly values a two way game and that trio would be terrible regarding that aspect.

I was thinking 15 goals for Danault and 25 for Gallagher. This is based on a healthy season mind you.

As for CJ, I get your point. Though Lehkonen is excellent in his own zone so he'd be some help.

 

[Kriss E]

I was thinking 15 goals for Danault and 25 for Gallagher. This is based on a healthy season mind you.

As for CJ, I get your point. Though Lehkonen is excellent in his own zone so he'd be some help.

Well, that would be a career high in goals for both Danault and Gallagher, this while taking on the toughest match ups. Not outside the realm of possibilities I guess, but not something I would expect them to do either.

I have a feeling Julien is going to go with a Patches-Plek-Hemsky line. Veterans who we know can play reliable hockey. Plek-Hemsky have something to prove, I can see him going with such a line.

 

[OldCraig71]

Dear god, do you never learn? You have repeated this nonsense for years now, every year showing a massive failure. Guy Lafleur had hall of famer centers, Pat Kane played on a team that always had Jonathan Toews.
You still cannot grasp this simple fact that those players all had legit centers on their teams.
Radulov could create his own plays or set up others, Drouin is similar although I'd say a better playmaker who has a higher ceiling. As it stands today though, their production is similar.

For years you have said that Galch as a premiere winger would be fine. Sure man. He would. But that was never the point, just like Drouin being a premiere winger is also not the point. Whether this happens or not, we will still need a top center.

I mean really dude, it's really not that complicated to observe. Why don't you tally up the list of cup winners over the past 10 years, or heck, do 20, better yet, last 50, whatever number of years you actually want, and look at the number of teams that has won it without a legit top center.
This idea that all we need is talent, it doesn't matter which position it plays is such an amateurish way of looking at pro sports. Positions matter.
We need a top center. You have been wrong every year about this. Time for you to get it.

I agree with this post 100%, a thing of beauty.

 

[Habs Icing]

The goal for any team looking to contend is simple, be better than you were the year prior.

Now, I'm definitely on the side that a top center is very important. I also believe there's more than one way to win.

That being said...I don't think we're better than last year and even if we were it's not enough. So if MB was planning on starting a new trend he has to start with rule 1, be better than you were when you failed. We aren't.

There's that. But if you looked at the roster from last year where could our improvements yield a higher result? The answer would be at center.

For example trading for a stud back up goalie would be a waste of resources at this point. Another example going from a 40 point winger to a 45ish point one is an improvement but will it provide as much of an improvement as improving your center position from a defensive liability and creative hole to a legit top six?

Aside from the immediate improvements that center would bring, the residual benefits would be great. You can take that legit top six center and slot him in the first line and then you can put Galchenyuk in the 2nd or even 3rd line as a center and have him grow into the position.

The excitement for Drouin I think is unrealistic. Supposedly because JD's puck creativity will help Patches. Aside from the fact that no one can help Patches in the playoffs, how much better is JD's creativity when compared to Radulov's? Sure over the next 10 years we win but over the next two or three years the improvement is negligible.

Leaving aside the defense for the moment, I think MB made two serious mistakes this off season. (If Markov isn't signed or replaced, it'll become three mistakes)

1) Losing Radulov (or not adequately replacing him without wasting assets)
2) Using a blue chip to acquire a player for a position where we were relatively very good and not using it in a package for a top line center. Not necessarily an elite one but a top 30ish center.

Net results.

1) Our winger positions at best may be slightly better than last year BUT at the cost of a blue chip prospect.

2) Our center position at best is on par with last year and we all know how fantastic it was last year.

3) If Markov is not replaced or signed our defence is weaker than last year.

And this is after 5 years of MB's tenure. He's simply spinning his wheels at best.

 

[417]

Don't you tell people not to focus on the name but more the type of player? Maybe Tavares wasn't traded because Snow didn't want to move him, or maybe Bergey didn't want to give up as much.
But if you give up a blue chip prospect + top 6 player with good upside + picks, then ya you're talking about a value that should fetch you a top center a la Tavares, not a rnh type.

And why the hell would the Isles do this move today when they're doing everything they can to get him signed to an extension?

 

[Habs100]

i think that's what we'll do. Pacioretty is going to score his 35 regardless. Put him with Danault and Gallagher and you've got a line that's going to score 75 goals and excel all over the ice.

Then you can load up the offensive exploitation line of Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Drouin. If those 3 can fulfill their promise and CJ can match them up well, that line can be incredibly dangerous.

The key to it working though is Galchenyuk needs to learn how to be adequate at face offs. It's one thing to be bad defensively but that's compounded when you lose possession as soon as the ref drops the puck.

Pacioretty was in a huge slump at the beginning of the year before Radulov was placed on his line. Then, when Radulov was taken off of Galchenyuk's line, he slumped.

Both Galchenyuk and Pacioretty are shooters who need to play with playmakers. Our two best playmakers now are Drouin and Hemsky. Each should play with one of Pacioretty and Galchenyuk.

Bottom line: the Radulov loss hurts. We should have shown him the money.

 

[417]

If you're too close to the tree, you won't notice the forest.

Hmm...is this some type of analogy to illustrate that while i'm focused on the Drouin trade, i'm missing the fact that we're still weak down the middle?

It can't be, because i've been at the forefront for YEARS about how weak we are down the middle.

So perhaps you should look at that analogy and apply it to yourself.

Me being the tree, the forest being reality.

The trade in and of itself is good, most have already said so.

Wrong, quite a few, lead by you and a few vocal others, have basically put an asterix on the trade because it didn't address our biggest need.

Like our biggest need isn't offense, PERIOD. The GM should do nothing until a trade for a #1C like John Tavares materializes.

Yeah, i'm sure you'd have a ton of patience for that

What some have issue with is the fact it didn't fill any need for us.

But this is FACTUALLY inaccurate....you've decided to switch your crusade of getting a top 6 forward, to now having it EXCLUSIVELY be a center. This is so ridiculous, I can find so many posts from you the last 3-4 years whining about Bergevin's inability to land a top 6 forward.

He FINALLY does, and now your arguments shifts to it not filling a need, which is absolutely ludicrous.

If we trade Gallagher for a slightly better top 6 winger, that trade will also be in and of itself good, but it does not really help us.

what if we trade Gallagher for equal value at center? or what if we package Gallagher and some draft picks, do you think we could get a solid #2C?

Is that a bit more realistic than throwing out the incredibly unlikely scenario that the New York Islanders, who are trying to save their franchise by re-signing their franchise player, are going to accept Alex Galchenyuk (a player teams didn't seem all that interested in this summer) + Mikhail Sergachev + some more undetermined number of draft picks?

Really?

Some would have rathered use our best prospect to fill a void, instead of bulking our already strongest area.

Funny how you dismiss this argument when I suggest we didn't need to re-sign Radulov at any cost, since it would just bolster an area of the team that's already strong.

Yet here you are, arguing just that

At least give me the courtesy of acknowledging it works both ways

Don't skip leg day. We are running on chicken legs while our arms are jacked.

I'm over here playing chess, while you're out here playing checkers

Here's an EXACT quote from Kriss E dated January 2016 - while Drouin was going through his episode with Cooper/Yzerman

Drouin help us score more. I actually think we need a playmaker as much as we could use a goalscorer. Patch, Plek, Gallagher, Galch, they can score goals. Heck, Eller scored 15 as a 3rd center with terrible wingers. Weise already has like 11.
We have nobody that can dangle the puck and set up guys though. We're so desperate for one that people call DD a playmaker.
Drouin has the potential to be Joe Thornton level for playmaking. He turned Cheechoo into a 56 goal scorer, 93pts!
So if Drouin can reach his potential, he will help a lot of players score more. The question is whether or not he'll reach it, and what would the cost be.

Some more gems here

I'm all for it, I just don't see it happening. Bergevin seems to love reclamation projects, but he has never paid a premium price for what he wanted.
Considering the potential of Drouin and him being owned by a divisional rival, I just don't see Bergevin paying the price.

So about 18 months ago, you believed Jonathan Drouin had playmaking abilities rivalling Joe Thornton, he cnan help other players score more.

Furthermore, you then suggested Bergevin didn't have the stomach to trade for Jonathan Drouin because he'd never want to pay the premium.

Yet here you are 18 months later, complaining about what?

Drumroll please...

THE VERY PREMIUM BERGEVIN ENDED UP PAYING!

Sorry man...I don't like to go back and post things people say in the past, we all get things wrong, but the way you've shifted your argument as soon as Drouin was acquired is shameful.

How can your opinion on a player chance so drastically in 18 months, despite the fact that all he did was progress as a player.

We ALL agree that it would of been ideal if they could of traded Sergachev for a center, hell, if Drouin was actually a center, this would be an even BETTER trade.

But the reality is, we've criticized Bergevin for sitting on his hands and not making meaningful moves, he finally goes out and does just that, and you want to put forth this lame argument about how Jonathan Drouin, who I will remind you again, 18 months ago thought was good enough to be compared to Joe Thornton as a playmaker...

"Doesn't fill a need"???

Chess Kriss E...not Checkers

 

[Kriss E]

And why the hell would the Isles do this move today when they're doing everything they can to get him signed to an extension?

Did you even read the post? Why are you focusing on one player and not the level? You literally just told a poster not to do exactly what you are doing.
If this is a package we are willing to put forth, then the value in return should be of a top center, not a top 6 one.