I don't really like the moves in the sense that I think Ott and Martinsen in the sense that including them in the lineup at any point creates a liability on whatever line they play on, but am curious about the Benn trade and like the Davidson/King acquisitions.
Top-3 lines are the same/interchangeable, I'm looking to keep Benn in the lineup for now and would probably try Davidson over Emelin but I doubt they'd do that. The only change to line-4 I'd want is King for Flynn while calling up Carr to come in for Mitchell every once and a while. Ott/Martinsen would only be in my lineup if literally every other fourth line option was injured and, if I had to play both, I'd rather just call up the first line from St. John's and try them there.
The ongoing Weber/Subban controversy proves otherwise.
I think it's a lot less controversial to Bergevin then it is to all of us. We're all at opposite extreme's firmly in our camps and coming to the same places to complain/celebrate the trade. Meanwhile, in the Canadiens office, Bergevin is surrounded by guys who back his decision 100% and will no longer take questions on it publicly. Not he's trying to defuse the controversy by avoiding it but because he believes it's an insult to his intelligence.
I firmly believe that this will all blow up in his face in the near future, being in the Subban camp and all, but, to him, he would make the move again 10 times out of 10. There was no risk.
