Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Interesting that VGK are shopping Patches. He’s basically their best scorer...seems a slightly odd choice. In any case, I doubt they get many takers; the current climate is so weird and so revenue-free that teams are liable to be hyper risk-averse.

 

It's not that surprising: he's a streaky floater with the charisma of a turnip, at a 7M per season cap hit. They are hoping they can find a taker so they don't have to lose a better asset to get cap compliant.  It's unlikely, but they have got to take a shot at it at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

 

It's not that surprising: he's a streaky floater with the charisma of a turnip, at a 7M per season cap hit. They are hoping they can find a taker so they don't have to lose a better asset to get cap compliant.  It's unlikely, but they have got to take a shot at it at least.

 

That would be fine and all, except for the fact that reports are that Patches is the one they would least like to trade. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/golden-knights-owner-shuts-reports-max-pacioretty-shopped/

 

“We’re not shopping Patches," Foley said. "We do have cap issues, and so some of those things have to be resolved as we go forward, we started getting into the season. But he definitely is not being shopped."

 

Oh and the guy who supposedly doesn't score in the playoffs has 19 points in 23 playoff games with Vegas.  #ThereIsNoSuchThingAsClutch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

That would be fine and all, except for the fact that reports are that Patches is the one they would least like to trade. 

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/golden-knights-owner-shuts-reports-max-pacioretty-shopped/

 

“We’re not shopping Patches," Foley said. "We do have cap issues, and so some of those things have to be resolved as we go forward, we started getting into the season. But he definitely is not being shopped."

 

Oh and the guy who supposedly doesn't score in the playoffs has 19 points in 23 playoff games with Vegas.  #ThereIsNoSuchThingAsClutch

 

On the other hand, his charisma levels are definitely turnip-like 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

That would be fine and all, except for the fact that reports are that Patches is the one they would least like to trade. 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/golden-knights-owner-shuts-reports-max-pacioretty-shopped/

“We’re not shopping Patches," Foley said. "We do have cap issues, and so some of those things have to be resolved as we go forward, we started getting into the season. But he definitely is not being shopped." ...

 

The issue may well be, for all teams trying to get under the cap, not who they want to trade but who are they able to trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

The issue may well be, for all teams trying to get under the cap, not who they want to trade but who are they able to trade.

 

They can get under without trading anyone if they want to carry a minimum roster.  (Waive Nosek and Dahlstrom and then recall/sign a minimum-salaried forward.)  There's obviously a risk to that strategy but if a taxi squad is cap-exempt, they can pull it off.  Of course, for a trade proposal thread, that's not very fun...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 

The issue may well be, for all teams trying to get under the cap, not who they want to trade but who are they able to trade.

 

They don't need 7 million in space.... they are barely over (less than a million) as Brian points out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, sbhatt said:

 

It's not that surprising: he's a streaky floater with the charisma of a turnip, at a 7M per season cap hit. They are hoping they can find a taker so they don't have to lose a better asset to get cap compliant.  It's unlikely, but they have got to take a shot at it at least.

 

If a guy can score 32 goals in 71 games I could care less about charisma. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, dlbalr said:

They can get under without trading anyone if they want to carry a minimum roster.  (Waive Nosek and Dahlstrom and then recall/sign a minimum-salaried forward.)  There's obviously a risk to that strategy but if a taxi squad is cap-exempt, they can pull it off.  Of course, for a trade proposal thread, that's not very fun...

 

13 hours ago, Commandant said:

They don't need 7 million in space.... they are barely over (less than a million) as Brian points out. 

 

Unless they want to move Pacs and then make a top 6 move that allows them to stay cap compliant (for example, sign Hoffman to a 1-yr deal) while gaining future cap flexibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a "bit thin" but interesting none the less ... always fun to think BIG names (how to make room for Hoffman or a Pierre-Luc Dubois offer sheet) but expect it is more likely a high-end 3rd or 4th liner ... 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2020 at 8:39 PM, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

If a guy can score 32 goals in 71 games I could care less about charisma. 

Well, at least Suzuki and Tatar combined for 35 goals last year compared to Pacioretty’s 32.

 

Don’t mind me, I just find the argument you quoted somewhat ridiculous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Well, at least Suzuki and Tatar combined for 35 goals last year compared to Pacioretty’s 32.

 

Don’t mind me, I just find the argument you quoted somewhat ridiculous. 

 

I love the Pacioretty trade, think Suzuki will be a terrific player for a long time. The only point I was trying to make is that if a player produces then i don't care how charismatic the player is. Charisma won't put the puck in the net and win hockey games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Some players are cancer in the change room, though. However, not suggesting that Pacioretty is in that category.

 

Personally, I think the whole “locker room cancer” argument is overblown. I’m not saying it never happens, but I suspect that fans and media suggest that it happens more often than it does. Like “character,” it tends to be a somewhat lazy argument which distracts us from what is really important, i.e., actual results and play on the ice.

 

As for Patches, that trade was a win for both teams. VGK, in “win now” mode, got one of the league’s top goal-scorers and the “intangible” benefit of Pacioretty’s years in the pressure-cooker in Montreal. Montreal, in “retool” mode, got a core piece for the future and a productive FW who for some reason doesn’t produce in the playoffs and had not fit within Vegas’s structure in any case.

 

Patches is an excellent hockey player, and Habs fans who crap on him are picking the wrong target. The real problem with Patches in Montreal was that he was asked to drive the team’s offence, to be *the* key guy up front - but he is a streaky player by nature. The result was that you could not rely on him to drive the bus week in and week out over a long season. People got tired of his act for that reason: we were looking to him to be the engine but he could only do that when he was on a hot streak. The rest of the time he was useless and so was the team. That’s not Pacioretty’s fault; he was miscast in a role that a really good team would not have put him in in the first place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Personally, I think the whole “locker room cancer” argument is overblown. I’m not saying it never happens, but I suspect that fans and media suggest that it happens more often than it does. Like “character,” it tends to be a somewhat lazy argument which distracts us from what is really important, i.e., actual results and play on the ice.

 

It's used too often, I agree. But there are times when a player's behaviour (or his spouse's behaviour!) distracts or demotivates the rest of the team. But, at any given time, I would say there are no more than a handful of such players in the league.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, tomh009 said:
1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Personally, I think the whole “locker room cancer” argument is overblown. I’m not saying it never happens, but I suspect that fans and media suggest that it happens more often than it does. Like “character,” it tends to be a somewhat lazy argument which distracts us from what is really important, i.e., actual results and play on the ice ...


It's used too often, I agree. But there are times when a player's behaviour (or his spouse's behaviour!) distracts or demotivates the rest of the team. But, at any given time, I would say there are no more than a handful of such players in the league.

 

Exactly ... overused but not irrelevant ... as we are not privy to the inner workings of a team fans never truly know the dynamics of a locker room ... unless word eventually seeps out ... only possible issue I recall with Pacs was talk that there may have been some kind of  PK/Pacs split "in the room" when Max was named captain ... sort of like the supposed Koivu/Kovalev split ... BTW ... think there are lots of "neutrals" in any such scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

It's used too often, I agree. But there are times when a player's behaviour (or his spouse's behaviour!) distracts or demotivates the rest of the team. But, at any given time, I would say there are no more than a handful of such players in the league.

 

Agreed ... you just hope your GM isn' the one that hitches his team's wagon to one of them with a multiyear contract because they think they can "change/fix" the player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/23/2020 at 11:07 AM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Personally, I think the whole “locker room cancer” argument is overblown. I’m not saying it never happens, but I suspect that fans and media suggest that it happens more often than it does. Like “character,” it tends to be a somewhat lazy argument which distracts us from what is really important, i.e., actual results and play on the ice.

 

You are correct The third Hawks Cup winner had many players who openly hated each other, and many huge locker room blowups during that season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would this trade between Pittsburgh and Montreal make sense?

 

To Pittsburgh : Weal ($1.4M) and Mete ($0.735M)

To Montreal : Sam Lafferty ($0.750M)

 

I think this would improve Pittsburgh both in their bottom forwards and defense

 

It will give Montreal come cap relief and a waiver exempt forward with ok face-off numbers, speed and size. A good fit for the taxi squad

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem for Pittsburgh is that neither of who they'd be getting is waiver-exempt.  Mete would be their 7th D at best and Weal would have to be waived for Pittsburgh to be cap-compliant and wouldn't crack their top-12.  They'd just be better off keeping Lafferty and being able to shuttle him back and forth to save some cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Trizzak said:

With all the draft capital and prospect depth Montreal has, I wonder if sending Weal with a 3rd round pick to someone like New Jersey or LA would make sense. 

 

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Or Chicago? They will be struggling with both Toews and Dach missing from the lineup.

 

Much as I like Byron as a player, I think he is the guy that the Habs should "pay" to move ... it could take more as PB has two more years on his deal at a higher cap hit; but of course he is also far more useful.

 

Trading Weal puts the Habs about $284K under the cap ceiling ... whereas moving Byron puts them about $2.284 under the cap ceiling ... one is "getting legal" the other is "and also having some breathing room".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, tomh009 said:

So, what would we have to give up to get someone to take Byron? He's not a complete write-off (a la Alzner) but clearly his salary is out of sync with his level of play.


I don’t think his salary is the issue. Las time I checked (a couple of months ago) most teams have a 15-20g bottom 6 player on their roster with a similar contract

I think that the lower salary cap is the issue

 

I think a team near the salary floor or a cup contending team looking for a PB like player would take him,  for example Pittsburgh ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I don’t think his salary is the issue ... I think that the lower salary cap is the issue ...

Absent the frozen cap the salary isn't much of an issue ... so:

 

 

39 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

... I think a team near the salary floor or a cup contending team looking for a PB like player would take him,  for example Pittsburgh ;) 

 

Don't know about Pittsburgh (they are only $1.3M under the cap and MB wouldn't want to take salary back ... unless it was Crosby in a much larger trade) and I believe that all teams are already over the floor ... but I could see him being a fit in Columbus with Torts ... maybe Nashville

 

 

 

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...