Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I like that, when Price returns he Koskinen can be waived to avoid loosing Montembault. Or Montee can stay in the taxi squad if it is still around.

 

Montembeault won't be eligible for the taxi squad.  Anyone who has been on an NHL roster more than 75% of the season isn't eligible.  He also would have to clear waivers to go there if he was eligible.  And, unless there's a big change in policy, the taxi squads are eliminated after the All-Star Game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

The only way this works for Montreal is if they know Price is for sure not coming back this season.  Otherwise, they may not be able to open up enough cap room to activate him (they probably have to go with a 21-man roster if everyone aside from Weber were to be healthy at some point).  I know others will be moved but if there's retention on those players, they may not be able to free up enough to cover Koskinen's salary outright.  If Price wants to play (or a team wants him to play to see if he has recovered), I'd hate for something like this to prevent it from happening.  But it's a creative idea though that I like.  If Price gets ruled out for the year, this is the type of move they should be looking at.

 

 

It's not about getting points and wins - Koskinen isn't exactly an NHL-calibre goalie at the moment and playing him would actually increase Montreal's chances of losing.  The purpose to the deal is to add the draft pick that comes as the sweetener to take Koskinen's contract.  Primeau isn't NHL-ready and continuing to run him out there would be more detrimental to his development than beneficial.  He needs to play a lot of games and the spot for that to happen is in Laval, not Montreal.

Why not see what he has by playing him in NHL this year. The experience would be a plus for him and help him to see what he needs to work on next year in Laval. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Why not see what he has by playing him in NHL this year. The experience would be a plus for him and help him to see what he needs to work on next year in Laval. 

 

Because putting in a player when he's clearly not ready can actually hurt his confidence and development.  There's a pretty significant risk of that happening based on the history of goalie prospects around the league.  Primeau has clearly demonstrated he's not ready.  What does he need to work on?  Everything and it's a lot easier to do that with frequent reps in the minors than limited reps in the NHL where teams will continue to exploit his weaknesses.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Why not see what he has by playing him in NHL this year. The experience would be a plus for him and help him to see what he needs to work on next year in Laval. 

Are you serious?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

I like that, when Price returns he Koskinen can be waived to avoid loosing Montembault. Or Montee can stay in the taxi squad if it is still around.

 

You have to.waive a player to go on the taxi squad (if that player needs waivers).  Taxi isnt a way to get someone off the roster without waivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Commandant said:

You have to.waive a player to go on the taxi squad (if that player needs waivers).  Taxi isnt a way to get someone off the roster without waivers.

 

got it now

 

got it now

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

We can't trade allen now.

 

However, I have an alternate option. 

 

Oilers Trade Mikko Koskinen (cap dump) plus a draft pick to Montreal.  We throw in some Laval player we don't care to resign after this season (just to not add to our 50 contracts), perhaps Baddock or Teasdale

 

In this way, we can let Primeau develop in the minors and run a Koskinen/Montembault tandem while Allen and Price are allowed to fully recover from long-term injuries. 

 

The oilers get the cap relief they need to make their other trades for a goalie and perhaps another piece.

 

That's a creative way to get extra picks and I am sure there will be other opportunities for the Habs to take on short term contracts for extra picks to give contending teams cap relief.  The way I see it the cup is really wide open this year with no clear favourite and perhaps 10-12 teams that have legitimate shots.  There should be opportunities for the Habs to get additional picks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

That's a creative way to get extra picks and I am sure there will be other opportunities for the Habs to take on short term contracts for extra picks to give contending teams cap relief.  The way I see it the cup is really wide open this year with no clear favourite and perhaps 10-12 teams that have legitimate shots.  There should be opportunities for the Habs to get additional picks. 

 

I am wondering whether Hughes et al should be targeting 2023 picks ... especially if their evaluation is that a potential trade partner is likely to slip next season ... and some GMs are more willing to give up higher picks in later drafts, so a second might turn into a first (etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

like we say in Pori: "A bird in the teltta is worth two in the maapuoli”

 

Let's pick the best now so that they graduate to the NHL one year sooner

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

I am wondering whether Hughes et al should be targeting 2023 picks ... especially if their evaluation is that a potential trade partner is likely to slip next season ... and some GMs are more willing to give up higher picks in later drafts, so a second might turn into a first (etc).

I assume you get bit extra something-something by deferring picks, say if a contender already dealt away their 2022 pick (like Aves/Panthers/Knights/Carolina).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

I am wondering whether Hughes et al should be targeting 2023 picks ... especially if their evaluation is that a potential trade partner is likely to slip next season ... and some GMs are more willing to give up higher picks in later drafts, so a second might turn into a first (etc).

I would be surprised if he won’t. It only makes sense from a prospect management perspective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Are there any deals with Carolina to be made for a prospect, their GM hinted that although no 1st pick left...they do have depth in prospects and Wheeler (not that he is gold standard) has them as a top 5 farm system. 

Would Chiarot be good fit there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/22/2022 at 9:03 AM, GHT120 said:

 

I am wondering whether Hughes et al should be targeting 2023 picks ... especially if their evaluation is that a potential trade partner is likely to slip next season ... and some GMs are more willing to give up higher picks in later drafts, so a second might turn into a first (etc).

 

I think that's a very reasonable suggestion. We have seen first hand how teams can slip from one year to the next.  I am absolutely fine with having an extra 2023 1st rounder.  I expect trade talks to heat up soon now that we are into February and Gorton/Hughes have had some time to settle in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I think that's a very reasonable suggestion. We have seen first hand how teams can slip from one year to the next.  I am absolutely fine with having an extra 2023 1st rounder.  I expect trade talks to heat up soon now that we are into February and Gorton/Hughes have had some time to settle in. 

 

Maybe…but there is a danger in trying to be “too clever by half.” I have no problem with acquiring 2023 picks, but projections about how other teams will fare next season should not be the basis of our rebuilding strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, DON said:

Are there any deals with Carolina to be made for a prospect, their GM hinted that although no 1st pick left...they do have depth in prospects and Wheeler (not that he is gold standard) has them as a top 5 farm system. 

Would Chiarot be good fit there?

 

Chiarot would be a good fit for a lot of teams but he'd be a third-pairing guy in Carolina playing behind Slavin and Skjei.  Does it make sense for the Hurricanes to part with one of their better prospects (in lieu of the first-rounder that they don't have) for an upgrade on the third pairing?  I'm not sure that's the best use of their resources.  They're well into LTIR and basically only have enough cap space for one move unless they move someone like Ian Cole out.  I don't think that one move should be with the Habs.  I think they should be looking for a middle-six winger with some team control that can bolster their depth now and hedge against some cap-necessitated departures in the summer (Trocheck and Niederreiter are UFAs while Kotkaniemi and Necas are RFAs and they can't afford all of them).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

Are there any deals with Carolina to be made for a prospect, their GM hinted that although no 1st pick left...they do have depth in prospects and Wheeler (not that he is gold standard) has them as a top 5 farm system ...

I like the concept ... If a top prospect is available that could be more valuable than a first round pick ... depending on the prospect and the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Maybe…but there is a danger in trying to be “too clever by half.” I have no problem with acquiring 2023 picks, but projections about how other teams will fare next season should not be the basis of our rebuilding strategy.

 

I don't think it's so much the Habs doing the projecting. If a team is willing to give up a first round pick this year then they are obviously a team in contention and that pick is likely 25-32. If that same team is willing to give up a pick for next year then that team is obviously thinking/hoping that it will be another low first round pick. They could be wrong and the Habs could really benefit if things go wrong for that team  next year. 

 

I am just saying that if a contending team offered the Habs a choice of a 1st round pick this year or one next year then I would rather take next year's as that  pick has a better chance of being a higher pick. Of course that requires more patience. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

Chiarot would be a good fit for a lot of teams but he'd be a third-pairing guy in Carolina playing behind Slavin and Skjei.  Does it make sense for the Hurricanes to part with one of their better prospects (in lieu of the first-rounder that they don't have) for an upgrade on the third pairing?  I'm not sure that's the best use of their resources.  They're well into LTIR and basically only have enough cap space for one move unless they move someone like Ian Cole out.  I don't think that one move should be with the Habs.  I think they should be looking for a middle-six winger with some team control that can bolster their depth now and hedge against some cap-necessitated departures in the summer (Trocheck and Niederreiter are UFAs while Kotkaniemi and Necas are RFAs and they can't afford all of them).

 

That sounds like Lehkonen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amidst all the love for Lehks, we might keep in mind that he is turning 27 on an expiring contract, with his value at its highest it has ever been by far. If I’m him, I insist on term this time. In terms of cap management, this does not bode well for a “value signing.” 

 

I don’t know how much that matters on a rebuilding team. All I’m saying is that the folks currently suggesting that we keep Lehks might be the same voices later complaining about his next contract. 

 

He is almost the prototypical example of a player you should ship out at about this juncture, because a good organization will always have Lehkonens coming up through the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Amidst all the love for Lehks, we might keep in mind that he is turning 27 on an expiring contract, with his value at its highest it has ever been by far. If I’m him, I insist on term this time. In terms of cap management, this does not bode well for a “value signing.” 

 

I don’t know how much that matters on a rebuilding team. All I’m saying is that the folks currently suggesting that we keep Lehks might be the same voices later complaining about his next contract. 

 

I agree, sell high, buy low. I really like Lehks but there may not be a better time to sell. IF and that's a big "IF" they can get a 1st rounder then you jump all over it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chiarot, Petry, Lehkonen, Anderson, Toffoli, Hoffman, Byron, Allen, Kulak, Wideman all should have For Sale signs on them, but should be no rush to get rid of them, aside from Chiarot.

All kids, Armia, Savard, Edmundson assume staying put.

If a new contract for Lehkonen works under the cap, i dont think his value would be much less next March. He may have bigger role on rebuilding Habs and show some offense again next season. Caufield, Suzuki, Poheling, Wright will need some quality vets to play with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DON said:

Caufield, Suzuki, Poheling, Wright will need some quality vets to play with. 

Right. Am waiting to see who those vets ("the keepers") are in the Gorton/Hughes plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

Right. Am waiting to see who those vets ("the keepers") are in the Gorton/Hughes plan.

And we wont know that till July/Aug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, DON said:

... Caufield, Suzuki, Poheling, Wright will need some quality vets to play with. 

Depends on what is meant by "quality" ... if it is top-6 on a legit playoff team(e.g., Toffoli) then not IMO for next season ...  my priority for next season would be to have them play with hard-working 16/17&17/18-Byron-ish players who can help their development AND set an example.

 

BTW - LOVE the optimism of listing Wright

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Amidst all the love for Lehks, we might keep in mind that he is turning 27 on an expiring contract, with his value at its highest it has ever been by far. If I’m him, I insist on term this time. In terms of cap management, this does not bode well for a “value signing.” 

 

I don’t know how much that matters on a rebuilding team. All I’m saying is that the folks currently suggesting that we keep Lehks might be the same voices later complaining about his next contract. 

 

He could also simply opt for another one-year deal to get him to unrestricted free agency as soon as possible.  That's a strategy a lot of players take - it's either a long-term pact or we go to arbitration and take the one-year award.  That's exactly what happened with Anderson, actually - Bergevin had an ultimatum of one year or seven from Anderson's agent.

 

1 hour ago, DON said:

If a new contract for Lehkonen works under the cap, i dont think his value would be much less next March. He may have bigger role on rebuilding Habs and show some offense again next season. Caufield, Suzuki, Poheling, Wright will need some quality vets to play with. 

 

Part of what makes Lehkonen's value what it is (and I think it's a bit overstated, to be honest) is that he's coming off a good showing in the playoffs.  That resonates with a general manager - here is a player who just went through the grind and did well.  The further you get away from that, the worse it is from a value perspective.  Now, it's 'here's a player who went through the grind and did well a couple of years ago but since then has played on a lousy team so he isn't contributing to success like he was before'. 

 

If Lehkonen signs a long-term deal, his trade value drops in a flat cap environment as a lot of teams don't want to take on long-term money right now.  If he takes a one-year deal, he become a pure rental next February at the 2023 deadline.  From a trade value perspective, it's as high as it's ever going to get as the acquiring team then gets to evaluate him in their system and then decide if they want to do a long-term contract or another short-term one rather than having that decision forced upon them.

  • Like 1
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...