Permanent Rumour Thread

[alfredoh2009]

3 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

Interestingly enough, TSN has Matheson on their top-20 trade bait list. 

 

yeah, Marc Dumont has it also in his mailbag list/blog

 

https://montrealhockeynow.com/2023/12/11/canadiens-mailbag-defensive-logjam-laval-rocket-issues-trade-options-habs-rumors-trade-nhl-goalies-hughes-primeau-rocket-defencemen/

 

Quote

His numbers have taken a huge nosedive this season, however, we also have to recognize that he probably should not be facing opposing teams’ best players every night. His production also mitigates some of his defensive woes.

But here’s why I’d lean toward moving him: he’d garner the greatest return.

He produces more than most defencemen in the NHL, but he only carries the 62nd-highest salary cap hit among all blueliners.

 

Your #GoHabsGo Daily:

- #Habs Mailbag: Should the Montreal Canadiens trade a defenceman? What's going on in Laval?
- Potential trade partners around the NHL in a goaltender trade.
- Prospect Adam Engstrom's exciting development.

And more⬇️https://t.co/vQgIZbZb6b

— Marc Dumont (@MarcPDumont) December 12, 2023

 

Edited December 12, 2023 by alfredoh2009
added link and quote

[Prime Minister Koivu]

3 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

Interestingly enough, TSN has Matheson on their top-20 trade bait list. 

I would consider trading Matheson for a legit top 6 winger. 
 

I don’t want to trade him but we have depth to do so. 
 

Not suggesting Columbus is interested but I would do Matheson for Laine for example 

[hockeyrealist]

I’d trade Mattheson for a quality return any day.

I have lots of respect for his skills, professionalism he has shown with Habs, but….

1) he is not a number one dman, or even top pairing player on a cup contender so no need to plan long term around him.

2) he is too old to plan long term around him when compared to the core that will be expected to contend for cups, some of which is not even on Habs yet so again no need to plan around him.

3) he is injury prone throughout his career, and now, related to number 2 above he is likely even more susceptible to injury.

4) he is not cheap (he has provided value when healthy, but regardless of value he is a contract slot and money that should go to younger core players rather than holding onto him into his final year. I’d like him traded this offseason or next season.

5) he is not good positionally, chases the play far out of position and can recover due to his speed, agility so it is an asset for him to play like a rover defensively  but, I don’t like younger players having to play with him doing that. It sets a bad example, puts them in awkward spots when he is in their area and also creates opportunities for opponents on the weak side (Mattheson’s side).  
 

This is mainly why he is not best suited as a top pairing guy, rather someone who should be used when offense is needed, and at 5v5 used against bottom/ middle six versus the top line.   He really reminds me of Petry, can fill in as top pairing guy but you don’t want him there for long.  Mobile, good offensive instincts although I think Petry was more physical at that age range.

 

Ive been critical above but do like the player, think he has been a bright spot in some dark times.  He will fetch a great return as long as he stays healthy.

He has been a valuable player for Habs and I am fine with parting with him is simply because we need the quality return to be had from moving him, we have young dmen that are soon ready to be challenged with more duties, his age is a little high for the team’s trajectory. 
Don’t see how picks help at this point so hopefully they receive a high ceiling (floor of top 6) forward in return from a team with injuries, need for speedy D.  
Wit no research can see Vegas, Dallas, Minnesota,  Arizona (crazy to think) as teams with need for adding players for a push this year or next.

Jersey need d help now, Calgaryay if they move out Hannifin and Tanev, so I believe there will be a healthy market for a prime Mattheson, even with a couple years left on his deal.

[DON]

How could they trade Matheson?

Seems kooky to me.

 

Leave Guhle-Struble-Xhekaj-Harris as young left-d?

Would be youngest left side group ever i would guess.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

41 minutes ago, DON said:

How could they trade Matheson?

Seems kooky to me.

 

Leave Guhle-Struble-Xhekaj-Harris as young left-d?

Would be youngest left side group ever i would guess.

 

 

That was my first thought as well. 

 

One the other hand…

 

1. This is not a playoff team so losing him does not sabotage any immediate goals

2. Guhle and Kovacevic will be in their third season each next year; it might be time for us to mentally remove the training wheels

3. We could get a huge return for him

4. We might be able to add a lower-level veteran LD via free agency to continue to give the young D some buffer

 

So if you can get a king’s ransom back, and have a plausible prospect of adding a decent-not-stellar LD to replace him as a UFA, then why not trade him?

 

[GHT120]

2 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

That was my first thought as well. 

 

One the other hand…

 

1. This is not a playoff team so losing him does not sabotage any immediate goals

2. Guhle and Kovacevic will be in their third season each next year; it might be time for us to mentally remove the training wheels

3. We could get a huge return for him

4. We might be able to add a lower-level veteran LD via free agency to continue to give the young D some buffer

 

So if you can get a king’s ransom back, and have a plausible prospect of adding a decent-not-stellar LD to replace him as a UFA, then why not trade him?

The questions are (1) what constitutes a huge return/kings' ransom and (2) who would be willing to pay it?

 

For the same reasons you are willing to trade him I am not certain many teams would offer the type of return for which you hope.

 

But if someone did make such an offer, then Hughes should jump on it.

[Prime Minister Koivu]

Some of last year’s shine has fallen off of Matheson for me. Yes, he continues to show incredible speed and adeptness in transition and the Ozone but holy crap Matheson makes brutal decisions with the puck in the Dzone - especially under pressure. 

[TurdBurglar]

45 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Some of last year’s shine has fallen off of Matheson for me. Yes, he continues to show incredible speed and adeptness in transition and the Ozone but holy crap Matheson makes brutal decisions with the puck in the Dzone - especially under pressure. 

He's basically Petry 2.0.  We've seen Petry's best years while playing 2nd pair with Weber anchoring the first pair.  We've seen Petry struggle when thrust in the first pair role.  While Petry is a more desirable RHD, Matheson has far better skating than Petry. 

 

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

We could get a huge return for him

 

So if you can get a king’s ransom back, and have a plausible prospect of adding a decent-not-stellar LD to replace him as a UFA, then why not trade him?

 

A return of a top-4 defenseman, a top-6 forward or higher-end prospect in a straight 1-for-1 isn't out of the question. 

 

I wonder if maybe Nashville would revisit trading Askarov, for Matheson in some form of package.  All reports are they are looking to resign Saros, who is only 28.

[DON]

2 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

I wonder if maybe Nashville would revisit trading Askarov, for Matheson in some form of package.  All reports are they are looking to resign Saros, who is only 28.

Matheson Savard arnt being traded this year.

Maybe in summer/off-season it might make sense, this season, NO.

[tomh009]

3 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

A return of a top-4 defenseman, a top-6 forward or higher-end prospect in a straight 1-for-1 isn't out of the question.

I think a D swap would be unlikely, a team that needs Matheson probably doesn't have a surplus of top-four D. And we don't really need another D-man, either.

[TurdBurglar]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Matheson Savard arnt being traded this year.

Maybe in summer/off-season it might make sense, this season, NO.

 

As long as there's no salary retention, there's no reason they can't be from Montreal's standpoint.  Not that I'm advocating either be traded.  I still believe there's an outside chance they are a bubble team.

 

11 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I think a D swap would be unlikely, a team that needs Matheson probably doesn't have a surplus of top-four D. And we don't really need another D-man, either.

 

I was using it as a measure of value, not a wish list. 

[dlbalr]

8 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

I wonder if maybe Nashville would revisit trading Askarov, for Matheson in some form of package.  All reports are they are looking to resign Saros, who is only 28.

 

I don't think they would.  Their top two LD's are locked in for the next three years already (Josi and McDonagh), do they want to move their top prospect for a second-pairing guy?  (McDonagh would probably drop down a pairing.)  For a team that seems to be in a soft rebuild, that might not make sense for them.

[BCHabnut]

I think Matheson is better than petry was in Montreal. He is a 1st pair player now imo. Absolute steal of a trade. Habs have a full cupboard defensively. I wouldn't be against trading him.

[GHT120]

5 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

I think Matheson is better than petry was in Montreal. He is a 1st pair player now imo. Absolute steal of a trade. Habs have a full cupboard defensively. I wouldn't be against trading him.

It was a steal of a trade ... Petry had passed the apex of his career ... Matheson is a clear 1st pairing D in Montreal ... but I am not certain he is 1st pairing D on a legit Cup contender ... THAT said ... it has to be an excellent return if Mike is to be traded ... I expect Savard to be the veteran dealt ... lower AAV less term and the type of defenceman that teams prize for the more "rough & tumble" playoffs.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

It was a steal of a trade ... Petry had passed the apex of his career ... Matheson is a clear 1st pairing D in Montreal ... but I am not certain he is 1st pairing D on a legit Cup contender ... THAT said ... it has to be an excellent return if Mike is to be traded ... I expect Savard to be the veteran dealt ... lower AAV less term and the type of defenceman that teams prize for the more "rough & tumble" playoffs.

 

Agreed, no need to trade Matheson but if the right deal comes along??  I wasn't excited about the Petry trade at the time but looking back it was a very smart move. Savard is the kind of warrior that teams love to have in the playoffs. If he didn't have an extra year left on his contract then he would almost certainly be moved for a decent return. 

[GHT120]

25 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Agreed, no need to trade Matheson but if the right deal comes along??  I wasn't excited about the Petry trade at the time but looking back it was a very smart move. Savard is the kind of warrior that teams love to have in the playoffs. If he didn't have an extra year left on his contract then he would almost certainly be moved for a decent return. 

His 24/25 AAV is not "ridiculous" (tied for 47th amongst RHD) ... so not certain it is an obstacle.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

His 24/25 AAV is not "ridiculous" (tied for 47th amongst RHD) ... so not certain it is an obstacle.

 

Certainly not a ridiculous contract, the extra year might just lessen the number of suitors who would be interested. 

[DON]

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Certainly not a ridiculous contract, the extra year might just lessen the number of suitors who would be interested. 

Also, would leave zero vet RH-d, cant see happening this season.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, DON said:

Also, would leave zero vet RH-d, cant see happening this season.

 

More likely to happen next season but if Hughes gets the right offer I think he will pull the trigger. 

[GHT120]

Just now, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

More likely to happen next season but if Hughes gets the right offer I think he will pull the trigger. 

Exactly ... it wouldn't be a trade to dispose of Savard, but to optimize assets.

[tomh009]

33 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Exactly ... it wouldn't be a trade to dispose of Savard, but to optimize assets.

Right. And we have managed without veteran RHD for a third of a season. Next year Kovacevic and Barron/Harris will be that much more experienced, so it will be less of an issue than the first part of this season.

[TurdBurglar]

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Right. And we have managed without veteran RHD for a third of a season. Next year Kovacevic and Barron/Harris will be that much more experienced, so it will be less of an issue than the first part of this season.

There's also the possibility of looking at free agency if Savard gets traded and they don't feel Kovacevic is ready enough. 

 

Next year should be a playoff push year and without Savard I don't think the RD is strong enough to get the team in the playoffs. I doubt Reinbacher or Mailloux will be ready enough for top-4 minutes.  I also don't think Kovacevic/Harris/Barron will ever be playoff top-pair defenceman, 2nd pair at best.  I could just be pessimistic about it.

 

That being said, I really see a move coming for either Kovacevic, Harris or Barron.  Space will have to be made for Reinbacher and Mailloux.

 

It's fun to have these types of issues with defense, isn't it?

[Commandant]

52 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

There's also the possibility of looking at free agency if Savard gets traded and they don't feel Kovacevic is ready enough. 

 

Next year should be a playoff push year and without Savard I don't think the RD is strong enough to get the team in the playoffs. I doubt Reinbacher or Mailloux will be ready enough for top-4 minutes.  I also don't think Kovacevic/Harris/Barron will ever be playoff top-pair defenceman, 2nd pair at best.  I could just be pessimistic about it.

 

That being said, I really see a move coming for either Kovacevic, Harris or Barron.  Space will have to be made for Reinbacher and Mailloux.

 

It's fun to have these types of issues with defense, isn't it?

 

While its true that none of Kovacevic/Harris/Barron is worthy of being a top pair defenceman on a playoff team.  The fact is that at his current age, neither is Savard, so trading him next year isnt creating a hole.  The hole in the lineup exists, Savard or no Savard.

[alfredoh2009]

some rumblings on Savard:

 

Quote

That’s why Savard could become a valuable commodity for Canadiens GM Kent Hughes ahead of the March 8 NHL trade deadline.

 

Quote

When the Lightning acquired Savard ahead of the 2021 NHL trade deadline they only had to give up a fourth-round draft pick. Hughes will be hoping to get more than that after acquiring a conditional first-round pick as part of the package from the Florida Panthers when he dealt defenceman Ben Chiarot ahead of the 2022 NHL trade deadline.

My column on the important role veteran defenceman David Savard plays on Canadiens, which is why he could be a valuable commodity for GM Kent Hughes ahead of the March 8 NHL trade deadline #Habs #HabsIO: https://t.co/3sf6ZeehVw

— Stu Cowan (@StuCowan1) December 15, 2023

 

[PMAC]

16 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

some rumblings on Savard:

 

 

 

Didn’t quote the right portion but some where in there was a statement that Tampa only gave up a 4th to get Savard. The return was a 1st 2021 and 3rd (2022) with  a 4th going to Detroit for salary retention 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/lightning-acquire-david-savard-blue-jackets-three-team-trade/sn-amp/

Contending teams love to add guys like Savard who sacrifice their body to win. And for some teams, that reasonably priced additional year is an advantage. Given Hughes’ trade record, I don’t expect Savard to be traded this season unless the return is really good.