dlbalr

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

6165 posts in this topic

12 hours ago, JGC21 said:

It seems as though MB is playing the waiting game; Radu needs to decide if he'll accept an offer in length for 4-5 years.  If Radu goes sign with the Habs, my guess is Galchenyuk is gone.  What about dealing Chucky to Minny for Brodin or Scandella?

 

Radu - $7M/year

Markov - $5.5M/year

Brodin/Scandella - $4.1/year

 

That leaves $7M+ for Jumbo Joe :)

I'd much rather offer sheet Draisaitl than sign an old jumbo joe.  I think signing Jumbo would be the Briere deal all over again 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I'd much rather offer sheet Draisaitl than sign an old jumbo joe.  I think signing Jumbo would be the Briere deal all over again 

Because Chiarelli said he'd "match  any offer" sent Draisaitl's way, offer sheeting him now would essentially look like an attempt to cap strap the Oilers. That wouldn't sit well with GMs around the league.

 

Its one thing to offer sheet with the hope it's actually your contract. It's different when the expectation is that it will definitely be theirs. 

 

Essentially it looks like a "Have fun with this contract suckers!"

 

The chances of any offer sheets now are slim to none. With contracts like Eberles off the books, Chiarelli can actually back up the claims to match an offer too.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacob De la Rose is a guy who at I think only 19 years old, Michel Therrien was fine placing as a third line centre. And somehow, since that time, he's developed into... not an NHL player? So not good that Bergevin has to acquire fourth line grinders because De la Rose isn't good enough for an NHL spot?

 

Maybe it's a player. Maybe Montreal is constantly drafting players that keep regressing into their flaws and continually miss their mark in development. It's just really bad luck. He certainly wasn't a bust in scouting. Last Word on Sports had him #34, with other places having him as a first round pick. I trust LWOS' scouting and this was their analysis on DLR:

 

Quote

There are a lot of tools in de la Rose’s toolbox in the offensive zone.  He has great stickhandling and very soft hands.  He goes to the net and can score goals in tight on rebounds and tip ins.  He also has a good wrist soft, and his release is decent.  He’s an absolute beast on the boards and just loves physical contact, often being the initiator.  De la Rose has shown good vision and passing skills on occasion as well.  There is a huge “But” here though, and its that despite showing flashes of all these tools, de la Rose has not been as productive as he could be.

 

How did he lean so heavily into the, "Not as productive" and where did this offensive flash go? The physical contact? The vision? It all points to development.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DON said:

Names?

Which are the ones since 2012 that should be regular NHLers and arnt? 

 

If you have 20 players and each has a 10% chance of making an impact the NHL and you produce 0 NHLers, its a FAILURE of the development team. 

 

Its not about one individual player... its about the fact he has been given a number of prospects and not been able to succeed with any of them. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DON said:

Gallagher did, Beaulieu did, Condon did, Andrighetto did, Hudon and McCarron likely will. Lernout, Lindgren likely 50-50, but were long shots to begin with.

 

 

Gallagher played less than 1/2 a season, he was only there cause its a lockout. 

 

Andrighetto, Hudon, McCarron, Lernout, Beaulieu.... not one has proven yet that they are a top 4 defenceman or top 6 forward ...

 

Lefebvre doesn't develop the goalies.... he's not a goalie coach.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Jacob De la Rose is a guy who at I think only 19 years old, Michel Therrien was fine placing as a third line centre. And somehow, since that time, he's developed into... not an NHL player? So not good that Bergevin has to acquire fourth line grinders because De la Rose isn't good enough for an NHL spot?

 

Maybe it's a player. Maybe Montreal is constantly drafting players that keep regressing into their flaws and continually miss their mark in development. It's just really bad luck. He certainly wasn't a bust in scouting. Last Word on Sports had him #34, with other places having him as a first round pick. I trust LWOS' scouting and this was their analysis on DLR:

 

 

How did he lean so heavily into the, "Not as productive" and where did this offensive flash go? The physical contact? The vision? It all points to development.

 

JDLR plus Leblanc and Hudon.... are massive red flags on Lefebvre's coaching.  Massive.  You've already done a good job on Hudon. 

At 20 years old Leblanc was an NHL player with 7 goals and 7 assists for 14 points in 40 games.  He did not look out of place.  He didn't make the team the next year cause he Gallagher passed him, and Leblanc was AHL eligible and Galchenyuk was not.  They wanted to keep their new third overall pick... okay fair enough, but he was still really close to NHL ready.  What happened next?  He regressed in every AHL season under Lefebvre.  Didn't get better, he spent the next three years getting worse. 

 

Next Hudon..... in juniors he was an elite defensive player.  Picked twice for Team Canada at the World Juniors and given the role of being the shut down forward on the team.  Went to the AHL, his scoring kept happening.  His defensive game has stalled and gone to shit.  He's a defensive liability which is why he can't get an NHL job despite great AHL scoring.  How does this happen.  How is a kid excellent defensively at one level and makes no progression on that aspect of his game in the AHL. 

 

1 guy... maybe its the player.  3 guys?  I look at the coach. ... the fact he's developing no one?  DAMN RIGHT its the coach. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leblanc always bothered me and I'm glad more are seeing it.

 

He was an excellent bottom six in a bad season. He got his points, he worked the corners extremely well, defensively smart, brought good offence, he reminded me a bit of a smaller Lapierre with more spark.

 

Maybe Louis never had it, but he certainly looked like he had it in 11-12. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So rumor is that mcjesus is close to a contract valued at 13 and change per year. Might be fun to re discuss the offer sheet now. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe this is even a debate. I'm surprised that there are even two people(Don & Bergevin) who think Lefebvre has done even an adequate job. Unless I have the chance to talk to Bergevin, I'm not even going to bother to list all of Lefebvre's failures. -

2

Share this post


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

So rumor is that mcjesus is close to a contract valued at 13 and change per year. Might be fun to re discuss the offer sheet now. 

 

1. Edmonton can afford McDavid and Leon. They just couldn't afford McDavid + Leon + another big contract, which is why the Subban rumours fell through.

2. You pay your stars, especially McDavid.

3. Bergevin is an old boy in the old boys network. He ain't gonna offer sheet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

1. Edmonton can afford McDavid and Leon. They just couldn't afford McDavid + Leon + another big contract, which is why the Subban rumours fell through.

2. You pay your stars, especially McDavid.

3. Bergevin is an old boy in the old boys network. He ain't gonna offer sheet.

 

If Mcdavid makes 13+ then they really can't afford Draisaitl at 10. 

Chicago pays 21 to their top two stars and struggles with the cap.

 

They have money committed to Lucic and will have to pay Larson and Talbot.

 

Get rid of Pleks and offer Leon 10. If they match then they match.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

1. Edmonton can afford McDavid and Leon. They just couldn't afford McDavid + Leon + another big contract, which is why the Subban rumours fell through.

2. You pay your stars, especially McDavid.

3. Bergevin is an old boy in the old boys network. He ain't gonna offer sheet.

I don't see how they can afford both.  They will eventually have to get and pay for defence to be a serious contender.  They also are paying Lucic. who I'm sure has a no trade, as well as nugent-Hopkins.  They can probably move Hopkins.  But they don't have the luxury of having a guy like Keith at a bargain cap hit.

 

buy yeah, I doubt if MB has he stones to do an offer sheet.  A guy that can't fire his useless bum buddies isn't going to rock the boat with his peers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don't see how they can afford both.  They will eventually have to get and pay for defence to be a serious contender.  They also are paying Lucic. who I'm sure has a no trade, as well as nugent-Hopkins.  They can probably move Hopkins.  But they don't have the luxury of having a guy like Keith at a bargain cap hit.

Pens just made the demonstration that you can win a SC  with a defense that goes

 

Cole-Schultz

Maata-Daley

Dumoulin-Hainsey

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

 

If Mcdavid makes 13+ then they really can't afford Draisaitl at 10. 

Chicago pays 21 to their top two stars and struggles with the cap.

 

They have money committed to Lucic and will have to pay Larson and Talbot.

 

Get rid of Pleks and offer Leon 10. If they match then they match.

 

13 million is 17% of the cap

 

In 2007 the Penguins signed Sidney Crosby for 17% of the cap at 8.7 per season. 

In 2008 the Penguins gave an Identical contract to Malkin. 

in 2009 they won the cup. 

 

 

Will they win the cup? who knows... but contract wise, this plays out like Pittsburgh.  The guy who will eventually (and not this off-season necessarily) but eventually must go is the third line C... RNH becomes their Jordan Staal trade. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

buy yeah, I doubt if MB has he stones to do an offer sheet.  A guy that can't fire his useless bum buddies isn't going to rock the boat with his peers.

 

He reportedly had one ready (or very close to it) a couple of years ago for Brandon Saad which wound up facilitating his trade to Columbus.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about trading Draisaitl for Galchenyuk?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MacKinnon

 

Pacioretty Shaw Davidson Juulsen McNiven 1st 2018 1st 2019 1st 2020(conditional pending #67 extension)

 

(Where's the old smash your head on the wall emoji when you need it lol)

 

Radulov 4yr 6.33

Galchenyuk 5yr 5.5

Markov 1yr 4.75

Kulikov 3yr 4.75

Price 7yr 8.5

 

Drouin MacKinnon Galchenyuk

Lehkonen Danault Radulov

Byron Plekanec Gallagher

Hudon delaRose McCarron

Martinsen          Mitchell

 

Kulikov Weber

Markov Petry

Schlemko Benn

Jerabek

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nihilz said:

(Where's the old smash your head on the wall emoji when you need it lol)

 

Right here: :wall:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dlbalr said:

 

Right here: :wall:

 

Much obliged.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

If you have 20 players and each has a 10% chance of making an impact the NHL and you produce 0 NHLers, its a FAILURE of the development team. 

 

Its not about one individual player... its about the fact he has been given a number of prospects and not been able to succeed with any of them. 

So not a one off top of mind...

If you have 20 3-4-5 or later rounders, should get 5 NHL regulars...Andrighetto-Hudon-Gallagher-Condon...so 4 is not zero...it likely is above average.

Tinordi- Collberg-Thrower and likely Fucale they missed for sure, but not a development issue..were they? Beaulieu-McCarron-dela Rose, Lehkonen all should be NHLers.

Scherbak unlikely but Juulsen most seem more positive. So say 5 of 9 1st-2nd rounders again is OK and above expected %.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DON said:

So not a one off top of mind...

If you have 20 3-4-5 or later rounders, should get 5 NHL regulars...Andrighetto-Hudon-Gallagher-Condon...so 4 is not zero...it likely is above average.

Tinordi- Collberg-Thrower and likely Fucale they missed for sure, but not a development issue..were they? Beaulieu-McCarron-dela Rose, Lehkonen all should be NHLers.

Scherbak unlikely but Juulsen most seem more positive. So say 5 of 9 1st-2nd rounders again is OK and above expected %.

Sounds like an agree to disagree situation.

 

Not sure why you're bringing up guys like Gallagher (30ish games) and Lehkonen (ZERO) as evidence that Lefebrve can develop players.

 

To be clear, Lefebrve is who many us are saying needs to change.

 

goaltenders again, are not likely affected by the head coach as much as a goaltender coach, so they too are poor evidence. 

 

Further, simply making it to the NHL for a game or two isn't an indicator of successful development. As Commandant (I think) outlined above, Leblanc and JDLR are perfect examples, as they actually regressed under their time with Lefebrve.

 

Few if any seem to have actually flourished under him.

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Leblanc always bothered me and I'm glad more are seeing it.

 

He was an excellent bottom six in a bad season. He got his points, he worked the corners extremely well, defensively smart, brought good offence, he reminded me a bit of a smaller Lapierre with more spark.

 

Maybe Louis never had it, but he certainly looked like he had it in 11-12. 

 

He was another Pateryn however, with the mouthy girlfriend on Twitter. That didn't sit well, even though I thought it was bogus he was first cut from camp.

 

The development issues also stem from Bergevin being the last exit for 48 miles on the highway. How many players called Montreal home for the last time? Douglas Murray, Frankie Boo, Briere was effectively done, Manny Malhotra. Mike Weaver, he signed Travis Moen's last deal, George Parros. I'm not done! Jeff Halpern, Colby Armstrong. Hold the phone! Stay with me now. Sergei Gonchar, Bryan Allen. Tom Gilbert has played 18 games in the NHL since the Habs. Tomas Fleischmann, Mike Brown, John frigging Scott and Victor Bartley didn't play this year. Not finished. Alex Semin. Steve Ott just retired. Does anybody see Torrey Mitchell getting another deal? How about David Schlemko.

 

As you can see...development issues are also created when a GM plugs the bottom of his roster with the last squeeze of the towel from middling journeymen. Most of of these guys are hardly hasbeens. Plenty of players, and Brad Marchand is the best example, spend time on the lower lines learning to play in the NHL. They've been too conservative and asked too much of their young players to make the league, imo. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Meller93 said:

Sounds like an agree to disagree situation.

 

Not sure why you're bringing up guys like Gallagher (30ish games) and Lehkonen (ZERO) and evidence that Lefebrve can develop players.

 

To be clear, Lefebrve is who many us are saying needs to change.

 

goaltenders again, are not likely affected by the head coach as much as a goaltender coach, so they too are poor evidence. 

 

Further, simply making it to the NHL for a game or two isn't an indicator of successful development. As Commandant (I think) outlined above, Leblanc and JDLe are perfect examples, as they actually regressed under their time with Lefebrve.

 

Few if any seem to have actually flourished under him.

 

 

I'm not in on the debate on this one as I can see how our team is lacking in the area but the other side is arguing that Beaulieu, Andrighetto and McCaron haven't proven that they belong in a top 6 or 4 role and using it as a way to blame management for our developmental issues.

 

Andrighetto was on the top line in Colorado and spent time in the top 6 on the Habs and Beaulieu has proven he can play in the top 4. I'm ready for some advanced stat to prove me wrong but we'll see if he plays in the top 4 in Buffalo. I get the feeling he will. 

 

Finally, McCaron as a player was never projected to be in the top 6 by most posters here, including the one who mentioned it, and so why even bring that name up as a failure of development?

 

I haven't been against our coaches and actually I'm prepared to be harder on Julien than I was on Therrien, but the fact that Andrighetto played on the top line in Colorado indicates (yes, a weak team) just as much of a coaching issue in the developmental area as it does in the managerial area. They're the ones who choose who gets played in what role. The lines appear to be getting blurred.

0

Share this post


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

I'm not in on the debate on this one as I can see how our team is lacking in the area but the other side is arguing that Beaulieu, Andrighetto and McCaron haven't proven that they belong in a top 6 or 4 role and using it as a way to blame management for our developmental issues.

 

Andrighetto was on the top line in Colorado and spent time in the top 6 on the Habs and Beaulieu has proven he can play in the top 4. I'm ready for some advanced stat to prove me wrong but we'll see if he plays in the top 4 in Buffalo. I get the feeling he will. 

 

Finally, McCaron as a player was never projected to be in the top 6 by most posters here, including the one who mentioned it, and so why even bring that name up as a failure of development?

 

I haven't been against our coaches and actually I'm prepared to be harder on Julien than I was on Therrien, but the fact that Andrighetto played on the top line in Colorado indicates (yes, a weak team) just as much of a coaching issue in the developmental area as it does in the managerial area. They're the ones who choose who gets played in what role. The lines appear to be getting blurred.

I agree that at the NHL level there might be a lack of opportunity at times too, namely Hudon and Andrighetto, as well as a small margin of error for guys like Beaulieu and Galchenyuk. That could be half the reason why is seems like so few are making the jump; lack of opportunity. When you have about 700 Flynn's, Kings, Otts etc in the system, it's hard to find a spot for your youth. To be fair though, Colorado had about three wins last season, so I don't think Andrighetto on the first line exactly made a winner.

 

Still, it's hard not to see how development on the farm has been at least not good. Guys like Hudon, Ghetto, McCarron, Beaulieu all came out of junior on the heels of great production. If they actually all dried up that would be a clear red flag. Instead they've seen marginal improvement.

 

Even if you simply look at Lefebrve's record, it's atrocious. With the not so bad talent that comes from junior, we should at least see a winning team. Losing can't be good for development.

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Meller93 said:

I agree that at the NHL level there might be a lack of opportunity at times too, namely Hudon and Andrighetto, as well as a small margin of error for guys like Beaulieu and Galchenyuk. That could be half the reason why is seems like so few are making the jump; lack of opportunity. When you have about 700 Flynn's, Kings, Otts etc in the system, it's hard to find a spot for your youth. 

 

 

This. 

 

I think it's more of an organizational thing than a terrible AHL coach thing, even though I do think he is terrible. The kids cant crack the lineup because they are competing against more well rounded vets. And when they do get called up, the vets move up in the lineup and the kids play bottom 6 roles. The result is icing arguably the most competitive team they can that night, but the long term effects seem to be showing now. 

0

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