Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

OK by me. That’s one of those contracts that encroaches upon the rebuild - we should ship it out if we can IMHO.

 

Aside from Price, it will be the toughest contract to get rid of. We know that Bergevin likes him,  LA might be a fit with Brown retiring. We should definitely ship it out if we can. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at a hockey trade for Hoffman. Who would you pick out of these choices? Wennberg (SEA) is a very close match, but I would love to have Beuvilier to play with Suzuki and Caufield.

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Looking at a hockey trade for Hoffman. Who would you pick out of these choices? Wennberg (SEA) is a very close match, but I would love to have Beuvilier to play with Suzuki and Caufield.

 

image.png

 

Major age differences on all of those players mean it would need to be Hoffman +

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoffman + 3rd would be great. But much more than that? Maybe 2nd? He will be a UFA in two years, which is not so far away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anderson & a LH d (Romanov/Guhle/Harris) & Habs 2023 1st; for Devils pick#2 this year?:spamafote:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

Anderson & a LH d (Romanov/Guhle/Harris) & Habs 2023 1st; for Devils pick#2 this year?:spamafote:

 

 

Why would you overpay so much for #2 when next year is supposedly a better draft?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Neech said:

Why would you overpay so much for #2 when next year is supposedly a better draft?

We'd be overpaying if we have a good pick next year ... but a top-three pick is far from guaranteed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

We'd be overpaying if we have a good pick next year ... but a top-three pick is far from guaranteed.

 

We're still going to suck and pick in the top 10 if not top 5. Add our best non-Caufield-or-Suzuki forward and our top prospect to that? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I think New Jersey would jump on that in a heartbeat.  That's a lot to give up. 

The powerhorse would be attractive I assume (and get rid of some salary), kinda-sorta could afford losing 1 of the potential 2nd pairing young d and possible lottery pick is unknown value.

But, could make big splash at the draft, getting Wright & next best (Nemec, Cooley?), would be nice bump to prospect pool, even though lose a young d-man and the slim chance of drafting Bedard next year.

I just think it would take ALOT to make Devils trade the pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DON said:

The powerhorse would be attractive I assume (and get rid of some salary), kinda-sorta could afford losing 1 of the potential 2nd pairing young d and possible lottery pick is unknown value.

But, could make big splash at the draft, getting Wright & next best (Nemec, Cooley?), would be nice bump to prospect pool, even though lose a young d-man and the slim chance of drafting Bedard next year.

I just think it would take ALOT to make Devils trade the pick.

No just no. We can’t afford to give up not  only two young dmen - let alone two of our best dmen - but no way do I want to lose a lottery pick next year. And I think we are probably a bottom 19 team next year, probably bottom 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomh009 said:

We'd be overpaying if we have a good pick next year ... but a top-three pick is far from guaranteed.

 

But once traded it is guaranteed not to happen ... in a draft with a true generational player (by all accounts) and by some accounts two ... as well as top-end of the draft depth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

... And I think we are probably a bottom 19 team next year, probably bottom 5.

It is bottom 11 or bust (LOL) to have any chance at Bedard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GHT120 said:

It is bottom 11 or bust (LOL) to have any chance at Bedard.

That was a typo. Me at that we are probably a bottom 10 team next, and more likely even to be bottom 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, DON said:

I just think it would take ALOT to make Devils trade the pick.

 

Agreed it will take a lot and that's why it is unlikely to happen. It's rare for a team to trade a high 1st round pick at the draft.  I would love to see the Habs get both Wright and Slafkovsky but there is no way they can trade their own first next year.  It's fun to speculate though. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, DON said:

Anderson & a LH d (Romanov/Guhle/Harris) & Habs 2023 1st; for Devils pick#2 this year?:spamafote:

 

I would target a team out of the top 3 if Nemec is still available, with: CGY's 2022 1st, Norlinder or Harris and an NHL roster player the other team may want to have outside of Hug-Gort's core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I would target a team out of the top 3 if Nemec is still available, with: CGY's 2022 1st, Norlinder or Harris and an NHL roster player the other team may want to have outside of Hug-Gort's core

 

None of those assets outside of Suzuki/Caufield are worthy of a top-five pick.  It's not remotely feasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dlbalr said:

 

None of those assets outside of Suzuki/Caufield are worthy of a top-five pick.  It's not remotely feasible.

 

Nemec is the only other high pick I would want to trade for. I didn't want to change Don's proposal too much... well I did just that

 

I would not trade next year's Hab's 1st because I want them to tank.

 

It's hard to find a trade partner in the top 5 with what we guess Hug-Gort may offer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, alfredoh2009 said:

It's hard to find a trade partner in the top 5 with what we guess Hug-Gort may offer

 

Yep.  There isn't a realistic solution to get a second top-five pick.  Also keep in mind how rarely those picks get traded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I would not trade next year's Hab's 1st because I want them to tank.

 

It's hard to find a trade partner in the top 5 with what we guess Hug-Gort may offer

But, if trade Habs 1st next year. The whole tank thing for another year goes away and we can all pull for Habs to do as well as possible.

Sens at 7 i heard may be willing to move pick, but seem in same boat as Habs, so non starter.

 

But, if dlbalr thinks 0% this happening, id buy that. Just idea someone else floated out there, as who knows what kind of splash new mgmt willing to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

But, if trade Habs 1st next year. The whole tank thing for another year goes away and we can all pull for Habs to do as well as possible.

 

 

It wouldn't really go away because all next year we would be so worried about having giving up a chance for Bedard that after every losing streak we would be saying "darn we shouldn't have traded our first".  Of course we would pull for the Habs to do as well as possible but that doesn't mean they will. 

 

HuGo is thinking long term so I would be shocked if they traded next year's first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DON said:

Anderson & a LH d (Romanov/Guhle/Harris) & Habs 2023 1st; for Devils pick#2 this year?:spamafote:

 

Good thing our GM is Kent Hughes and not Reggie Houle. That is one horribly ugly trade proposal. Now if they offered Petry, two 2nds and a prospect not listed in the previous proposal say, Mailoux, it might be ok for Montreal, Jersey not so much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DON said:

But, if trade Habs 1st next year. The whole tank thing for another year goes away and we can all pull for Habs to do as well as possible.

Sens at 7 i heard may be willing to move pick, but seem in same boat as Habs, so non starter.

 

But, if dlbalr thinks 0% this happening, id buy that. Just idea someone else floated out there, as who knows what kind of splash new mgmt willing to make.

 

I agree and I also share your feeling about what may or may not be the preferred strategy of the new management

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PMAC said:

 Now if they offered Petry, two 2nds and a prospect not listed in the previous proposal say, Mailoux, it might be ok for Montreal, Jersey not so much. 

Then why even mention an unrealistic scenario? Or you just dont think any pain is required to make significant deal?

Isnt much of that offer NJ would consider,..again not that mine suggestion is great, but seems like one NJ would accept, acceptable loss to Habs long term and i would risk the whole picking #1 again.

 

But, we know it aint happening and just a thought. 

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...