Official Tank Thread
- Thread starter the
- Start date
-
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
If trading Kovacevic and Harris are tank moves, this team his downright horrible and doesn't needy assistance for the tank.
That may well be one of the biggest nonsense statements to validate an opinion I have heard in a long time.
Do we have a close-up of his eyes to see if he really shut them when he shot?
Habs
Jake Evans will steal your wife
- Feb 28, 2002
- 23,609
- 19,216
those two and that channel are the world's biggest Habs homers around. After a loss 'We gotta talk about this team's issues'. After a win 'Things have never looked better for this team!'.
Grate n Colorful Oz
Pure Laine Hutson
Who cares!? Both Matheson and Savard will not be part of future winning roster, but Patrick Laine could be extended to be part of that.
Win-win. Laine makes a case for contact extension while Matheson and Savard continue helping us lose a few more games for a better draft pick. Bonus, both veterans are good team players who won't raise a fuss if their ice time dwindles along the way as prospects win more TOI.
Grate n Colorful Oz
Pure Laine Hutson
We were talking about the Habs future record. Laine was simply supplemental to that. It's an argument towards a point, not the point itself.
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,903
- 13,387
Harris and Kovacevic were not tank moves. You had a logjam at defence. Either way, they were serviceable depth players at most.
Laine had one great game and you already want to extend him. With his history, I wouldn't gamble on him, unless he's willing to take a significant paycut. In what way does Savard help you lose games? He's great defensively. For every gaffe Matheson makes he makes up with it with a goal or assist. I don't follow your logic. Trading both will help the tank though. If you do manage to get a first for them, it won't be a top 5. It's better to package them for a prospect with great potential. Then again, teams won't trade their best assets for Savard. Matheson might garner something interesting.
It will take a good 5 years before the Habs can even think of competing. Armia, Dvorak, Pezz, Evans and Savard won't get much in terms of futures. Laine and Matheson next year might fetch a haul. I won't talk about Gally and Anderson. Dach and Newhook will be slotted on the third for a while until they throw the towel. So, management has to bank on the draft. Draft well and develop them. That being said, firsts and seconds will be more to difficult to acquire going forward.
Sorinth
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 11,966
- 6,811
Why wouldn't taking on cap dumps, and trading NHL level players for picks and replacing them with rookies not be considered rebuilding moves?
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,903
- 13,387
Honestly, i would have preferred we keep Kovacevic and trade Barron.
Sorinth
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 11,966
- 6,811
I didn't actually, I said it was closer to being a tank move then a non-tank move and in that context a non-tank move would be a move made where we are going for it.
Trading serviceable NHL players for picks and playing rookies knowing it weakens us in the shorterm in the hopes of longer term payoff is a rebuilding move. Now it's true a part of the long term payoff is expected to come from increased ice time to our young D.
We were sellers this offseason not buyers.
LaP
Registered User
I don't. That would have been doing the same thing we did for the last 30 years. We had to test Barron for another year to be 100% sure there's nothing there.
Rebuilding and tanking are two different things. Tanking is all about a shot at a top 5 pick. You can re-build without necessarily tanking. TB and Detroit kept re-building by picking late.
Kennerback
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2021
- 5,079
- 8,082
I can be patient with a D because’s he’s a bit too slow, or too short, or not strong enough, or has positioning issues, or immature, or decision making issues with the puck. General sloppiness with stickhandling, passing, and turnovers doesn’t ever improve much. Matheson is tolerated because he has exceptional skills to supersede this. Barron doesn’t. This isn’t a François Beauchemin or Ryan McDonagh issue.
Jurivan Demidovsky
#25 in '25
- Nov 26, 2024
- 758
- 1,250
Barron wasn't worth the 4th we got for Kova though. He was going to be waiver fodder and everyone in the league knew it.
Nope. Look at his 11pts only in 32gp last season. He lost his confidence. How you go from scoring 16pts in 25 in ahl to 11pts the next season. Both Mailloux and Struble have surpassed him in the ranking. Add Reinbacher next season. They should have try to trade him last season. His value is pretty much gone.
hardcorehabs
Registered User
Would you have said the same at the time of Kovacevic trade? Or you’re just using hind sight now?
What hind sight? Barron has starting to decline from last season(11pts only in 32gp). A young Mailloux has already outproducing him. I would have 0 problem keeping Kovacevic for one more season with us. Send Struble to Laval and have Barron and Kova battle for the #6 position. He is also 26 years old only. He could have play for us for next 2-3 years as our #5-7.
| 52 | Justin Barron | D | 32 | 2 | 9 | 11 | 10 | -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | ||
| 72 | Arber Xhekaj | D | 17 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 34 |
Sorinth
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 11,966
- 6,811
You're arguing semantics on something I never even said. I never called the trades tank moves, I called the rebuilding moves and said they were closer to being tank moves then non-tank moves which rebuilding moves are.
Bottom line is that this past offseason we made moves that made the team worse in the short term. And given that we've finished bottom-5 for the last 3 years it's self evident that Hughes was comfortable with another tank year because if he wasn't he wouldn't have made rebuilding moves selling NHL players for picks and taking on a cap dump.
WinterLion
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 5,462
- 5,582
