Jump to content
dlbalr

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, DON said:

 

How hard will Bergevin go for Krug?

What $$/term is he worth, what $$/term will he get?

 

I'm not expecting MB to bother with big-ticket UFAs, based on his comment about worrying about cap space two years hence.

 

I still think someone like Tiffoli is the likeliest bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Maybe overpayment, but not huge IMO ... what do you consider to be excessive?

Perhaps Nylander and Kerfoot for Domi, Kulak, Poehling, a 2nd and a 3rd ... but think the Leafs may want more

 

I don't think we need Kerfoot, so I would be talking about what the Leafs would want for Nylander. 

 

If we offered Domi & either Mete or Juulsen and maybe a second, I don't think I'd want to give up much more. It might be hard for these two teams to come to an agreement for Nylander, especially being division rivals. You'll probably say the Leafs wouldn't take that offer and I probably agree. But MB doesn't seem to be a GM who overpays, at least in the past 2-3 years, so I would be very surprised if he would give away much more.

 

He would give much much more for Laine, but I don't think he will for Nylander.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I'm not expecting MB to bother with big-ticket UFAs, based on his comment about worrying about cap space two years hence.

 

I still think someone like Tiffoli is the likeliest bet.

MB is very unpredictable isnt he.

Not sure anyone has guessed correctly any of his moves (granted both good and bad) beforehand, have they?

So, i havent a clue who he may be targeting; But, i assume he will be eyeing up teams with little cap space, or who is short of draft picks (like Canucks who have only have 5 picks, with no 1st or 2nd round pick). 

 

Go Canucks, bury the  400px-Knightni.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I'm not expecting MB to bother with big-ticket UFAs, based on his comment about worrying about cap space two years hence.

 

I still think someone like Tiffoli is the likeliest bet.

Yep. I hope there is zero interest in Krug.  There actually Yalu talk in Calgary about signing him because if his playoff history, since they are going to lose quite dmen to free agency and talks about trading Giordano as part of the core shape up and his down year - 1 year after winning the norris.

 

id rather male trade, or go after RFA’s over overpaying UFA’s that will be soon on a downward projectery.  It make sense when you are going after that one missing piece, but we aren’t there yet.

Share this post


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

I don't think we need Kerfoot, so I would be talking about what the Leafs would want for Nylander. 

 

If we offered Domi & either Mete or Juulsen and maybe a second, I don't think I'd want to give up much more. It might be hard for these two teams to come to an agreement for Nylander, especially being division rivals. You'll probably say the Leafs wouldn't take that offer and I probably agree. But MB doesn't seem to be a GM who overpays, at least in the past 2-3 years, so I would be very surprised if he would give away much more.

 

He would give much much more for Laine, but I don't think he will for Nylander.  

Sergechev?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hab29RETIRED said:

Yep. I hope there is zero interest in Krug.  There actually Yalu talk in Calgary about signing him because if his playoff history, since they are going to lose quite dmen to free agency and talks about trading Giordano as part of the core shape up and his down year - 1 year after winning the norris.

 

id rather male trade, or go after RFA’s over overpaying UFA’s that will be soon on a downward projectery.  It make sense when you are going after that one missing piece, but we aren’t there yet.

But, you never seem to mention RFAs not only would cost big salary, the more you offer the more 1st round picks you also lose and UFA is only salary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could they afford (the 2nd year i mean) to take on Giordano's 2 more years at $6.75?

 

Share this post


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

 

I'm not expecting MB to bother with big-ticket UFAs, based on his comment about worrying about cap space two years hence.

 

I still think someone like Tiffoli is the likeliest bet.

Me too, but it seems like Vancouver really wants to sign him. 
I would rather trade for Boeser and take on Eriksson’s bad contract for Domi and Mete

 

More like:

Brock Boeser($5.9M) and Loui Eriksson($6M)

for

Domi($5M-%5.5M) Mete($0.75M) and a a second round draft pick.

 

It gives them the cap space they need to wheel and deal, while signing their RFAs and UFAs

In Max Domi, they get a good middle-6 center, a very good third line center

 

Mete gives them a mobile Defenseman that can play in the NHL. 

 

The second round pick should get it done...

 

Edited by alfredoh2009
adding more details

Share this post


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

The jets are going to have to make a major move to upgrade their D.  The only legitimate Dman they have is Morrissey.  They’ve got three choices to get an impactful dman. wheeler (Who I think given his age should be the logical choice), Ehlers and Laine. They a are not  trading Conner or Scheifele.  Reports already are out their that Wheeler is not going anywhere.  Their preference will probably be to move Ehlers, but at least he’s signed to a decent cap hit long term. Laine May want somewhere between $8.5m to $9.5m. 

would they want a younger Dman?  For sure.  But if the ones that will probably be available - like Sougie Hamilton, what chance do they have to sign him long-term, since his contract is close to being up? Zero. He didn’t want to be in Calgary, he sure the hell wont want to be in Winnipeg.

 

Winnipeg is not a popular farewell agent destination - they have a hard time keeping their own players.  They had a mass exodus last year.  Hamornic is a legitimate possibility, but that’s about it and that’s not nearly enough.  They’ll want a player with term and someone who doesn’t have a NTC that excludes the jets

 

do I think that is the deal they want to make? No. But Weber should be able to give them at least two Elite years. Than his salary drops, making the him more  affordable to a team like Winnipeg and they can hope that he can give another 4 years.  GM’s make a lot of deal based on hope and character. On top of that, If we package in Domi To address their centre depth (May actually resign, was born their and his dad played there) and Mete and that might be good enough to get Laine and a RFA like Roslovic. To ease the cap, we also take Perrault.

 

1) do I think Laine-Weber by itself would work.  Of course not. But you broaden the deal and look at some of the Jets issues and we may be able to pull it off.


2) same thing in Calgary. I think we could make a one to one trade for Gaudreau and Gallagher, but given Calgary’s situation, I think we can take advantage it.  Their is legitimate talk and desire to blow up the core. The Captain Gioridono was a fan favourite and win the norris.  Lots of talk about him being moved. Gaudreau is seen as a perimeter player who can’t play 5 on 5 in the playoffs.  Monohan too laid back. They are looking to blow up the core and are going  to lose some dmen to free agency and desperately need a goalie.  
 

there is a opportunity to get them to overpay for a guy like a Gallagher (who I love, but has a lot of miles playing kamakazee hockey in a small frame).  Calgary May also be one of Those teams that may actually have interest in Orice and pay a substantial return.

 

3) monohon and Gaudreau May be available as a package if we had a Gallagher-Danault type package or price-danault. The only thing I wouldn’t do to make a deal happen with Calgary is take Lucic and his awful contract.
 

I think we have an opportunity to address our offence significantly by making one of these deals.

 

If we make the Weber trade, we need to address the D and I think Edmonton is a natural trading partner.  They need help on wing, shutdown centr and would probably also overpay for Gallagher.  They also need a real goaltender and would have interest in Price.


4) price-Byron-Drouin and Jullsaon for koskinan-Neal-Broberg-Bouchard-Puljujarvi-lavoie.  May be possible.

 

5) or Gallagher—Danault-jullson for Neal-Bouchard-Broberg-Puljujarvi-klefbom-lavoie.

 

I've put some numbers beside your ideas just to make it easier to address.

 

1) You don't think there are teams with younger defencemen available that would have interest in Laine?  If Winnipeg can't get a U24 top pairing defender for him, they're not going to move him.  Their cap situation isn't that bad to the point where they're going to trade what they think is a star in the making for someone that has a few good years left.  I get that they need to upgrade their defence but unless they get the perfect deal, it's not going to involve Laine.  Remember, Bryan Little's playing future is in serious jeopardy - if he's ruled out for next season over the next few months, they can use that money and go sign a d-man.  I also think you're underrating Pionk who had quite the year for them.  And Montreal's willingness to move Weber likely ranges between 0% to 0.000000000000000001%.  It ain't happening.

 

2) I don't think Calgary does that deal let alone the Habs getting them to add to that.  Gallagher saves them money for next year but they lose a year of team control and a lot of points in the process.  Gallagher's a good fit for them and if both sides wanted to do something like this, I think it could be done but I think it's Montreal adding, not Calgary.

 

3) Two top-line players for two lower-scoring rentals equals a terrible trade for Calgary.  They have some good young goalies in the system so while they could certainly use a short-term upgrade between the pipes, I don't see Price being appealing.  The Flames won't blatantly take a bad-value trade just to shake things up for the purposes of shaking things up.

 

4) There's still a salary cap in the NHL.  This proposal adds about $8M in cap spending to Edmonton's books when they're going to have very little to spend.  Price is a goaltending upgrade but with their cap structure, they simply cannot afford him.  Also, asking for their two top defence prospects with only sending a question mark in return in Juulsen would not go over well.

 

5) Edmonton parts with three of their top prospects and one of their top defencemen for two rentals (one being a third line centre on their depth chart) that they may not be able to afford to re-sign and a question mark prospect...why?  It makes them a better team next season and then sends them into another extended rebuild.  Ken Holland isn't managing for his job here; they're not that desperate to change things up.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, REV-G said:

I don't think we need Kerfoot, so I would be talking about what the Leafs would want for Nylander ...

 

Wouldn't say the Habs need Kerfoot ... it was more that freeing up more cap space might incentivize the Laffs to trade Nylander without getting a Top 3 defenceman in the deal

Share this post


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

Could they afford (the 2nd year i mean) to take on Giordano's 2 more years at $6.75?

 

Habs have tons of cap space for 21/22 ... it is all a question of how to allocate it ...

 

My concern would be that Giordano's Norris win 10 18/19 was a season in which he exceeded his per 82 total (excluding 18/19) by 30 points ... and 19/20 was not only a regression to his "norm" but his goals/82 games would have been his lowest since his rookie season ... at 37 entering the season I would only deal for him if it was in a package for a worthwhile player ... unless there are significant causes for that drop that are considered resolved for next season, IMO, Giordano is much closer to being a BAD contract that the Flames would be looking to DUMP than most of the players referenced as such in this thread and elsewhere

Share this post


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

... id rather male trade, or go after RFA’s over overpaying UFA’s that will be soon on a downward projectery.  It make sense when you are going after that one missing piece, but we aren’t there yet.

 

Conceptually I agree ... but I fear that MB fears that if he doesn't make the playoffs and win at least a round in 20/21 he may lose his job ... although RFAs have to be pursued with great caution as they tie up cap space while the offer is outstanding and can have a significant impact on the next 2-4 drafts if you are targeting a legitimately high-end player ... 

Share this post


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

But, you never seem to mention RFAs not only would cost big salary, the more you offer the more 1st round picks you also lose and UFA is only salary.

Would you have been okay with losing the 1st rounder this year and next year  and a 2’d ans 2rd rounder for Aho had our offer been more realistic?  I would. 

Share this post


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

Could they afford (the 2nd year i mean) to take on Giordano's 2 more years at $6.75?

 

Oh I don’t want Gioradono.  I was just saying that he has been one of the guys they have mentioned that could be moved as part of the core shake up  (he is a  the reigning Norris winning captain - the type of  player that illwill feel is untouchable) Threw main guy’s being talked about in order of noise are Gaudreau, Monohon and Giordano, along with a certainty that a goaltending change will occur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Conceptually I agree ... but I fear that MB fears that if he doesn't make the playoffs and win at least a round in 20/21 he may lose his job ... although RFAs have to be pursued with great caution as they tie up cap space while the offer is outstanding and can have a significant impact on the next 2-4 drafts if you are targeting a legitimately high-end player ... 

 

My feeling is that if MB did not lose his job after the debacles of 2016-18, he will not lose it now.

 

Next year will see the addition of Romanov and, hopefully, the further progression of KK and Suzy. If we miss the playoffs, the team will point to the 2020 playoff "run," to injuries, and to this young talent pool as proof that they're "on the right track," but that it's "tough" to make the playoffs annually in today's NHL. And a goodly portion of fans will swallow that. "Wait until Caulfield gets here..."

 

That line will be enough for a critical mass of the fanbase which has, after all, long ceased to expect excellence from the Habs. And as long as the money keeps rolling in and he's not getting egged in the street, Molson appears to be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Habs have tons of cap space for 21/22 ... it is all a question of how to allocate it ...

I do not think they have that much cap space if you add projected salaries for 2021 UFAs and RFAs or their equivalent players.

Also, there are some contract renewals that will take a good chunk out of the Cap.

 

I think there is room for two top 6/ top 4 players on the roster (on of each or twin of any, two total) to be added 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I do not think they have that much cap space if you add projected salaries for 2021 UFAs and RFAs or their equivalent players.

Also, there are some contract renewals that will take a good chunk out of the Cap.

 

I think there is room for two top 6/ top 4 players on the roster (on of each or twin of any, two total) to be added 

 

That is more or less what I meant by "allocate it" ... re-sign UFA/RFAs, sign UFA/RFAs or make trades ... OR ... most likely ... a mix of the three

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

My feeling is that if MB did not lose his job after the debacles of 2016-18, he will not lose it now.

 

 

The way the team played in the Tournament may have shifted the sands under MB's feet; on August 28th Geoff Molson "said":


Question from @at_barry28 on Instagram
When do you think the rebuilding stage for this team will be over?
I think we're heading into a phase where we've rebuilt enough to feel confident that we're going to have a competitive team for the next several years. Every year we have to build off the prior season. I do think we have a core group of players, young guys and veterans, who are capable of delivering a high-performing team and we've got some great young prospects coming up as well. The way the team played in the playoffs this year was a great sign of things to come.

 

Geoff may have tired of not receiving any playoff ticket sales ... missing the playoffs in 20/21 would mean 5 of the last 6 years (Habs made the Tournament but wouldn't have made the playoffs) with no playoff ticket sales (several million per game)

 

 

Share this post


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

 

I've put some numbers beside your ideas just to make it easier to address.

 

1) You don't think there are teams with younger defencemen available that would have interest in Laine?  If Winnipeg can't get a U24 top pairing defender for him, they're not going to move him.  Their cap situation isn't that bad to the point where they're going to trade what they think is a star in the making for someone that has a few good years left.  I get that they need to upgrade their defence but unless they get the perfect deal, it's not going to involve Laine.  Remember, Bryan Little's playing future is in serious jeopardy - if he's ruled out for next season over the next few months, they can use that money and go sign a d-man.  I also think you're underrating Pionk who had quite the year for them.  And Montreal's willingness to move Weber likely ranges between 0% to 0.000000000000000001%.  It ain't happening.

 

2) I don't think Calgary does that deal let alone the Habs getting them to add to that.  Gallagher saves them money for next year but they lose a year of team control and a lot of points in the process.  Gallagher's a good fit for them and if both sides wanted to do something like this, I think it could be done but I think it's Montreal adding, not Calgary.

 

3) Two top-line players for two lower-scoring rentals equals a terrible trade for Calgary.  They have some good young goalies in the system so while they could certainly use a short-term upgrade between the pipes, I don't see Price being appealing.  The Flames won't blatantly take a bad-value trade just to shake things up for the purposes of shaking things up.

 

4) There's still a salary cap in the NHL.  This proposal adds about $8M in cap spending to Edmonton's books when they're going to have very little to spend.  Price is a goaltending upgrade but with their cap structure, they simply cannot afford him.  Also, asking for their two top defence prospects with only sending a question mark in return in Juulsen would not go over well.

 

5) Edmonton parts with three of their top prospects and one of their top defencemen for two rentals (one being a third line centre on their depth chart) that they may not be able to afford to re-sign and a question mark prospect...why?  It makes them a better team next season and then sends them into another extended rebuild.  Ken Holland isn't managing for his job here; they're not that desperate to change things up.

The only comment that I want to make is that Gaudreau is 5'7, 165 lbs.  The Habs don't need another small player, especially in the playoffs where he disappears.  Give me Gallagher any day, even if his style limits his career.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Blazer said:

The only comment that I want to make is that Gaudreau is 5'7, 165 lbs.  The Habs don't need another small player, especially in the playoffs where he disappears.  Give me Gallagher any day, even if his style limits his career.  

 

Sweet Jesus, SIZE...again?

Will that dead horse ever stop getting beat.

Ya, of course dont want to add a 99pt winger...too small. 

 

Too bad Hughes is only 170lb d-man, if he was big he would have much more than paltry 16pts in 16playoff games...disappearing act smurff! :popcorn:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the Habs even particularly small, taken as a whole - ? This isn't 2010.

 

Gaudreau has 445 pts in in 464 NHL games. That level of production far outstrips any Hab. Who cares how small he is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Blazer said:

The only comment that I want to make is that Gaudreau is 5'7, 165 lbs.  The Habs don't need another small player, especially in the playoffs where he disappears.

 

Disappears? Four goals and three assists in ten playoff games this year. 19 points in 30 career playoff games is good enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Blazer said:

The only comment that I want to make is that Gaudreau is 5'7, 165 lbs.  The Habs don't need another small player, especially in the playoffs where he disappears.  Give me Gallagher any day, even if his style limits his career.  

 

 

7 points in 10 games is disappearing?

 

How about a small player like Brayden Point? does he disappear in the playoffs?  Would you not take him on the Habs?

Share this post


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

Sweet Jesus, SIZE...again?

Will that dead horse ever stop getting beat.

Ya, of course dont want to add a 99pt winger...too small. 

 

Too bad Hughes is only 170lb d-man, if he was big he would have much more than paltry 16pts in 16playoff games...disappearing act smurff! :popcorn:

 

I agree with the essence of your post ... but calling Gaudreau a 99pt player lis like calling Galchenyuk a 30 goal scorer ... Gaudreau is an 75-80 pt player whose best season was 99 ... Galchenyuk is a 20 goal scorer who once hit 30 goals.

 

Gaudreau would be a significant upgrade to the top 6 winger pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GHT120 said:

I agree with the essence of your post ... but calling Gaudreau a 99pt player 

99 has much better ring to it, didnt say 99pt/yr, and was mostly for effect...but 79pts/82gms is what he has been, is 27 signed for 2 more years and not sure his size will hurt the Habs in the playoffs (he has 19pts in 30gms)

(but cost to trade for might be bit high) 

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...