Value of: Justin Barron for a F

[MasterMatt25]

I'd rather trade Mailloux

 

[HabsAddict]

This potential C that you’re after; are you referring to someone in their teens/early 20s?

Yes. No more then 25.

It's about maturing the team at the same time and hopefully be serious contenders.

Of course the flip side is that if we don't have the right pieces it then puts us back into another rebuild several years from now.

 

[HabsAddict]

I'd rather trade Mailloux

We would be getting another questionable pick back.

There is a vast difference in value of an RHD in his early 20s playing 100 games and putting up 30-40-50 points then a player whose only credentials is "potentially".

No one knows what Maillioux will become. He has missed a lot of development and can be anywhere from a high scoring star defenseman to AHL journeyman. We will know better by next season.

 

[ole ole]

You aren't getting Pinto for Barron though. Sens have no reason to make that trade.

That's fine as we have no need for Pinto.

 

[lionsDen]

That's fine as we have no need for Pinto.

From my 50,000 for view and not a fan of either team that’s a pretty good trade. Again jmo

 

[ole ole]

From my 50,000 for view and not a fan of either team that’s a pretty good trade. Again jmo

How is anytime trading for a player you don't need good ?

 

[lionsDen]

How is anytime trading for a player you don't need good ?

what part of what I said do you not understand. Try again bud

 

[GirardSpinorama]

That's fine as we have no need for Pinto.

Habs need a lot at this point.

 

[ole ole]

Habs need a lot at this point.

That they do but Pinto doesn't help. We have enough Pinto's .We don't need any more. We need much better.

MOD

 

[FerrisRox]

That they do but Pinto doesn't help. We have enough Pinto's .We don't need any more. We need much better.

In what world is adding a 6'2 23-year old centre coming off 20-goals in his rookie season in exchange for a defensemen you have a surplus of "not helpful?"

The Canadiens would be thrilled to add Shane Pinto. You're out of your mind.

 

[samsagat]

Pinto's would certainly be interesting for me.

6'2" right shooting centers (that can play wing), 23 yo, playing "the right way" but still capable of offensive production. Habs would certainly take him.

For Barron?

I'd prefer a LHD but yeah, I would do it...

 

[LesCanadiens]

Pinto's would certainly be interesting for me.

6'2" right shooting centers (that can play wing), 23 yo, playing "the right way" but still capable of offensive production. Habs would certainly take him.

For Barron?

I'd prefer a LHD but yeah, I would do it...

I'm curious, why a LD? We're overloaded on that side right now:

Harris, Guhle, Matheson, Struble and WiFi chomping at the bit in Laval.

 

[samsagat]

Why I would prefer a LHD going the other way to acquire Pinto, instead of Barron?

Exactly for the reason you gave..

You misinterpreted my message I guess...

 

[samsagat]

I'm curious, why a LD? We're overloaded on that side right now:

Harris, Guhle, Matheson, Struble and WiFi chomping at the bit in Laval.

Why I would prefer a LHD going the other way to acquire Pinto, instead of Barron?

Exactly for the reason you gave..

You misinterpreted my message I guess...

 

[Gillings]

Perhaps. I don't know if he has upside for a top-6 role..... I just remember his father and how he never seemed to translate his potential into a top-6 role despite all kinds of talent. Any time he had the puck and speed through the neutral zone, it led to a scoring chance.

We have enough potential top6 players.

We need a SUREFIRE top 6 and even then, we need bottom 6 players. We need strong on the puck, forechecking smart players that play a role and can chip in on offence.

Our bottom two lines are just as important to playoff success as our top two.

 

[LesCanadiens]

Why I would prefer a LHD going the other way to acquire Pinto, instead of Barron?

Exactly for the reason you gave..

You misinterpreted my message I guess...

Gotcha. Makes sense now. And I agree. But would want a pick or forward for a package including a LD.

 

[pth2]

Why I would prefer a LHD going the other way to acquire Pinto, instead of Barron?

Exactly for the reason you gave..

You misinterpreted my message I guess...

Guhle can play either side and there are 2 high profile RD on the way, too, and I don't see Harris or Struble as having Barron's value, which is why I wondered about Barron's value.

 

[Jared Dunn]

Guhle can play either side and there are 2 high profile RD on the way, too, and I don't see Harris or Struble as having Barron's value, which is why I wondered about Barron's value.

Maybe not there yet but I honestly think Struble is a lot closer to Barron's value than Harris, he's outplayed him since getting recalled

 

[FerrisRox]

I'm curious, why a LD? We're overloaded on that side right now:

Harris, Guhle, Matheson, Struble and WiFi chomping at the bit in Laval.

That's exactly why he would prefer to trade a left handed defenseman, because of the surplus.

 

[Anardil]

Well, I don't consider moving him for a top-6 forward to be giving up on him.... moving him for a random pick for no good reason, or a far-off prospect, would be giving up.

For example, I don't consider that management gave up on Romanov.

That being said, I know this thread is premature and any such move would take place this summer (with Savard not having been moved, Reinbacher doing well early on in the AHL, Mailloux still progressing, Guhle having played more games as a RD, etc.)

You have to take into consideration that Romanov was picked by the Bergevin regime. New managements tend to be more open to trading players that were not picked by them. They didn't trade him because they gave up on him, rather because he wasn't one of "their guys."

Barron being acquired by HuGo buys him a certain level of 'protection.'

 

[LesCanadiens]

That's exactly why he would prefer to trade a left handed defenseman, because of the surplus.

Yeah, I realize that now, thanks. I totally misunderstood his post.

 

[FerrisRox]

Yeah, I realize that now, thanks. I totally misunderstood his post.

As I read on, I discovered that

 

[FerrisRox]

Maybe not there yet but I honestly think Struble is a lot closer to Barron's value than Harris, he's outplayed him since getting recalled

I have only seen Struble play at the NHL level, so I obviously have a small sample size with him, but I find him incredibly impressive.

For me I have him ahead of Harris without question; and that is no slight on Harris, I just find Struble to be better and he plays with a poise that is really impressive for a rookie and what is particularly promising is the growth in his game. For the last stretch of ten games or so, it's been interesting watching Struble and Slafkovsky, at the same time, building off of their own good play and seeing how a little confidence helps them grow more. These guys have been improving in real time in front of our eyes.

 

[Jared Dunn]

I have only seen Struble play at the NHL level, so I obviously have a small sample size with him, but I find him incredibly impressive.

For me I have him ahead of Harris without question; and that is no slight on Harris, I just find Struble to be better and he plays with a poise that is really impressive for a rookie and what is particularly promising is the growth in his game. For the last stretch of ten games or so, it's been interesting watching Struble and Slafkovsky, at the same time, building off of their own good play and seeing how a little confidence helps them grow more. These guys have been improving in real time in front of our eyes.

He's just so damn comfortable out there, I think even if he doesn't add much/any offence to his game he has a chance to be one of the league's better purely defensive D. He's the biggest surprise to me in the Habs organization, I never expected him to factor in at the NHL level this season. I too like Harris and think he can be a perfect, relatively low cost tonic to a more offensive, rover style D but Habs are running out of seats

 

[LesCanadiens]

You have to take into consideration that Romanov was picked by the Bergevin regime. New managements tend to be more open to trading players that were not picked by them. They didn't trade him because they gave up on him, rather because he wasn't one of "their guys."

Barron being acquired by HuGo buys him a certain level of 'protection.'

Also, they (new mgt, coach) aren't dumb. They understand how to manage assets and how to assess their group based on situation and perspective. I'm almost as puzzled as to why Barron gets so much flak by fans, as I was about Slaf. In what reality do we scream "he's useless", "get rid of him" (paraphrased to make a point) and blame one player ad nauseam, who is sooooo young and inexperienced? This kid shows lots of signs (sorta like Slaf did) of what his potential ceiling is. He's tall and lanky and just turned 22.

He has excellent offensive skills, especially a great first pass. And not a bad shot on the PP when given a chance on the point. 6 goals and 6 assists in around 40 games is nothing to sneeze at. He needs to improve defensively. Especially his coverage down low. But he's not often caught out of position. So I think the IQ is there. Just needs to learn how to contain better.

The odd awkward moment on his skates is par for the course for such a young D man with less than 80 games in the NHL. The one play that everyone lost their mind over a couple weeks ago where he stumbled, he was actually the only man back after I think it was Guhle or Matheson, made a horrible turnover high in the slot.

Speaking of Guhle, I love Guhle, but he hasn't been any better defensively, IMO. Ironically, they were drafted the same year, Barron 9 spots lower. Guhle for sure is the better prospect, no doubt. But this year, Barrons numbers are a touch better both offensively and +/-. FWIW.

Barron is far from the biggest problem on our defense in perspective. He has lots of promising skill which can't be taught. Defense CAN. So I think the harsh criticism is over-the-top and way premature. I hope we don't trade him unless it's an offer way to good to refuse.