montreal canadiens hockey – habs blog RSS

Game 35: Habs/Hurricanes

  • You woke up today with your Montreal Canadiens sitting in 1st place in the North East Division, 2nd only to the suddenly-Crosby-less Pittsburgh Pengiuns this morning. How good it feels to not follow up that statement with the qualifier “April Fools”.

    Montreal gets set today to face the Carolina Hurricanes as we inch towards the trade deadline on Wednesday. While the team has been generally excellent for the entire season, there are still some areas in which the club could certainly improve. A big forward or defensive acquisition would go a long way to making this team set for a deep playoff run. The question is whether or not Marc Bergevin feels as though it is worth it to risk giving up prospects or picks to gain a valuable player? Personally I waffle between thinking it makes better sense to simply stand pat, and the idea that you only get so many chances to have a highly ranked team.

    Look at the New York Rangers as case #1 for why teams who have a shot at a cup should take a chance. Everyone thought that team would be better this season, and yet.. they are in real danger of missing the post-season altogether. Should they have made more of an effort to win last season? Its hard to say in retrospect.

    You’d like to think that if you won, you would stand a good chance of coming back the next year. Boston is a good example of a team that has been able to turn success into a long-term condition. Still, they traded away Joe Colborne, a 1st rd pick, as well as a 2nd rd pick for Tomas Kaberle. He’s a guy that can’t even be trusted to crack an NHL lineup now.. how did that deal help them? And how much better would their future look now if they had kept Joe Colborne and their picks?

    A deadline pickup doesn’t always solve the problem you intend to – and can have real consequences down the line should you all of a sudden start to get thin in terms of prospects in the system. Montreal seems to have an abundance right now in terms of defense prospects and picks, but one has to imagine that the long-term success of the team would be increased by hanging on to these assets.

    What do you guys think?

    Go Habs Go!!


  1. #1 Avatar37 says:
    April 1, 2013 at 3:25 pm

    I think that if we can get a trade that makes sense, do it. If we can’t find one that makes sense, then don’t do it. There are some players I’d be willing to pay for, and some players I wouldn’t (like a first round pick for Clowe!!).

    I was disappointed that the Pens got Murray for a 2nd round pick and a conditional 2nd round pick, that is one trade I would have made, but maybe we’ll get a shot at going after him this summer as a UFA.

    It’s hard to say if the Rangers are sellers or not, they might be willing to make a trade, and a trade for Garborik and Boyle would make sense to me as a worthwhile gamble (I’d much rather have Nash, if available, but he probably isn’t). Gaborik may just need a change of scenery (or he may simply have forgotten how to play), but considering how both those players are performing, they might be available at a reasonable cost.

    Same goes for Hartnell, he’s not playing well these past few months, so I’d be inquiring if the Flyers would be willing to sell and for how much.

    We also need one bonafide enforcer, as I had discussed over on the side board, there are a few avenues that could be persued, such as John Scott out of Buffalo, or even Trevor Gillies from the KHL. We need someone capable of playing against Fraser, Thornton/Chara, and Neil, in 7 game series.

    Otherwise, that’s it. My guess is that we won’t make any more moves come the trade deadline, but if I were GM, this is what I’d be doing.

  2. #2 Senet1 says:
    April 1, 2013 at 7:27 pm

    I have never been on to trade away high draft picks especially for rental players, they usually come back to haunt you. However, if we were able to get a physical presence up front who could score as well as play a rough style like Hartnell, then I would take a chance on one of our 2nd rounders. I do not see NY trading any of their top players unless they get the ranch in return, as of right now they are still in 8th place with two days to go to the deadline. It will not happen. We have nothing to trade that we would want to give up that they would want. There are only two or three teams in the East that are actually sellers, two florida teams, and Philly. We may not need to make any moves depending on how the playoffs go. If you look at the standings right now we get NJ. Pitts gets NY, Boston – Ottawa and Winnipeg gets Toronto. I see Pitts, HABS and Boston and Toronto in the second round. That would put Pitts Toronto and Mont vs Bos. So what else is new. If Crobsy does not get back for the playoffs I can see Toronto taking that series to 7 games. I think we have Boston’s number. We have found how to frustrate big
    chara and the Bruins and they are spending time in the penalty box. Chara lost his cool again today and could get a suspension for his hit??? It is time the league clamped down on him. If we get out of the Semis I believe we can beat whoever wins the Pitts -TO series. However, the sleeper in this whole thing is the Capitals. I believe the way they are playing the last week or so, they are going to make the playoffs instead of NY. That puts them up against Pitts and again if Crosby does not get healthy to play I can see an upset. That changes the whole complexity of the PO and anything can happen.

  3. #3 Avatar37 says:
    April 1, 2013 at 10:22 pm

    Senet – You’re probably right, the Rangers aren’t going to part with their top players, but I think we could have Boyle for a 5th or 4th round pick, and at 6’7, he’d make a good 4th line aquisition for us, and he’s shown he plays well with Prust. Boyle has struggled all year with the Rangers, ever since Prust left. And, if we could pick up Scott from the Sabres, he’s also 6’7. We’d suddenly have two big forwards to go up against the Bruins and Leafs, and both could probably be have relatively cheaply.

  4. #4 Avatar37 says:
    April 1, 2013 at 10:22 pm

    Sorry, Scott is 6’8.

Leave a Comment