Confirmed with Link: Alexandre Carrier acquired from the Predators in exchange for Justin Barron

[Kobe Armstrong]

I find the difference is the contract is not nearly as bad, the player given away not as good (and from a position of strength, rather than weakness), the player recieved clearly filling a need and unlike Drouin, Dach was actually looking to become a good player before the injury.

What happened doesn't matter, it was a good gamble at the time and the rest of it is revisionism

 

[Andrei79]

What happened doesn't matter, it was a good gamble at the time and the rest of it is revisionism

What I'm saying is Drouin wasn't a "good" gamble. He was just a gamble. MB gave up his best prospect and only LD to get him.

 

[Rapala]

I haven't put stock in anything an NHLer says about a prospect since Teemu Selanne told us that Janne Lahti could play top 6 for the habs

Well there was that one time Saku told us Arturri would make the team out of camp.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

So we traded for a bad player and we knew it?

How the #@$% do you manage to come to that conclusion from reading my replies????

My previous posts clearly state otherwise.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Agreed.Xhekaj-Carrier. A sharp smart positional D paired with a monster.

Better than a Red Barron-carrier

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Lol @ the Lehkonen revisionism.

I liked him at the time, but most of the fan base thought he sucked because of his alleged stone hands and wanted him gone.

Both Danault and Kotkaniemi were independently stated to be victims if they played on a line with Lehkonen. Danault even complained to the media about the atrocity.

I do remember many posters describing Lehkonen that way. I wasn’t one of them, I thought he was exactly the type of vet you want to keep around for the youth movement.

My position was keep him unless you get a very good offer. I thought the offer they took was worth sacrificing his leadership skills and worth ethic you want the kids to follow. I still think we’re giving up on Barron too soon. I liked his tools then and admittedly it hasn’t come together yet, but the team as a whole is a bit of a dumpster fire. It’s hard to know what you have.

Carrier is a decent 5/6 that will help us stay in the mix. I think the team might make a playoff push still. This should help, so I’m not in favour of this deal, I get where it comes from.

 

[Whitesnake]

Is Jean Perron the best Habs coach of the past 40 years?

Was MT & Bergevin's improved win/loss record in year 1 a result of how well they ran the organization?

Confusing outcomes with effectiveness is to ignore the role that chance plays in how results play out.

Of course results play a role, arguably the most important or influential role, in assessing an organization... But sustained excellence is a much better indicator of a well run organization than any individual result or outcome.

Not sure why you confuse my wins and success as if I was talking short term. I keep saying that us in the Cup Finals was not the definition of a relevant team so I guess it helps to sort that out.

Define “win”?

Win & success are NOT one & the same - I guarantee you Molson defines success very differently from Joe Fan and Jeremy Jacobs / Jim Dolan very differently from Molson etc

Relevant in the regular seasons. That has at one point to be shown in the playoffs. Being a relevant team. Being talked about as a surefire playoff team.

 

[Whitesnake]

I don't know if it's not looking good, too early to judge with Newhook and Dach and once more, if Hage hits it's all moot, but again, that's the nature of the game. When you're a shitty team and you're trading for players who aren't established and it's mostly a "upside" trade, that's what happens...it's really not any different from the draft.

They took a gamble on Slaf, on Hutson...seems to be working out OK.

Cheques and Balances at the end of the day.

I don't anticipate any of these players to be with the Habs much longer, though the Primeau/Fucale is an odd one.

There was no gamble on Hutson. We keep hearing how you'd be lucky to hit on low 2nd rounders....what's the worst that could happen? That he doesn't hit? Hutson was BPA by a lot of lists for quite some time. We just decided to go BPA there. And we hit a homerun. Good job from them for taking him. But it was a gimme. That most people here also loved despite the size.

We will see about Slaf. I also think it will be fine.....but what can save a rough analysis of a Slaf pick is how weak that draft was.

As far as Fucale/Primeau...well everybody wants a 2nd goalie. And the ones that have them, keep them. Might as well go Europe they way we did with Connor Hughes. Fucale was fine with the Caps.

 

[Whitesnake]

He has tons of wins. Monahan got firsts coming and going. That’s insanely good.

Kulak traded for a second - Hutson.

Toffoli for a first and Heineman

Petry for Matheson and then Petry for free and another pick trading him away again

I still disagree that the Lek trade was a loss. The 2nd we got for Lek that was leveraged with the Monahan 1st for Hage.

Wait now....I never said Hughes had no wins. I'm talking about gambles. I mean, the guy is already known as the guy who takes projects. Just saying that the guys he took under that strategy are not paying out at all.

As far as Lehky, against, I did mention Hage. But needless to say that the target was Barron. And I will believe in the end it was badly evaluated. Kinda strange that the 2 guys we got from the Avs are dissapointments don't you agree?

 

[expy]

.

 

[Adam Michaels]

Habs lost the trade. Last game, Barron was in the line-up, Habs score 6 goals and had 1 againt. Tonight, Carrier is in, Habs score 4 and had 3 against.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Wait now....I never said Hughes had no wins. I'm talking about gambles. I mean, the guy is already known as the guy who takes projects. Just saying that the guys he took under that strategy are not paying out at all.

As far as Lehky, against, I did mention Hage. But needless to say that the target was Barron. And I will believe in the end it was badly evaluated. Kinda strange that the 2 guys we got from the Avs are dissapointments don't you agree?

Well, I'd say trading Toffoli was a gamble wasn't it? He was our best forward at the time.

If you mean only the prospects he gambled on... Dach looked great and got hurt. Newhook looked good last year, this season he's been a disapointment. That trade could blow up in our faces. I was okay with it at the time but if Newhook plays like this rather than last year, then it's a fail.

 

[Not The One]

I, for one, am still very bitter about how Markov was treated at the end. That bridge still needs to be mended IMO

Was nobody here alive that summer? Markov WANTED to go back to Russia to be with his child. And he had one good year left in him, no more. If he'd gotten a deal large enough to get him to stay you'd all be whining because Bergevin overpaid for an over the hill vet on his last legs.

The problem was thinking Karl freaking Alzner could somehow fill in for what Markov brought to the team.

 

[nhlfan9191]

Was nobody here alive that summer? Markov WANTED to go back to Russia to be with his child. And he had one good year left in him, no more. If he'd gotten a deal large enough to get him to stay you'd all be whining because Bergevin overpaid for an over the hill vet on his last legs.

The problem was thinking Karl freaking Alzner could somehow fill in for what Markov brought to the team.

Markov was still very effective in his final season and his contract demands weren’t unreasonable. I believe he wanted 2 years and Bergevin basically spit in his face. Two years even if he did decline wouldn’t have killed the team. Replacing him with Alzner was a completely different issue.

 

[malcb33]

Markov WANTED to go back to Russia to be with his child. And he had one good year left in him, no more.

How exactly do you know "he had one good year left in him, no more"? Also if "WANTED to go back to Russia to be with his child" why was he reportedly asking for a 2 year deal and not a year year?

Markov was already supposed to be finished after his back-to-back knee injuries and was still solid when he returned to the line-up. I'm confident he could have played at a decent level for the 2-year contract he was rumoured to have been asking for.

The guy was the backbone of the team for the better part of a decade and needed just a few more games to reach 1000 with the Habs, surely there was a middle ground to work it out, but Bergy had other ideas (Alzner), and his arrogance got the better of him IMO.

 

[Kimota]

Just watched Gorton's scrum after the trade. I liked hearing talk about them looking at adding some veteran presence because they have a lot of young guys. It really is the next step, adding some vets.

Also liked him mentioning that when they moved Kovacevic, it was to leave the room to some of the young guys because they needed to see them play in order to properly evaluate them. And that helped them realize that it might be too much to ask for some of the young guys to particularly play on their off-side.

That is the misfire, do you create a team of young guys to give them all the ice in the World to see what they can do or you have a balanced team where th young guys have to work hard to make the line-up? We have seen in recent memory that simply having a young team, it doesn't teach them much to be professionals. That is the issue of a scorched Earth rebuild.

We have seen for example a Maillioux given all the ice and he did not perform. Why not have him instead force the Habs to play him by him busting his ass to make the line up? This should have been the road to take. But instead we traded a valuable asset in Kovacevic to play Mailloux, it did not work out and we took a step back this year.

 

[Miller Time]

That is the misfire, do you create a team of young guys to give them all the ice in the World to see what they can do or you have a balanced team where th young guys have to work hard to make the line-up? We have seen in recent memory that simply having a young team, it doesn't teach them much to be professionals. That is the issue of a scorched Earth rebuild.

We have seen for example a Maillioux given all the ice and he did not perform. Why not have him instead force the Habs to play him by him busting his ass to make the line up? This should have been the road to take. But instead we traded a valuable asset in Kovacevic to play Mailloux, it did not work out and we took a step back this year.

I think it's a stretch to suggest our team took a step back because of Kovacevic being moved.

We're playing .625 hockey with Laine in the lineup... 1/4 of the season.

Maybe, just maybe, the main offseason veteran upgrade to the youngest roster in the league getting injured in camp is a bigger reason why we are slightly off our win% from last season