A conversation about the C position

[Deebs]

I would love to have O'Reilly on our team but not at the expense of our 1st. If we could do it for Max straight across, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Even if we had to add a little bit to it, I'd still consider it.

 

[justafan22]

Drouin instead of Point is why the habs are where they are right now. Anyone could see drouin was being propped up by Stamkos

 

[Deebs]

Drouin instead of Point is why the habs are where they are right now. Anyone could see drouin was being propped up by Stamkos

Point wasn't available or even in the conversation. Why even bring him up?

 

[justafan22]

Point wasn't available or even in the conversation. Why even bring him up?

Then look elsewhere instead of fixating on a winger that was propped up with stamkos

 

[gillyguzzler]

HF should ban Galchenyuk and Center in the same sentence. If it didn't happen this year, it will never happen so we need to move on. I'm hoping he won't be traded but the RDS experts all agreed that he should be part of a package for ROR and, well, Bergevin gets much of his pro scouting advice from RDS.

 

[Tourist]

The only way the Habs should package this year's first (or Poehling for that matter) is if they got back a current elite center under 28 or an elite center prospect. Moving up the draft to get Dahlin or down to somehow get an extra 1st rounder are other options I'd consider too I guess.

O'reilly is good but not elite. Unless the Habs can do a Pacioretty+ for him I'd pass. And still I'd prefer simply going for Tavares and maybe Statsny instead, who "only" cost money and cap space, and saving a potential Pacioretty package for a trade to acquire a younger promising player/prospect .

 

[Laurentide]

You can't remake a team that finished fourth from the bottom overnight with the addition of one player, even if that one player was named Sidney Crosby, which he won't be. On the other hand you have to start somewhere. ROR is the kind of player this team needs so he's worth going after. Would I trade my first round pick for him? Well that depends on where that first round pick is slotted. According to the models I've read, we don't stand much chance of staying put at 4th overall. We could move up but odds are that we'll move down. If that happens then I'd be fine with trading the pick because from what I've read there are no decent centers to be had in the first round but mostly I'd be fine with trading it because I have zero faith in the abilities of our scouting department to pick a winner. I'd rather get a known quantity in ROR than risk wasting a first round pick on the next David Fisher.

ROR is 27 and still has plenty of tread left on his tires. Stastny, on the other hand, is 32 and will be getting paid for what he used to do rather than what he's going to do. I would pass on him as he'd be nothing but a progress-stopper. It's the same reason why I wouldn't re-sign Plekanec. All guys like that do is suck up cap space and prevent younger players from getting a look.

 

[WinterLion]

All the questions can only be answered when we know which Carey Price we have. If he is a true #1 goalie, then we can be a team that makes the playoffs with a few additions, if not we cannot.

 

[Ozmodiar]

yeah we all know that scouts can predict which players are going to pan out AND AT WHAT position. With 100% certainty.

Say we adopt this plan and in 10 years we STILL don't have a center and there are no clear cut #1's that we can draft. then what ? pick BPA even if it doesnt address a need and NEVER try to address team weaknesses ? Precisely how do you think this works out ?

We are going to make out team worse, on purpose on the outside chance that we either draft a generational player, OR that we select players that address extant needs and not just make some of our current players at that position expendible in order to rearrange deck chairs. Because we know that if we have a good scoring winger that we can absolutely flip him for a 1C, every day of the week.

If we try to address the team's deficiencies we make progress and re-evaluate as we go along. We control the process. If the hope is that some kid in pee wee right now is gonna tear up the league as a rookie in a decade we have to tank, and hope to tank better than anyone else so that we get that kid based on balls being pulled out of a hat.

Working hard is 100% better than allowing and even supporting a culture that losing is not only okay but needed.
You play five years telling kids that its their job to lose, that doesnt evaporate over night and what you do is develop a team fill of players okay with losing ( see buffalo).

I doubt your repeated strawman arguments are fooling anyone.

Nobody's claiming that a rebuild comes with 100% certainty. Nobody's claiming that they'd need a rookie to "tear up the league", or rely on a lottery win.

Nobody said the team should spend 5 years telling kids it's their job to lose.

You might want to take a look at the best teams in the league. You'll see that most of their core is drafted and developed by their team. Look at Winnipeg, Toronto, Washington, Tampa Bay, Boston, .... and you might learn a little about how to build a team that's a lock for the playoffs.

The time to make trades to fill holes is when a team is close, and there's already a good foundation of prospects and depth. To do so when the team is a bottom-feeder gets them no further ahead in the long-term.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Agreed...that is the conundrum that's facing Bergevin.

But that's the position he's put himself into, he's going to bite the bullet in acquiring a center eventually...either in free agency $$$ or assets (trade picks & prospects & players).

But at the very least, he's at least better positioned this year with a top 5 pick and 4 2nd round picks. Now you've got some currency.

I don't think the task is impossible, but it requires foresight and creativity...2 things i've never associated with Bergevin.

If Tavares does make it to free agency, he has to open the vault for him, of course. Absent that opportunity, however, if what we need to do is accumulate young elite talent I think we should focus on that. To Belial's credit, he does raise a good point: you can't just scorch the earth and expect to draft yourself back to success. So I would propose to get rid of only some of the older assets that we have, and move them exclusively for picks and prospects. That does two things: it raises the expected value of our own picks (we'll be bad), and it gives us more picks. More and better picks is just more chances to acquire elite young talent.

Beyond that, I would actually look to do something innovative with all our picks. I would look to do two things: trade back, and trade ''forward'' in time. The Islanders, Rangers, and Chicago all have multiple firsts and thus make potential ''move back'' targets. This gives us more opportunities to draft, while still giving us a top 10 pick (I think the value in this draft really levels out around here, so trading up would be a mistake that we should exploit). The real juice comes from the second idea. We give a ''contender'' one of our early 2nd round picks this year for their first next year. Let's say we get a taker, and they weren't quite as good as they thought they would be, and we end up with the 20th overall pick. We could then do another trade back. And around and around it goes. All of a sudden, we drafted 4 times in the first, and 5 times in the 2nd in 2 years, instead of twice in the first and 5 times in the second.

 

[Ozmodiar]

I like ROR, but isn't the attitude that he showed by his locker at the end of the season the same attitude that Bergevin is trying to rid from his locker room?

 

[417]

If Tavares does make it to free agency, he has to open the vault for him, of course. Absent that opportunity, however, if what we need to do is accumulate young elite talent I think we should focus on that. To Belial's credit, he does raise a good point: you can't just scorch the earth and expect to draft yourself back to success. So I would propose to get rid of only some of the older assets that we have, and move them exclusively for picks and prospects. That does two things: it raises the expected value of our own picks (we'll be bad), and it gives us more picks. More and better picks is just more chances to acquire elite young talent.

Beyond that, I would actually look to do something innovative with all our picks. I would look to do two things: trade back, and trade ''forward'' in time. The Islanders, Rangers, and Chicago all have multiple firsts and thus make potential ''move back'' targets. This gives us more opportunities to draft, while still giving us a top 10 pick (I think the value in this draft really levels out around here, so trading up would be a mistake that we should exploit). The real juice comes from the second idea. We give a ''contender'' one of our early 2nd round picks this year for their first next year. Let's say we get a taker, and they weren't quite as good as they thought they would be, and we end up with the 20th overall pick. We could then do another trade back. And around and around it goes. All of a sudden, we drafted 4 times in the first, and 5 times in the 2nd in 2 years, instead of twice in the first and 5 times in the second.

Agreed - the Habs have some draft capital this year.

Need to get creative.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

if we can trade Pacioretty and receive a 1st high enough to take Veleno, we could be deep at the C position in a couple of years with Poehling, Veleno, Evans, Danault, and DLR. None of those guys are #1s, but you could definitely roll 4 lines that you could win with.

 

[Laurentide]

I like ROR, but isn't the attitude that he showed by his locker at the end of the season the same attitude that Bergevin is trying to rid from his locker room?

Bergevin is full of s***. That whole "attitude" crap is just that: crap. Just like "ka-RACK-ter" was. Just like "Pas d'excuses!" was. They're just deflections. If he can actually get his hands on a top 6 center like ROR he will take him no matter what his attitude issues might be. If anyone asks he'll just give them the same line he gave about Alzner: "I spoke with him and we both agree that he has to be better"

When he made the deal for Shaw, he talked about character but that's not really why he did it. In the end, Bergevin made that deal for the same reason he hired Lefebvre and Daigneault; the same reason he does anything: Because he knew them personally and/or had a prior relationship with them. That's it. If Bergevin had worked for Dallas instead of Chicago prior to the Habs he'd have traded those 2 picks to the Stars for Antoine Roussel and would have had no interest whatsoever in Shaw.

 

[Price is Wright]

HF should ban Galchenyuk and Center in the same sentence. If it didn't happen this year, it will never happen so we need to move on. I'm hoping he won't be traded but the RDS experts all agreed that he should be part of a package for ROR and, well, Bergevin gets much of his pro scouting advice from RDS.

You are asking fans of the Montreal Canadiens, the team that believes in forum ghosts, to move on.

I got a feeling if you surveyed Habs fans my age you would still find some who believe that Bunny Laroque and Mario Tremblay were held back and that Houle, Tardiff, and JC Tremblay in the WHA was the real reason Philly won back to back.

This fanbase doesn't let anything go. They just forget things.

 

[sandysan]

I like ROR, but isn't the attitude that he showed by his locker at the end of the season the same attitude that Bergevin is trying to rid from his locker room?

if the plan is to lose, and lose frequently, then it looks like ROR can be convinced to go along with it. It means we have to emulate Buffalo, but from all accounts, that's entirely doable.

 

[SOLR]

if we can trade Pacioretty and receive a 1st high enough to take Veleno, we could be deep at the C position in a couple of years with Poehling, Veleno, Evans, Danault, and DLR. None of those guys are #1s, but you could definitely roll 4 lines that you could win with.

Not Veleno, we have plenty of 3rd line centers.

 

[Scriptor]

Drouin instead of Point is why the habs are where they are right now. Anyone could see drouin was being propped up by Stamkos

When Drouin payed some of his best hockey in the absence of Stamos!? Ridiculous assertion.

 

[Scriptor]

if we can trade Pacioretty and receive a 1st high enough to take Veleno, we could be deep at the C position in a couple of years with Poehling, Veleno, Evans, Danault, and DLR. None of those guys are #1s, but you could definitely roll 4 lines that you could win with.

Best -- absolutely best -- case scenario, you have 4 young and relatively inexpensive Cs; two 2nd line Cs in Poehling and Veleno and two 3rd line Cs in Danault and Evans. If you keep depth at the wing and ice 4 two-way lines with offensive upside, it could become the new model for a Cup-winner...

...I wish, but unfortunately, I just woke up...

 

[MasterDecoy]

A T T I T U D E
T
T
I
T
U
D
E




(Marc is an asshole)

 

[DXStriker]

IF and i mean IF Tavares makes Jul 1st .
MB has 1 move and its give Tavares a Blank Cheque ... 15 Million or 10 million he decides and MB figures it out after even if it means trading his BFF Shawzy.

I would rather finally have a damm C like Tavares for 13 ish million then Alzner and Shaw for close to 8 million .

Also i am a lil scared about Danault contract .

 

[L4br3cqu3]

I love Ryan 'Radar' O'Reilly, but, I sure don't want to get him for our 1st, would be a 'band-aid' move... we have some major holes to fill on that team, but I believe we need to think more about the future than the present, cause I also don't believe we'll be the next 'Avalanche' next season...

And that's what is scary for me, cause MB really seems to believe it's the case. Guy made a monumental mess of a team that looked nice 2 seasons ago and that just needed tinkering. Getting a quality 2nd line center like ROR (would be a 1st C here, but well, we suck) would only fill 1 hole...

And on the Tavares part, I guess I'm perhaps the worst Habs fan ever but... I sincerly hope Tavares re-sign with the Isles, or elsewhere come July 1st. I don't want MB to 'win' and parade in all his glory like an idiot, I want him to fail, hard, and if it means having another bottom 5 season, so be it, at the very least we'll have quality in the near future with the prospects we'll get (unless he trades the picks away... )

 

[tnq]

Ok let try Weber. We have a big guy who can pass shot hit very good in defense

 

[WeThreeKings]

Alienate your fanbase
Trade PK Subban
Terrible pro-scouting
Invest in better food
Terrible player development
Ugly purple pants
Destroy the defense
Ensure you sign Karl Alzner

 

[Laurentide]

You are asking fans of the Montreal Canadiens, the team that believes in forum ghosts, to move on.

I got a feeling if you surveyed Habs fans my age you would still find some who believe that Bunny Laroque and Mario Tremblay were held back and that Houle, Tardiff, and JC Tremblay in the WHA was the real reason Philly won back to back.

This fanbase doesn't let anything go. They just forget things.

Houle was no big loss and JC Tremblay was past his prime. Tardif, however, was a guy the Habs could have used. I would have loved to see him playing alongside Lafleur in his prime. And let's also not forget that one of the years that the Flyers won was the year that Dryden decided to go to law school rather than accept the Habs' "take it or leave it" contract offer.

Bunny got his chance to shine after being traded to the Leafs and he played like a back-up. And Mario Tremblay wasn't held back. He won his first Cup when he was barely old enough to shave. He cracked the toughest roster in pro hockey outside of Moscow a month after his 18th birthday. Doesn't sound like being held back to me.