Jump to content

Permanent Rumour Thread


Fanpuck33

Recommended Posts

Heard that Blackhawks are trying to trade Bickell - nothing new ($4 million) but they may have to give up Tuevo Teravainen in any trade involving Bickell (according to ESPN's Craig Custance). Teravainen had 38 points last season and he's 21 years old.

Interesting. Our first round pick + what/who?

Don't think I would trade 9 for the Finn straight up. Be better in short run of course, but a Jost/Keller would likely have higher 'ceiling' and then there is boat anchor Bickell to consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our first round pick for a once highly touted prospect who is now 22 and done very little plus a forward with a boat anchor of a contract?

Not a chance.

I'd lynch Bergevin myself for such a stupid trade.

I wouldn't trade #9 for Teuvo straight up, without that stupid Bickell contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those kind of trades have always been fantasy anyway. I can't think of a time when a high quality prospect was wrapped like bacon onto a shit sandwich cap anchor. Even if it has happened once, it rarely happens.

Chicago isn't in some sort of perilous trouble. Toews, Kane, Hossa, Anisimov, Teuvo, Panarin and Desjardins are signed and coming back. That's 7 of 13. Shaw and Panik are RFA and won't be getting huge raises. That's 9. Seabrook, Keith, Hjal, TVR, Gustafsson and Svedberg make 6 defencemen. Crawford and Darling are signed. That means Chicago can either continue to dump Bickell's $4M in the minors or buy him out for a $1M and $1.5M cap hit in the next two years. Much more manageable than selling Teuvo out just to save $4M. I believe if the NHLPA votes to up the cap, Chicago has a good $10 million to spend on four forwards and an extra defenceman, more if they buyout or bury Bickell.

That's plenty for Chicago to maybe call up Ville Pokka to defence and maybe give a roster spot or two to Vinnie Hinostrosa or Mark McNeil, plus add a couple free agents. All make more sense than trading Teuvo just to get rid of one year of Bickel, especially since Bickel has been really good for the Rockford Ice Hogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: I don't mind the name per say :) I was saying more if they picked the name from the black knight character in the Monty Python movie then (be it very long for a name :D ) I like the response from the film (once he has all his limbs cut off): I can still fight it's just a flesh wound :rofl:

They should play the audio (its just a flesh wound) after every goal scored against the Las Vegas team.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should play the audio (its just a flesh wound) after every goal scored against the Las Vegas team.

I'm pretty sure that if the name is 'Black Knights,' the team will embrace that skit (e.g., jokingly play it on the Jumbotron when the team is getting beaten bad, etc.). And if they don't, the fans will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, let's change the subject. Bob McKenzie is reporting hat Columbus is willing to trade the #3 pick if they can stay in the top-10. That puts the Habs, theoretically, in play.

Any speculation as to what we've have to give up along with the #9 pick? Relatedly: what would you be willing to give up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, let's change the subject. Bob McKenzie is reporting hat Columbus is willing to trade the #3 pick if they can stay in the top-10. That puts the Habs, theoretically, in play.

Any speculation as to what we've have to give up along with the #9 pick? Relatedly: what would you be willing to give up?

One of Fucale, Sherbak, McCarron, + #9 for the #3? Too much maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of Fucale, Sherbak, McCarron, + #9 for the #3? Too much maybe?

There's a big difference in value between those three prospects. I'd suggest that more would need to be added as none of those three are surefire impact NHL'ers down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big difference in value between those three prospects. I'd suggest that more would need to be added as none of those three are surefire impact NHL'ers down the road.

Yeah, no doubt in my mind you are right Brian, so add more/what it takes, to be able to get a true NHL impact player, would be fine by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, let's change the subject. Bob McKenzie is reporting hat Columbus is willing to trade the #3 pick if they can stay in the top-10. That puts the Habs, theoretically, in play.

Any speculation as to what we've have to give up along with the #9 pick? Relatedly: what would you be willing to give up?

A lot.

Gallagher.

Would be an instant upgrade on RW, if Pujujarvi is as promoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot.

Gallagher.

Would be an instant upgrade on RW, if Pujujarvi is as promoted.

In my humble opinion, no one can replace Brendan 'work the arse off ya' Gallagher.

Try to find 25+ Goal 60 point (healthy projection) players who piss off the other team and lead by example each and every night. Very very very few exist.

Not sure adding puljujarvi and subtracting Gallagher helps the team at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my humble opinion, no one can replace Brendan 'work the arse off ya' Gallagher.

Try to find 25+ Goal 60 point (healthy projection) players who piss off the other team and lead by example each and every night. Very very very few exist.

Not sure adding puljujarvi and subtracting Gallagher helps the team at all.

BUT, to get 3rd pick...you must agree that Columbus will be asking for that kind (and likely more) of a return.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT, to get 3rd pick...you must agree that Columbus will be asking for that kind (and likely more) of a return.

It's possible, but I don't trade Gallagher either.

I'm also not 100% certain that that level of return would be required. Remember, they'd still be getting back a top-10 pick - a valuable commodity.

The problem we'd have in making the deal is that we might be competing with franchises that are closer to the 'rebuilding' stage than we are (e.g., Edmonton, Arizona, Buffalo), and therefore would be more willing to ship out a quality player in their prime as part of the package. Even if it doesn't take a Gallagher, it would require someone that we probably don't want to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's possible, but I don't trade Gallagher either.

I'm also not 100% certain that that level of return would be required. Remember, they'd still be getting back a top-10 pick - a valuable commodity.

The problem we'd have in making the deal is that we might be competing with franchises that are closer to the 'rebuilding' stage than we are (e.g., Edmonton, Arizona, Buffalo), and therefore would be more willing to ship out a quality player in their prime as part of the package. Even if it doesn't take a Gallagher, it would require someone that we probably don't want to lose.

Like who then? 9th+39th + Beaulieu your thinking maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like who then? 9th+39th + Beaulieu your thinking maybe?

Beaulieu is always a likely candidate. Young, cheap, projects to be a legit top-4 D-man.

My problem here is that I don't have much of a sense of what Columbus needs or wants. But I would not be completely floored if 9th pick + Beaulieu + some other second-tier asset were sufficient to get the deal done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9th to 3rd is a huge jump and CC you asked what would be willing to give up.

I would be 'willing' to part with Gallagher , Beaulieu, or any Hab prospect for the big Finn.

Would it be overpayment? Maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9th to 3rd is a huge jump and CC you asked what would be willing to give up.

I would be 'willing' to part with Gallagher , Beaulieu, or any Hab prospect for the big Finn.

Would it be overpayment? Maybe?

I would not consider Gallagher + 9th if that's what's you're saying. Beaulieu + 9th yes, but Columbus probably doesn't do that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9th to 3rd is a huge jump and CC you asked what would be willing to give up.

I would be 'willing' to part with Gallagher , Beaulieu, or any Hab prospect for the big Finn.

Would it be overpayment? Maybe?

Getting on the sauce early today Don? :lol:

No way do I even think about trading Gallagher in any form for the 3rd pick. The guy is a heart and soul type guy who can easily score 25 goals a year and is locked up at 3.75m per season for the next 5 years. And he is only getting better each year. One of the best values in the entire league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gallagher is 17th for PPG of right wingers in the past 3 seasons (at least 200 games played). There are only 20 right wingers in the NHL that have scored at a 0.50 point per game pace or higher in the past three seasons. You're giving up one of the 20 best right wingers for Jesse Pujujarvi?

I mean, all the power to ya?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not consider Gallagher + 9th if that's what's you're saying. Beaulieu + 9th yes, but Columbus probably doesn't do that

I absolutely love Gallagher, and would not want to trade him, BUT he is a little guy who plays much bigger than he is, however guys like him tend to get worn down faster than the big guys. So if we were able to pick up the #3 draft pick. I would have to think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gallagher is 17th for PPG of right wingers in the past 3 seasons (at least 200 games played). There are only 20 right wingers in the NHL that have scored at a 0.50 point per game pace or higher in the past three seasons. You're giving up one of the 20 best right wingers for Jesse Pujujarvi?

I mean, all the power to ya?

17 RW in production...seeing that stat I would think it is more reasonable than I first thought to deal him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What that shows is that Gallagher is a legitimate top-line RW. Add to that a great contract and his off-the-chart intangibles, I have to agree that Gallagher is an overpay. Yes, he might break down relatively young, but even if he's done by 30, that's another 5-6 years of terrific play and leadership. Meanwhile, what if it takes the Pujujarvi 2-3 years to grow into his potential? We'll actually have weakened our team right in the middle of its Cup window. A dodgy move for a team that is not rebuilding.

Beaulieu would leave a big, structural hole as well, but at least it doesn't - potentially - handicap us further at our weakest area (top-6 FW) for the next couple of seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting on the sauce early today Don? :lol:

No way do I even think about trading Gallagher in any form for the 3rd pick. The guy is a heart and soul type guy who can easily score 25 goals a year and is locked up at 3.75m per season for the next 5 years. And he is only getting better each year. One of the best values in the entire league.

Heart and soul :wub: , Bah Humbug! He is a smurf who has already peaked and can only take a beating like he does for so long before is worn down.

So "We like this guy"... so no way can even propose trading him eh and we think it is Habs Mgmt who are ultra-conservative, but fanbase seems even worse and almost terrified to buy-in on any proposed big deal. :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What that shows is that Gallagher is a legitimate top-line RW. Add to that a great contract and his off-the-chart intangibles, I have to agree that Gallagher is an overpay. Yes, he might break down relatively young, but even if he's done by 30, that's another 5-6 years of terrific play and leadership. Meanwhile, what if it takes the Pujujarvi 2-3 years to grow into his potential? We'll actually have weakened our team right in the middle of its Cup window. A dodgy move for a team that is not rebuilding.

Beaulieu would leave a big, structural hole as well, but at least it doesn't - potentially - handicap us further at our weakest area (top-6 FW) for the next couple of seasons.

On the Habs Gallagher is a #1 RWer, who else they got to play there?

Intangibles, hocus pocus stuff, the big Finn would fill his slot in 4 months, not years. Galchenyuk- Pacioretty-Pujujarvi sounds nice to me.

And also frees up more cap space to add a Okposo to beef up the RW slot, so WIn-Win. :popcorn:

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...