TSN: The Drouin Saga Part II - "How You Drouin?"

[waffledave]

So if I understand the logic, lets say we were offered to deal Beaulieu and/or McCarron 2 years ago for lets say Kuznetsov, we should have said no, correct? The worst part is Drouin has the potential to be better than Kuz. The kid is not even 21 yet.

Lets face it, there's always an element of risk in every trade. But given the potential reward you could be getting, it may be worth taking that risk... if we want to this team to finally become a powerhouse.

Every great GM takes a risk. Sometimes they pay off, and the GM is remembered as a genius, goes down in history, etc...

Sometimes it doesn't work, and it follows the GM forever.

Imagine if Scott Gomez came here and found his 80 point form again. Imagine if McDonagh ended up as a bust. But that's not what happened, it was a risk (a bad one, let's be honest) and it didn't work out.

MB is not a risk taker. He'll never risk his reputation on a move like this because he lacks the experience to do it. He's playing it safe because he's still too green in this job.

 

[MXD]

Beaulieu is ALREADY a solid Top-4, so the idea of him being a solid Top-4 down the road is more or less a fallacy. He's more like a solid Top-2 down the road who plays with our no1 D-Men at the moment because he's the best we have on the left side.

It's been a while since our Top-4 is actually manned by Top-4 players, so throwing it all away for the sake of a big "what if" don't seem to be the way to go. Unless the point is not to actually win hockey games.

 

[sergejean]

Every great GM takes a risk. Sometimes they pay off, and the GM is remembered as a genius, goes down in history, etc...

Sometimes it doesn't work, and it follows the GM forever.

Imagine if Scott Gomez came here and found his 80 point form again. Imagine if McDonagh ended up as a bust. But that's not what happened, it was a risk (a bad one, let's be honest) and it didn't work out.

MB is not a risk taker. He'll never risk his reputation on a move like this because he lacks the experience to do it. He's playing it safe because he's still too green in this job.

You're right. There's always a risk. I would think that Bergevin would pull the trigger on a deal like the one we're discussing though. I get it, MB is cautious and all but I think the perspective of being the first GM to bring a local offensive superstar since the good old days of Guy Lafleur (or to a lesser extent Stefan Richer) would be enticing enough for him to risk it. Only my opinion though.

 

[Saxon]

Beaulieu is ALREADY a solid Top-4, so the idea of him being a solid Top-4 down the road is more or less a fallacy. He's more like a solid Top-2 down the road who plays with our no1 D-Men at the moment because he's the best we have on the left side.

It's been a while since our Top-4 is actually manned by Top-4 players, so throwing it all away for the sake of a big "what if" don't seem to be the way to go. Unless the point is not to actually win hockey games.

We are already not winning hockey games. ..... with Nathan on the top pair. .. but how else do you improve the team? Draft 26th every year?

 

[Slew Foots]

Keep in mind Kuznetsov is almost three years older than Drouin. Last year in 80 games he posted the following:

11G 26A 37Pts

Last year in 70 games, Drouin has posted the following... and keep in mind he is 3 years younger:

4G 28A 32Pts

So I am asking you this again. Last year, you are offered Kuznetsov for Beaulieu and/or McCarron. Do you do it or not? Do you take the risk?

Keeping in mind that I believe Drouin's potential to be even better than Kuznetsov's I say it's worth the risk.

I agree. A lot of people here are seriously underrating Drouin.

His NHL production, considering his utilization & age, is impressive, and a good sign that he will eventually reach his potential. He is a legit first line talent, and he is French Canadian as a bonus: definitely worth the risk.

I'm very high on Beaulieu and McCarron, and would hate to lose either, let alone both. But you need to give quality to get quality.

 

[MXD]

Beaulieu's potential is a solid second pair d man. Drouin's potential is ppg top line forward. We have a chance that we rarely get we have a chance to get top line talent without selling the farm. Drouin's progression is pretty much the same as Galchenyuk's but with more potential. Would you trade a Beaulieu for a Galchenyuk? I would. Is there a risk? Always, ask Pittsburgh about the established winger they traded for. .......

Talk about selling short a player for the sake of making a point...

Once again, Beaulieu is ALREADY a solid 2nd pair D-Men and has shown continuous improvement since joining the Habs. He's on the 1st pair due to handedness. Which means that Beaulieu's replacement would be WORST than Beaulieu.

Of course, if Petry and Juulsen were LHS, and if Markov was 27 years old as opposed to 37, Beaulieu would be somewhat more available.

But that's not the case. And we're not in rebuilding mode either. At least I don't think so. I mean, if we get Drouin for Beaulieu, first thing I do is probably shopping Pacioretty, because keeping him at 4M, but only for the seasons where our D would be completely inadequate to contend, makes absolutely no sense .

 

[MXD]

We are already not winning hockey games. ..... with Nathan on the top pair. .. but how else do you improve the team? Draft 26th every year?

By not getting worse by virtue of overpaying for what's a prospect.

 

[sergejean]

Beaulieu is ALREADY a solid Top-4, so the idea of him being a solid Top-4 down the road is more or less a fallacy. He's more like a solid Top-2 down the road who plays with our no1 D-Men at the moment because he's the best we have on the left side.

It's been a while since our Top-4 is actually manned by Top-4 players, so throwing it all away for the sake of a big "what if" don't seem to be the way to go. Unless the point is not to actually win hockey games.

Well, we were winning hockey games last year but people wanted Therrien fired because the goal is to win the Stanley Cup.

I am arguing right now that to win the Stanley Cup, we need at least one game breaker on offense. Paccioretty has shown he is not that. To acquire such gamebreaker, you either have to pay a lot in a transaction or spend a lot on the UFA market although these game changers rarely hits the market.

I believe there is an opportunity to acquire one here for less than what it would normally cost because he is unproven. Hey, even McDavid was unproven before the season started!

The goal should be to win the Stanley Cup and Drouin would bring us closer to that goal in the event he pans out as we have every reason to think he eventually will. Calculated risk imo.

 

[MXD]

Well, we were winning hockey games last year but people wanted Therrien fired because the goal is to win the Stanley Cup.

I am arguing right now that to win the Stanley Cup, we need at least one game breaker on offense. Paccioretty has shown he is not that. To acquire such gamebreaker, you either have to pay a lot in a transaction or spend a lot on the UFA market although these game changers rarely hits the market.

I believe there is an opportunity to acquire one here for less than what it would normally cost because he is unproven. Hey, even McDavid was unproven before the season started!

The goal should be to win the Stanley Cup and Drouin would bring us closer to that goal in the event he pans out as we have every reason to think he eventually will. Calculated risk imo.

Beaulieu showed more progression at a position of need (LEFT-D) in the last three years, and shipping him is an bad, bad, bad risk.

I mean, if TB accepts what's a fair price for Drouin (think Juulsen + Sherback, or something like that), awesome. Now we have a calculated risk.

Otherwise, we're getting Drouin for the wrong reasons.

 

[sergejean]

Beaulieu showed more progression at a position of need (LEFT-D) in the last three years, and shipping him is an bad, bad, bad risk.

I mean, if TB accepts what's a fair price for Drouin (think Juulsen + Sherback, or something like that), awesome. Now we have a calculated risk.

Otherwise, we're getting Drouin for the wrong reasons.

We have lots of depth in defense and while I agree nothing we have would be as good as Beaulieu, it's still possible to manage while we're trying to acquire a solid top 4. What's been an even more crying position of need is an offensive gamebreaker and the opportunity to acquire one aren't happening very often. We have every reason to take this calculated risk. Of course is if the Stanley Cup is the ultimate goal.

 

[MXD]

We have lots of depth in defense and while I agree nothing we have would be as good as Beaulieu, it's still possible to manage while we're trying to acquire a solid top 4. What's been an even more crying position of need is an offensive gamebreaker and the opportunity to acquire one aren't happening very often. Plus if you factor the fact Drouin is a local product, then you have every reason to take this calculated risk.

We have no depth whatsoever on LEFT-D.

 

[Uncle Gary]

I think Beaulieu is almost untradeable at this point. Markov and Emelin have shown that they aren't reliable options anymore.

 

[sergejean]

We have no depth whatsoever on LEFT-D.

But we have even less depth at superstar gamebreaker offensive dynamo position

 

[MXD]

Seriously, if at least users were honest about the real reasons to get Drouin, we'd only have reached 400 posts.

 

[FuzzyWuzzy]

I don't buy that people are clamoring over Drouin in MTL simply because he's french.

You do not pass up a possible high tier talent like Drouin if you have the chance to get him. We have seen guys like Sequin, Turris etc. be moved with 'potential attitude issues' go on to thrive in new situations.

We have a REAL lack of top 6 talent, we should be excited about the prospect of adding Drouin, the fact that he's somewhat local is nice but ultimately does not matter.

It does matter, it makes the whole thing more exciting for fans who are so inclined. The thing is, though, that it's not even close to the reason why people want Drouin in Montreal. He's a high end young offensive talent that could be acquired and we need high end offensive talent very very badly. Suggesting that this is "because he's french" or "a Quebecor" (Quebecor, seriously? ) is assinine.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Keep in mind Kuznetsov is almost three years older than Drouin. Last year in 80 games he posted the following:

11G 26A 37Pts

Last year in 70 games, Drouin has posted the following... and keep in mind he is 3 years younger:

4G 28A 32Pts

So I am asking you this again. Last year, you are offered Kuznetsov for Beaulieu and/or McCarron. Do you do it or not? Do you take the risk?

Keeping in mind that I believe Drouin's potential to be even better than Kuznetsov's I say it's worth the risk.

Keep in mind it's a different person and situation all together and has zero to do with Drouin.

 

[Wats]

Seriously, if at least users were honest about the real reasons to get Drouin, we'd only have reached 400 posts.

I don't get it. A 20 year old lottery pick with high end offensive upside AND hometown kid? What's there not to want. Similar would occur here if Yakupov asked for a trade.

 

[sergejean]

Seriously, if at least users were honest about the real reasons to get Drouin, we'd only have reached 400 posts.

What are you insinuating? And how are the people who don't want to get Drouin any more "honest"?

 

[jfm133]

Funny to read many here that would not trade McCarron because he has such potential and such a great package of size, toughness and skills. But at the same time almost everybody is crying for Bergevin to make a trade. If McCarron is so good, and I believe he will be very good, it means we have out two first centermen with him and Galchenyuk. Then you have Max and Gally on the wings of the first line and you need two more wingers. At least one of Hudon, Scherbak, Andrighetto and Carr will make it on the second line, maybe two, and you still have Lekhonen and Reway for the future.

Why not just be patient and develop these players and that team? Instead of trading good young assets, it would be preferable to trade veterans like Plek and Markov for good youth.

 

[sergejean]

Keep in mind it's a different person and situation all together and has zero to do with Drouin.

Yes. Everything is based out of projections and every situation is different. Just like the "possession" stats. The last few years have demonstrated that you have a significant increases in your chance of winning the Stanley Cup if you were a top "possession" number team. This led many including you if I'm not mistaken (if I am, please accept my apologies) to come to the conclusion that the coach must be fired if we want to increase our chances at winning the Stanley Cup.

Similarly, history has demonstrated that top 3 selection have considerably more chances of becoming offensive gamebreaker type of players, stud defenseman, franchise player etc. Recent history has also demonstrated a need for this type of player to increase your chance of being successful.

I don't think you're debating in good faith here.

 

[MXD]

I don't get it. A 20 year old lottery pick with high end offensive upside AND hometown kid? What's there not to want. Similar would occur here if Yakupov asked for a trade.

I have nothing against getting Drouin. I just have problems with the unreasonable prices that some are ready to pay.

Hell, take a look on the Trade Boards. Rumors of Fabbri for Drouin. Blues fanbase not amused...

 

[Sterling Archer]

Yes. Everything is based out of projections and every situation is different. Just like the "possession" stats. The last few years have demonstrated that you have a significant increases in your chance of winning the Stanley Cup if you were a top "possession" number team. This led many including you if I'm not mistaken (if I am, please accept my apologies) to come to the conclusion that the coach must be fired if we want to increase our chances at winning the Stanley Cup.

Similarly, history has demonstrated that top 3 selection have considerably more chances of becoming offensive gamebreaker type of players, stud defenseman, franchise player etc. Recent history has also demonstrated a need for this type of player to increase your chance of being successful.

I don't think you're debating in good faith here.

I'm not sure why you keep trying to infer all these unrelated points to your Drouin love that have zero to do with the argument at hand.

Drouin is no doubt an interesting prospect. No one is denying that. It's at what price? If awuiring him leaves you with a massive hole on your D and a in your prospect pool and doesn't add any immediate relief which is goal SCORING (he has 6 goals in his 90+ game NHL career) then how does this help the Habs.

Even from a long term perspective, 3rd overall picks are hardly a slam dunk and he hasn't shown anything to show he'll be otherwise. Going over this list in retospect, there aren't many names id give up McCarron, Beaulieu and a 1st for at any point in their development, much less at such an early unproven age. http://www.mynhldraft.com/nhl-draft-picks/3rd-overall/30509/

So not sure what the incredible need for Drouin is now just because he demanded a trade rather than play through his contract and play for his team and coach which ALL 20 y.o rookies should do. I can't even remember if an ELC player has ever even asked for a trade in the past. Considering who else is available and can be had for the same or less and would be more impactful, id pass on Drouin at that price.

 

[RealityBytes]

Beaulieu showed more progression at a position of need (LEFT-D) in the last three years, and shipping him is an bad, bad, bad risk.

I mean, if TB accepts what's a fair price for Drouin (think Juulsen + Sherback, or something like that), awesome. Now we have a calculated risk.

Otherwise, we're getting Drouin for the wrong reasons.

That would be your opinion of a fair price, most likely not Yzerman's. He might say you are overvaluing your players and it is not a fair price for him.

I see so many posts on what is fair value for Drouin, but what really is fair? That a player has more value to one team than another certainly comes into play and is part of the dynamics of trades. That difference in value however, throws the meaning of fair all over the place. What one side considers fair value may not be considered fair by the other side. What a team has to decide is either what they gain in a trade or have to give up in a trade worth the more to them.

So what is fair? Fair is a completed trade. Trades that are completed are done with what both sides have agreed to as a fair and agreeable price for both. If and when a trade is made, only then we'll know what is the fair price from both sides. If no trade is completed, then an agreeable and what is a fair price for both teams has not been realized.

 

[MXD]

So not sure what the incredible need for Drouin is now just because he demanded a trade rather than play through his contract and play for his team and coach which ALL 20 y.o rookies should do. I can't even remember if an ELC player has ever even asked for a trade in the past. Considering who else is available and can be had for the same or less and would be more impactful, id pass on Drouin at that price.

... Turris did that. In a way.

 

[G0bias]

Isn't Tampa set on the left side with Hedman and Coburn anyways?

Sure, they could improve on Coburn but I don't see why that's a crying need specially when they're possibly going to lose 2 top forwards in Stamkos and Drouin.

Something around the likes of Scherbak, a 1st and a choice between Andrighetto/Hudon/De La Rose would be fair price.