Rumor: Andrei Markov wants to return to the NHL next season, preferably with the Canadiens

[Edgy]

What? No...

Shaw was a serviceable player who was on a career year, sure. Everyone can see he might not reproduce. He was also 3 years older and an injury away for retirement.

The return was fine.

Move along.

Shaw was never worth 2 2nd round picks. We overpaid, making it a bad trade. Move along.

 

[Habby4Life]

Paccioretty was a weak return? He got Tatar - who out scored Patches - plus Nick Suzuki plus a 2nd round pick. That was an outstanding return.

How come you have left out trading Tomas Fleischmann and Dale Weise for Philip Danault and 2nd round pick? That was an exceptional trade. That 2nd rounder, by the way, was used to select Alexander Romanov.

You also left out Jeff Petry for a 2nd and a 5th, another excellent trade for Montreal.

You also strangely didn't include Sebastian Collberg and a 2nd round pick for Tomas Vanek, which was a great addition.

There are a lot of things you can knock Bergevin for, but pretending he doesn't have a good track record on trades seems like a weird one based on the evidence.

The Patch and Domi trades were clear homeruns.

MB trade is history is good and the record proves it. I would suggest that he needs to be more creative and use cap space to pry more players from handcuffed teams.

Of all the larger trades, at the time I didn’t like the Weber trade as I thought he should of acquired youth but it has worked out as well. Weber has played well, he is a good leader, and he still looks like he has more good years left in him.

There are no glaring errors with the trading of picks or moving down in the draft and the swapping of AHL fodder is just that.

There are reasons to criticize MB but his trade history is not one of them

 

[NORiculous]

Shaw was never worth 2 2nd round picks. We overpaid, making it a bad trade. Move along.

So that means you then think the return was superb?

I think the 2 x 2nd was a slight overpayment but the return was great.

 

[Edgy]

So that means you then think the return was superb?

I think the 2 x 2nd was a slight overpayment but the return was great.

I think the return fell short of what we paid to make it a wash instead of a loss. To make it superb he would have had to return higher than what we paid for him

 

[NORiculous]

I think the return fell short of what we paid to make it a wash instead of a loss. To make it superb he would have had to return higher than what we paid for him

Habs used him up 3 years... that is a heck of a return for losing 1 round.

 

[Edgy]

Habs used him up 3 years... that is a heck of a return for losing 1 round.

That 2nd turned into DeBrincat, heck of a return indeed.

 

[NORiculous]

That 2nd turned into DeBrincat, heck of a return indeed.

That is pure speculation. Nothing indicates the Habs would have taken DeBrincat and nothing indicates that, had they drafted him, that he would have turned out as well as he did in Chicago.

 

[Edgy]

That is pure speculation. Nothing indicates the Habs would have taken DeBrincat and nothing indicates that, had they drafted him, that he would have turned out as well as he did in Chicago.

Nothing indicates they wouldn't have either, but it seems likely since they went for Caufield the last draft who they hope turns out to be like DeBrincat. As for how he would have turned out if we drafted him, well the same can be said about all the arguments defending the Pacioretty trade because of Suzuki's potential. Can't have it both ways.

 

[NORiculous]

Nothing indicates they wouldn't have either, but it seems likely since they went for Caufield the last draft who they hope turns out to be like DeBrincat. As for how he would have turned out if we drafted him, well the same can be said about all the arguments defending the Pacioretty trade because of Suzuki's potential. Can't have it both ways.

How about they drafter Caufield because of how DeBrincat turned out? The only indication they would have drafted him is a draft list or something of the sorts and it still doesn’t mean he would have turn out as good with the Habs.

Also, there is a 3rd pick that came back for Shaw, so it is not a player but a switch if picks that was traded. I would bet a very good player was available had the Habs made a perfect pick. But that would be in the same line of your argument, which is pure speculation.

I don’t understand what Suzuki has to do with this. He is not a speculated draft pick. I think he is part of a good return for Pacioretty. The pick that came with Suzuki and Tatar, that would be a better comparable.

 

[Edgy]

How about they drafter Caufield because of how DeBrincat turned out? The only indication they would have drafted him is a draft list or something of the sorts and it still doesn’t mean he would have turn out as good with the Habs.

Also, there is a 3rd pick that came back for Shaw, so it is not a player but a switch if picks that was traded. I would bet a very good player was available had the Habs made a perfect pick. But that would be in the same line of your argument, which is pure speculation.

I don’t understand what Suzuki has to do with this. He is not a speculated draft pick. I think he is part of a good return for Pacioretty. The pick that came with Suzuki and Tatar, that would be a better comparable.

Suzuki is a as good as a speculated pick at the moment, he was touted as the main piece of the Pacioretty trade and why it was great, Tatar's performance was an unexpected surprise. Just because it happened last season, doesn't mean the narrative is forgotten.

To say DeBrincat might not have turned out to be a good fit with us but continue to say Suzuki will turn out to be the center we are missing is talking out both sides of your mouth.

Chances of a 3rd round pick ever making it to the NHL are around 30%, so not exactly a resounding argument for a great return and it's worse when trading a 2nd round pick to get it along with something as insignificant as a 5th round pick. All that does is give Bergevin stage presence a few more times at the draft but does nothing for the team.

Saying Caufield was drafted because of DeBrincat is just as much speculation as you're saying I'm doing. You can't prove we wouldn't have gone after DeBrincat any more than I can. But fact of the matter remains we are deprived of scoring power and DeBrincat fits that need just as much as Caufield does, so it stands to reason we would have drafted him based on that more than it does to say we wouldn't have.

 

[NORiculous]

Suzuki is a as good as a speculated pick at the moment, he was touted as the main piece of the Pacioretty trade and why it was great, Tatar's performance was an unexpected surprise. Just because it happened last season, doesn't mean the narrative is forgotten.

To say DeBrincat might not have turned out to be a good fit with us but continue to say Suzuki will turn out to be the center we are missing is talking out both sides of your mouth.

Chances of a 3rd round pick ever making it to the NHL are around 30%, so not exactly a resounding argument for a great return and it's worse when trading a 2nd round pick to get it along with something as insignificant as a 5th round pick. All that does is give Bergevin stage presence a few more times at the draft but does nothing for the team.

Saying Caufield was drafted because of DeBrincat is just as much speculation as you're saying I'm doing. You can't prove we wouldn't have gone after DeBrincat any more than I can. But fact of the matter remains we are deprived of scoring power and DeBrincat fits that need just as much as Caufield does, so it stands to reason we would have drafted him based on that more than it does to say we wouldn't have.

Suzuki is not a pick. He has nothing to do with this.

Comparing probabilities of 3rd round picks lead to nothing (in this situation). Comparing probabilities of 3rd round picks vs. 2nd round picks gives a the picture of the reality here.


Yes I speculated with Caufield to show you what you are doing. And you see it makes no sens.

 

[Edgy]

Suzuki is not a pick. He has nothing to do with this.

Comparing probabilities of 3rd round picks lead to nothing (in this situation). Comparing probabilities of 3rd round picks vs. 2nd round picks gives a the picture of the reality here.


Yes I speculated with Caufield to show you what you are doing. And you see it makes no sens.

None of what you just said makes any sense.
You're losing sight of the bigger picture of this conversation.

Suzuki was the main piece coming back from the Pacioretty trade, not Tatar, not the pick. He was touted to be the answer to our #1 center problems, that Bergevin was a genius and the trade was a bigger win based on Tatar's performance. Tatar is an average player and while he outproduced Pacioretty last season, it does not mean he's suddenly better than a perennial 30goal scorer. So for this grade to be called a success, Suzuki has to pan out, the 2nd turn into a decent NHL player and Tatar continue his production, otherwise that trade is a loss. This is how Suzuki and the picks tie into all this. Clear?

Yes, comparing probabilities of 2nd round picks vs 3rd round picks is exactly the point, it shows you how stupid to downgrade from higher chance to a lower chance for the sake of gaining an even lower chance pick.

What I'm speculating with Caufield? I didn't speculate anything with Caufield. I said DeBrincat would have been probably picked based on our needs just like Caufield was. That's based on an analysis of our situation and our needs, it is logical. And it shows that trading that 2nd round pick for Shaw was a stupid over payment and getting a lower pick back is further proof Bergevin sucks at trades which started this whole conversation.

 

[CTHabsfan]

I thought this was a thread about Andrei Markov. Seeing as how the Canadiens have stated they will not be bringing Markov back and there has been no indication of another NHL team offering him a contract, maybe it's time to shut this down?

 

[NORiculous]

None of what you just said makes any sense.
You're losing sight of the bigger picture of this conversation.

Suzuki was the main piece coming back from the Pacioretty trade, not Tatar, not the pick. He was touted to be the answer to our #1 center problems, that Bergevin was a genius and the trade was a bigger win based on Tatar's performance. Tatar is an average player and while he outproduced Pacioretty last season, it does not mean he's suddenly better than a perennial 30goal scorer. So for this grade to be called a success, Suzuki has to pan out, the 2nd turn into a decent NHL player and Tatar continue his production, otherwise that trade is a loss. This is how Suzuki and the picks tie into all this. Clear?

Yes, comparing probabilities of 2nd round picks vs 3rd round picks is exactly the point, it shows you how stupid to downgrade from higher chance to a lower chance for the sake of gaining an even lower chance pick.

What I'm speculating with Caufield? I didn't speculate anything with Caufield. I said DeBrincat would have been probably picked based on our needs just like Caufield was. That's based on an analysis of our situation and our needs, it is logical. And it shows that trading that 2nd round pick for Shaw was a stupid over payment and getting a lower pick back is further proof Bergevin sucks at trades which started this whole conversation.

You are mixing up what I am saying.

Comparing picks (Shaw trade) and players (Pacioretty trade) makes no sense since one is concrete and the other is probabilities, speculation and such.

That is how this started but now it is wide open and I don’t have tine to cut the corners for you.

Cheers,

 

[Edgy]

You are mixing up what I am saying.

Comparing picks (Shaw trade) and players (Pacioretty trade) makes no sense since one is concrete and the other is probabilities, speculation and such.

That is how this started but now it is wide open and I don’t have tine to cut the corners for you.

Cheers,

Shaw trade isn't speculation, overpaying for him isn't speculation, trading down draft rounds for no good reason isn't speculation, probability of a 2nd round pick making the NHL being better than that of a 3rd and a 5th round pick isn't speculation, saying we would have drafted a player that fits our needs is deductive reasoning not speculation and it is further supported by our draft choice the year after.

You clearly are not following anything being said and why it's said, but think you have to cut corners for me? lol

 

[MMC]

 

[Jeti]

The Patch and Domi trades were clear homeruns.

MB trade is history is good and the record proves it. I would suggest that he needs to be more creative and use cap space to pry more players from handcuffed teams.

Of all the larger trades, at the time I didn’t like the Weber trade as I thought he should of acquired youth but it has worked out as well. Weber has played well, he is a good leader, and he still looks like he has more good years left in him.

There are no glaring errors with the trading of picks or moving down in the draft and the swapping of AHL fodder is just that.

There are reasons to criticize MB but his trade history is not one of them

The Drouin trade was pretty bad. The Subban trade was also questionable - it was a sensitive topic in Montreal for years after.

 

[Kranix]

At centre

 

[dukeofjive]

Dude i got all excited like finally somebody finally gave him a chance.

 

[qqaz]

Dude i got all excited like finally somebody finally gave him a chance.

Me too!

He could help the Jets, Leafs, or Ducks. Potentially... maybe. I do love a comeback.

 

[lauraP]

The 20 posters before me already said he was too slow/old and broken down, better post the exact same thing incase someone missed it

 

[ole ole]

Suzuki was the main piece coming back from the Pacioretty trade, not Tatar, not the pick. He was touted to be the answer to our #1 center problems, that Bergevin was a genius and the trade was a bigger win based on Tatar's performance. Tatar is an average player and while he outproduced Pacioretty last season, it does not mean he's suddenly better than a perennial 30goal scorer. So for this grade to be called a success, Suzuki has to pan out, the 2nd turn into a decent NHL player and Tatar continue his production, otherwise that trade is a loss. This is how Suzuki and the picks tie into all this. Clear?

Wow are you out in left field.

Suzuki turns out = great trade for us no matter what the 2nd rd pick does.
Tatars performance so far is an added bonus.

 

[Edgy]

Wow are you out in left field.

Suzuki turns out = great trade for us no matter what the 2nd rd pick does.
Tatars performance so far is an added bonus.

You don't seem to understand what was said. None of it is wrong.

Suzuki has to pan out and become a #1 center for us to declare this a win. He is looking promising, but we're only 5 games into his first season. He was a prospect at the time that post was written with no indication that he will be part of the lineup to start the season. If he does become a #1 center, I'll gladly quote that post myself and serve myself crow to eat.

Same goes for Tatar, if he out produces Pacioretty again this year and becomes a perennial 60 point player, I'll gladly eat my words. But a career year isn't a solid argument to defend the trade with.

The 2nd becomes empirical if both of the above fail to become what they were touted to be at the time of the trade.

If Suzuki turns out to be a #1 center and Tatar continues last year's production level then the 2nd becomes irrelevant and we would have won the trade.

If Pacioretty bounces back and Tatar falls back to career average and Suzuki fails to become a #1 center then we lost the trade.

If Suzuki pans out, Tatar falters it's a narrow win because #1 centers are more valuable.

If the 2nd pans out and becomes an NHL regular and Suzuki pans out, it's a great deal.

If all 3 pan out, I'll never criticize Bergevin ever again and I will apologize on tv during a Habs game with a massive sign lol.