Confirmed with Link: Canadiens Will Pick 5th (Hughes Presser in OP) NO POLITICS

[417]

I said something should have been done like trading Anderson or someone else. Contrary to you, I did not assume anything. So you flip thing doesn’t apply.

Several things were done...just clearly not as perceptible to you.

You assume so much stuff in your post, it’s something special.

Aren't you the one whose assumed that trading Player X = more losses = 1st overall pick?

You're projecting.

I said… He was inconsistent is he actions not the results of those actions. No one can perfectly predict the results, I’ll give you that, but the actions themselves speak as to what the general idea is.

He's been consistent with his actions since day 1 he took over. He hasn't sacrificed the future to go after quick fixes or to try to salvage the playoffs.

The actions you're suggesting he should have done, with all due respect, aren't rooted in reality, at least not IMO. But you're certainly entitled to your opinion

a contract like his doesn't get moved for a 1st round pick only)

You know it depends on how high that pick is.

I’d say yes to a ‘23 pick in the 8-12 range for certain.

Except no team in the 8-12 range would.

So...it's fantasy.

 

[DAChampion]

It seems pretty obvious Hughes wants Smith to fall to 5th.

On what basis?

It seems pretty obvious Hughes wants Smith to fall to 5th.

On what basis?

 

[Sterling Archer]

On what basis?


On what basis?

I base this on Hughes commnets about how impressed he was with Smith at the tourney and the fact he coached him and to Smith's own words how Hughes is responsible for him being the player he is today and how lucky he was to have him. It's a massive bromance on both their sides. Highes practicaly raised the kid when at the rink.

 

[NORiculous]

What were the circumstances at the time Tolvanen was waived? What was the Habs waiver priority? Did some other team jump ahead? What was the Habs roster like at the time?

How the hell could he have known, at that time, that losing 6 more times would have guaranteed him the 1st overall pick?

Remember, he's not benefiting from hindsight like you are here.

and if he did pick up Tolvanen, you'd be saying they did a poor job tanking

So in other words, you've just drawn up scenarios that allow you to criticize whatever the outcome is.

Like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Again. You mind is made up. All you want to do is prove the theory wrong but you won’t take 2 mins to understand it.

I am saying he was inconsistent. I will say it again because that is what I have have been saying from the start. He was inconsistent.

Now, you say I have hindsight. Sure. But at the moment of these actions, me and a lot of fans were underlining these same comments. So time has not changed anything.

If he did pick Tolvanen, I would understand the move. Adding a young core player for free is always fun. But whether I agree or disagree with the move, it would have been consistent of him with how he was dealing with the team since the beginning of the year.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I am asking because every move has consequences.

Hughes picked up Tierney but didn’t pickup Tolvanen. Was this his way of trying to tank?

If it was, then he failed to tank by 6 wins.
If it wasn’t, then he failed to pickup the better player.

Inconsistent.

They weren't picked up at nearly the same time.

At the time of Tolvanen being waived - the team was struggling with keeping everyone playing because they had too many bodies.

Tierney was later when they were decimated by injuries.

 

[NORiculous]

Several things were done...just clearly not as perceptible to you.

Really? Name them.

Aren't you the one who’s assumed that trading Player X = more losses = 1st overall pick?

You're projecting.

All I “assume” is if you trade a player that helps the team, the team should do worse at least temporarily while the coach figures stuff out. It’s not projecting at all. lol

He's been consistent with his actions since day 1 he took over. He hasn't sacrificed the future to go after quick fixes or to try to salvage the playoffs.

The actions you're suggesting he should have done, with all due respect, aren't rooted in reality, at least not IMO. But you're certainly entitled to your opinion

I disagree with that statement regarding this last season. I have given examples to understand the general sense. These suggestions were talking from rumours but I did not says it HAD to be that. I gave them as examples so that people could think and understand the direction of the comment.

 

[Jaynki]

What would Tolvanen have bringed to this team exactly ?

He is soft, not a good top six player long term and doesnt have bottom six attribute imo

 

[NORiculous]

They weren't picked up at nearly the same time.

At the time of Tolvanen being waived - the team was struggling with keeping everyone playing because they had too many bodies.

Tierney was later when they were decimated by injuries.

Yeah I know and it is an important element of the decision, no doupt. But still, if you want a guy, you make it happen.

I brought it up because I see it as an element that shows Hughes at least believed a little in getting a good pick.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Yeah I know and it is an important element of the decision, no doupt. But still, if you want a guy, you make it happen.

I brought it up because I see it as an element that shows Hughes at least believed a little in getting a good pick.

I think we know what the entire NHL really thought of Tolvanen, it's not like he was picked up right after us either.

Good for Tolvanen and it's a risk I probably would have taken, but I understand why they didn't.

 

[417]

Again. You mind is made up. All you want to do is prove the theory wrong but you won’t take 2 mins to understand it.

You're projecting again...if anything, I'm trying, desperately I might add, to understand your position.

I am saying he was inconsistent. I will say it again because that is what I have have been saying from the start. He was inconsistent.

Fair enough - but the examples you provided, IMO, don't have the same conclusions you've reached.

It's a lot of fantasy scenarios, re-imagined as realistic and plausible scenarios.

There's enough tangible evidence, however, that challenges your position though and I've tried to highlight those.

Now, you say I have hindsight. Sure. But at the moment of these actions, me and a lot of fans were underlining these same comments. So time has not changed anything.

Time changed a lot because I don't recall a single would predicting the 3rd last team was going to win the lottery.

If he did pick Tolvanen, I would understand the move. Adding a young core player for free is always fun. But whether I agree or disagree with the move, it would have been consistent of him with how he was dealing with the team since the beginning of the year.

Again, I don't recall the circumstances surrounding Tolvanen at the time of his waiver claim.

 

[NORiculous]

What would Tolvanen have bringed to this team exactly ?

He is soft, not a good top six player long term and doesnt have bottom six attribute imo

He can play fairly tough minutes, has a really good shot. In Sea, he drove possession against decent opposition. His advanced stats are good.

He was also some kind of reclamation project since he was stuck on the 3rd line in the city that kills offensive forwards. So the upside that was seen when he played in the KHL was arguably still there but possibly hidden under circumstances.

 

[Redux91]

How the hell could he have known, at that time, that losing 6 more times would have guaranteed him the 1st overall pick?

Remember, he's not benefiting from hindsight like you are here.

And like you mentioned: The dead last team in the NHL did NOT win the loto sooo..
Yeah it's pretty astounding reading people complain about "should of tanked harder" like.. what?
Who comes into the office in the mornings planning to delegate ways to LOSE games

The best is reading people complain about Monty starting so many games like, ..people think Kent is just gonna casually walk up to Martin St Louis and tell HIM how to run his team on the ice and what line ups to use.. telling Marty, a f***ing winner, to straight up LOSE, like come on guys my god lol

There's a world in a universe somewhere where we DID try to tank, and I bet you we finished above 5th because we DIDNT get riddled with injuries lol

(And I'm only oddly quoting you and adding on, cuz if I quote the other guy my blood pressure will reach critical levels, and im not sure how you find the energy to argue with people who have already lost before the debate starts lol)

 

[NORiculous]

I'm trying, desperately I might add, to understand your position.

That’s fine. It won’t happen.

 

[jaffy27]

Thanks but I’m not a fan of Cantin. I’ll pass.

Same

 

[26Mats]

I think we know what the entire NHL really thought of Tolvanen, it's not like he was picked up right after us either.

Good for Tolvanen and it's a risk I probably would have taken, but I understand why they didn't.

I can't get behind not picking Tolvanen because we had vets like Drouin, Dadonov, Hoffman, and Armia ahead of him. Those guys can rotate in the press box to make a spot for Tolvanen.

We also should have snagged Valimaki even though we have a lot of LD's - just as it was great to trade Petry for LD Matheson, even though we had a log jam of LD's at that time also.

But, if Tolvanen and Valimaki didn't strike managent as good players I can understand not taking them.

 

[417]

Really? Name them.

We started the season with Jake Allen and Samuel Montembeault as a goaltending duo, one guy who has never been able to establish himself as a 1# and another who was picked up on waivers and has never had a sub 3.00GAA average

Oh and they “reinforced” this duo by starting 4 rookies on Defense, including one who was picked off waiver a few days before the season began.

He also didn't sacrifice any prospects or picks for veterans or short-term roster help.

Things got so bad with injuries he had to make an emergency recall of an OHL player to play a game.

That's the reality...

Your reality is asking him to do things which are far fetched and then suggesting he wasn't consistent because he didn't accomplish them.

All I “assume” is if you trade a player that helps the team, the team should do worse at least temporarily while the coach figures stuff out. It’s not projecting at all. lol

Helps the team?

Josh Anderson didn't help the team win or lose more. He's a good player but he's not that influential.

I disagree with that statement regarding this last season. I have given examples to understand the general sense. These suggestions were talking from rumours but I did not says it HAD to be that. I gave them as examples so that people could think and understand the direction of the comment.

I understand that, but these examples aren't rooted in reality, you're just throwing things out there and knocking the guy for not achieving them.

That's like me suggesting that if Hughes packaged Suzuki, Caufield, Dach, Guhle, Hutson, Mailloux and both of our 1st round picks, the Hawks would give us #1 overall...

Then I shit on KH for not executing it.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I can't get behind not picking Tolvanen because we had vets like Drouin, Dadonov, Hoffman, and Armia ahead of him. Those guys can rotate in the press box to make a spot for Tolvanen.

We also should have snagged Valimaki even though we have a lot of LD's - just as it was great to trade Petry for LD Matheson, even though we had a log jam of LD's at that time also.

But, if Tolvanen and Valimaki didn't strike managent as good players I can understand not taking them.

They were already rotating guys in the press box at the time and had waived Rem Pitlick, who they had signed as a UFA at the beginning of the year.

They were not, even though I'd have waived Drouin's ass, waiving their veteran players to take on a reclamation project at that time.

 

[Redux91]

I think we know what the entire NHL really thought of Tolvanen, it's not like he was picked up right after us either.

Good for Tolvanen and it's a risk I probably would have taken, but I understand why they didn't.

Yeah it's pretty simple really
If Bergevin didn't **** everything up and leave us with what will amount to THREE YEARS (this is offseason#2/3 thank god) of problems to fix because of contracts like gallagher, armia, Hoffman and even Anderson to a degree
If even just ONE of those contracts didn't exist this year
Tolvanens probably a hab
Like its not that Kent "didn't like or doesn't want Tolvanen" shit we just CANT sometimes because we're still fixing the LAST guys f*** ups for at least 1 more season

 

[NORiculous]

Josh Anderson didn't help the team win or lose more. He's a good player but he's not that influential.

This shows why it is impossible to talk with you.

On a previous post you say Anderson worth more then a 1st and here you say he isn’t that influential. Totally inconsistent.

This shows that all you do is move the goal post to try and be right and it doesn’t matter what we are talking about.

So I am done. Cheers,

 

[jaffy27]

Yeah I know and it is an important element of the decision, no doupt. But still, if you want a guy, you make it happen.

I brought it up because I see it as an element that shows Hughes at least believed a little in getting a good pick.

Has Hughes expressed interest in Tolvanen?

 

[Sterling Archer]

Sterling Mallory Archer you know what you were doing.

Just chillin’ and listening to Danger Zone.

 

[Runner77]

On top of this… if you add the rhumours of passing on Michkov… I think it’s pathetic.

I am still giving the runner a chance to run but I can’t say that I am not disappointed.

Well thank-you even though I have done nothing to deserve it.

Rhumors, huh? Is that what they call a diagnostic from a fake rheumatologist?

 

[NORiculous]

Has Hughes expressed interest in Tolvanen?

Not that I know. Clearly he didn’t make the move for a reason. But even the NSH GM said it could have been a mistake to waive Tolvanen and that they thought he would pass because of a couple technical reasons.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Still colder than Montreal according to wiki.

Really in the winter? I believe their summers are colder. Dosent matter michkov will love MTL

 

[417]

And like you mentioned: The dead last team in the NHL did NOT win the loto sooo..
Yeah it's pretty astounding reading people complain about "should of tanked harder" like.. what?
Who comes into the office in the mornings planning to delegate ways to LOSE games

Yeah I always found this kind of reasoning odd...its like it's straight out of an Xbox/PS5 NHL game where player's strip their roster bare, simulate entire seasons so they suck and POOF!

you get 1st overall and sign a bunch of free agents and you're a dynasty again.

I know some folks will say the Chicago Blackhawks did exactly that...

Except they didn't finish last and they won a lottery, that same draw could have happened 10 other times, with 10 different outcomes. I don't think you strategize an entire plan around that.

The best is reading people complain about Monty starting so many games like, ..people think Kent is just gonna casually walk up to Martin St Louis and tell HIM how to run his team on the ice and what line ups to use.. telling Marty, a f***ing winner, to straight up LOSE, like come on guys my god lol

See my Xbox/PS5 example above...I legit used to do that whenever I started a franchise lol.

I know they make these games very real these days but that's a bit too much.

That’s fine. It won’t happen.

Well changes nothing for me...but I hope you can reconcile!

This shows why it is impossible to talk with you.

On a previous post you say Anderson worth more then a 1st and here you say he isn’t that influential. Totally inconsistent.

Because both of those things can be true.

Ben Chiarot got us back more than a 1st, he's also not an influential player.

Maybe you can't wrap your head around it, and that's fine...but value doesn't exist in a vacuum.

This shows that all you do is move the goal post to try and be right and it doesn’t matter what we are talking about.

So I am done. Cheers,

I'm devastated, opinions probably aren't for you if you fold whenever your opinion is challenged.