OldCraig71
Sleeveen
We don't need more picks and we aren't in the spot to call up AHLers because Laval is doing well and they want the young players to go on a playoff run.
Post-Game Talk: Trade Deadline Day: March 7, 2025: Montreal stands pat
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
HuGo Burner Acc
Registered User
- Mar 30, 2016
- 4,783
- 5,475
Bring up prospects right now isn't the move because of everything I mentioned. Also maybe those players aren't garnering 2nds. Also you're thinking way too transactionally. What about the human aspect of team morale with Savard in the lockeroom very some random. Look at Brady crying today. That's the human aspect of trading away beloved players. So if Suzuki would rather have a player or two over a few picks, so be it. He has a better gauge of the room than you or I.
Why don’t we need more picks? Don’t forget that these also could be used as future trade deadline ammo when we actually would be ready to make a playoff run…
If the issue is calling up from Laval, it is easily solvable by asking for a warm body in return
Andrei79
Registered User
- Jan 25, 2013
- 17,361
- 33,333
This makes sense. Personally, I would have been irritated if they sold seeing as being in this group of teams was their stated goal this year. I would have also been irritated if there were a number of players at interesting prices that filled a need (RHD, center) and they stood there doing nothing.
Also, Unless we're adding a recently drafted Matthews or Malkin type player, going through the 14-16th pick phase is a natural progression for rebuilding teams... As long as there's no regression.
This is why as you state, this summer will be important. They cant bank on a Barron and Dach to take on key roles. Reinbacher and Demidov making the team ? Sure. But, they have to add more depth too.
bcv
My french sucks.
- Sep 18, 2010
- 4,752
- 2,967
7 top 64 picks and 21 total picks in the next two drafts.
But yes, the Habs are in dire need of an extra 2nd rounder even if they are 1 point out of a playoffs spot.
Use that 2nd next year as extra ammo to get help when you actually want to make noise in the playoffs?
We are still in rebuild, those picks can be traded to go higher in the draft. We are not at one Armia to be in the playoffs or not. Yes the team is doing better but don't fool ourselves because we are close to the middle, this is still a rebuilding team
bcv
My french sucks.
- Sep 18, 2010
- 4,752
- 2,967
re-read my post. They already have plenty of picks to do that.
im not sure what happen here tonight but for me the situation was clear: We are in a playoff run where 3 spots are availables (actually hold by NJ-CLB-OTT) and we are ranked 5th on 6 teams on that run. Theres no way that we would be sellers when we try to teach young player to be winners and closed of their goal. We have to support them where they put themselves. Then, you cannot be buyer and break the long term plan for rentals. So we were actually "sitters" on search for hockey trades to insert somes legit players to the long term plan, a search for a 2C and a Top 4 RD but obviously that was what almost all the buyers searching for recently... So you have to be the team with the specific element to make this possible or having the system to welcome some specimens. Unfortunatly, we dont possess a center like Josh Norris or having the adequate hockey system to welcome a Mittelstadt... About the RD, they are so rare... we understand that we should pick another one to the following draft.
Everything happened today was predictable
Everything happened today was predictable
Last edited:
26Mats
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2018
- 34,172
- 26,598
I agree with what you said about Dvo.
I was just responding to a post that said no one would want Dvo because of his cap hit. I was saying if Hughes wanted to trade him, imo there would have teams that would have wanted him at a low price.
MSL uses Dvo a lot. I think Hughes wanted to keep him for the playoff push more than getting whatever low draft pick he could have gotten...
And, I think it's fine to use all retention spots before the draft. If you really need a retention spot, you can bring in a 3rd party team.
Last edited:
OldCraig71
Sleeveen
Well, while that is true there has to be demand for what you have to offer and our junk must not have been another mans treasure.
OldCraig71
Sleeveen
Savard might retire at the end of this season. He really should.
If you go back one page, Engels confirmed that Hughes had a 2nd rounder on the table for Armia and didn’t take it
I don't think Armia or Savard or Dvorak were returning a 2nd round pick.
le_sean
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2006
- 43,373
- 48,509
- Jun 24, 2012
- 86,799
- 162,306
Interesting take.
« Kent Hughes press conference. It was easy to read between the lines that he regretted the deal he made with the players: « be in the mix and you will be rewarded ». It was a sellers’ market and he is quite possibly going to lose 3 FAs for absolutely NOTHING. GM learning on the job. »
Fallouts/ takeaways:
1. Should a GM ever handcuff himself by making promises directly to players? Why not leave that to the head coach so the GM is free to move as he sees fit?
2. Should a small sample size of games decide longer term asset management? Were the Habs a losing streak away, from being sellers?
3. Hughes was so anal about not losing a lowly pick that he tolerated a 3-goalie system last season. But now?
4. Finally, did love/ power of dressing room friendship, conquer all?
« Kent Hughes press conference. It was easy to read between the lines that he regretted the deal he made with the players: « be in the mix and you will be rewarded ». It was a sellers’ market and he is quite possibly going to lose 3 FAs for absolutely NOTHING. GM learning on the job. »
Fallouts/ takeaways:
1. Should a GM ever handcuff himself by making promises directly to players? Why not leave that to the head coach so the GM is free to move as he sees fit?
2. Should a small sample size of games decide longer term asset management? Were the Habs a losing streak away, from being sellers?
3. Hughes was so anal about not losing a lowly pick that he tolerated a 3-goalie system last season. But now?
4. Finally, did love/ power of dressing room friendship, conquer all?
Hannibal
Fear the Weber
- Feb 11, 2007
- 11,454
- 9,409
Interesting take.
« Kent Hughes press conference. It was easy to read between the lines that he regretted the deal he made with the players: « be in the mix and you will be rewarded ». It was a sellers’ market and he is quite possibly going to lose 3 FAs for absolutely NOTHING. GM learning on the job. »
Fallouts/ takeaways:
1. Should a GM ever handcuff himself by making promises directly to players? Why not leave that to the head coach so the GM is free to move as he sees fit?
2. Should a small sample size of games decide longer term asset management? Were the Habs a losing streak away, from being sellers?
3. Hughes was so anal about not losing a lowly pick that he tolerated a 3-goalie system last season. But now?
4. Finally, did love/ power of dressing room friendship, conquer all?
Interesting take
Interesting take.
« Kent Hughes press conference. It was easy to read between the lines that he regretted the deal he made with the players: « be in the mix and you will be rewarded ». It was a sellers’ market and he is quite possibly going to lose 3 FAs for absolutely NOTHING. GM learning on the job. »
Fallouts/ takeaways:
1. Should a GM ever handcuff himself by making promises directly to players? Why not leave that to the head coach so the GM is free to move as he sees fit?
2. Should a small sample size of games decide longer term asset management? Were the Habs a losing streak away, from being sellers?
3. Hughes was so anal about not losing a lowly pick that he tolerated a 3-goalie system last season. But now?
4. Finally, did love/ power of dressing room friendship, conquer all?
Interesting indeed, but I would disagree for two reasons:
1)the bigger deals will be at the draft/in the off-season, and the actual value of draft picks will be known, helping quantify the capital KH has amassed.
2)Sacrificing some mid picks for the team structure, with Laval depleted would ruin this season's narrative of forward progress. He made a deal and sticking to it is beneficial in the long run to morale and culture, especially if they squeak in.
Guess
Registered User
Engels said that we were offered a 2nd for Armia but declined. Don't see us getting much for the other players that were trade bait. Would have been nice to have the 2nd round pick, but whatever, it's not going to change the franchise. I honestly have no qualms with standing pat and letting the team try to go as far as possible this season.
You have to manage the culture and not just make decisions based on what would best help the team in the long term.
It's just too bad this isn't the year we were tanking when we traded Petry, Toffoli, etc.
You have to manage the culture and not just make decisions based on what would best help the team in the long term.
It's just too bad this isn't the year we were tanking when we traded Petry, Toffoli, etc.
Guy Larose
Registered User
- Jan 25, 2018
- 2,927
- 4,349
There were no players that were trade bait. KH told Suzuki he was keeping the team together.
Guess
Registered User
Exactly, not exactly a fan of our drafting for the most part. Our needs are 2C, top 4 RD, gritty skilled mid 6ers. Gonna be hard to get those with a second round pick with our drafting abilities.
WinterLion
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 5,508
- 5,661
Next year he will be able to deal Laine and Matheson at the deadline....
don't make those promises next year Kent...
don't make those promises next year Kent...
Saundies
Fly On The Wall
Interesting take.
« Kent Hughes press conference. It was easy to read between the lines that he regretted the deal he made with the players: « be in the mix and you will be rewarded ». It was a sellers’ market and he is quite possibly going to lose 3 FAs for absolutely NOTHING. GM learning on the job. »
Fallouts/ takeaways:
1. Should a GM ever handcuff himself by making promises directly to players? Why not leave that to the head coach so the GM is free to move as he sees fit?
2. Should a small sample size of games decide longer term asset management? Were the Habs a losing streak away, from being sellers?
3. Hughes was so anal about not losing a lowly pick that he tolerated a 3-goalie system last season. But now?
4. Finally, did love/ power of dressing room friendship, conquer all?
1) Depends. You could pull the Billy Beane in Moneyball approach where you avoid the players at all costs or you can do stuff like this and develop a more trustworthy relationship with them. It's seemed to have done him well in negotiations with guys in contracts and may buy him some brownie points in this scenario.
2) They probably were a losing streak away from being sellers but they didn't lose. They are (whether fans tired of the phrasing or not) in the mix. They did their job. Their room is tight and they've pulled together so far. It's been great to see.
3) I'm not going to defend the three-goalie system because it sucked and helped no one but I understand his POV 100% in this case. People up in arms about it don't like the fact that we didn't do anything, simple as that. Selling the guys we had available doesn't get us anything of use to us right away (that we don't already have in spades.. we are literally stacked with picks already) and 'buying' makes no sense when we are clearly not going to win a cup this year.
4) Unironically probably lmao.
