Let's give credit where credit is due, this team is good.

[L4br3cqu3]

Danault has 38 even strength points and a GF% of 61.80 while starting only 36.91% of his shifts in the offensive zone.

Hayes has 24 even strength points with a GF% of 50.82 while starting 54.82% of his shifts in the offensive zone.

Philip Danault is the better and more complete player!

Danault faces tougher opposition than Hayes also.

But keep thinking that those couple of points Hayes got while playing on the PP make him the better player.

So, those are all possible stats existing out there ?

Danault beats him in any possible stat existing out there this season!

People who can't go wrong are disturbed.

 

[Runner77]

In fact Bergevin did say that he would do "hockey trade" all day long in another interview.
Habs are 9-1-2 since he did his presser, i'm sure he didn't expect that.

As for mortgaging the future, i don't think a 2nd or 3rd round pick is mortgaging the future......

It's generally not. However, for the Habs, it's a resource they can ill-afford to squander as they've missed out on amassing quality disposable organizational depth due to shortsighted decisions taken in prior years.

That combined with the fact that Timmins appears to have hit a homerun with at least one of his second rounders means that you have to go into the 2019 draft thinking that if MB's trading a 2nd rounder, they'd be denying Timmins a weapon of choice.

I know, MB said hockey trades and that means acquiring a contract that has term. I don't know, I much prefer an Armia-style move and if it can't be had, I'd much rather only deal in depth that doesn't require the trading of picks.

 

[Belial]

So, those are all possible stats existing out there ?



People who can't go wrong are disturbed.

So instead of actually analyzing the information I provided you're gonna focus on that?

Hilarious...

Hayes has 37 points in 45 GP

Danault has 40 points in 55 GP

OMG Hayes blows him out of the water!

 

[Runner77]

Well said.

For me, still not his biggest fan based on his tenure as a whole with the team, but yes, he has had a great post-March 2018 (I selected this time as it was post TDL where we got a good package for Pleks).

That said, his success was due to his massive failure last season. So sure, he recovered but he recovered from self inflicted wounds.

However, I will admit he deserves credit regardless of the road he used to get there.

Anyways, as crazy as it sounds, what he’s done since March is easy. When you are near the bottom of the heap, you can only go up. The hard part is now... making us go from good to great, and to keep us there.

KK had to be the biggest surprise of them all. I don't know how much of the selection is on MB vs. Timmins vs. some scout who threw out the most F-Bombs at their draft meetings, but to select a guy who wasn't even in the top 10 at one point, who wasn't a consensus no. 3 pick according to many, who is not only a center (filling a need that eluded MB throughout his tenure) but who became a top 6 during his first NHL season -- I mean, this is truly genius. Or incredibly lucky. Or both.

 

[Habs Icing]

Your opinion isn't a fact.

I didn't state my opinion, bud. You did. You called the Habs a bubble team. That's an opinion. I gave you facts. I told you where they stood in the conference and in the league. You see why I dislike debating with posters like you?

 

[L4br3cqu3]

So instead of actually analyzing the information I provided you're gonna focus on that?

Hilarious...

Hayes has 37 points in 45 GP

Danault has 40 points in 55 GP

OMG Hayes blows him out of the water!

"Danault beats him in any possible stat existing out there this season!" -Belial

You still made that claim bud

 

[sandviper]

KK had to be the biggest surprise of them all. I don't know how much of the selection is on MB vs. Timmins vs. some scout who threw out the most F-Bombs at their draft meetings, but to select a guy who wasn't even in the top 10 at one point, who wasn't a consensus no. 3 pick according to many, who is not only a center (filling a need that eluded MB throughout his tenure) but who became a top 6 during his first NHL season -- I mean, this is truly genius. Or incredibly lucky. Or both.

We should actually give the scouts props as well. Not only for KK, but for what seems to be a very successful draft overall.

Biggest surprise for me though was Domi. Domi I did not expect to be as productive like he has. Not so happy we traded Galchenyuk but I have accepted that Chuck will never be the “guy” in Montreal. Regardless of where to place blame for that is irrelevant as end of the day, moving him was best for everyone.

 

[Belial]

"Danault beats him in any possible stat existing out there this season!" -Belial

You still made that claim bud

Yes I did!

And it's actually true.

The only thing I got wrong is that Hayes missed some games so his PPG is slightly higher than Danault's.

You want to focus on that? Fine, that still doesn't change the fact that Danault is better than Hayes this year overall.

 

[Runner77]

We should actually give the scouts props as well. Not only for KK, but for what seems to be a very successful draft overall.

Biggest surprise for me though was Domi. Domi I did not expect to be as productive like he has. Not so happy we traded Galchenyuk but I have accepted that Chuck will never be the “guy” in Montreal. Regardless of where to place blame for that is irrelevant as end of the day, moving him was best for everyone.

I think Galchenyuk was done and it was obvious that there was a lot of stuff happening that the GM didn't seem to like. Galchenyuk seemed to be too high maintenance, with what was reported about his meddling father and all that yo-yoing from the first to the fourth line, you could tell nothing good was going to come of it had he not been traded. I didn't see it as clearly as I do now, but it had to be done. Of course, Domi has just made it so much easier to transition from Galchenyuk. Dems are the breaks. And we were due for a couple, it had been a roller coaster 6 years prior to that.

 

[Milhouse40]

It's generally not. However, for the Habs, it's a resource they can ill-afford to squander as they've missed out on amassing quality disposable organizational depth due to shortsighted decisions taken in prior years.

That combined with the fact that Timmins appears to have hit a homerun with at least one of his second rounders means that you have to go into the 2019 draft thinking that if MB's trading a 2nd rounder, they'd be denying Timmins a weapon of choice.

I know, MB said hockey trades and that means acquiring a contract that has term. I don't know, I much prefer an Armia-style move and if it can't be had, I'd much rather only deal in depth that doesn't require the trading of picks.

The Armia deal isn't something that happened often in the NHL and the Habs are not in any better position to make that deal than most teams in the NHL. As of today, there's not many teams who would like to add and don't have the Cap Space to do it. Washington are probably the only team that would need some cap space in order to make an acquisition and 15 teams that could help them.

Although a 2nd round pick is not an asset to throw away easily, i still don't think it's where you build your team going down the road. But it's like the 1st round pick.....if those 2nd round pick would be high 2nd round pick, i would want to keep them, but both of the 2nd round pick the Habs have will be low 2nd round picks, closer of being 3rd round picks.

Most low 2nd round pick would take at least 3 to 4 years to make an impact and that's only if they make any impact at all....that's a big gamble. I still prefer to have Vanek or Petry for that price. Noboby is talking about those 2nd round picks today. Of course there's the Shaw deal, but those were both high 2nd round pick

 

[MasterDecoy]

Soon to be the work-work-work line, no Drake no RiRi.

I don’t need know what that means

 

[Habs Icing]

In fact Bergevin did say that he would do "hockey trade" all day long in another interview.
Habs are 9-1-2 since he did his presser, i'm sure he didn't expect that.

As for mortgaging the future, i don't think a 2nd or 3rd round pick is mortgaging the future......

If that 2nd or 3rd is for a player with term sure. If it's for a rental, I would think long and hard and the answer would probably be no.

 

[Runner77]

The Armia deal isn't something that happened often in the NHL and the Habs are not in any better position to make that deal than most teams in the NHL. As of today, there's not many teams who would like to add and don't have the Cap Space to do it. Washington are probably the only team that would need some cap space in order to make an acquisition and 15 teams that could help them.

Although a 2nd round pick is not an asset to throw away easily, i still don't think it's where you build your team going down the road. But it's like the 1st round pick.....if those 2nd round pick would be high 2nd round pick, i would want to keep them, but both of the 2nd round pick the Habs have will be low 2nd round picks, closer of being 3rd round picks.

Most low 2nd round pick would take at least 3 to 4 years to make an impact and that's only if they make any impact at all....that's a big gamble. I still prefer to have Vanek or Petry for that price. Noboby is talking about those 2nd round picks today. Of course there's the Shaw deal, but those were both high 2nd round pick

Except that you have to take into consideration that this draft and the one in 2020, make it worthwhile to hold on to those second rounders, as I understand they are particularly deep. There will be fallers in the first round and one of them can be had for that second round pick we didn't trade.

 

[L4br3cqu3]

It's generally not. However, for the Habs, it's a resource they can ill-afford to squander as they've missed out on amassing quality disposable organizational depth due to shortsighted decisions taken in prior years.

That combined with the fact that Timmins appears to have hit a homerun with at least one of his second rounders means that you have to go into the 2019 draft thinking that if MB's trading a 2nd rounder, they'd be denying Timmins a weapon of choice.

I know, MB said hockey trades and that means acquiring a contract that has term. I don't know, I much prefer an Armia-style move and if it can't be had, I'd much rather only deal in depth that doesn't require the trading of picks.

Bingo !

In the last 2 drafts only, we got Brook (!!!), Ikonen, Ylonen, Romanov and Olofsson in the 2nd round, Walford, Fleury, Hillis and Harris in the 3rd round.

Cautiously, I could claim that only 1 or 2 could pan out for us.

But in reality, all of them could.

The 2nd and 3rd rounds are where most teams find their depth, and 'surprises'.

We've lacked depth for so long now, AND surprises. (Subban in 2007 became a superstar, Lehkonen in 2013 is very nice depth now)

We need those picks, AND patience.

 

[holy]

I don’t need know what that means

Means my boy putting in that work and y'all hating. In the playoffs no one gonna want smoke.

 

[L4br3cqu3]

Yes I did!

And it's actually true.

The only thing I got wrong is that Hayes missed some games so his PPG is slightly higher than Danault's.

You want to focus on that? Fine, that still doesn't change the fact that Danault is better than Hayes this year overall.

So, you were right, then you go on saying you were wrong.

 

[Runner77]

I don’t need know what that means

Soon to be the work-work-work line, no Drake no RiRi.

The "work-work-work" reference comes from the song Work, by Rihanna. The song features Drake.

RiRi must a nickname for Rihanna. She named a perfume after it.

Holy, how am I doing?

Now, if only @Bloumeister would write riddles like this. We'd at least have a shot at figuring them out within the year.

 

[Milhouse40]

If that 2nd or 3rd is for a player with term sure. If it's for a rental, I would think long and hard and the answer would probably be no.

Jacob De La Rose - Bust
Zach Fucale - Bust
Sebastien Collberg - Bust
Dalton Thrower - Bust
Arthurri Lehkonen - 3rd liner

In 2012-2013, the Habs had 5 2nd round picks and their back pocket and out of those 5 picks the Habs got a 3rd liner.
Knowing this today, would you have traded those 2nd round picks even if it was for rentals back then?

Habs got all the trouble in the world to find NHLer out of their low 1st round pick, imagine low 2nd round pick.

But a question, why would you prefer:
Trading a 5th round pick for a marginal player that won't make much of a difference or trading a 2nd round pick for a player that might really help get out of the 1st round?

Cause one thing i'm sure of, Bergevin will get that marginal player at the TDL for a lower round pick.....always does.

 

[Edgy]

I didn't state my opinion, bud. You did. You called the Habs a bubble team. That's an opinion. I gave you facts. I told you where they stood in the conference and in the league. You see why I dislike debating with posters like you?

Fact is we're a couple of losses away from not being in a playoff spot, and we've been fighting for a wild card spot since Weber's return pretty much. By definition that makes us a bubble team, that's a fact. You're looking at the current standings without consideration to the bigger picture.

We're on an insane hot streak with several players having career year numbers, our goalie is playing at 0.940 save percentage during this streak, all of this is unsustainable and once everything falls back to a median, more realistic range we'll be back to being a bubble team fighting for a wild card spot or just sneaking in by the skin of our teeth.

So if you choose to ignore the bigger picture, that's you prerogative but it doesn't make the facts above any different which in turn renders your argument to an opinion, not a fact thus both my points still stand.

 

[Runner77]

...We need those picks, AND patience.

Also because they tried the opposite and it didn't work so well.

 

[Milhouse40]

Except that you have to take into consideration that this draft and the one in 2020, make it worthwhile to hold on to those second rounders, as I understand they are particularly deep. There will be fallers in the first round and one of them can be had for that second round pick we didn't trade.

Don't get me wrong here, i'm not advocating that we should be trading our 2nd round picks just for the sake of trading it....just saying that we shouldn't overestimate the value of that pick for the Habs and considered it as part of the "future".

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

The odds of picking a top 6 forwards, top 4 D or a #1 G (Which are the players i would consider as part of the future) is 10% considering where the Habs should be picking. If the Habs or Columbus dropped a little in the standings, it goes only to 10.8%. So for every 10 players picks in that range, 9 won't be part of the team's future and most likely be bust.

If the Habs would totally great at drafting, that would be another story....but they are not.

 

[Runner77]

Don't get me wrong here, i'm not advocating that we should be trading our 2nd round picks just for the sake of trading it....just saying that we shouldn't overestimate the value of that pick for the Habs and considered it as part of the "future".

https://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-nhl-draft-pick-value-1.786131

The odds of picking a top 6 forwards, top 4 D or a #1 G (Which are the players i would consider as part of the future) is 10% considering where the Habs should be picking. If the Habs or Columbus dropped a little in the standings, it goes only to 10.8%. So for every 10 players picks in that range, 9 won't be part of the team's future and most likely be bust.

If the Habs would totally great at drafting, that would be another story....but they are not.

True, but I think this is a bad time to trade away those early picks.

For one, if last summer's draft prep wasn't a fluke, they may be able to achieve another haul.

Second, the depth of the draft also needs to be taken into account as it can skew the percentages.

Third, the more kicks at the can you have, the more likely you're going to hit for extra bases.

Fourth, we are only in the current position because of shortsighted decisions over the 6 years prior to last summer.

Fifth, we need to develop quality disposable organizational depth so that it puts us in a position to win a trade by dangling an asset that another organization will value. Right now, if any of our best assets are traded, we are likely to create a hole while attempting to fix one. This is not how you gain leverage and manage risk in a transaction. That cycle based on gambling, short-term solutions, shortcuts and "anything can happen" needs to end.

 

[MasterDecoy]

The "work-work-work" reference comes from the song Work, by Rihanna. The song features Drake.

RiRi must a nickname for Rihanna. She named a perfume after it.

Holy, how am I doing?

Now, if only @Bloumeister would write riddles like this. We'd at least have a shot at figuring them out within the year.

Yeah, that explanation was wasted on me...

How bout them habs eh?

 

[BaseballCoach]

Bingo !

In the last 2 drafts only, we got Brook (!!!), Ikonen, Ylonen, Romanov and Olofsson in the 2nd round, Walford, Fleury, Hillis and Harris in the 3rd round.

Cautiously, I could claim that only 1 or 2 could pan out for us.

But in reality, all of them could.

The 2nd and 3rd rounds are where most teams find their depth, and 'surprises'.

We've lacked depth for so long now, AND surprises. (Subban in 2007 became a superstar, Lehkonen in 2013 is very nice depth now)

We need those picks, AND patience.

Yes, but if they are traded for established players (not rentals or projects), there is no problem.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Fourth, we are only in the current position because of shortsighted decisions over the 6 years prior to last summer.

Perhaps, but if trading a pick or prospect gets you a player whom you can count upon for years, that is not a short-sighted decision.