Jump to content
dlbalr

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Petry has an NMC until the summer so cross him out unless he requests a trade.

I forgot ... darn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Claude Giroux finishes the season with 102 points. I suppose he isn't as washed up as some suggested when I proposed a trade for him 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems a lot better when not having to play centre... I'll give him that. 

Share this post


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

He seems a lot better when not having to play centre... I'll give him that. 

 

Yeah, the whole point of acquiring him would have been to play him at C, a position at which he had declined precipitously. That's about enough of the "W who we try to play at C" experiment, thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys are talking as if a guy who played center his whole life and just put up 102 points wouldn't be our #1 C. I don't care where those points came from, it'd be better than we have

Share this post


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

You guys are talking as if a guy who played center his whole life and just put up 102 points wouldn't be our #1 C. I don't care where those points came from, it'd be better than we have

You think he would have gotten 102 pts with the guys we have on this team, regardless what position he played?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would he have been our best centre? Sure i but that.

 

Would he have been an 80 point guy and would that have saved this miserable season?  Doubtful on both counts.

Share this post


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

You think he would have gotten 102 pts with the guys we have on this team, regardless what position he played?

 

I missed the part where I said that. I clearly stated he would be the best center on this team. We want and need centers. What's the problem here? 

Share this post


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

 

I missed the part where I said that. I clearly stated he would be the best center on this team. We want and need centers. What's the problem here? 

That’s not really saying much.  There are over 75 centres in the league today that would become the top centre on the habs.

Share this post


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

That’s not really saying much.  There are over 75 centres in the league today that would become the top centre on the habs.

 

Okay. So let's not acquire one of them and continue being one of the worst teams in the league. I really don't get what your point is 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

Okay. So let's not acquire one of them and continue being one of the worst teams in the league. I really don't get what your point is 

What would we have needed to give up to acquire Giroux I wonder, and would that price have been worth it?

 

obviously he has a hell of a lot more value now, but I’m also one who thinks he would have produced far less as Montreal’s top Center.

 

No doubt he’s leagues ahead of any center we have, and he would be a huge upgrade there for us. But at what price ?

Share this post


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

What would we have needed to give up to acquire Giroux I wonder, and would that price have been worth it?

 

obviously he has a hell of a lot more value now, but I’m also one who thinks he would have produced far less as Montreal’s top Center.

 

No doubt he’s leagues ahead of any center we have, and he would be a huge upgrade there for us. But at what price ?

Exactly.  First of all Giroux is no longer a centre - he had three straight years of declining production.  Cost would have been high and he has lousy term left on his deal.  Giving up picks and probably a player like Galchenyuk for an older player with $8.2m for 5 more years would dumb.  Especially for a guy who had three straight years of declining production as a centre.  If Giroux was available cheap, without giving up significant assets and the flyers picked up some of his Salary like the leafs picked up kessel’s salary, or if Giroux was a free agent like Stall was that was signed for a decent $ and terms, it wild have been worth the gamble.  

 

As it is, I’d rather have resigned radulov than give up assets for a higher priced winger with a higher cap hit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 0:43 PM, alfredoh2009 said:

I was looking at the roster and I would definitely trade Plekanec, Hemsky, delaRose, Petry and Lehkonen and commit to tanking the rest of the way; for example by playing Hudon at center the rest of the way. The return should be decent to help us retool.

 

That should get us a young NHL centre, a D prospect and a few extra draft picks to rebuild the pipeline.

(replying to my post :rolleyes:)

Going into the draft, with 4x 2nd round draft picks and 6 picks in the top 100. Assuming we do not get 1st overall on April 28: I would:

I would try to trade a couple of these top picks and one of Lernout, Valiev, Rielly and a throw in for Ekman-Larsson or Fowler to play with Weber:

OE-L/Fowler - Weber

Mete-Petry

Alzner-Juulsen

If not, I would try to sign a free agent among Ian Cole, Hickey or De Haan to play with Petry:

Mete-Weber

Cole/Hickey/De Haan-Petry

Alzner-Juulsen

===

Then I would try really hard to sign Tavares, if that fails I would try to trade for O'Reilly, Duchene, Zibanejad or Carter for a swap of 1st round picks (to the other team's advantage), a 2nd round pick, DeLaRose and one of McCarron or Rychel:

#67-O'Reilly/Duchene/Zibanejad/Carter-#62

#27-#92-#11

#38-#24-#65

#20-#49/#42-#41

#54

 

I think these two trades to fill two holes would improve the team significantly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya with the comments O’Reilly made the other day he should be a big target for MB. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Davehab said:

Ya with the comments O’Reilly made the other day he should be a big target for MB. 

 

Ah the old Mike Cammalleri "Point out the team has a losing attitude and get traded for it"

 

Of course, it's what Bergevin is basically accusing the Habs of having.

Share this post


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

Ya with the comments O’Reilly made the other day he should be a big target for MB. 

 

I think Bergevin has his built-in excuse for when he doesn't get O'Reilly.

 

"He has a losing attitude, and would not help the team."

"Marc, he puts up 60 points on bad teams..."

"Ya, but did you hear what he said about getting used to losing?"

"Marc, he scored more than anyone on the Habs. He's a de facto #1 centre here."

"Bad attitude. Can't win with those guys."

Share this post


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

 

I think Bergevin has his built-in excuse for when he doesn't get O'Reilly.

 

"He has a losing attitude, and would not help the team."

"Marc, he puts up 60 points on bad teams..."

"Ya, but did you hear what he said about getting used to losing?"

"Marc, he scored more than anyone on the Habs. He's a de facto #1 centre here."

"Bad attitude. Can't win with those guys."

I hate the fact that this conversation might actually take place. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny is that Bergevin used to talk about how he wanted guys who would be angry in the locker room after a loss. Which to me is a bad attitude to have. Why dwell on a loss you can't change?

 

But again, it's all weak and flimsy terms that are malleable to anything you want it to be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we need centres, but I'm not a big fan of trading for O'Reilly

 

55-65 point guy. 

 

Signed at over 7 million a year. 

 

I think he's overpaid, and I think Buffalo is going to want huge assets for him, ala what Colorado got for Duchene. 

 

 

I have no interest in that. 

 

Give them a call and see what they want? sure.... If Buffalo is selling him cheap, sure I'll take him.  But I'm not paying a premium for a guy who isn't a true #1 C and I don't think O'Reilly is.  If you don't land Tavares, I'd rather sign Stastny than trade for O'Reilly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many more years does Evgeni Malkin have? How many more years does Alex Ovechkin have? Blake Wheeler? Jamie Benn? Sidney Crosby?  Anze Kopitar? Eric Staal? Claude Giroux? Gosh, it feels like there’s a lot more on the border of 30 plus year olds who can produce quite well.

 

Brad Marchand? I remember when Boston fans wanted to trade him. Older than Pacioretty.

 

I’ve already heard how Ovechkin is done and that Eric Staal is over the hill years ago and yet here they are at 33 scoring 40 plus goals. I strongly disagree that Pacioretty only has two years left in the tank. 

 

I can certainly see how there might be a little more inconsistency in one’s game as they get older from season to season. Heck, Pacioretty already has an off year this year. But it would not surprise me to see Pacioretty have a great year in 4-5 years. 

 

Signing him to a large contract may be a mistake but let’s hear what those numbers and term are first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evgeni Malkin?

Alex Ovechkin?

Sidney Crosby?

Jamie Benn?

 

Pacioretty has never been in their league... its not a fair comparison. Call me when Pacioretty is putting up over a point per game.  Oh wait he's a clear tier below.

 

How about looking at the last few years of Rick Nash, Andrew Ladd, corey perry, erik cole, todd bertuzzi, bobby ryan, milan lucic, marian gaborik, hemsky, matt moulson, kesler, callahan, backes, loui eriksson, spezza, plekanec, etc... 

 

Sure some guys like staal buck the trend.  But you cannot deny a few things.

 

1) there is a risk of him falling off as he ages.

2) far more players fall off as they hit 32, 33, 34 then buck the trend and maintain the same production from their late 20s.

3) the fall off is quicker in forwards than dmen.. and quicker in dmen than goalies.

4) father time is undefeated in these battles.  Sure some take longer than others... but he eventually wins.

 

Pacioretty isnt falling off a cliff tomorrow... but i want no part of a 7 or 8 year contract at big money.

 

It could be an albatross by year 3 or 4.

 

Right now he has big trade value.

 

You have a team in serious need of a re tool.  In serious need of centres and defence and with an abundance of wingers.

 

There will never be a better time to trade him for younger pieces in positions of.need.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am not very good at playing armchair GM. But from going over the 2018 UFA center list and the top league centers that are not concession players,  the choices are not very good. There is only a handful of >30A/50pt centers with over 51FO%

Trading for these 2C centers is within reach of the CH: O'Reilly (bad contract but productive), Zibanejad, Carter, even overpaid Duchene or Stastny, etc

 

To me, it makes more sense to package a middle-6 20 goal winger with draft picks and prospects for one of these guys than to trade away Pacioretti. Just for asset management reasons. Iw we trade Patches we risk depleting the CH prospect pipeline like Gauthier did (and MB did his first year) for short term relief and still no chance for a cup.

 

If Weber/Pacioretti/Petry/Price have 2-3 years of elite production left. I would trade for a better 2C center than Danault to push him down one or two lines. I think the CH would benefit more from landing two solid top 4 LDs than to trade Patches and loose those points from LW. Lehks, Chucky, Byron, Scherbak are 20G wingers, Gally may repeat 30 but most likely will be under that.

 

I do not want to trade Patches unless we go into reset/rebuild mode.

Edited by alfredoh2009
added that MB traded draft picks 1st year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly dont care about faceoff percentage.

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

×