Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

21 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Apologies all .... misread CapFriendly ... can't wait for the "cap year" switch-over.

  

 

It's ok, when it happens to me I just call it a senior's moment and move forward. I am confident your next trade proposal will be better.  LOL Don't let it discourage you!

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

I know Kaliyev has been brought up here before. It doesn't sound like Rob Blake is trying to increase his trade value. 

 

 

Kings Kaliyev 'Didn't Help us Down The Stretch at All" According to Blake - Los Angeles Kings News, Analysis and More (thehockeynews.com)

[alfredoh2009]

I would trade the 5th overall and a defenseman not named Hutson, Reinbacher or Guhle for Batherson.

 

The #GoSensGo have 24 hours to decide if they will forfeit their 2024 1st round pick or push the decision to either 2025 or 2026, due to the invalid Evgenii Dadonov trade.

— CapFriendly (@CapFriendly) May 7, 2024

 

Edited May 8 by alfredoh2009

[Commandant]

Not trading 5th overall and Xhekaj or Mailloux for a 26 year old 65 point guy.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

10 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I would trade the 5th overall and a defenseman not Hamed Hutson, Reinbacher or Guhle for Batherson.

 

 

 

I had forgotten about the penalty. I would almost guarantee the Senators don't forfeit this year since they will most likely be drafting higher in 2025 or 26.  It would be nice if they forfeited this year though as it pushes the Winnipeg pick one spot closer. 

 

I do not make that trade. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

My reasoning for not making that trade is as follows:

 

1) with the 5th pick the Habs could easily get a forward just as good or better than Batherson, someone who is 8 years younger and cheaper for a number of years.  The Habs window to win is not for a couple years.

 

2) the extra defensemen could be used in another deal 

 

3) I don't want to help Ottawa by giving them potentially a young stud (maybe a Lindstrom) that may haunt us for years to come

 

I am not discounting Batherson who is a good player and on a reasonable contract but a no for me. 

 

 

[IN THE HEARTS OF MEN]

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I would trade the 5th overall and a defenseman not Hamed Hutson, Reinbacher or Guhle for Batherson.

 

 

crazy talk

[alfredoh2009]

12 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

My reasoning for not making that trade is as follows:

 

1) with the 5th pick the Habs could easily get a forward just as good or better than Batherson, someone who is 8 years younger and cheaper for a number of years.  The Habs window to win is not for a couple years.

 

2) the extra defensemen could be used in another deal 

 

3) I don't want to help Ottawa by giving them potentially a young stud (maybe a Lindstrom) that may haunt us for years to come

 

I am not discounting Batherson who is a good player and on a reasonable contract but a no for me. 

 

 

 

those are good points, but the Habs would be getting a top-6 forward that plays hard and would complement well Dach-Newhook.

It would cleat the logjam at D, giving the Habs' prospects more minutes to develop.

In my worst scenario, OTT ask for Xhekaj (who would definitely make us pay) and they pick a good player, replacing Batherson in their lineup. I am not too concerned about them improving too much: this is still small-market Ottawa with only a slim chance of keeping a strong core.

 

The Habs solidify the top-6 in the Suzuki/Dach/Newhook/Guhle/Matheson window. They can focus on managing their prospects and building a winning culture.

They still have a late first-round draft this year, and high picks in the other rounds. They still have two first round picks next year. And the Habs would still have a strong prospect pool after this trade.

 

This is the time to do it for the Habs.

[GHT120]

8 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

this is still small-market Ottawa with only a slim chance of keeping a strong core.

Understand your logic, but I would want more than a decent 2nd line winger (more likely 20-25g than 25-30g) for a 5th overall pick and a young defenceman.

 

As for the above quote, while technically true, the Sens now have a real billionaire owner (Melnyk had similar wealth when he bought the team, before he lost half in a divorce and lot$ in securities related fines) who is also backed by similarly (or more) deep-pocketed minority owners.

[alfredoh2009]

12 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Understand your logic, but I would want more than a decent 2nd line winger (more likely 20-25g than 25-30g) for a 5th overall pick and a young defenceman.

 

As for the above quote, while technically true, the Sens now have a real billionaire owner (Melnyk had similar wealth when he bought the team, before he lost half in a divorce and lot$ in securities related fines) who is also backed by similarly (or more) deep-pocketed minority owners.

 

Batherson scored 28 this season, on a weak team. He was one of the best OTT players. With the Habs he would make the Batherson-Dach-Newhook line a solid 1b line, much better than a typical 2nd line. He players all games for the past two years, which is important for the Habs. And he is entering his prime at the same time as Suzuki, and hopefully Dach and Newhook who have looked strong. Slafkovsky and Caufield are very good but IMHO are a year or two away from entering their prime.

 

The Senators have other players to pay and build around ahead of Batherson, they need a stud D. With the plans to build a downtown arena, their ownership will have higher priorities that hanging onto Batherson.

 

I still like my trade proposal.

 

[GHT120]

30 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

The Senators have other players to pay and build around ahead of Batherson, they need a stud D. With the plans to build a downtown arena, their ownership will have higher priorities that hanging onto Batherson.

 

I still like my trade proposal.

We can disagree about Batherson ... my point on the new ownership group is that they are likely to be willing to spend to keep players around ... trades are now likely to be made by the management team focusing solely on building a winning team, without ownership constraints ... I expect Staios to give Green a season to see what the new coach can do with the roster and then make some tough decisions next off-season ... SS may tweak the defence this summer (i.e., Chabot or Chychrun) if the right deal comes up.

[alfredoh2009]

Chabot plays like Barron, and Chychrun cannot defend anymore than Wideman could.

but I digress…

 

Go Habs Go!

[GHT120]

5 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Chabot plays like Barron, and Chychrun cannot defend anymore than Wideman could.

but I digress…

 

Go Habs Go!

(A) Is Chabot really as good as Barron? 😉 😉 😉 

(B) *** WASN'T *** suggesting them for the Habs ... just speculating on what Ottawa might do, if anything "significant", this summer ... I expect those two also fit into the "see what Green can do" philosophy.

[Commandant]

Multiple people have told you the offer is bad.... and you keep doubling down on it. 

 

I'm not giving up a cheap player we'd get at 5th overall and a young D (either Mailloux or Xhekaj according to your proposal) for a guy who is a 60 point winger, already 26 years old, and set to be UFA in 3 years. 

 

Trading the Winnipeg pick as part of a package for a forward and trading a top 5 pick are two entirely different things. 

[GHT120]

Guhle, Mailloux, Jets' 2024 first, habs 2024 third and Calgary's 2025 first to Chicago for #2

 

OR

 

Mailloux, Habs 2024 first and Habs 2024 third for #2

 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

Guhle, Mailloux, Jets' 2024 first, habs 2024 third and Calgary's 2025 first to Chicago for #2

 

OR

 

Mailloux, Habs 2024 first and Habs 2024 third for #2

 

 

There would have be somebody you would want really really badly at #2 to make those trades. 

 

If I am Chicago I take 1) all day long, great opportunity to build defensive depth plus the pick from Calgary next year may be top 15.  

 

I think 2) is a little fairer, giving up a 3rd is not a big deal for Montreal, there would have to be a forward obviously that they really want at 2. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

5 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

those are good points, but the Habs would be getting a top-6 forward that plays hard and would complement well Dach-Newhook.

It would cleat the logjam at D, giving the Habs' prospects more minutes to develop.

In my worst scenario, OTT ask for Xhekaj (who would definitely make us pay) and they pick a good player, replacing Batherson in their lineup. I am not too concerned about them improving too much: this is still small-market Ottawa with only a slim chance of keeping a strong core.

 

The Habs solidify the top-6 in the Suzuki/Dach/Newhook/Guhle/Matheson window. They can focus on managing their prospects and building a winning culture.

They still have a late first-round draft this year, and high picks in the other rounds. They still have two first round picks next year. And the Habs would still have a strong prospect pool after this trade.

 

This is the time to do it for the Habs.

 

The focus of a trade is not to clear a logjam at defense, it may be a secondary consideration but the purpose of the trade for Montreal should be to improve them in the medium and longer term. If Batherson was 22 and putting up those numbers then I might be more interested. 

 

If you are looking at the short term then just sign Tyler Toffoli as a UFA and you don't have to give up anything but cap space which you would do for Batherson anyway. 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

There would have be somebody you would want really really badly at #2 to make those trades. 

 

If I am Chicago I take 1) all day long, great opportunity to build defensive depth plus the pick from Calgary next year may be top 15.  

 

I think 2) is a little fairer, giving up a 3rd is not a big deal for Montreal, there would have to be a forward obviously that they really want at 2. 

Aren’t we most likely getting Florida’s pick next year, instead of Calgary’s own pick given the terms of the convoluted clauses of the Monohan deal?

[Commandant]

8 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Aren’t we most likely getting Florida’s pick next year, instead of Calgary’s own pick given the terms of the convoluted clauses of the Monohan deal?

 

Likely yes, but nothing is for certain until we see what happens in the season. 

[GHT120]

2 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

There would have be somebody you would want really really badly at #2 to make those trades. 

 

If I am Chicago I take 1) all day long, great opportunity to build defensive depth plus the pick from Calgary next year may be top 15.  

 

I think 2) is a little fairer, giving up a 3rd is not a big deal for Montreal, there would have to be a forward obviously that they really want at 2. 

My gut tells me Demidov qualifies ... the "advantage" I see to the first option is that it retains the 2024 5th overall pick ... depending on picks 3 & 4 the Habs can also get a 2nd high-end forward to "fix" the prospect pool weakness, or by all accounts I read a near NHL-ready defence prospect.

[GHT120]

28 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Aren’t we most likely getting Florida’s pick next year, instead of Calgary’s own pick given the terms of the convoluted clauses of the Monohan deal?

19 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Likely yes, but nothing is for certain until we see what happens in the season. 

 

I should perhaps have said "the 2025 first the Habs get from Calgary".

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Aren’t we most likely getting Florida’s pick next year, instead of Calgary’s own pick given the terms of the convoluted clauses of the Monohan deal?

 It's not as convoluted anymore.  If both Calgary and Florida finish outside the top 10 then we get the better of the two picks (likely Calgary). If Calgary finishes bottom 10 and Florida doesn't then we get the Florida pick. 

 

I think realistically Calgary is a bubble bottom 10 team next year but they seem to be partly in rebuild mode so they could be near the bottom and then we do get the Florida pick.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

59 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

My gut tells me Demidov qualifies ... the "advantage" I see to the first option is that it retains the 2024 5th overall pick ... depending on picks 3 & 4 the Habs can also get a 2nd high-end forward to "fix" the prospect pool weakness, or by all accounts I read a near NHL-ready defence prospect.

 

Perhaps Demidov is the guy, he seems to be #2 in a lot of mock drafts now. Guhle and Mailloux is a lot to give up but getting the #2 pick will not come cheap. 

[GHT120]

5 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Perhaps Demidov is the guy, he seems to be #2 in a lot of mock drafts now. Guhle and Mailloux is a lot to give up but getting the #2 pick will not come cheap. 

Especially if you get to keep the #5 pick

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

The trade below was posted in the draft section. I think this trade makes a lot of sense if the guy Montreal wants at 5 isn't available and Calgary wants Buium to build their defense around. 

 

If this trade happened, I would then package the Winnipeg and Calgary picks along with either Harris/Struble and trade them to San Jose for the 14th pick. Then take the best forward available with the 14th pick and there will be a good one at 14, maybe someone who falls unexpectedly (Eiserman?) or take a Sennecke or Greentree

 

I can see a lot in this for San Jose. They already get their stud building block forward in Celebrini plus a good young D in Harris/Struble plus 2 additional 1st round picks in a pretty good 1st round. 

 

Montreal will still be able to draft a really good forward at nine. One of Helenius/Catton/ Iginla/ Sennecke will likely still be available. 

 

I do like trading down if the player Montreal really wants isn't there. Of course depends on the return.