Montreal made their first trade of note this season when they sent Justin Barron to Nashville for Alexandre Carrier. Having had some time to ponder the swap, our writers offer up their thoughts.
Terry Costaris: The trade has to be a teachable moment for both Jeff Gorton and Kent Hughes. That is, they need to keep in mind the concept of peak performing years and how they need to find players that fit into age requirements for Montreal’s projected path of the rebuild.
I hate to say that I was wrong but here goes: I have to admit that they should never have traded for Barron in the first place. I still believe in his potential but Montreal was not the place for him to develop it. Neither, incidentally is Nashville.
He was too young a trade piece to acquire from Colorado and did not have the proper runway to succeed here. I feel sorry for this kid who was basically run out of town. Part of our media and fanbase can, and is oftentimes brutal.
The Canadiens should have traded for someone of Barron’s ilk who was 24 years old at the time. Someone who was more of a known entity, who would begin his peak years at 27 which is around now.
This summer, what the Habs should have done is kept Jonathan Kovacevic and traded Justin Barron.
Carrier is 28, and is now just past his peak. He’s a better version of Kovacevic but at the cost of Artturi Lehkonnen. Carrier will hopefully be a reliable defensive scaffolding player until either David Reinbacher or Logan Mailloux come online.
I asked ChatGPT to calculate the average scoring point decline of superstar defenders after their peak season. The number is approximately 17%. Carrier is no superstar. Throw in the size and weight of this defender (5’11 and 175 pounds) and I’m not confident that Father Time will be kind to him over the next four or five years – when most defenders retire (32-33).
Defencemen, and even worse, goalies, take forever to develop. Barron was too young an acquisition by the tandem of Gorton and Hughes. Kudos that they admitted their mistake and managed to salvage their error by landing a steady and reliable placeholder in Alexandre Carrier.
This no way diminishes my confidence in Montreal’s management. The best of the best make mistakes, lots of them. The crème de la crème though, make more correct decisions than errors. Hughes and Gorton so far fall under the latter category.
Allan Katz: Chris Nilan said it best; This team needs more men and less boys. Barron is a boy, he has talent, size, skating, offensive chops and an incredibly immature defensive game. My guess is in four years he will potentially be a better 200-foot player than the MAN who is replacing him. The Habs have so much defensive depth throughout their organization that it was easy for them to trade the talent who was progressing the slowest.
Ironically, Carrier is cut from a similar cloth except that he has already put in the years to develop and is ready now to be a solid defensive presence. His ceiling is at least a cut below Barron’s but his floor is NHL ready. The reason is simple; he’s paid his dues.
The final seven defencemen who will be carrying Lord Stanley’s Cup in 2028 have not been defined yet. Most speculation involves seeing Carrier as a stopgap replacement for David Savard, but no one really knows. He will be around 32 when the reconstructed team is trying to touch the sun and how he ages might be a factor in deciding his fate.
Here’s a little tidbit I dug up that I have seen nowhere. There is a player developing in the KHL who is the same size as Carrier and seems to have the talent to make it in the NHL one day. Bogdan Konyushkov’s KHL contract has two years left. There is a chance he will be NHL-ready or need a few months in the AHL to acclimatize to the rink, culture, and language, but he is paying his dues for the next two years and he would be a perfect replacement for Carrier when the time is right.
The waiver situation was the problem with Barron (let’s add Cayden Primeau to this) because not everyone is ready (early twenties) to make the big time. Samuel Montembeault is a classic example of this, so many teams lose verifiable NHL talent, to waivers, because of slower development.
Carrier is in the right place at the right time for this team. Barron was not. Kudos for a good hockey trade. Best of luck to Barron on his journey, welcome home to Carrier and happy holidays to everyone but the Toronto Maple Leafs and Boston Bruins.
Brian La Rose: Over the past season and change, we’ve seen the defence struggle. It’s the reality of having the bulk of your blueliners be youngsters. While you want to see that unit improve as a whole, it’s not exactly a tried-and-true strategy for success, both developmental and on-ice. At some point, you need to elevate the defensive floor for the team to get better. This trade does that.
I could easily see Barron developing into a better defender a few years from now. The tools are there for him to be a top-four player. But he wasn’t exactly close to getting to that point with the Canadiens; it’s easier to argue that his development had stagnated. When that happens, it’s either put him in a different role to get him going, trade him, or sit him and let his value plummet. They chose the middle option and it was the right one.
Carrier isn’t anything special. He’s just a steady fourth defender. And I mean that in a good way. The words steady and stable don’t apply to many of Montreal’s blueliners. He’ll help defensively at five-on-five and help on the penalty kill. Both of those are areas of need.
There was going to come a time when the Canadiens would need to add a veteran defender. Some expected it last summer, others figured it might come this summer. Instead, it comes in between. And believe it or not, they might have to do it again this summer anyway.
While they add money and two more years on Carrier’s deal, that’s probably about the ideal length of the contract. That should be enough insurance to allow Mailloux and Reinbacher to develop without being rushed. And if they’re out of the playoffs come the trade deadline, Carrier’s presence will make it easier to move Savard.
In the long run, if Barron becomes a top-four player, Nashville could be the long-term winner of the swap. But for what Montreal needs today and over the next couple of years, Carrier is the better fit for them.
Kevin Leveille: The Habs decided that Barron wasn’t a fit anymore and moved on in a very positive trade. The 23-year-old 6’2” Barron was, for this writer’s taste, far too easy to play against. General Managers need to find a good mix of players to be successful. Even six Lane Hutson’s would be too much of a good thing and not be an effective way to build a team. Barron found himself as the extra because in comparison, much of his competition that are vying for the same role as him had passed him in importance, whether short or long-term. Short term, Barron was behind Hutson and Mike Matheson. Long term, the contract situations and recent progressions of both Logan Mailloux and Adam Engstrom made them more appealing. Barron, through his own play, had made himself the odd man out.
In Carrier, the Habs receive what appears to be the heir apparent for the Savard role on the team. For now, they add another defender that is difficult to play against. At 5’11”, Carrier’s physical style might be closer to Francis Bouillon than Savard, but that’s still tougher than Barron ever was. Carrier is younger and more mobile than Savard, and in his fourth NHL season, this is Carrier’s first as a minus player. I agree with most that the stat may not be telling on a micro scale, the macro trend used here is still a piece of information that should not necessarily be ignored and strengthens the idea of the Savard comparison of being a steadying presence for the group. In the Carrier-Savard comparison, the cap numbers are similar, too.
Carrier is signed for $250,000 per season more than Savard. However, he’s signed for two more seasons. I saw some complaints on social media about the trade being bad cap management when compared to Barron, but I think it’s actually excellent cap management if the Savard replacement theory is correct. Remember that it is widely believed around the league that the cap is rising by more than the usually allocated amount. This means that the Savard replacement would cost significantly more on the open market in the summer. Instead, the Habs replace the role for the next few seasons without losing cap space, get tougher to play against in the short term by having both guys on the team, and acquire another player who is happy to play in Montreal. They also give themselves a wide-open opportunity to deal Savard if the team remains uncompetitive to the trade deadline.
Overall, the Habs lose some potential upside in talent but gain a steady presence that should solidify the group in the short term and open significant trade options as early as February. In the mindset that the team is looking to figure out what they have in their youth as opposed to simply stockpiling assets forever, this is a step in the right direction in my opinion and one that should provide a boost to the current group who get an addition instead of the steady departures of the last few seasons.
Peter Longo: This trade is just another example of Hughes cleaning up a mess he created! For reasons only known to Hughes, he decided to trade Kovacevic in June for a fourth-round pick. Kovacevic is a big, strong, and right-handed defenseman who was a surprising +14 last season while playing a stable and dependable game in Montreal. He is continuing to play strong for New Jersey this season.
After 31 games this season – with many being quite embarrassing – Hughes has finally realized his mistake and he’s gone out to pick up a stable, right-handed defenseman in Carrier to try to fill the gap created when he traded Kovacevic. In the process, he’s paying more for Carrier, who is older and much smaller than Kovacevic.
Don’t get me wrong, Barron had ample opportunity to establish himself as an NHL defenceman and he struggled. So I have no problems moving on from him or even acquiring Carrier in return (the Habs clearly need more help on D). But somewhere along the way, management made a big mistake in asset management in moving Kovacevic. Now Hughes was forced to move Barron to try and fill that hole, rather than accumulate additional assets more useful in a rebuild. This is not the way a rebuild is supposed to work, Mr. Hughes.
Norm Szcyrek: I am ecstatic about the Canadiens moving Barron out of Montreal, and the return for him was a good one. Carrier is a mobile defenceman who is very defensively responsible, exactly what Barron is not. As a veteran right-shooting defenceman who is very positionally sound, he is exactly what this team needs to help stabilize their defence. He is undersized at 5’11, but Hutson has shown us that smaller defenceman can play well defensively if they have the hockey sense to anticipate and counter an opponent. The term and cost of Carrier’s contract are reasonable.
Barron was never able to grasp the defensive side of the game at the NHL level, and I doubt he ever will. While he is a good skater and has good instincts to jump into the play in the offensive zone at times, his defensive gaffes were too frequent and more often than not led to a goal against that should have been preventable. Too often after one of those goals, the camera would pan to the bench to show assistant coach Stephane Robidas patting Barron on the shoulder and apparently offering some encouraging words. I said in a recent HabsWorld podcast that I believe Barron would make a better winger than he does a defenceman, since his offensive skills could be better used up front, and his defensive liabilities better hidden. Maybe Nashville will try this, although they have had a lot of injuries on defence so that experiment won’t happen soon.
It’s also a good sign that Hughes, after over 2 1/2 years since trading for Barron, learned from his mistake and was able to move him. Recently when Barron was inserted into the lineup, Martin St. Louis played him as little as possible which shows he lost confidence in the player. Now it’s easy to understand that ice time was necessary to showcase him for this trade. This move also gives Hughes his first “loss” as far as the original Lehkonen/Barron trade can be analyzed, since Arturri has proven to be a very valuable player for Colorado. Perhaps trading Kovacevic could be argued as Hughes’ first trade loss, since he is flourishing in New Jersey.
James Turner: I think this is a solid move for Hughes. It was becoming increasingly clear that Barron was not a great fit for the team’s long-term direction, and Carrier has been the subject of trade rumours since last season. It’s a deal both GMs can justify.
The trade gives both players a change of scenery, and for the Canadiens, it gives them a player who can immediately impact the defensive side. The Habs are near the bottom in goals allowed and goal differential this season, and adding a defensive defenceman who blocks shots and does the dirty work should help. For the Preds, the trade looks cap-motivated. Nashville GM Barry Trotz has repeatedly shut down speculation of a rebuild, but the team has to do something. Sitting dead last in the NHL in points, goals scored, and goal differential is not where anyone foresaw them after spending over $100 million in free agency. They can make the case that they get a younger player for $2.5 million less annually. If Barron never pans out in Nashville, it makes little difference.
The deal isn’t a seismic shift that drastically alters the team’s makeup, but I think we might look back on it in a year or two and view it as an under-the-radar win for the Habs. It aligns with the ongoing rebuild, the team departs with a player who no longer fits into the future vision, and they gain a veteran defenceman who can help mentor some of their young talent. Carrier being a Quebec native is an added bonus. I can’t help but wonder if there is another move coming after the holiday roster freeze ends. Specifically, will Hughes make a move for a goaltender?
Dave Woodward: When the Habs dealt Lekhonen, Barron, a first-round pick for the Avalanche, was the centrepiece coming the other way. At the time, Barron was projected as part of their back end on the right side for the foreseeable future. It has not worked out that way.
No prospect’s development is consistently linear but Barron’s play, in his own end in particular, was not improving. There seemed to be an element of panic and certainly a palpable lack of confidence every time Barron had the puck and was pressured in his own end. While Barron was not billed as a steady stay-at-home defensive defender, even offensive rearguards must display a minimum level of defensive competence. And Barron simply didn’t do so. Most breakouts under pressure were adventures when Barron was on the ice.
After spending a good part of last season in Laval, Barron made the team out of camp in part because he was no longer waiver-exempt. Given his play, he was a healthy scratch frequently this year despite being one of the only two right-shot defencemen on the roster. When he was in the lineup, Barron had to be sheltered defensively which limited his minutes and his ability to develop his offensive game (which is his strength). This past week, the Canadiens found an opportunity to trade him straight up for a consistent NHL defender in Carrier and they took it, for good reason.
While this scribbler has not had the chance to watch Carrier in Nashville, the consensus is that he is a steady, reliable NHL defensive defenceman. Carrier was part of the NHL All-Rookie team a few years ago. While he does not have the offensive upside that Barron might yet provide, Carrier will provide some much-needed stability on the back end’s right side. With Savard’s contract expiring this season and the very real possibility that he will be dealt before the trade deadline, Carrier has the opportunity to serve as a stable veteran presence and play around 20 minutes per game for the next few years. With his contract expiring in 2027, Carrier may well serve as a bridge until Reinbacher and Mailloux are ready for the show.
In the short term, the Canadiens have definitely improved with this trade. They acquired a stable veteran defender in exchange for a struggling prospect. Even with the extra cap hit, it was very positive that the Canadiens acquired a potential top-four defender for Barron. A young right side of Barron, Reinbacher, and Mailloux? The addition of an experienced Carrier makes much more sense, especially with Barron encountering so many challenges in his development.
Does it make sense for a rebuilding team to trade a young developing player for a veteran with a cap hit more than $2 million higher than Barron? It does if you are convinced that the player will not be part of the rebuild long-term. Barron had several opportunities and he just did not perform. Of all the Habs’ young defenders, Barron never established an identity or skill set that moved the needle for the team. All of the other members of the defence corps bring something unique to the squad. Barron’s defensive struggles simply precluded him from earning the minutes that would have allowed him to demonstrate his offensive strengths. Perhaps a change of scenery will help him.
Of course, Jayden Struble may be the odd man out of the lineup as a result of this trade, especially with Arber Xhekaj playing much more consistently over the last few weeks. Barron and Struble seemed to be the sixth and seventh defenceman with Struble playing more often than not. It will be interesting to see how the Habs manage Struble if they remain healthy as he’s no longer waiver-exempt.
