Toggle sidebar

Player Discussion Kirby Dach: Welcome to Montreal

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Andy said:
Lou gave a 13OA pick for a young inconsistent dman who has shown zero offensive ability in his young career and has never been projected to be a point producer.

Had the habs traded their 13OA for a dman of similar caliber, we would be trashing our GM.

The habs traded their 13OA for a player picked 3rd overall three years ago. The last time we traded for a player selected 3rd it cost the team Sergachev.
Click to expand...
A 22 year old defenseman though, he's only started to mature. Dach is exceptional bad in faceoffs. As top 2 center he has to win faceoffs in offensive zone. He's going to end up on wing. Doesn't have goal scorer hands, 40-50 points most he will top out at. There's not much value there. He's big but doesn't play big. It's just not there. He's another Pouliot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: habsgirl5000
Runner77 said:
It wasn’t a trick question. :laugh:

If Dach had been properly developed, he wouldn’t have been available for what we gave up. This is HuGo seeing a whole lot of untapped potential under the hood.

I hope they’re right.
Click to expand...
If they are not right, it will be seen as the trade Serg-Drou 2.0.
You know that, heh?
 
Runner77 said:
If there was a bidding war, then there were other GMs (at least one more, to be conservative) who did not think that Dach was a depreciating asset at age 21. Dach can yet be flipped. Hopefully, it won’t come to that and he will find his game.
Click to expand...

A kid who doesn't live up to his draft pedigree early will necessarily depreciate in value, the question is how much. Don't really need to look far either to understand he's a depreciating asset as his initial relative value was a 3rd overall and he was traded for less.

The other also knew he was a depreciating asset, but thought he was worth the gamble. And that's what it boils down to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CristianoRonaldo and cphabs
vitooooo said:
and then regretted it

what does that tell you?
Click to expand...
It tells me that Chicago doesn’t realize their franchise is operating in a capped profit sharing league that is expanding…
Player development, regardless of drafting, is probably the most critical asset an NHL franchise can hope to have. We just came to that realization midway through last season…
 
  • Like
Reactions: SlafySZN
If we take out all the draft drama..... Romanov for Dach is a deal we had to make given our depth at LD. Add to that these kids who are knocking at the door bringing a dynamic & diverse skill set.

People dumping on Dach, keep in mind his development was stalled by both an injury and Covid (he’s 21)

Before dumping on me, I’m a big fan of Romanov but I also like the kids behind him and Dach has shown he can be a special player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sagikev, CaptainKirk, BehindTheTimes and 3 others
Scorey Perry said:
Old Lou took a rookie GM to school on this trade. Romanov is real good hitter whose offense would evolve into good defenseman. Dach reminds me of Benoit Pouliot. A so-so NHL career but never reach anything close to being third overall pick
Click to expand...
bizarre trade for sure.
 
Ozymandias said:
A kid who doesn't live up to his draft pedigree early will necessarily depreciate in value, the question is how much. Don't really need to look far either to understand he's a depreciating asset as his initial relative value was a 3rd overall and he was traded for less.

The other also knew he was a depreciating asset, but thought he was worth the gamble. And that's what it boils down to.
Click to expand...
I’d like to think of Dach as a depreciated asset for which we dealt from a position of depth (LHD being our deepest position).

Whether he’ll be depreciating is a function of future unknown factors. Before we conclude on who schooled who, I’d like to think that Hughes parlayed a 13OA pick in a weak draft to shore up a position of critical need.

What if Davidson moved too soon? Why could he not secure a 2023 first rounder instead? Lots of what ifs. Maybe no one schooled anyone, they each got what they wanted all around.

However, it’s much too early to determine who did best since Dach’s potential can still be realized.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catanddogguitarrr
SuzukiSZN said:
Romanov is nowhere near as good as sergachev offensively…
Click to expand...
I know but some people keep comparing Dubois with Drouin. Some people doesn't see shades or subtil differences. They quicky jump into conclusions, having one point of reference and building a logic on small sample. But you know that if you are here since few years.
 
Catanddogguitarrr said:
If they are not right, it will be seen as the trade Serg-Drou 2.0.
You know that, heh?
Click to expand...
The org. did a poor job of scouting Drouin. There were a lot of red flags that they missed. They were so clueless that they actually believed he could play center. And Bergevin admitted that they were motivated by an opportunity to land a local offensive player.

Of course, Dach could also not reach his potential and we also don’t know what Romanov will become. It’s a calculated risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sterling Archer, Miller Time, Andy and 3 others
Runner77 said:
The org. did a poor job of scouting Drouin. There were a lot of red flags that they missed. They were so clueless that they actually believed he could play center. And Bergevin admitted that they were motivated by an opportunity to land a local offensive player.

Of course, Dach could also not reach his potential and we also don’t know what Romanov will become. It’s a calculated risk.
Click to expand...
It's risky and I was surprised they took that risk. But at least they didn't sign Dach for a long term big money. Not yet. I hope they were right. If they missed on that one, I don't think it will be so bad. Hug will find a way to fix his mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Runner77
Im not super hopeful or anything when it comes to Dach but when the trade is for Romanov it's a no brainer. I really liked the kid for his personality and physicality but I don't mind letting him go. He's not shown any offensive ability and his defense was mediocre to bad. He's a great skater and could transition decently but that's about it. I think his best play to this day is the pass to Tatar in his second or third game. I don't see him ever being more than a #3 where Dach at the least is a big 2 way 3C, with the outside chance of developing into a big top 6 center.

Chicago trading him actually makes me MORE exciting because everything they've done in the last 2 years has been ass backwards.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Habs10Habs, montreal, HankyZetts and 2 others
Afterwards, Danault was a good solution if he stayed here. He scored 26 goals last year and LA fans think he's the 1C ahead of Kopitar. To replace Danault we have Dvorak at 4,5 who doesn't bring half of the advantages Danault brings every game. And we have Dach as a project. Two players to fill the job of Danault. And maybe none of them will bring positive results. Danault is like a safe car. You start the engine, whatever it's minus 20 or plus 35. You are sure to get from point A to B. And on the other end you have two cars that doesn't start or always at the garage. You are sure pairing Danault with Gallagher they will bring something positive at the end. Now we have an hole to fill at center and we have the Gallagher problem.

All this because of a difference of .5M and the stubborn attitude of Bergevin. LA fans are laughing at us now and Danault is probably at the beach with his family and his dog.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcyhabs
Scorey Perry said:
A 22 year old defenseman though, he's only started to mature. Dach is exceptional bad in faceoffs. As top 2 center he has to win faceoffs in offensive zone. He's going to end up on wing. Doesn't have goal scorer hands, 40-50 points most he will top out at. There's not much value there. He's big but doesn't play big. It's just not there. He's another Pouliot.
Click to expand...
So Romanov is starting to mature but Dach won’t?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sterling Archer, Whalers Fan, JoelWarlord and 4 others
Trading for Drouin was nuts and it really showed that Bergevin didn't scout his team or other teams well, and that he didn't know whether the team needed a square peg or a round peg. He'd just get something vaguely peg-shaped and expect it to fit without adjustments or hammering.

Romanov is not fully developed. We hope that the habs have worked with him and determined his ceiling but then Toews got traded... Romanov may look very different in a more suitable role on a better team, probably better, but could always be worse, too.

I hope Hughes saw something he liked in Dach as opposed to just trading for a big guy who was being shopped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal, Runner77 and Andy
Catanddogguitarrr said:
Afterwards, Danault was a good solution if he stayed here. He scored 26 goals last year and LA fans think he's the 1C ahead of Kopitar. To replace Danault we have Dvorak at 4,5 who doesn't bring half of the advantages Danault brings every game. And we have Dach as a project. Two players to fill the job of Danault. And maybe none of them will bring positive results. Danault is like a safe car. You start the engine, whatever it's minus 20 or plus 35. You are sure to get from point A to B. And on the other end you have two cars that doesn't start or always at the garage. You are sure pairing him with Gallagher they will bring something positive at the end. Now we have an hole to fill at center and we have the Gallagher problem.

All this because of a difference of .5M and the stubborn attitude of Bergevin. LA fans are laughing at us now and Danault is probably at the beach with his family and his dog.
Click to expand...

Danault would've been preferable in the short term, but in the long term, with the perspective of Weber, Price and Petry going out soon, investing long term in Danault made less sense. We would inevitably head towards a major roster turnover, which meant drafting high for at least 2-3 years with a high chance at a talented center in the interval, making the later part of Danault's contract a bit more problematic as he would be a high cost as a 3rd string guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CristianoRonaldo and montreal
dcyhabs said:
Trading for Drouin was nuts and it really showed that Bergevin didn't scout his team or other teams well, and that he didn't know whether the team needed a square peg or a round peg. He'd just get something vaguely peg-shaped and expect it to fit without adjustments or hammering.

Romanov is not fully developed. We hope that the habs have worked with him and determined his ceiling but then Toews got traded... Romanov may look very different in a more suitable role on a better team, probably better, but could always be worse, too.

I hope Hughes saw something he liked in Dach as opposed to just trading for a big guy who was being shopped.
Click to expand...

Hughes spoke with his entourage all around chicago, people with the team, gorton probably scouted him a lot in 2019 since NYR had the 2nd pick. Looked into his medical files for his wrist and the shoulder he injured last 10 games last season. They know what they are doing and visibly liked him a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cphabs, dcyhabs, jrom and 2 others
Since it's been already said that we got a Jagr in Slafkovsky, I assume Dach is our Messier?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom