Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Middle school humor meant for small minds. Maybe you ought to write fart jokes on your own time instead of burping up your daily dose of baloney on here?   "Duhhhh...faith in Bergevin...duhh

2009-2010 82 games/54 points 2010-2011 79/67 2011-2012 82/81 2012-2013 48/47 2013-2014 59/66 2014-2015 82/86 2015-2016 78/70 2016-2017 77/66   I said:

Posted Images

42 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

How about a

 Kotkaniemi + Byron + Mete + 2nd round pick for Dubois 🤔

 

 we don't know Kotkaniemi will be asking for on his next contract. Plus trading Byron contract would be nice. 

 

Suzuki 

Dubois 

Danault 

 

Would give us one of the deepest center positions we have ever had.

 

Not certain that Byron and Mete are of significant interest to most teams ... and KK and a 2nd won't do it

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

 

Not certain that Byron and Mete are of significant interest to most teams ... and KK and a 2nd won't do it

They need a winger and light on the D so it might work. I think Toffoli/Dobuis would look good together. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:

They need a winger and light on the D so it might work. I think Toffoli/Dobuis would look good together. 

Love it from the Habs side ... just don't see the CBJ liking it ... more likely something like KK, Caufield and Guhle/Norlinder/Harris/Struble as an initial ask ... think they may want young, close to the NHL players to build with their current youngsters ... unless they can get an existing legit 1C, which I doubt they will

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

 

Not certain that Byron and Mete are of significant interest to most teams ... and KK and a 2nd won't do it

 

Yup... quantity does not make up for quality.  Throwing in a 4th liner with a huge contract and our 7th defenceman doesnt make a difference when we want a #1 c

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

 

Considering how many different sites had reported it by this point, I don't think the confirmation really caught anyone by surprise and shouldn't affect his trade value.

 

Well, I guess not so much the fact he confirmed the rumors, but that he very publicly burned that bridge and made it pretty clear there's not going to be a reconciliation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what VERY little it is worth ...
 

 

Both because it is Kypreos and because PLD has no control over where he goes 

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


I just posted this elsewhere but this is the better place. 
 

KK YES

SUZY NOOOOOOOO

 

I just don't see trading Suzuki, I believe he will turn out to be a better player than Dubois.  I get the attraction for Dubois but NOT Suzuki!!

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


I just posted this elsewhere but this is the better place. 
 

KK YES

SUZY NOOOOOOOO

Tend to agree ... and last night showed why, if the Habs are to have success this season, even if MB could convince CBJ to take a deal centred around Danault (pun intended) the Habs couldn't make it ... Phil is the only Habs centre that has consistent faceoff success ... PLD thus far has been 43.8%, 43.5&% and 44.6% ... similar to KK (45.7%, 42.8%, 11.1% last night) and Suzuki (46.3% and 50% last night) ... but no replacement for Danault.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Somehow, I don't think we should assume that the single-game faceoff percentages will hold for the full season.

 

It could make sense (for the Habs) if you could could get Dubois for Kotkaniemi and a few spare parts (Byron and Mete) but then Bergevin would have to dump another salary. Which means we would now be two skaters (?) short that would need to be filled in from the AHL. Bring up Poehling and Belzile?

 

With Dubois, Belzile and Poehling, but minus Kotkaniemi, Byron and (say) Armia -- would we really be a much stronger team? Our fourth line would have three near-AHL players (Poehling, Evans and Belzile) and the third (?) line would now be Toffoli, Dubois and Lehkonen.

 

I don't see it as a huge win for us overall, even if Dubois is significantly ahead of Kotkaniemi in development. And, even so, would Columbus even accept the "Kotkaniemi plus spare parts" deal?

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

Tend to agree ... and last night showed why, if the Habs are to have success this season, even if MB could convince CBJ to take a deal centred around Danault (pun intended) the Habs couldn't make it ... Phil is the only Habs centre that has consistent faceoff success ... PLD thus far has been 43.8%, 43.5&% and 44.6% ... similar to KK (45.7%, 42.8%, 11.1% last night) and Suzuki (46.3% and 50% last night) ... but no replacement for Danault.

 

 

I’d trade Danault. I doubt if we will be able to resign him. Drouin, Danault and a 2nd pick.  Doesn’t Columbus need draft picks?

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Somehow, I don't think we should assume that the single-game faceoff percentages will hold for the full season.

 

It could make sense (for the Habs) if you could could get Dubois for Kotkaniemi and a few spare parts (Byron and Mete) but then Bergevin would have to dump another salary. Which means we would now be two skaters (?) short that would need to be filled in from the AHL. Bring up Poehling and Belzile?

 

With Dubois, Belzile and Poehling, but minus Kotkaniemi, Byron and (say) Armia -- would we really be a much stronger team? Our fourth line would have three near-AHL players (Poehling, Evans and Belzile) and the third (?) line would now be Toffoli, Dubois and Lehkonen.

 

I don't see it as a huge win for us overall, even if Dubois is significantly ahead of Kotkaniemi in development. And, even so, would Columbus even accept the "Kotkaniemi plus spare parts" deal?

Am I the only one that sees a higher ceiling for KK??? I don’t get why we don’t keep our home grown talent, who we have more years of control with??

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’d trade Danault. I doubt if we will be able to resign him. Drouin, Danault and a 2nd pick.  Doesn’t Columbus need draft picks?

 

10 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Am I the only one that sees a higher ceiling for KK??? I don’t get why we don’t keep our home grown talent, who we have more years of control with??

 

Depends on whether you are building a team for next year and beyond or trying to win this season ... think Bergevin is looking at THIS season

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

Somehow, I don't think we should assume that the single-game faceoff percentages will hold for the full season.

I wasn't looking at single game (just included that data) ... since Danault's first full season as a Hab he has been over 50% ... in their young careers the others are 45-46% ... in a win now season, much as I see the future benefits, the Habs can't afford to depend on the youngsters improving ... besides, I doubt Danault gets any trade done, unless MB loads up big time on prospects.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I’d trade Danault. I doubt if we will be able to resign him. Drouin, Danault and a 2nd pick.  Doesn’t Columbus need draft picks?

 

Would you accept a rental centre, an overpaid winger, and a second-round pick for Kotkaniemi?  That's basically what you're proposing Columbus do, trade their top centre (a somewhat-recent top-five pick) for not a whole lot of value here.  I don't think you'd be happy if Bergevin did that; similarly, Columbus would rightfully be skewered if they did that trade.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

I wasn't looking at single game (just included that data) ... since Danault's first full season as a Hab he has been over 50% ... in their young careers the others are 45-46% ... in a win now season, much as I see the future benefits, the Habs can't afford to depend on the youngsters improving ... besides, I doubt Danault gets any trade done, unless MB loads up big time on prospects.

 

Danault with a signed contract would have real value. Whether it's enough would depend on what Columbus is looking for.

 

Are we really in a "win now" mode, all of a sudden? We have a much better team this year, but surely a Cup is still very much a long shot?

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

Would you accept a rental centre, an overpaid winger, and a second-round pick for Kotkaniemi?  That's basically what you're proposing Columbus do, trade their top centre (a somewhat-recent top-five pick) for not a whole lot of value here.  I don't think you'd be happy if Bergevin did that; similarly, Columbus would rightfully be skewered if they did that trade.

 

Danault would need to be a sign-and-trade. Signed to another 4-5 years, I do believe that he has real value.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Danault would need to be a sign-and-trade. Signed to another 4-5 years, I do believe that he has real value.

 

At the right price tag, sure, but how willing would Danault be to forego testing the market to sign a long-term extension with Columbus right now?  And even if he was signed, I'd have no interest in him as the centrepiece of a trade for Dubois if I'm the Blue Jackets.  If they're dealing one of their franchise pillars, a young guy that they were going to build around, they're going to want a core, young centre back.  That's Suzuki or Kotkaniemi and if one of them isn't involved, Columbus should hang up the phone.  An extended Danault has value, but not enough to be the key part of a Dubois trade.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

Danault would need to be a sign-and-trade. Signed to another 4-5 years, I do believe that he has real value.

Danault? for a big 22yr old #3 pick centre averaging 55pt/82 over 1st 236gms.

Get serious. 

New rumour is Flames want him.

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

Danault? for a big 22yr old #3 pick centre averaging 55pt/82 over 1st 236gms.

Get serious. 

New rumour is Flames want him.

 

Danault is also averaging 50 points over 82 games. And he's not over the hill yet at 27. Not as valuable as Dubois, sure, but still could be a valuable piece in the trade.

 

But, as I wrote last night, I'm not convinced that a trade like this (that Columbus would accept) would actually make us a better team in the short term.

 

16 hours ago, tomh009 said:

With Dubois, Belzile and Poehling, but minus Kotkaniemi, Byron and (say) Armia -- would we really be a much stronger team? Our fourth line would have three near-AHL players (Poehling, Evans and Belzile) and the third (?) line would now be Toffoli, Dubois and Lehkonen.

 

I don't see it as a huge win for us overall, even if Dubois is significantly ahead of Kotkaniemi in development. And, even so, would Columbus even accept the "Kotkaniemi plus spare parts" deal?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Tom that in the short term we are not better.  I think with 2 young centers the defensive aspect that Danault brings is better than what Dubois brings right now.  In 2-3 years I would expect that to be different.

 

That all being said, if the Habs are interesting to going the Dubois route and trading Danault, I would part with Caufield in that trade.  I know I’m about to get a ton of flak for that, I’m just not sold on him.

 

No matter what, Dubois isn’t getting traded until the deadline at the earliest, unless his relationship with Tortorella sours more and Columbus is forced to take what they can get to end the saga.

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

 

Danault with a signed contract would have real value. Whether it's enough would depend on what Columbus is looking for.

 

Are we really in a "win now" mode, all of a sudden? We have a much better team this year, but surely a Cup is still very much a long shot?

 

Although it could perhaps be debated how much the tight-market due to the flat cap aided him ... regardless ...MB was the agreessive he has ever been in the offseason, singing three free agents (Anderson, Edmundson and Toffoli) and trading for a pending UFA and signing him to an extension (Allen) ...

 

Win now isn't necessarily the same as "win the Cup" ... in this case it is (IMO) go far enough this season to get the GM an extension, with the hope that all could fall into place with a Cup.

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...