Proposal: TOR-MTL (Weber)

[Captain Mountain]

Fair enough. I've just been thinking of this from a Leafs perspective and I just don't think there is a trade that would make sense.

I agree there, but trades always have at least two perspectives.

 

[Randy Randerson]

You got unscrewed by using your deep pockets to get rid of Clarkson and LTIR Horton, building Robidas Island and suckering Ottawa into taking Phaneuf (who was already lousy). The only underwhelming return move was moving Kessel to Pittsburgh, but that seemed more like a trade to reset the culture and optimize tanking than clearing cap space.

Phaneuf and Kessel were the big parts of that, Clarkson was badly overpaid for what he brought but the cap hit was one of a supplementary player not a core player. Both Kessel and Phaneuf brought returns less than what you'd expect for a player of their talents because of their contracts, Phaneuf on a $5Mx3year deal would have been worth a lot more than 2 cap dumps, a player that Ottawa wanted rid of in Cowan, a very B prospect in Lindberg and a 2nd round pick - the $7Mx7 commitment was the scary part

 

[Captain Mountain]

Phaneuf and Kessel were the big parts of that, Clarkson was badly overpaid for what he brought but the cap hit was one of a supplementary player not a core player. Both Kessel and Phaneuf brought returns less than what you'd expect for a player of their talents because of their contracts, Phaneuf on a $5Mx3year deal would have been worth a lot more than 2 cap dumps, a player that Ottawa wanted rid of in Cowan, a very B prospect in Lindberg and a 2nd round pick - the $7Mx7 commitment was the scary part

We're talking about usage of cap space and what's wasted, I don't care about Clarkson being a supplementary player.

And comparing Phaneuf even in his time in Toronto to Weber now is crazy. Weber is still a high end defensive player and has been at least a .5 PPG D-man for basically his entire career. Phaneuf produced less offense and was FAR less effective defensively even when he was in Toronto.

 

[Randy Randerson]

We're talking about usage of cap space and what's wasted, I don't care about Clarkson being a supplementary player.

And comparing Phaneuf even in his time in Toronto to Weber now is crazy. Weber is still a high end defensive player and has been at least a .5 PPG D-man for basically his entire career. Phaneuf produced less offense and was FAR less effective defensively even when he was in Toronto.

Clarkson occupied less cap space, therefor wasted less, which is important if we're talking about usage of cap space

I'd expect Weber to bring back more than Phaneuf because he's a better player, but if you can't see the parallels then I think you're too close to it.

Kessel & Phaneuf occupied $15M of our cap space, Price & Weber occupy just under $18.5M of yours in a higher cap era. If you can navigate those two, guys like Shaw and Alzner are secondary concerns just like Clarkson was for us

and don't get me wrong, Clarkson was an awful contract from the minute we signed it, I thought the number was mis-reported when I saw it the first time

 

[Captain Mountain]

Clarkson occupied less cap space, therefor wasted less, which is important if we're talking about usage of cap space

I'd expect Weber to bring back more than Phaneuf because he's a better player, but if you can't see the parallels then I think you're too close to it.

Kessel & Phaneuf occupied $15M of our cap space, Price & Weber occupy just under $18.5M of yours in a higher cap era. If you can navigate those two, guys like Shaw and Alzner are secondary concerns just like Clarkson was for us

and don't get me wrong, Clarkson was an awful contract from the minute we signed it, I thought the number was mis-reported when I saw it the first time

That's not even remotely how wasted cap space works. Clarkson was worse because anyone could easily replace him with an ELC or a player making under a million.Phaneuf was/is a player that you can replace much relatively cheaply, because he's not a very good defenceman and hasn't been great since before he left Calgary. Kessel was/is not a player that you can replace cheaply.

Weber is still a #1 D-man in the NHL. Montreal's not going move him as a cap dump, because to replace him they'd need to spend a ton of money.

 

[Randy Randerson]

That's not even remotely how wasted cap space works. Clarkson was worse because anyone could easily replace him with an ELC or a player making under a million.Phaneuf was/is a player that you can replace much relatively cheaply, because he's not a very good defenceman and hasn't been great since before he left Calgary. Kessel was/is not a player that you can replace cheaply.

Weber is still a #1 D-man in the NHL. Montreal's not going move him as a cap dump, because to replace him they'd need to spend a ton of money.

Clarkson made $5.25M with 5 years left at the time of trade, Kessel made $8M with 7 years left at the time of trade, those things are finite. I agree that Clarkson was a replacement level player and Kessel is far from that, total dollars left on the contract were also not close to even. I agree that Clarkson was terrible and I was happy to have him gone, if we still had him on the books our position would be barely different than it is today. He would be on the bench and an ELC player would be on the roster in place of Marleau

hindsight is also 20/20, Kessel was bad the year that we traded him and there was lots of talk that his decline had started already because of bad conditioning. If it had gone that way, we'd be talking about the bullet dodged by the Leafs by trading him

Why would Mtl need to replace Weber for the course of a rebuild? the point is to be bad

 

[Captain Mountain]

Clarkson made $5.25M with 5 years left at the time of trade, Kessel made $8M with 7 years left at the time of trade, those things are finite. I agree that Clarkson was a replacement level player and Kessel is far from that, total dollars left on the contract were also not close to even. I agree that Clarkson was terrible and I was happy to have him gone, if we still had him on the books our position would be barely different than it is today. He would be on the bench and an ELC player would be on the roster in place of Marleau

hindsight is also 20/20, Kessel was bad the year that we traded him and there was lots of talk that his decline had started already because of bad conditioning. If it had gone that way, we'd be talking about the bullet dodged by the Leafs by trading him

Why would Mtl need to replace Weber for the course of a rebuild? the point is to be bad

Kessel was more unlucky than bad his final year in Toronto, and he still finished with 25 goals and 61 points. Which is still pretty good. There was lots of talk of decline, but it was pretty superficial and not well researched.

Why would Montreal need to trade Weber for a rebuild? He's a good player, but as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, his cap hit wouldn't hurt them if they rebuild since they already have a lot of cap space. And he's not the deciding factor of Montreal tanking, Price is.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Kessel was more unlucky than bad his final year in Toronto, and he still finished with 25 goals and 61 points. Which is still pretty good. There was lots of talk of decline, but it was pretty superficial and not well researched.

Why would Montreal need to trade Weber for a rebuild? He's a good player, but as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, his cap hit wouldn't hurt them if they rebuild since they already have a lot of cap space. And he's not the deciding factor of Montreal tanking, Price is.

Kessel was part of a really bad team, he definitely looked worse that year than in previous years and the indicators all say that he was worse that year than in previous years. If it was superficial, it's weird that there wasn't a bunch of teams willing to trade for him, meaning that we would have gotten a better return and not had to retain on his contract. Those things tell you what the market thought of him at the time, so the NHL club side pro scouting departments obviously didn't share that sentiment

being bad raises your chances of drafting high, not as much as it once did but the basic premise is still there. If Weber is a good player, having him makes you better, reducing your chances to be bad and draft high. If you're counting on him to be good on the other side of a scorched earth rebuild, that seems like a hell of a stretch at 33 years old. I agree that Price is the bigger factor

 

[Captain Mountain]

Kessel was part of a really bad team, he definitely looked worse that year than in previous years and the indicators all say that he was worse that year than in previous years. If it was superficial, it's weird that there wasn't a bunch of teams willing to trade for him, meaning that we would have gotten a better return and not had to retain on his contract. Those things tell you what the market thought of him at the time, so the NHL club side pro scouting departments obviously didn't share that sentiment

being bad raises your chances of drafting high, not as much as it once did but the basic premise is still there. If Weber is a good player, having him makes you better, reducing your chances to be bad and draft high. If you're counting on him to be good on the other side of a scorched earth rebuild, that seems like a hell of a stretch at 33 years old. I agree that Price is the bigger factor

Kessel had his 2nd worst shooting percentage of his career that year and while it was a down year, there wasn't any evidence it was the start of some massive decline. It was an example of a narrative taking over analysis.

And its pretty obvious that there are many teams that have crappy pro scouting departments. Vegas wouldn't be as good as they are if teams were better at identifying talent.

The odds being what they are right now, it doesn't make sense to get rid of a player just to be worse. Between the lottery odds and the general parity of the league, it doesn't make sense to dump a guy just for the sake of it.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Kessel had his 2nd worst shooting percentage of his career that year and while it was a down year, there wasn't any evidence it was the start of some massive decline. It was an example of a narrative taking over analysis.

And its pretty obvious that there are many teams that have crappy pro scouting departments. Vegas wouldn't be as good as they are if teams were better at identifying talent.

The odds being what they are right now, it doesn't make sense to get rid of a player just to be worse. Between the lottery odds and the general parity of the league, it doesn't make sense to dump a guy just for the sake of it.

I think making the assumption that a whole bunch of highly paid people working in the elite ranks of their field are bad at their jobs is a very faulty premise. There was reason to be cautious, and that was obviously a pretty consensus opinion among pro scouting departments or the Leafs would have done better by the trade.

In addition to help with drafting higher, it would serve you well to get what you can for him in futures. Probably not right now, but if he has a good season until the TDL that might be your time

 

[Brock Radunske]

We had to take it on the chin a bit with Kessel and Phaneuf but Babs wouldn't have been able to instill his culture with them there and we wouldn't have been bad enough to get Matthews.
If Montreal is rebuilding, to quote Babs "there will be pain" and that often means addition* by subtraction.



* in Montreal's case it may mean getting bad returns on big contract core guys in order to free up space and ensure a low finish.

 

[Baksfamous112]

True for everything discussed on here though, and Bergevin doesn't exactly inspire credibility.



It'll be interesting, don't know if they have the core pieces or pipeline to replenish like the Bruins model, which is mostly a one-off more than anything. Bergeron and Marchand are absolutely elite, world class players, Timmins hasn't hit on a player like McAvoy/Pasta and the laundry list of other depth guys in their system in a long time.

Can't really fault the Habs for rolling with what they have though. It's hard to turn back after the Price/Subban-Weber deals.

Bergeron/Marchant are elite, but so are Price and Weber. Just out of curiosity, how old do you think Bergeron is?

Timmins has hit Sergachev and Galchenyuk is still the highest point producer of his draft year. That was also our only two top 10 picks in the past decade and in the past 5 years we have drafted in the 23-28 ranges a lot.

 

[Baksfamous112]

We had to take it on the chin a bit with Kessel and Phaneuf but Babs wouldn't have been able to instill his culture with them there and we wouldn't have been bad enough to get Matthews.
If Montreal is rebuilding, to quote Babs "there will be pain" and that often means addition* by subtraction.



* in Montreal's case it may mean getting bad returns on big contract core guys in order to free up space and ensure a low finish.

We already have 18M of free cap space with little to no players needing a raise. #1 D are so hard to get (much harder than 1W) and Weber is loved by his teammates, management and fans (which Kessel wasn’t).

Weber is the type of guy/mentor that you can build around. Kessel isn’t and I suppose that’s why he was let go

 

[mrinsane]

replace Deslau with DLR and we can talk

 

[Magic Man]

We already have 18M of free cap space with little to no players needing a raise. #1 D are so hard to get (much harder than 1W) and Weber is loved by his teammates, management and fans (which Kessel wasn’t).

Weber is the type of guy/mentor that you can build around. Kessel isn’t and I suppose that’s why he was let go

A 25 year old Weber is someone you build around. You shouldn't be building around a 33 year old. At this point he'd be a piece you acquire to push your team over the top, like Kessel did. He gave the Pens the offensive depth to win 2 cups and he followed it up with 92 points this year.

 

[firstemperor]

Bergeron/Marchant are elite, but so are Price and Weber. Just out of curiosity, how old do you think Bergeron is?

Timmins has hit Sergachev and Galchenyuk is still the highest point producer of his draft year. That was also our only two top 10 picks in the past decade and in the past 5 years we have drafted in the 23-28 ranges a lot.

Bergeron is probably a top 5 centerman in the NHL, at minimum and ~top 10 player in the league. Same with Marchand at his respective position.

A lot of good goalies in the league today and Price based on recency doesn't stand up and above anyone in particular. It's not like Rask is a push over by any means.

Then the depth of the Bruins and their pipeline blow it out of the water. I personally don't think the Boston model retool can be replicated for many older teams and it's not just the Habs. We've seen many times try to retool on the fly and it hasn't provided great dividends, Vancouver is a great example. Montreal is in a tough spot primarily because they haven't built enough pieces from their pipeline beyond the Sergachev pick, and particularly from the 2nd round onwards.

One of the main reasons Boston could retool back into contention is they already had a world-class core (including Rask and Chara, who's declined a bit) and their pipeline restocked with high-end young cost-controlled depth players, McAvoy, Pasta to name a few.

 

[Funk21]

If I am paying 7 plus million to a RHD I would rather not spend any assets and get a 5 year younger Carlson for free this summer. I can deal with a 7 or 8 year (sign and trade) on a 28 year old not a 33 who has never been fleet of foot.

Weber is a great D but not at the price most Habs fans think he is worth IMO.

 

[drewjenks]

Two first and a roster player, not a cap dump.

LOLLLLLLL

 

[drewjenks]

Markov was also "getting a little slower already" at 33, and Id pay the 8m everyday of the week to have Markov on this team at 39.

The 7.9 for Weber doesnt matter. Teams are going to make him fit under the cap for a cup, its shortsighted to look at a contract like that and think hes 33 and overpaid.

This is how you end up on a 50 years drought.

Soooo......just to confirm:

If I'm looking at 33 year old Weber & I'm thinking that his $8 million cap hit for another 8 years might be a problem in the future......that makes ME short sighted?

Da fook are you goin on about junior?

 

[sansabri]

Soooo......just to confirm:

If I'm looking at 33 year old Weber & I'm thinking that his $8 million cap hit for another 8 years might be a problem in the future......that makes ME short sighted?

Da fook are you goin on about junior?

Calling Weber a 'salary dump' is what makes you shortsighted.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Calling Weber a 'salary dump' is what makes you shortsighted.

calling Weber a salary dump is literally the long view - he's worth his money today (if healthy), it's somewhere in the next 5-8 years that he'll stop earning his money. Not seeing the highly probable case that he'll be an albatross contract is shortsighted.

"Shortsighted" is very much the opposite of the correct term to use in this case

 

[Baksfamous112]

Bergeron is probably a top 5 centerman in the NHL, at minimum and ~top 10 player in the league. Same with Marchand at his respective position.

A lot of good goalies in the league today and Price based on recency doesn't stand up and above anyone in particular. It's not like Rask is a push over by any means.

Then the depth of the Bruins and their pipeline blow it out of the water. I personally don't think the Boston model retool can be replicated for many older teams and it's not just the Habs. We've seen many times try to retool on the fly and it hasn't provided great dividends, Vancouver is a great example. Montreal is in a tough spot primarily because they haven't built enough pieces from their pipeline beyond the Sergachev pick, and particularly from the 2nd round onwards.

One of the main reasons Boston could retool back into contention is they already had a world-class core (including Rask and Chara, who's declined a bit) and their pipeline restocked with high-end young cost-controlled depth players, McAvoy, Pasta to name a few.

I agree with you, Bergeron is definitely a top 5 C in the league, but so is Weber (top 10 debatable). Don't forget he was voted #5 last year for the Norris and was on pace for 50 points this season with a fractured ankle, which he suffered on game #1 of the season. Price is Price, I'm really not worried he will bounce back next season.

Our current roster looks like:

Pacioretty* - X - Gallagher
Galchenyuk - Drouin - X
Byron/Hudon - Danault - Lehkonen
Deslaurier - JDL - Shaw

X - Weber
Mete** - Petry
Alzner - Juulsen/Rielley/Benn/Schemlko

Price
X

*Most likely will be traded
**Might be bumped to the first pairing if he takes another big step forward next year.

As you can see, we're not that much in trouble. If Pacioretty goes, we will have a bigger whole on our top 6 but we're also going to draft a young Winger or a young LHD (depending on how the draft lottery goes). Add to that our 4x 2nd rounder and we will have a much better prospect pool. Boston had nothing in the pipeline when they decided they needed a retool and only had a much older Chara, Bergeron, Krug, a soon-to-be star in Marchant (he wasn't THAT good, he took a big step forward once they started the retool) and a very young Pastrnak. We have Weber, Price, Drouin, Pacioretty (for now), Galchenyuk and a young Mete who at 19 was better than at least half of the D man in this league, he will be a key piece going forward, but he needs to take another step

What they did very well, as you said, is drafting very well for 3 years and if Montreal can replicate what the Bruins did at the draft table (easier said than done), they'll be as competitive as the Bruins are right now in two years.

As for the Weber & Kessel comparison, I really don't agree with you. As I said, you don't build a team around a guy like Kessel, he simply doesn't have the leadership and competitiveness to be a mentor and a leader. He's such a great hockey player and he's probably the biggest "secondary guy" threat in the league, but as toronto saw, you can't have him as a leader. Weber, on the other side, is a great mentor. So many good D in Nashville grew their game to where it is right now because of Weber. Potential and skills plays a big part of it but I don't think Nashville would have had the D they have right now without Weber showing the way and this is what I think Montreal need (aside from his stellar play) from him. For that reason only, he shouldn't be traded at all.

 

[Mrb1p]

calling Weber a salary dump is literally the long view - he's worth his money today (if healthy), it's somewhere in the next 5-8 years that he'll stop earning his money. Not seeing the highly probable case that he'll be an albatross contract is nearsighted.

"Shortsighted" is very much the opposite of the correct term to use in this case

Teams don't give a flying crap about their future, that's the fan way of managing. Win now, look at it later. It's been done, it's being done and it will be done again.

Plus, the cap is going up yearly, to the point where 7M is not really all that much of an impact, giving enough room for 3 to 4 other contracts that would've been considered "big" back in the days.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Teams don't give a flying crap about their future, that's the fan way of managing. Win now, look at it later. It's been done, it's being done and it will be done again.

Plus, the cap is going up yearly, to the point where 7M is not really all that much of an impact, giving enough room for 3 to 4 other contracts that would've been considered "big" back in the days.

lol, k man.

Edit: I hope that Bergevin shares your view on things and keeps throwing futures at winning now

 

[Brock Radunske]

Teams don't give a flying crap about their future, that's the fan way of managing. Win now, look at it later. It's been done, it's being done and it will be done again.

Plus, the cap is going up yearly, to the point where 7M is not really all that much of an impact, giving enough room for 3 to 4 other contracts that would've been considered "big" back in the days.

Looks like Marc Bergevin joined HfBoards!