Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

If Tavares wants up to $15M, he can get it from the Islanders. They will pay it to him. He took a discount for them last time. 

 

If he's going to free agency and it's for a Cup he's going to take less to make it work. We're not a team he's going to play for in order to win a Cup.

 

If he's going to free agency to find a new home he's taking as much as he can get, which will be a 7 year $84M-$105M deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

If Tavares wants up to $15M, he can get it from the Islanders. They will pay it to him. He took a discount for them last time. 

 

If he's going to free agency and it's for a Cup he's going to take less to make it work. We're not a team he's going to play for in order to win a Cup.

 

If he's going to free agency to find a new home he's taking as much as he can get, which will be a 7 year $84M-$105M deal.

I think he’d be nuts to resign with the islanders.  MB must have taken lessons form Snow, because it makes zero sense on how either of them still have jobs. 

 

If he wants to stay in the nyc area, he’d be much better off signing with NJ.  Much better chance of winning there than with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I think he’d be nuts to resign with the islanders.  MB must have taken lessons form Snow, because it makes zero sense on how either of them still have jobs. 

 

If he wants to stay in the nyc area, he’d be much better off signing with NJ.  Much better chance of winning there than with us.

 

I don't know what Ledecky is waiting for. I know Snow is close with Wang but Wang is now only a minority owner. Ledecky and Malkin are majority owners. Maybe he's really good at selling himself as the guy, but I feel like if Tavares felt Snow was the problem, Snow would be fired already.

 

The Devils are indeed his best bet in the NY area, since he hates the Rangers, but nobody has a clue what he wants to do and anyone who says they know are liars. He's so far giving up less info than even Stamkos did, and with Stamkos people speculated and made up a thousand reasons why he wanted to leave Tampa, only for him to actually want to stay there more than anything. Tavares has been a very loyal Islander, and I feel he does want to stay and be a franchise player with them, but something is holding him back. I've heard it used to be the arena, and Ledecky went to Tavares before anyone else when the deal in Belmont was approved. So that's done, and so there's gotta be something else. Everyone has said it isn't money because if it was money the deal would be done. Isles will pay him anything to stay. Whatever it is, we won't know until he signs elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Commandant said:

With the way the NHL has gone with the 5 day period for contacting players before July 1st, no I would not trade for a UFA's rights

 

If both player and team agree they'd want to go 8 years instead of 7, trading for rights would be worthwhile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Trizzak said:

 

If both player and team agree they'd want to go 8 years instead of 7, trading for rights would be worthwhile.

 

You can't sign a player to 8 years unless you own their rights prior to the trade deadline. 

 

A trade for rights at the draft doesn't give you the ability to go 8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

You could do a sign and trade, the Isles sign for 8 years, and then you trade for him.

 

But this has never been something done in the NHL. 

Thats more NBA so they can save on the cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more I'd like to trade the 3rd pick to fill a hole down the middle. It's the best bargaining chip that we have and the most surefire way to finally fix the never ending problem. Players that I would target with such a proposition:

 

Draisatl

Patrick

Barzal

Nylander

Barkov

Dubois (Although Columbus needs centers as bad as the Habs)

 

In some of those instances there would be other pieces involved. And yes I know that it is a terrible thought trading such a high pick, but we can have all of the elite wingers in the world and the team will never go anywhere without some centers. No, trading Pacioretty isn't going to get one. Either is packaging a bunch of mediocre players. You have to give up value to get value. I am also open to hearing a different and realistic way of acquiring a quality center or two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, illWill said:

The more I think about it the more I'd like to trade the 3rd pick to fill a hole down the middle. It's the best bargaining chip that we have and the most surefire way to finally fix the never ending problem. Players that I would target with such a proposition:

 

Draisatl

Patrick

Barzal

Nylander

Barkov

Dubois (Although Columbus needs centers as bad as the Habs)

 

In some of those instances there would be other pieces involved. And yes I know that it is a terrible thought trading such a high pick, but we can have all of the elite wingers in the world and the team will never go anywhere without some centers. No, trading Pacioretty isn't going to get one. Either is packaging a bunch of mediocre players. You have to give up value to get value. I am also open to hearing a different and realistic way of acquiring a quality center or two. 

 

If you could get one of those centres, yes I'd trade the pick.  If i could get a guy who is established and under the age of 22, sure. 

I guess I don't see a single one of those players as available though.  Teams don't often trade young and established centres for draft picks. And yes I know you'd add more, but the draft pick is the centrepiece of the deal. 

If someone is willing to talk about those guys, of course you listen. 

I still think the best way to get a centre is trading Pacioretty for a high-end centre prospect.  

LA - Vilardi - season ends in a 4 game sweep, they don't score enough goals
Anaheim - Steel - season ends in a sweep, they don't score enough goals. 
St. Louis - Thomas- miss the playoffs, they didn't have enough secondary offence behind the Tarasenko - Schenn - Schwartz line.
Arizona - D. Strome - do they want to accelerate the rebuild?

Winnipeg - Roslovic - a cup contender, if they don't win it, do they want to add one more piece?

Philly - Frost - ready to take the next step, again issue in that they didn't have scoring beyond the first line. 

Florida - Borgstrom - barely missed the playoffs. Tallon already got replaced once by that owner, does he feel pressure to win now?

Vegas - Suzuki or Glass - got good way before they expected to. Free agents in Perron and Neal. Do they want another NHL ready piece?


Those are teams and players I'd target.  They might not want to deal either, but i think its a bigger possibility than teams giving up a Barzal, or Barkov, etc... who are already centre pieces of their club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, illWill said:

The more I think about it the more I'd like to trade the 3rd pick to fill a hole down the middle. It's the best bargaining chip that we have and the most surefire way to finally fix the never ending problem. Players that I would target with such a proposition:

 

Draisatl

Patrick

Barzal

Nylander

Barkov

Dubois (Although Columbus needs centers as bad as the Habs)

 

In some of those instances there would be other pieces involved. And yes I know that it is a terrible thought trading such a high pick, but we can have all of the elite wingers in the world and the team will never go anywhere without some centers. No, trading Pacioretty isn't going to get one. Either is packaging a bunch of mediocre players. You have to give up value to get value. I am also open to hearing a different and realistic way of acquiring a quality center or two. 

 

What about Patches AND the pick? A heavy price, but that kind of offer just might shake lose a Draisaitl type...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is crazy. “Team x doesn’t score enough goals so they would be interested in Pacioretty”. What was the Habs problem

again? I’m assuming our team won’t need to score goals until “the young kids are finally ready.”

 

I’m actually even more against trading the top

3 pick because the returns listed there are not the likely return teams would offer. One of the reasons I’ve been constantly arguing against these trade proposals are because they are proposals that are either clearly better for us, or clearly better for the other team.

 

I don’t believe Pacioretty, with one year left on his contract, would be of any enticement to the Oilers in a trade for Draisaitl. Some people argue that Montreal will not have even a chance at winning the cup next year. I see even a less of a chance for that Edmonton team, even with McDavid. They are not going to trade away Draisaitl for one year of Pacioretty, even if the 3rd overall is included. 

 

Edmonton also has the 10th overall pick so it’s not like they are drafting incredibly deep. In any case, a more likely trade between the teams would include a swap of draft picks along with a few less important pieces than Draisaitl and Pacioretty.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

What about Patches AND the pick? A heavy price, but that kind of offer just might shake lose a Draisaitl type...

 

I don't know if I like that particular deal per se, but I definitely would be behind the premise of a deal like that. By any means necessary though should be the mantra going into this off season to get a center. Actually I probably would do that deal if we missed out on Tavares. 

 

15 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

This is crazy. “Team x doesn’t score enough goals so they would be interested in Pacioretty”. What was the Habs problem

again? I’m assuming our team won’t need to score goals until “the young kids are finally ready.”

 

I’m actually even more against trading the top

3 pick because the returns listed there are not the likely return teams would offer. One of the reasons I’ve been constantly arguing against these trade proposals are because they are proposals that are either clearly better for us, or clearly better for the other team.

 

I don’t believe Pacioretty, with one year left on his contract, would be of any enticement to the Oilers in a trade for Draisaitl. Some people argue that Montreal will not have even a chance at winning the cup next year. I see even a less of a chance for that Edmonton team, even with McDavid. They are not going to trade away Draisaitl for one year of Pacioretty, even if the 3rd overall is included. 

 

Edmonton also has the 10th overall pick so it’s not like they are drafting incredibly deep. In any case, a more likely trade between the teams would include a swap of draft picks along with a few less important pieces than Draisaitl and Pacioretty.

 

 

 

The problem to me isn't necessarily the lack of ability on this team, it's the configuration of it. We have way more wingers than we know what to do with and many of them play a similar style. I am sick and tired of just being able to throw any player on any line at any position at any given time. I want defined roles and lines on my team. And if a scoring forward gets injured I don't want a 4th line scrub to replace him on the scoring line, while a scoring forward from Laval gets called up to play on the 4th line. 

 

Other than Gallagher I don't even care at this point what wingers stay or go, but we have to get rid of some. It is pure insanity to keep going on this path and to me picking yet another winger in the draft makes no sense. Unless of course we are able to ship out a handful of them but that's easier said than done. I'm getting all fired up over here and need to stop writing haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

What about Patches AND the pick? A heavy price, but that kind of offer just might shake lose a Draisaitl type...

We aren’t getting ng to get Draisaitl unless we moved Price or Weber - which I’d do in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2018 at 12:32 PM, illWill said:

The problem to me isn't necessarily the lack of ability on this team, it's the configuration of it. We have way more wingers than we know what to do with and many of them play a similar style. I am sick and tired of just being able to throw any player on any line at any position at any given time. I want defined roles and lines on my team. And if a scoring forward gets injured I don't want a 4th line scrub to replace him on the scoring line, while a scoring forward from Laval gets called up to play on the 4th line. 

 

Other than Gallagher I don't even care at this point what wingers stay or go, but we have to get rid of some. It is pure insanity to keep going on this path and to me picking yet another winger in the draft makes no sense. Unless of course we are able to ship out a handful of them but that's easier said than done. I'm getting all fired up over here and need to stop writing haha

I agree. Last week I was looking at different scenarios (some I posted didn't make sense). But now that I had the chance to read some of the comments on the forum and to think a bit more: here is what I would do:

Option 1: Trade Galcheynuk & DelaRose to Arizona for D.Strome

Option 2: Package Pacioretty with picks and non-NHL prospects to either Buffalo (for O’Reilly) or Edmonton ( for Nugent-Hopkins)

 

That would give us a top 9 of:

Pacioretty-or-Galchenyuk, Strome/ROR/RNH, Lehkonen,

Scherbak, Drouin, Gallagher,

Byron, Danault, A.Shawn

 

If we get Tavares, the new center moves down, Drouin moves to 2LW and Schernack down to 3LW

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

I don't see buffalo accepting that trade.  I also don't see edmonton accepting the trade. 

I think we are the ones ripped off in the arizona deal. 

Edmonton would get an elite LW to play with McDavid. With the right pieces added (a potential 2LW between Rielly, Alzner, or both Lernout and Parisi) , I think it makes sense for Edmonton.

 

Buffalo would get another of our captains, a change for both players would be good. I think it would

==========================================

That being said, I would be careful not deplete too much the CH's D-depth. It will take a miracle to bring the defense up a couple of notches. For starters, I would limit myself to signing one of these UFAs: De Haan(NYI) or I.Cole(CBJ) or Hickey(NYI). To add to our D-core of:

Weber, Petry, Juulsen, Alzner, Mete, Rielly

 

My focus would be to hire the right NHL assistant coach to improve how the NHL Ds perform.

 

I would then hire the best coaching staff possible to develop our D prospects above expectations:

Lernout, Brook, Fleury, Walford, Koberstein, Staum

 

I want to hear praises on how great or Ds are, like we hear from the work J. Martin has don ein Pittsburgh or I. Laperriere has done in Philadelphia or L. Robinson a few years back

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edmonton was playing RNH with McDavid down the stretch, and that combo was already elite. 

 

Buffalo is not interested in Max, who is UFA in one year.  They are looking long term.  They also already have Reinhart, Nylander, Okposo, on the wings....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...