Not Wild About Latendresse Trade

by Robert L on Nov 23, 2009 7:14 PM EST Comment 15 comments

Not everyone liked or appreciated Guillaume Latendresse during his three seasons in Montreal. I on the other hand liked the kid a great deal.

There was never any getting around the truth that Latendresse was a below average skater who was submitted early to the tremendous pressure of being a local boy playing for the team of his dreams. Through his first three campaigns, he at times struggled or showed promise, but over the course of close to 200 games, it became evident that the Canadiens organization did not quite do what needed to be done to develop him properly.

The promise of Latendresse's potential seemed to stagnate this season. With a new coach seemingly unwilling to pair him with the player he worked with best in Max Lapierre, Guillaume was back to trying to carve a niche for himself.

It hasn't been an easy season for many of the Canadiens forwards, complying and dealing with the numerous changes of a constantly shufled lineup. For Latendresse, a player who hadn't quite yet cemented his place, such a scenario was extremely detrimental to his standing.

2009-10 was said to be a season in which Latendresse would finally surpass the 20 goal mark, which is still something noteworthy for depth player on teams thought to be playoff bound. After seasons of 16, 16 and 14 goals, much more was expected of the former second round pick.

In his time in Montreal, Latendresse aquitted himself decently under pressure, having been one of the few teenagers in Canadiens history to join the club, nevermind scoring 16 goals. What is bothersome now, looking back, is that he is something of a posterboy for regressive Habs draft picks. There are too many to list, but it's oddly coincidental that on the day that Guillaume is shuffled off to Minny, Sergei Kostitsyn, another Habs pick that has regressed in three years is recalled.

Perhaps what bugs me most about the deal is that it comes at a time when many of the teams' offensive gears are grinding. Thruthfully, apart from Mike Cammalleri and Tomas Plekanec, who on the club is having the season that was expected of them? In that light, what a miserable time it is to judge a talent so nascent. Twenty games into the season, on a team still searching for identity is a bit of a risk.

Where it really gets me is that Latendresse had taken steps towards fulfilling what he was to eventually become, as a second round pick. In a sense, he had delivered on that some. He might never have been power forward material, but on a power play that includes Andrei Markov, he couldn't been made into an asset had he learned how to park his ass in front of the net.

From the Minnesota Wild, the Canadiens receive former fourth overall pick Benoit Pouliot. A positive outlook on the trade is that Montreal moves up 41 spots retroactively in the 2005, getting the player selected immediately prior to Carey Price.

The word on Pouliot has often been that he is talented but lazy. A player of size and skill superior to Latendresse, he's worn out several Wild welcome mats in three season. If Guillaume is still trying to latch on into his fourth season, you can be sure there are reasons Pouliot has played but a handful of game since being drafted.

Perhaps the best scenario in the trade is that it is simply the shuffling of those prospects who were in need of a scenery change. We're all familiar with what Latendresse endured, but Pouliot has gone through his own disappointments and trying times.

0 recs | Comment 15 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I’m somewhat shocked…

I was out doing some christmas present “browsing” for my daughter… I get home and read about Latendress being traded.

I’m not really sure what to think about it, I’ll take some time to read people’s thoughts and digest it for myself.

Honestly, I feel bad for Latendress. I always wanted to see him succeed.. and for a young player, his numbers really weren’t bad at all… except that the expectations became too much.

I have to admit I don’t know to much about Pouliot. So I have my homework to do… ;-)

But from what I gather, a change of scenery might do both of these guys some good.

- Yves -
http://yvesonhabs.com

by yves_on_habs on Nov 23, 2009 7:24 PM EST reply actions

This move strikes me as a time-honored Habs tradition: a bad hockey trade made for non-hockey reasons.

Let’s just hope it’s not going to become yet another cautionary tale. Still this isn’t likely to be Ribeiro-for-Niinimaa bad at least. The trade just isn’t of the same scope and there’s potential upside for Montreal. Pouliot and Latendresse are in the same draft, and Pouliot deserves the same kind of patience that Latendresse does for much the same reason, even if Lats has been far and away the better player so far in his NHL career. (At this age it’s possible it will change).

Pouliot has talent (4th overall draft pick after all — think Minny newspaper muttered that they could have had Price instead?) but he is said to have work ethic issues. Considering how close to Price he was selected, there’s a very good chance Timmins has scouted the guy, and . I took a look at his rate stats and peripherals, and they aren’t really great… except, interestingly, this year, where his Corsi and Goals/60 are actually pretty good, albeit in very limited action so sample size is an issue.

That Lats and Martin had a conflict was starting to become increasingly obvious and clearly Martin doesn’t worth through conflicts with young players. Time will tell if it pays up, especially with Sergei up now. Although I’m not sure adding another guy with a reputation for work ethic issues (not to mention a DUI) is a good idea given the reasons the team is downgrading in the first place.

I don’t think it will surprise anyone if I conclude I don’t like the move. The Habs gave away the better player in the deal, and while trading prospects at this stage is prone to reversals of situation because of development tracks, I can’t get over the point the Habs have traded a guy who has been productive NHLer for a guy who has yet to be one. But when trading players of this age, it really is a bit of a gamble.

by MathMan on Nov 23, 2009 7:27 PM EST reply actions

...

huh……. high draft swap… both big guys..both designated for the same role… meh lets see how this pans out (optimistic)

by jon paine on Nov 23, 2009 8:22 PM EST reply actions

I have no problem with Gainey picking up Pouliot but it’s too bad that we lost Lats. Tough to give up on player that is so young and has had three decent years in the NHL. We will also miss the potential that a guy 6’3"/230 brought to the table. I would have rather seen us trade someone who had less size but I guess that’s what Minnesota wanted in return. Chuck Fletcher is a sharp guy so we’ll have to wait and see what happens here. I would expect an initial positive flurry after which we’ll get to see the real Pouliot with all his strengths and weaknesses.

It’s unbelievable how quickly Montreal give up on their young players. Our development program over the past six years has been brutal.

by 24 Cups on Nov 23, 2009 11:36 PM EST reply actions

It begs the question, what truly is the developmental program if it is having such shabby results. The number of second year setbacks (Sergei, Lapierre, O’Byrne, Price) is concerning.

by Robert L on Nov 23, 2009 11:54 PM EST up reply actions

Well, at least we didn’t trade Price to the Flyers for a 6th round pick, so I guess this is a “good” trade…
I don’t know anything about this guy, but if he has good speed, that is helpful. Of course, it won’t help if he is going to have the work ethic of an Alexandre Daigle either.

It is a shame that we can’t do better with developing our players, particularly local talent. I don’t think it is correct to keep blaming the city and the pressure for these failures. Latendresse needed more time in Hamilton. In Montreal, he was stuck with having to be a role player, when he should have been afforded the opportunity to develop all around skills and confidence at a lower level. He is only 22 now. He has proven he is capable of playing in the NHL. Most players at 22 are either in the minors or just finishing playing in the NCAA.

Mostly, this trade seems to be an attempt at a warning for other players. How much does that really help in the long run? Usually, it doesn’t.

by nyhabsfan on Nov 23, 2009 11:42 PM EST reply actions

What scares me is that this trade might say more about Jacques Martin than it does the players involved. The question of whether Guillaume was given familiar and comfortable elements to succeed is a definite “No”. I see no reason as to why he could not have played 22 games alongside Lapierre, where both enjoyed their best days. Ending last season, both looking to be players on the rise. A quarter season later, both were lost.

by Robert L on Nov 23, 2009 11:57 PM EST up reply actions

At the start of the season, it was staggering how many of the younger-than-Plekanec vets were headed for their worst seasons ever, and how the rookies were not producing anything. I am somewhat worried about Martin’s reputation for being good with young players, and would be more so if Kostitsyn and Price hadn’t woken up recently. Martin does not seem to have a deft hand at putting players in positions where they can be successful or letting them work through their growing pains. It seems all he knows is how to send messages, and that’s not encouraging.

Sad, isn’t it? Not even 25 games into the season, and already wondering about the coach.

Losing Latendresse for a gamble like Pouliot, simply because the coach doesn’t like him, is wasteful, plain and simple. Good on the Habs if the gamble works out, but this is not a good trade no matter how you slice him.

by MathMan on Nov 24, 2009 1:50 AM EST up reply actions

Just gonna quote you guys here..Don’t get me wrong I agree with everyone’s opinion and would just like to shoot out a few of my own.

“It’s unbelievable how quickly Montreal give up on their young players”

I don’t think its just Montreal, you constantly see young players being traded or put on waivers. They just need a change of scenery to excel, John Leclair and Grabovski are good examples. I think Montreal fans like us just want to find an easy way to point at faults; sometimes its the hockey gods. :)

“I don’t think it is correct to keep blaming the city and the pressure for these failures”

Which in so many ways is true…though maybe a percentage of players are at fault for not being able to actually handle it. Montreal is a tough place to play; they are constantly reminded of The Rocket, Roy, Savard and many more. Me personally I’d probably be annoyed to all hell seeing that in my face everyday..but on the flip side, that should be a prerequisite for hockey players who want to be in the NHL; they need to suck it up and play the damn game they love.

I’m gonna revert back to my older post, optimistic about this move

by jon paine on Nov 24, 2009 2:52 PM EST up reply actions

Let it slide

Seriously, La-tenderness was well lackluster. Yes many here (and on the French Canadian Channels) would have you believe he was the next coming of some former French star. But seriously, did we really believe 16,16, 14 was the sign of a potent goal scorer?

Yes he’s big, he’s strong, and we could admit that there was difficulty assigning a role to him – because no one (besides Markov, Pleks and Camaro (small and sporty) has played a decent role in MTL in years. Koivu was likely the most consistent heart and soul player they had for a decade, and we all liked Kovalev when he was on his long streaks of good fortune.

But history has shown us, not Martin has show us, history has shown us that BIG guys don’t play well in MTL. Can anyone name the last BIG forward who played AWESOME in their role in MTL?? Roy as a tender, Muller, Carbs, Gainey as Defencive forwards, but have we EVER had a Garbage goal kinda guy? No. And people keep pushing the fact that LeClair was in a long list of prospects that the Habs gave up on. The issue is that the so-called 4-8 yr vets we have had (in the past 10 yrs) haven’t been up to snuff on a consistent basis, that we draft fairly well (No Wickenheisers in a long time) and need to bring them up earlier than the young guys are ready for.

Seriously, if the guys were HUNGRY for a spot on the HABS we wouldn’t have Glen Metropolit on the PP… and no one can argue that.

by Cruisin4aBruisin on Nov 24, 2009 3:33 AM EST reply actions

Muller had over 90 points with the Habs. Bobby Smith was a huge reason we won the 1986 Cup. Steve Shutt scored a lot of garbage goals.

We can have those guys. It’s not something that is impossible. We obviously don’t have the traidition of them teams like Boston and Philly have, but we have had some good ones.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Nov 24, 2009 9:56 AM EST up reply actions

The Habs may not have developed Latendresse properly, and that’s unfortunate, but the Wild mismanaged an even better asset in Pouliot. I never agreed with Benoit’s draft day ranking, but he definitely had good potential with his size, speed, and hands. Hopefully a change will do him good, like it has for Gilbert Brule.

I wish Guillaume success. Something happened with him… he was regressing fast. As for Martin splitting he and Lapierre up, fact is if Guillaume was to become a scoring winger, that split needed to occur. What was bizarre was Martin giving Lapierre the second line role instead of Latendresse.

Hockey blogging can't get any flatter.

by saskhab on Nov 24, 2009 10:02 AM EST reply actions

Kostitsyn>Latendresse.

If you were satisfied with Lats progression towards filling the 2nd round hype, then how can Kosty be regressing? Other than a couple HOFs and future HOFs, how many 7th rounders even score a goal? Gui came up too early and Habs should have sent him down the moment he started to suck, but didn’t. Management is at fault but the guy never should have played so quickly. He’s was not good enough.

by PaulX on Nov 24, 2009 4:35 PM EST reply actions

Just because SK was drafted as a 7th rounder, does mean he’s a seventh rounder in talent. That steal was apparent the moment he suited up for London Knights. SK has 2nd round talent.

by Robert L on Nov 24, 2009 6:14 PM EST up reply actions

Another thing to consider is how old the player is when drafted. What’s better? To be drafted in the last round at 18, or drafted first, a year later at 19?

by nyhabsfan on Nov 25, 2009 10:14 AM EST reply actions