Habs - The Best Team at the Deadline

[Nynja*]

I can list at least 3 reasons why the Vanek trade was good, and all these reasons has nothing to do with Vanek himself.

Meanwhile we listed 6 reasons why the Vanek trade was good...

Still waiting for the other 2 buddy.

 

[DAChampion]

If Jeff Petry gets us a few more playoff wins (I think he has) and leaves in July, then he's already surpassed the expected value of a second round pick. It's a good trade even then. However, the trade is even better if we sign and keep Petry.

Further, even if several individual rentals are worthwhile, a sequence of rentals is not because the process is not sustainable -- see the Pittsburgh Penguins as an example. Their cup contention window has closed and their cupboard is bare.

Going back to 2007, the Habs are even in first and second rounders I think. However a lot of picks were traded away in 2008-2011, later restored by Gauthier's tank, which feels most painful now.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

The matter with rentals is that they need to be replaced when they leave, and without a deep pool of prospects, the replacements would be very poor indeed. Maybe not immediately, but certainly in the future.The price paid for Vanek's service is arguably only fair, but certainly not a steal by any stretch. Collberg and the draft pick might have never panned out, but their potential is arguably similar in value to the number of games Vanek played with us, considering that he mailed it in for some of the games he players in.

 

[Richiebottles]

And regarding Petry signing here, Bergevin keep repeating that he will not build his team through free agency, you really think that he will sign Vanek or Petry for multi years deal?

The only free agents that he will sign is depth players (that's another concept that people don't get: depth players).

Uh, yea I am willing to bet you he will sign Petry.

He didn't sign Vanek because both parties knew Vanek was gone to Minnesota.

MB will do everything in his power to keep Petry.

 

[Nynja*]

The matter with rentals is that they need to be replaced when they leave, and without a deep pool of prospects, the replacements would be very poor indeed. Maybe not immediately, but certainly in the future.The price paid for Vanek's service is arguably only fair, but certainly not a steal by any stretch. Collberg and the draft pick might have never panned out, but their potential is arguably similar in value to the number of games Vanek played with us, considering that he mailed it in for some of the games he players in.

You couldnt have known Vanek would have stopped caring when the trade was made.

 

[Kriss E]

Many people don't seem to understand the concept of rental players in the NHL. Kriss E thinks that Vanek left the team but he was never with the team to begin with. When you rent a movie, the movie is not yours, you have to give it back at the end, this is what rental means. And when you give the movie back there's no refund.

That has to be the worse analogy I have ever heard.
You realize that we have the rights to Vanek the moment we acquire him right?? Or maybe I just imagined him all together, because according to you, he was never with the team..
If we traded for him 3 hours before the deadline, we technically could trade him to another team. Once the POs are over, we can trade his rights until July 1st.
I mean, did you think we gave Vanek back to the Islanders at the end of the season??? Do you think that's what happened??? We rented him from them for a couple of months and then returned him?? That's not what happened dude.

A rental is simply an expression given to players set to become UFA that are brought in at the deadline and not re-signed either because the team wasn't interested, or the player wasn't, or they couldn't come to a mutual agreement. So on July 1st, they become free agents.

When you want to rent anything you want there's a price to pay, and the thing is not yours.

I don't think you understand why people call some players ''rentals''.
By your definition, Petry is a rental and he cannot be re-signed here. Because when you rent a movie, you don't own it right, you have to bring it back. Otherwise we probably will have to pay late fees to blockbuster..

A rental trade is a win-win situation for both teams because the team that acquire a rental improve their chances to win the Cup and for all the other reasons we listed, and for the other teams it gives them prospects and draft picks to build with to improve their poor team.

And if you don't win the cup or achieve your PO objective, then you just wasted your prospects and picks.

You guys really wanna argue that the Vanek and Petry rental deals were bad deals? Ok go ahead lol...

They weren't bad deals. We just can't keep giving away prospects and/or picks for players we won't re-sign and we end up losing in POs.

 

[Kriss E]

1. It showed support and faith in the team - good for morale
2. Added depth to the top6 - good for the team
3. Kept other contenders from picking up a big piece - good for our chances

So trading for Allen is similar to trading for Petry? It shows support? No. The fact that you get a skilled guy like Vanek is what gives you this boost.
All three of your points are linked to Vanek. We added depth in the form of Vanek and prevented opponents from getting him.

4- giving confidence for every other players in team for the last stretch of the season and for the playoffs. Confidence bring wins and wins bring momentum.

5- having a better chance to win the Cup

6- 3 rounds of playoffs experience for every young players in the team and keep building on that winning culture that the Habs are trying to bring back to the team.

There's no price you can pay for experience.

4- It gave confidence to the team that we added a guy as skilled as Vanek. Unless you want to argue that adding Flynn and Mitchell gives the same confidence boost??
5- Increases our cup chance because we got a talented player that is Tomas Vanek.
6- Yes, and Tomas Vanek was part of the team.

Every single reason you referred to is directed to Vanek. You're so lost buddy.

 

[MasterDecoy]

What were the Penguins thinking when they traded Despres for Lovejoy?

probably thinking: i need a new job

 

[Sam I Am]

Those are great trades value wise, but they essentially become rather useless if they don't yield results and then they leave.
Last year, you can say we got experience out of that Vanek trade. Maybe we just don't reach the Conference Finals if we don't go after him. But you can't keep trading 2nd round picks for rentals.
It doesn't make the Petry vs 2nd+conditional a bad trade on the value side of it. But from a managerial point of view, you can't keep doing it.

Couldn't agree less.

As long as the Habs have a contending team, I would trade our 2nd-rounder every year for rentals as high quality as Vanek and Petry. Not only does it help the Habs to a better regular season finish and enhance their playoff chances, it places them in a better position to sign the player going forward.

 

[Sam I Am]

Are you kidding man? A second and Sebastian Collberg for Tomas Vanek was a steal for the Habs. Unreal trade.

And now we got probably the best defenseman available at the deadline for a 2nd and conditional 5th pick and you're unsure about it? Both trades were very good, even if both players end up being rentals. We got bargain deals for two of the biggest deadline pickups, and to make those types of trades, most teams would be paying much more at the deadline.

For two years in a row, Bergevin managed to add key players at the deadline while giving little in return. Both Vanek and Petry were acquired well below the market value for similar rentals.

Last year the Habs were one Keider away from going the the finals. Letting Vanek walk was the correct decision. Good deal nonetheless.

This year, Petry's contribution is plain for all to see. And the Habs have a head start in signing him once the playoffs are over.

 

[S Bah]

For two years in a row, Bergevin managed to add key players at the deadline while giving little in return. Both Vanek and Petry were acquired well below the market value for similar rentals.

Last year the Habs were one Keider away from going the the finals. Letting Vanek walk was the correct decision. Good deal nonetheless.

This year, Petry's contribution is plain for all to see. And the Habs have a head start in signing him once the playoffs are over.

Bergevin will be signing Petry, he's a solid defenceman, plays like a 10 year veteran, with lots of poise, a definite have too.Of course all the deadline players are contributing huge also, DSP & Mitchell are starring in their roles and should be accorded with contracts, Flynn Too, IMHO. This is a team built to win the Stanley Cup, they can stymie the best teams into frustration just as former Habs Champions have done in the past.

 

[Guilliam]

An amazing summer? Why?

Got rid of Gorges' contract.
Refused to overpay for Gio and let him walk (I'm one to think that who he chose not to keep should be just as important as who he brought in when assessing a GM's job).
Got rid of Brière
Signed Sekac
Signed Gilbert
Re-signed Weaver (didn't turn out great but was a no-brainer at the time)
Signed Malhotra
Re-signed Weise for 2 years
Re-signed PK for 8 years.

Those are all good moves.

 

[Monctonscout]

Got rid of Gorges' contract.
Refused to overpay for Gio and let him walk (I'm one to think that who he chose not to keep should be just as important as who he brought in when assessing a GM's job).
Got rid of Brière
Signed Sekac
Signed Gilbert
Re-signed Weaver (didn't turn out great but was a no-brainer at the time)
Signed Malhotra
Re-signed Weise for 2 years
Re-signed PK for 8 years.

Those are all good moves.

The Briere-Parenteau deal was his biggest mistake of the off season. He'll have to buy out PAP in the off season.

 

[Nynja*]

The Briere-Parenteau deal was his biggest mistake of the off season. He'll have to buy out PAP in the off season.

Thats a hindsight opinion...when the trade was made everyone was saying "OMG COLORADO TOOK BRIERE LOL"

 

[Monctonscout]

Thats a hindsight opinion...when the trade was made everyone was saying "OMG COLORADO TOOK BRIERE LOL"

There is a reason Colorado was trying to dump Parenteau for a year before. MB probably did it as a favor to Briere instead of burying him in the AHL or Europe.

 

[Monctonscout]

I'd like to see them sign Mitchell for a couple years, he fits well as #4 center.

 

[Richiebottles]

There is a reason Colorado was trying to dump Parenteau for a year before. MB probably did it as a favor to Briere instead of burying him in the AHL or Europe.

He also did it as a boom/bust move.

It has been more bust them boom but whatevs.

 

[Richiebottles]

I'd like to see them sign Mitchell for a couple years, he fits well as #4 center.

Mitchell reminds me of Dominic Moore.

He would fit really well in our bottom 6.

 

[Sam I Am]

I'd like to see them sign Mitchell for a couple years, he fits well as #4 center.

Mitchell is currently paid $2.5M/year. He will have to take a major pay cut.

 

[themilosh]

The biggest problem isn't that we lost them, it's that we didn't replace their low contribution.

You have to factor in that with "those" guys gone, others got more ice-time and contributed as well. It's not as clear cut as replacing the offense they generated but rather if the current(future) crop are able to generate the equal amount of offense in their absence, PLUS more offense with less cap hit. At least, that's the way a GM should be approaching it. But then again, GMs in hockey aren't exactly businessmen so maybe a bit of "dumb luck" mixed in with "good advice" makes them look either smart or stupid. Either way, I don;t have much respect for NHL GMs - way overrated IMO.

 

[Blackshad]

Mitchell reminds me of Dominic Moore.

He would fit really well in our bottom 6.

Good comparaison

 

[themilosh]

Couldn't agree less.

As long as the Habs have a contending team, I would trade our 2nd-rounder every year for rentals as high quality as Vanek and Petry. Not only does it help the Habs to a better regular season finish and enhance their playoff chances, it places them in a better position to sign the player going forward.

Agreed! NHl teams only have a few windows of opportunity. The Habs had that window last year, this year, and for the next 2 years. 2nd round picks are nice but totally a crap-shoot. Outside the top 10 picks of any draft, I hope MB trades whatever necessary to solidify the roster with another two top-6 forwards. Trade whatever draft picks you want, so what if Timmons cries - these opportunities (world's best goalie) only come once in a generation.

 

[Nynja*]

There is a reason Colorado was trying to dump Parenteau for a year before. MB probably did it as a favor to Briere instead of burying him in the AHL or Europe.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/player.htm?id=8469707

20G/51 pts in 81GP
18G/67 pts in 80GP
18G/43 pts in 48GP
14G/33 pts in 55GP in an injury year

So it was probably a gamble that his off year was due to injury. Or...the other theory is that he was leeching points off Tavares in NYI. Hey that sounds familiar...someone leeching points off an all-world player to make themselves look better than they are? Hmmm...

 

[Monctonscout]

Mitchell is currently paid $2.5M/year. He will have to take a major pay cut.

With his numbers the last 3 years, he won't get any more than 1.5 mil AAV from anybody.

I'd offer 2 years at 1 mil AAV...maybe go as high as 1.25-1.3 AAV.

 

[Guilliam]

The Briere-Parenteau deal was his biggest mistake of the off season. He'll have to buy out PAP in the off season.

I wouldn't call that trade a mistake. We needed a top-6 RW and Parenteau was basically free. It was a good gamble to take.

He also did it as a boom/bust move.

It has been more bust them boom but whatevs.

Exactly. A boom or bust move when you risk basically nothing is a no-brainer IMO.

Edit : As for Mitchell, I think by giving him 2 years we could make his cap hit lower and we could then afford to keep him. He might be willing to take a hometown discount as well since he grew up a Habs fan, he seems to love playing here and he's nearing the end of his career so he knows it's probably now or never.