Jump to content
dlbalr

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Metallica said:

Other teams are saying the same thing about Hundon. He's not worth more then a 5th or 6th round pick to other teams . In the eyes of edmonton Puljujarvi is a potential top 6 player and their just not going to give him away like some of you think.

I’m not trying to convince you that Hudon is worth more than at 5th or a 6th. A 4th would be a great return on him right now. As for Puljujarvi Edm is not getting strong offers for him or he would have been traded already. I think they are hoping he goes to Europe next season and plays well to boost his trade value.

All I’m saying is that he is too big  a risk for MTL to acquire for anything more than a bargain basement price and so they probably will not get him and I am fine with that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PMAC said:

I’m not trying to convince you that Hudon is worth more than at 5th or a 6th. A 4th would be a great return on him right now. As for Puljujarvi Edm is not getting strong offers for him or he would have been traded already. I think they are hoping he goes to Europe next season and plays well to boost his trade value.

All I’m saying is that he is too big  a risk for MTL to acquire for anything more than a bargain basement price and so they probably will not get him and I am fine with that 

Agreed and it to mention We don’t need him at all.

we need a top pairing dman. 

 

Share this post


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

I’m not trying to convince you that Hudon is worth more than at 5th or a 6th. A 4th would be a great return on him right now. As for Puljujarvi Edm is not getting strong offers for him or he would have been traded already. I think they are hoping he goes to Europe next season and plays well to boost his trade value.

All I’m saying is that he is too big  a risk for MTL to acquire for anything more than a bargain basement price and so they probably will not get him and I am fine with that 

I am just trying to tell you that Puljujarvi isn't as bad as you make him out to be. Also I don't think Puljujarvi hasn't been traded yet not because he isn't good, but i think Edmonton doesn't want to give up on him because of his potential to be a top 6 player. I think Edmonton is hoping that like you said he goes over to Europe and Edmonton has a good year he changes his mind and stays.

Share this post


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

Other teams are saying the same thing about Hundon. He's not worth more then a 5th or 6th round pick to other teams . In the eyes of edmonton Puljujarvi is a potential top 6 player and their just not going to give him away like some of you think.

Dude. Its hudon. Not hundon.  Not sure if your phone is auto correcting or what, but for the love of God stop calling him hundon.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

I am just trying to tell you that Puljujarvi isn't as bad as you make him out to be. Also I don't think Puljujarvi hasn't been traded yet not because he isn't good, but i think Edmonton doesn't want to give up on him because of his potential to be a top 6 player. I think Edmonton is hoping that like you said he goes over to Europe and Edmonton has a good year he changes his mind and stays.

 

Part that, I expect, and part hesitation by other teams. The waiver rule is a killer: if he's not ready for NHL ice time, you can't get him into the AHL without someone else snapping him up on waivers. So you risk sitting him in the press box and using up a roster spot. So unless you are really weak on RW it's not a great risk to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

 

Part that, I expect, and part hesitation by other teams. The waiver rule is a killer: if he's not ready for NHL ice time, you can't get him into the AHL without someone else snapping him up on waivers. So you risk sitting him in the press box and using up a roster spot. So unless you are really weak on RW it's not a great risk to take.

And not a risk Montreal should take imho. Not  saying that Puljujarvi has no upside but ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Metallica said:

Other teams are saying the same thing about Hundon. He's not worth more then a 5th or 6th round pick to other teams . In the eyes of edmonton Puljujarvi is a potential top 6 player and their just not going to give him away like some of you think.

 

2 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

Dude. Its hudon. Not hundon.  Not sure if your phone is auto correcting or what, but for the love of God stop calling him hundon.

 

Say it with me:  Who, DON?

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PMAC said:

And not a risk Montreal should take imho. Not  saying that Puljujarvi has no upside but ....

 

What? Not a risk?

This is the exact type of risk MB should be taking.. he’s a young kid with tons of potential who looked like a beast a couple years ago.. he’d be a reasonable cost, and would fit into the team window..

 

It’s a low risk with the potential to be very rewarding.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

What? Not a risk?

This is the exact type of risk MB should be taking.. he’s a young kid with tons of potential who looked like a beast a couple years ago.. he’d be a reasonable cost, and would fit into the team window..

 

It’s a low risk with the potential to be very rewarding.. 

 

In principle it's a good risk, and I think there is a good chance that Puljujarvi would feel more at home with with our Finn squad, and get his game to where it should be.

 

But as was pointed out to me when I proposed this (or was it Honka?) we don't really have room on the NHL roster for him. And what he really needs is ice time, I think, to adjust and get his confidence up. But sending him to Laval is a non-starter as we would likely lose him on the waivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheDriveFor25 said:

It’s a low risk with the potential to be very rewarding.. 

And Mete has "potential" to score 15g this year or Reilly will learn how to defend this summer...same likelihood. :D

Whose job he would take on the roster, pile him up in the bottom six group? Hudon looks to have more potential anyways, but is no spot for him on roster neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Puljujarvi has more potential than Hudon. But we don't have room for either one in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Hudon can be a contributor given an opportunity in the top 6 on an NHL team. The problem is that this can possibly be said for quite a few players. In order to solidify that type of spot, he needs to stand out. 

 

Statistically in their young careers, I would have to actually say that I trust Hudon a little more to produce. The difference comes when arguing about their “potential” as Puljujarvi was a 4th overall pick, whereas Hudon was a 5th rounder. 

 

I can see the argument where someone may feel as though Puljujarvi is going to break out given a change of scenery but at this point I think the team would need to get him almost for free to even consider going after him. 

Share this post


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

Statistically in their young careers, I would have to actually say that I trust Hudon a little more to produce. The difference comes when arguing about their “potential” as Puljujarvi was a 4th overall pick, whereas Hudon was a 5th rounder. 

 

Yes, I think that's a good way to put it. Puljujarvi likely has a higher ceiling, but Hudon is more likely to reach his own ceiling. Puljujarvi is more of a gamble at this point.

Share this post


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

 

What? Not a risk?

This is the exact type of risk MB should be taking.. he’s a young kid with tons of potential who looked like a beast a couple years ago.. he’d be a reasonable cost, and would fit into the team window..

 

It’s a low risk with the potential to be very rewarding.. 

I disagree unless the cost is very low. Gusev, on the other hand would be worth taking a chance on. He has at least consistently produced in a Men’s league 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I think Puljujarvi has more potential than Hudon. But we don't have room for either one in any case.

 

Tatar - Danault - Gallager

Drouin - Kotkaniemi - Puljujarvi

Lehks - Domi - Armia

Byron - Cousins - Thompson/Weal/etc..

 

Are we concerned with bumping Weal or Thompson or Weise from the lineup??.. I'd rather have three really good lines and if he finds his game and is a fit in the top 6 it only gives you more trade chips to get the LD. His salary is not a problem.

 

And if Poehling or Suzuki earn a spot then again - more trade chips to add to the D.

Plus, a trade will likely include one of those forwards going out anyways..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again.  I wouldn't be willing to pay more for Puljujarvi than St. Louis paid for Yakupov.  Puljujarvi hasn't put up the same numbers as Yakupov.  Oilers backs are against the wall as well.  He is refusing to sign with them.

 

Puljujarvi                                                            Yakupov

28/1/7/8 = 0.29PPG                                        48/17/14/31 = 0.65PPG                         

65/12/8/20 = 0.31PPG                                   63/11/13/24 = 0.38PPG   

46/4/5/9 = 0.20PPG                                        81/14/19/33 = 0.41PPG

 

Puljujarvi has some intangibles that Yakupov did not have, but the offensive numbers are worse.  Edmonton is trying to sell his potential, not what he is.  What he is right now is a bottom 6 forward with upside.  That's not worth anything more than a mid round pick.  One could argue that Hudon is a bottom 6 forward with upside.  Because Puljujarvi was a 4th overall pick, I'd be willing to give up a 3rd rounder and maybe an inconsequential roster player with upside (like Hudon) or a low level project type prospect.  Yakupov went for a 3rd and an ECHLer, and he was a 1st overall pick that put up better numbers and had more upside.  It would be nice to acquire Puljujarvi to see if he blossoms here, but I wouldn't want to see the Habs pay an Andrew Shaw type price (2nd and 3rd rounder) for him.  Just my two cents.

 

Note : Hudon has 0.35PPG over his career while Puljujarvi has 0.27PPG.  Granted Hudon is older and has played a couple of seasons in the minors to develop.  Hudon also has similar career point totals (39 to Puljujarvi's 37) in a similar number of games (110 for Hudon, 139 for Puljujarvi).                                                                              

Share this post


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

I may have mentioned this before, but I'll mention it again.  I wouldn't be willing to pay more for Puljujarvi than St. Louis paid for Yakupov.  Puljujarvi hasn't put up the same numbers as Yakupov.  Oilers backs are against the wall as well.  He is refusing to sign with them.

 

Puljujarvi                                                            Yakupov

28/1/7/8 = 0.29PPG                                        48/17/14/31 = 0.65PPG                         

65/12/8/20 = 0.31PPG                                   63/11/13/24 = 0.38PPG   

46/4/5/9 = 0.20PPG                                        81/14/19/33 = 0.41PPG

 

Puljujarvi has some intangibles that Yakupov did not have, but the offensive numbers are worse.  Edmonton is trying to sell his potential, not what he is.  What he is right now is a bottom 6 forward with upside.  That's not worth anything more than a mid round pick.  One could argue that Hudon is a bottom 6 forward with upside.  Because Puljujarvi was a 4th overall pick, I'd be willing to give up a 3rd rounder and maybe an inconsequential roster player with upside (like Hudon) or a low level project type prospect.  Yakupov went for a 3rd and an ECHLer, and he was a 1st overall pick that put up better numbers and had more upside.  It would be nice to acquire Puljujarvi to see if he blossoms here, but I wouldn't want to see the Habs pay an Andrew Shaw type price (2nd and 3rd rounder) for him.  Just my two cents.

 

Note : Hudon has 0.35PPG over his career while Puljujarvi has 0.27PPG.  Granted Hudon is older and has played a couple of seasons in the minors to develop.  Hudon also has similar career point totals (39 to Puljujarvi's 37) in a similar number of games (110 for Hudon, 139 for Puljujarvi).                                                                              

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if minnesota still wants to trade Zucker and what they are looking for.  He reminds me of a poor man's Mark Stone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We all know that we need a solid upgrade at LD and top 6 forward (right winger or upgrade at centre). I want MB to address at least one of our needs if not both.

 

My question is what are we willing to give up to get that upgrade? Drouin seems to be part of the new "Ryder, Halak and a 2nd" proposals that we keep seeing but Drouin alone is not going to get us the upgrade that we really need.

 

Our current line up:

 

Tatar - Danault - Gallagher

Drouin - Domi - Byron

Lehkonen - Kotkaniemi - Armia

Cousins - Thompson - Weal

Peca

Hudon

 

Mete - Weber

Chiarot - Petry

Kulak - Folin/Juulsen

Reilly

 

Notable prospects:

 

Suzuki

Phoelling

Romanov

Caufield

Brook

Primeau

Fleury

 

I think that our defense needs help on the left side but when I look at our right wingers I am even more concerned. 

 

What can we realistically give up that will get us the return we need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can almost guarantee right wing is not a priority for Bergevin, nor should it be. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Habber31 said:

I can almost guarantee right wing is not a priority for Bergevin, nor should it be. 

Yes, dont need another forward, but do 'need' a LH d-man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Habber31 said:

I can almost guarantee right wing is not a priority for Bergevin, nor should it be. 

 

I agree that the left D is a pressing need but I don't see how you look at our right wingers and think that is fine. Byron and Armia are 3rd line guys but we will have one of them playing ont he second line unless something changes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

I agree that the left D is a pressing need but I don't see how you look at our right wingers and think that is fine. Byron and Armia are 3rd line guys but we will have one of them playing ont he second line unless something changes

Byron has a 20g season and then on pace for 22g last year and Tatar can play either wing, no big hole there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tatar already has a needed spot so moving him does not help. Byron is "fine" but we need an upgrade there.

 

Perhaps Pheolling takes third line C, move Kman up to 2nd line and Domi on the wing?

 

We definitely need a LD but I don't see how you can be happy with our current top 6 forwards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Perhaps Pheolling takes third line C,

 

Share this post


Link to post
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...