Jump to content
dlbalr

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

Recommended Posts

xXx..CK..xXx    146
16 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

 

Amen.  He should be a right winger, with orders to shoot the puck every chance he gets.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, he's our modern day Kovalev. 

 

With that being said, I'm not sure why trading Pacioretty is thinking outside of the box and trading Galchenyuk isn't. The best argument I can see is that Galchenyuk is younger and was also a higher draft pick. I'm not saying I wouldn't trade Pacioretty, but I wouldn't be out there shopping him around either. I'm happy we have him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    606
1 hour ago, sbhatt said:

 

Amen.  He should be a right winger, with orders to shoot the puck every chance he gets.

 

I'd still give him every opportunity at C first, RW next.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    167
7 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

I'd still give him every opportunity at C first, RW next.... 

100% agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I've said it before and I'll say it again, he's our modern day Kovalev. 

 

With that being said, I'm not sure why trading Pacioretty is thinking outside of the box and trading Galchenyuk isn't. The best argument I can see is that Galchenyuk is younger and was also a higher draft pick. I'm not saying I wouldn't trade Pacioretty, but I wouldn't be out there shopping him around either. I'm happy we have him. 

 

Pacioretty's a fine player, but that was sort of my point. Galy is widely perceived as trade bait, Patches isn't. Therefore, Machine is 'thinking outside the box.'

 

As for the argument over whether Galy should be C, LW, or RW, I cannot believe that after four seasons we are still having these discussions about this player. What a pathetic state of affairs, an indictment of the Habs's handling of him for sure.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nihilz    30

Pacioretty's value with 2 years left on that contract is huge. His next contract will be to hefty to carry at wing with Price's cap hit. Max's salary has to be shifted to center.

 

Max is the organization's best chance at trading for a bonafied #1 center. Balance the roster. Wing depth would be sufficient/adequate.

 

He has been a prolific goal scorer. But it's my opinion that he is simply a finisher in a system. And, others will be able to finish. I think if the system gets balanced, more scoring chances will arise throughout and better depth and chemistry will prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BCHabnut    161

Max at close to 40 goals every year with that cap hit could carry some clout in the trade market. Especially for a team with not a lot of money. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    419
1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

 

 

As for the argument over whether Galy should be C, LW, or RW, I cannot believe that after four seasons we are still having these discussions about this player. What a pathetic state of affairs, an indictment of the Habs's handling of him for sure.

 

Every single coach, trainer, GM, water boy, teammate, administrator and girlfriend screwed him over. If only everybody didn't handle him the way they did, he would be a solidified #1 center by now. He deserves zero blame for where he is. 

 

32 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Max at close to 40 goals every year with that cap hit could carry some clout in the trade market. Especially for a team with not a lot of money. 

 

I would love the Habs to try to trade for a perennial 30+ goal scorer with a below average cap hit.......oh wait 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BCHabnut    161

Haha. Good point. I was thinking about a Tavares type trade. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146
33 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

Every single coach, trainer, GM, water boy, teammate, administrator and girlfriend screw him over. If only everybody didn't handle him the way they did, he would be a solidified #1 center by now. He deserves zero blame for where he is. 

I think the fact we're talking about it isn't really his fault. This whole thing has been played out to make it seem as though the center position is some sort of higher achievement than playing wing.

 

I don't know if it's the organization, the media, or the fan base who have created this narrative but it sure as hell ain't him. Galchenyuk should have either been given an extended look at center or when he was moved to wing, it should have been stated that the plan moving forward is to have him play wing. Not only that, but they better mean it when they say that and they didn't need to make it out as bough it's because he's not capable of playing center.

 

Galchenyuk has been a fine player in general and I personally don't give a damn where he plays. He's actually produced wherever he plays anyway. The problem is that the organization has a clear need at the center position and they still didn't put him there. I understand what you are saying and I guess the argument from your end would be that it's because he hasn't himself proven that he can play center effectively, but as far as I'm concerned, he better not be a center at the beginning of next year because if he is, my only conclusion will have to be that the coach made a mistake these last playoffs by sticking him on 4th line wing. Heck, even if he starts the year at wing and moves to center at some point during the season, I won't really be able to understand how he could "improve" so much at the position in a few months after having been see-sawing back for 4 years.

 

Regardless of his play, there has definitely been a mishandling of the situation as well because there is a clear confusion as to where he belongs. Even playing well, which he has over these past 4-5 years it has happened and Galchenyuk has no control over that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy at work is big Oilers fan - suggests Nurse and Draisaitl for Galchenyuk and Sergachev 

 

interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

Guy at work is big Oilers fan - suggests Nurse and Draisaitl for Galchenyuk and Sergachev 

 

interesting

He doesn't know how good Leon is. I run with that offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    606

I'd do that too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PMAC    81
7 hours ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

Guy at work is big Oilers fan - suggests Nurse and Draisaitl for Galchenyuk and Sergachev 

 

interesting

I hope he has Chirarelli's ear😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeLassister    276

Ok.  There is a player that I want bad.  He has some serious potential to turn out to be a Brandon Gallagher type of player, but with waaaay more speed.

 

 

From Tampa Bay : Mathieu Joseph

From Habs :  What would they want, what would it take ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dlbalr    674
2 hours ago, JoeLassister said:

Ok.  There is a player that I want bad.  He has some serious potential to turn out to be a Brandon Gallagher type of player, but with waaaay more speed.

 

From Tampa Bay : Mathieu Joseph

From Habs :  What would they want, what would it take ?

 

The challenge in these circumstances is that the offer has to be high enough that it's worthier than the role they anticipate the player to be.  So if Tampa envisions Joseph to be a good bottom six guy (personally, I don't think he has a real shot at a top six role), the return needs to be better than what a good bottom six forward goes for.  That's already a second round pick before factoring in seven years of team control and lots of cost control as well.  So now you have to beat that 2nd rounder.  Is that a 1st rounder?  Two 2nd's?  At that point, that's way too high of a return to justify from Montreal's standpoint.  (And if they think he has top six potential, you're probably looking at a 1st rounder plus something else which, again, is way too high.)  

 

Generally prospects aren't dealt for picks before they actually turn pro.  They're either included in a deal for an established NHL player (I don't foresee Montreal entering selling mode which takes this off the table) or for another prospect, often one at a greater position of need.  They need some defence in the system but I wouldn't give up Sergachev or Juulsen for Joseph and I don't think Tampa would take any of the other prospects.  It's not a great fit trade-wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
REV-G    16
On 2017-05-22 at 7:57 PM, Commandant said:

 

I'd still give him every opportunity at C first, RW next.... 

I agree totally. So let me add this out of the box suggestion [a touch of sarcasm]. If we need a first line C and we have none in the minors ready, and it's so difficult or expensive to get one...if we have one that is at least close...why don't we hire a former top C who knows what has to be done every shift and who has some coaching aspirations and then put Chucky in the top line C position and have this specialized coach work with him after every game. 

 

I see our goalie coach out on the ice with computers and video's showing Price certain things, why don't we do the same thing with our highly paid and potentially very important 1st line C candidate. Wouldn't that be a cheaper and better option than selling the farm to get someone who may end up not being as good as what we already have?

 

Sports teams all over the world from the Olympics on up to professional sports have specialized coaches and do this all the time. Doesn't that make sense?? 

 

It's creative and it's called developing what we have! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    167
1 minute ago, REV-G said:

I agree totally. So let me add this out of the box suggestion [a touch of sarcasm]. If we need a first line C and we have none in the minors ready, and it's so difficult or expensive to get one...if we have one that is at least close...why don't we hire a former top C who knows what has to be done every shift and who has some coaching aspirations and then put Chucky in the top line C position and have this specialized coach work with him after every game. 

 

I see our goalie coach out on the ice with computers and video's showing Price certain things, why don't we do the same thing with our highly paid and potentially very important 1st line C candidate. Wouldn't that be a cheaper and better option than selling the farm to get someone who may end up not being as good as what we already have?

 

Sports teams all over the world from the Olympics on up to professional sports have specialized coaches and do this all the time. Doesn't that make sense?? 

 

It's creative and it's called developing what we have! 

Haven't you heard it's the job of coaching staff to just win games, not develop players.  If galchenyuk is not ready to be a centre and can't magically make the transition from wing to centre on his own, than he shouldn't be considered as a centre.  Just like if  he can't produce against weaker competition on the 4th line, he obviously is not good enough to be in the top 6.

 

besides MB doesn't have any former buddies to give a job as a consultant to galchenyuk (all his buddies are grunts), even if they did want to help him develop.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habsfan1989    4

Call me crazy but are we doing to galchenyuk what the leafs did to kadri early on in his career?

 

the leafs all most blow kadri's career by not developing him probably. But now under mike he has turned into a good two way player.

 

i just see us developing galchenyuk the wrong way much like what the leafs did to kadri. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    606
14 minutes ago, Habsfan1989 said:

Call me crazy but are we doing to galchenyuk what the leafs did to kadri early on in his career?

 

the leafs all most blow kadri's career by not developing him probably. But now under mike he has turned into a good two way player.

 

i just see us developing galchenyuk the wrong way much like what the leafs did to kadri. 

 

Good post. 

 

I said the same thing a few months ago.  Hopefully Julien turns him around like Babcock did to Kadri.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scott462    55

Both are good old school coaches and Julien only had a couple months to work with him and he has said he wants to work with him.

 

Hopefully it works out for everyone the way it's working out with Kadri in Toronto 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BCHabnut    161
1 hour ago, Habsfan1989 said:

Call me crazy but are we doing to galchenyuk what the leafs did to kadri early on in his career?

 

the leafs all most blow kadri's career by not developing him probably. But now under mike he has turned into a good two way player.

 

i just see us developing galchenyuk the wrong way much like what the leafs did to kadri. 

The Kadri comparison is a very good one. You have to wonder how much of the development is coaching and hope much is personality and general intelligence of the player. I am still hopeful with Galchenyuk. At the end of this season, he was 5th in career points among players 23 and under. And only a few points separated 2nd from 5th. Is to bad Montreal doesn't have a Hossa type winger who could insulate his defensive liabilities and mentor defensive play on ice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146
3 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

The Kadri comparison is a very good one. You have to wonder how much of the development is coaching and hope much is personality and general intelligence of the player. I am still hopeful with Galchenyuk. At the end of this season, he was 5th in career points among players 23 and under. And only a few points separated 2nd from 5th. Is to bad Montreal doesn't have a Hossa type winger who could insulate his defensive liabilities and mentor defensive play on ice. 

If Plekanec could have been good for anything last year I'd assume it could have been this. At least the defensive mentor part.

 

I think the whole Galchenyuk thing is overblown. He's scored some big game winning goals for us and had an injury riddled season. I am a little troubled by how Julien handled Galchenyuk since being with us but I'm willing to see how a full season plays out.

 

I expect good things from Galchenyuk next season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

If Plekanec could have been good for anything last year I'd assume it could have been this. At least the defensive mentor part.

 

I think the whole Galchenyuk thing is overblown. He's scored some big game winning goals for us and had an injury riddled season. I am a little troubled by how Julien handled Galchenyuk since being with us but I'm willing to see how a full season plays out.

 

I expect good things from Galchenyuk next season. 

 

That's a reasonable expectation. The kid can play. What's irksome is, first, the demotion during the playoffs - which was bizarre then, and remains bizarre in retrospect, given that the team could not score its way out of a paper bag - as well as the fact that the organization still has no idea if he should be a C or a W. If the team is going to fill holes, then it first needs to define what those holes are. If Galy is a C, then we need to add one top-6 C. If he's not, then we need to at two. All this prevaricating makes a major difference to what the FW configuration will look like and what needs to be done about it.

 

It also doesn't help that Galy looked completely lost under Julien. Yes, that may well have been injury-related. Or it may speak to a young man who is just lost, period.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146
6 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

That's a reasonable expectation. The kid can play. What's irksome is, first, the demotion during the playoffs - which was bizarre then, and remains bizarre in retrospect, given that the team could not score its way out of a paper bag - as well as the fact that the organization still has no idea if he should be a C or a W. If the team is going to fill holes, then it first needs to define what those holes are. If Galy is a C, then we need to add one top-6 C. If he's not, then we need to at two. All this prevaricating makes a major difference to what the FW configuration will look like and what needs to be done about it.

 

It also doesn't help that Galy looked completely lost under Julien. Yes, that may well have been injury-related. Or it may speak to a young man who is just lost, period.

 

 

I agree and I think as it stands, the answer is to play Galchenyuk as a top 6 center and to acquire another top 6 center. I feel as though Julien didn't really think he had a weak top 6 with Danault and Plekanec because of the past success he had with Plekanec as well as all the things he probably heard from his Bruins' players when they faced him. The fact is that while there can be an argument made that neither Plekanec nor Danault should have been in the top 6, I think there's no doubt that both of them should not have been in the top 6 simultaneously. I guess from the coach's perspective Galchenyuk-Danault or Galchenyuk-Plekanec was no better than Danault-Plekanec but I think it is. Galchenyuk scored the game winning goal in overtime in our last regular season game and had 3 points in his last 5 playoff games. He was still producing to an extent. 

 

Your statement is the only reason I would ever consider trading him even though I think he'll have a good year. Although I used to think he could be used in a versatile way, he seems to need some consistency. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    28
20 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I agree and I think as it stands, the answer is to play Galchenyuk as a top 6 center

Is one answer, but maybe not correct one. If he pumps in 30+ goals as a LWer instead of at centre, is that so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×