Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

[Habsfan89]

Would this be a fair trade for Zegras? As much as I like Guhle I think if we can get a player like Zegras and move up to 3 I would trade him. So how about this 

 

Guhel + Anderson + Dvorka + 5pick

for

Zegras and 3rd pick

 

then habs can take Dem at 3

 

it would make our offensive that much more dangerous and with our depth on D I don’t think it would hurt us giving up Guhel.

 

Ducks would make out great here too because they would get cap space once Dvorka deal ends after next season.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

17 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Would this be a fair trade for Zegras? As much as I like Guhle I think if we can get a player like Zegras and move up to 3 I would trade him. So how about this 

 

Guhel + Anderson + Dvorka + 5pick

for

Zegras and 3rd pick

 

then habs can take Dem at 3

 

it would make our offensive that much more dangerous and with our depth on D I don’t think it would hurt us giving up Guhel.

 

Ducks would make out great here too because they would get cap space once Dvorka deal ends after next season.

 

It's an interesting proposal I had to think about. I think the value on both sides is pretty close. Not sure Anaheim is crazy about taking on Anderson's contract, that might be a sticking point. I think Anaheim would prefer a RD although Guhle has been playing the right side. It would open up cap space for the Habs as the Zegras and Anderson's contracts are a wash but they get rid of the Dvorak contract. I have said for a while I think a Habs/Anaheim deal could be on the table as they have pieces each other could use. I think Anaheim likes this deal a whole lot better without taking on Anderson's contract. 

[GHT120]

8 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:

Would this be a fair trade for Zegras? As much as I like Guhle I think if we can get a player like Zegras and move up to 3 I would trade him. So how about this 

 

Guhel + Anderson + Dvorka + 5pick

for

Zegras and 3rd pick

I could see Anaheim accepting Guhle and the 5th for Zegras and the 3rd ... but I don't see them having any interest in taking on Anderson and/or Dvorak ... I-M-O they both have at best zero trade value (i.e., you could give them away but get nothing back), but more likely negative value (i.e., you have to pay a team to take them)

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

I could see Anaheim accepting Guhle and the 5th for Zegras and the 3rd ... but I don't see them having any interest in taking on Anderson and/or Dvorak ... I-M-O they both have at best zero trade value (i.e., you could give them away but get nothing back), but more likely negative value (i.e., you have to pay a team to take them)

 

That seems like a reasonable take. At least the 3rd would help to mitigate, somewhat, the pain of giving up the better all-around player in Guhle. This assumes that the gap between 3 and 5 is meaningful; I pay little attention to draft rankings, so I can’t speak to that.

 

I’ve said more than once that any price we pay to get a young, impact FW is going to hurt. The proposal here fits that bill. But I don’t know. We’ve been burned so many times trading stud young D for hotshot FWs, I can barely stand to contemplate it happening again.

 

If we do make such a play, we had BETTER have done exhaustive research on Zegras, encompassing not just hockey scouting but reports on what kind of human being we’re adding to the mix. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

14 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

If we do make such a play, we had BETTER have done exhaustive research on Zegras, encompassing not just hockey scouting but reports on what kind of human being we’re adding to the mix. 

 

 

No question about that, Hughes is big on character and this type of deal won't happen unless Hughes is confident that Zegras will be a good fit. 

[DON]

32 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

No question about that, Hughes is big on character and this type of deal won't happen unless Hughes is confident that Zegras will be a good fit. 

St Louis was doing some research for Hughes, at some gym just a little while ago wasnt he?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

1 minute ago, DON said:

St Louis was doing some research for Hughes, at some gym just a little while ago wasnt he?

 

Hahaha, hopefully we’ve come a long way from the time when a Habs GM traded a D for a FW because the coach had gone golfing with Richer and Richer told him he would work hard if acquired. 🙄

[TurdBurglar]

10 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:

Would this be a fair trade for Zegras? As much as I like Guhle I think if we can get a player like Zegras and move up to 3 I would trade him. So how about this 

 

Guhel + Anderson + Dvorka + 5pick

for

Zegras and 3rd pick

 

then habs can take Dem at 3

 

it would make our offensive that much more dangerous and with our depth on D I don’t think it would hurt us giving up Guhel.

 

Ducks would make out great here too because they would get cap space once Dvorka deal ends after next season.

 

I don't see how Montreal adding 2 cap dumps and the 5th would get the 3rd, when it's doubtful Anaheim takes Guhle for Zegras as a straight trade.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

17 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

I don't see how Montreal adding 2 cap dumps and the 5th would get the 3rd, when it's doubtful Anaheim takes Guhle for Zegras as a straight trade.

 

Who is the more valuable player - Guhle or Zegras? I’m not prejudging the answer, but I incline to the view that an all-situations 22-year-old d-man who has already shown he can eat tough minutes and do well, has more value than a 60-point C/W coming off a terrible season and with question marks around his work ethic and coachability. But I may be misreading things. 

[Habsfan89]

1 hour ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

I don't see how Montreal adding 2 cap dumps and the 5th would get the 3rd, when it's doubtful Anaheim takes Guhle for Zegras as a straight trade.

Ducks are rebuilding, Anderson has trade value if he can return to form from a couple of years ago. Dvorak can be draft capital at the trade deadline for the Ducks. If they take on max money value on his contract they could get a 3rd pick from a playoff team looking to add depth at centre. 
 

They don’t have depth on D and Guhle would add that.  It’s a smart hockey move for both teams especially if Ducks are looking to trade down a few spots 

[TurdBurglar]

58 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Who is the more valuable player - Guhle or Zegras? I’m not prejudging the answer, but I incline to the view that an all-situations 22-year-old d-man who has already shown he can eat tough minutes and do well, has more value than a 60-point C/W coming off a terrible season and with question marks around his work ethic and coachability. But I may be misreading things. 

 

A 23 year old 60+ pts center vs a 22 year old top-4 LD.  Take the names off of it and everyone will pick the center as more valuable.  It's why the reported ask from Anahiem was Guhle/Reinbacher plus for Zegras. 

 

1 minute ago, Habsfan89 said:

Ducks are rebuilding, Anderson has trade value if he can return to form from a couple of years ago. Dvorak can be draft capital at the trade deadline for the Ducks. If they take on max money value on his contract they could get a 3rd pick from a playoff team looking to add depth at centre. 
 

They don’t have depth on D and Guhle would add that.  It’s a smart hockey move for both teams especially if Ducks are looking to trade down a few spots 

 

Taking on bad contracts with multiple years left is of no value to them.  If anything, they would be looking to get extra value by taking those 2 contract, not looking to takes on bad contract and trade down.  If they're trading down in the draft it's to acquire prospects, not to gain pet projects in hopes of flipping them. 

[Commandant]

"A 23 year old 60+ pts center vs a 22 year old top-4 LD.  Take the names off of it and everyone will pick the center as more valuable.  It's why the reported ask from Anahiem was Guhle/Reinbacher plus for Zegras. "

 

Thats a bit of a misleading analysis though. We have to factor in that its more than just 60 point centre though. 

Just as an example.... You can have a Bergeron-like centre getting 60 points, and you can have a Domi-like centre getting 60 points.  And a bunch in between. They are not the same value. 

 

Zegras with the fact that he is a liability away from the puck is much more the domi like player than the Bergeron like player. 

[alfredoh2009]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Who is the more valuable player - Guhle or Zegras? I’m not prejudging the answer, but I incline to the view that an all-situations 22-year-old d-man who has already shown he can eat tough minutes and do well, has more value than a 60-point C/W coming off a terrible season and with question marks around his work ethic and coachability. But I may be misreading things. 

 

my feeling too. Guhle needs to bulk up a bit, but otherwise is a fine top-4 D. I don't like Zegras, reminds me too much of the type of player Drouin was with the Habs (not the one he is with the Avs).

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

59 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Ducks are rebuilding, Anderson has trade value if he can return to form from a couple of years ago. Dvorak can be draft capital at the trade deadline for the Ducks. If they take on max money value on his contract they could get a 3rd pick from a playoff team looking to add depth at centre. 
 

They don’t have depth on D and Guhle would add that.  It’s a smart hockey move for both teams especially if Ducks are looking to trade down a few spots 

 

There is a big difference between taking on Dvorak's contract and Anderson's contract. Dvorak has 1 year left and Anaheim has tons of cap room this year. They could easily take it on and flip it at the deadline.  Anaheim's cap room will likely shrink substantially in a couple years when their young guys come off their ELC's. They may not appreciate Anderson's cap hit then. You have to throw in a sweetener for anybody taking on Anderson's contract. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

38 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Just as an example.... You can have a Bergeron-like centre getting 60 points, and you can have a Domi-like centre getting 60 points.  And a bunch in between. They are not the same value. 

 

Zegras with the fact that he is a liability away from the puck is much more the domi like player than the Bergeron like player. 

 

True and that's why it's really hard to establish what the correct value for Zegras is. He doesn't seem like an attitude problem, more like a fun loving talented kid who can make fancy plays but not too interested in a 200 foot game, at least so far in his career.  If that could change and he could turn into a Suzuki like player (maybe wishful thinking) then I would be all over trying to get him but you don't know that now. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

9 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

True and that's why it's really hard to establish what the correct value for Zegras is. He doesn't seem like an attitude problem, more like a fun loving talented kid who can make fancy plays but not too interested in a 200 foot game, at least so far in his career.  If that could change and he could turn into a Suzuki like player (maybe wishful thinking) then I would be all over trying to get him but you don't know that now. 

 

Right. I do think it's a bit rich to condemn at 23-year-old kid for not playing a 200-foot game. There was a time when hardly any highly-skilled kids at that age did so. These days, it's more common even for gifted FWs to be reasonably complete players (better coaching, offseason training, etc.). But Zegras has lots of time to add that dimension of maturity to his game.

 

That's why the real question is character. How coachable is he? Equally importantly, how smart is he? (Defensive excellence involves some understanding of how to read the play). How much does he want to win? Domi seemed to be a hothead who never learned, and maybe wasn't especially bright in hockey terms. After three seasons, Zegras should be getting at the point where he's beginning to tire of losing and beginning to realize that he needs to round out his game. But if he's one of these kids who has always had everything handed to him, then he may never take that next step. It's just a bit premature to draw conclusions either way, I'd think.

[TurdBurglar]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

Thats a bit of a misleading analysis though. We have to factor in that its more than just 60 point centre though.

 

It's no more misleading than picking a legitimate top line center on any team and comparing it to a center who played half of his career on the wing.  Or not factoring in the type of D in the consideration at all, like Klingberg vs Trouba.

[Commandant]

8 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

It's no more misleading than picking a legitimate top line center on any team and comparing it to a center who played half of his career on the wing.  Or not factoring in the type of D in the consideration at all, like Klingberg vs Trouba.

 

So you agree with me, there is much more to the equation than saying its a 60 point centre vs a top 4 D. 

 

Glad we sorted that.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

41 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Right. I do think it's a bit rich to condemn at 23-year-old kid for not playing a 200-foot game. There was a time when hardly any highly-skilled kids at that age did so. These days, it's more common even for gifted FWs to be reasonably complete players (better coaching, offseason training, etc.). But Zegras has lots of time to add that dimension of maturity to his game.

 

That's why the real question is character. How coachable is he? Equally importantly, how smart is he? (Defensive excellence involves some understanding of how to read the play). How much does he want to win? Domi seemed to be a hothead who never learned, and maybe wasn't especially bright in hockey terms. After three seasons, Zegras should be getting at the point where he's beginning to tire of losing and beginning to realize that he needs to round out his game. But if he's one of these kids who has always had everything handed to him, then he may never take that next step. It's just a bit premature to draw conclusions either way, I'd think.

 

Yes, good post. Smarts and coachability are certainly two very important ingredients in becoming a good 2 way player. Work ethic is another important ingredient. 

[TurdBurglar]

8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

So you agree with me, there is much more to the equation than saying its a 60 point centre vs a top 4 D. 

 

Glad we sorted that.

 

If you believe calling an analysis misleading then justifying it with an equally misleading analysis makes up in agreement, then you do you.

[Commandant]

20 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

If you believe calling an analysis misleading then justifying it with an equally misleading analysis makes up in agreement, then you do you.

 

Just as an example.... You can have a Bergeron-like centre getting 60 points, and you can have a Domi-like centre getting 60 points.  And a bunch in between. They are not the same value. 

 

JUST

 

AS

 

AN 

 

EXAMPLE

 

I don't know how to make it any clearer that my comment was an example and not an exact comment on this particular player and situation. 

 

 

[TurdBurglar]

3 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Just as an example.... You can have a Bergeron-like centre getting 60 points, and you can have a Domi-like centre getting 60 points.  And a bunch in between. They are not the same value. 

 

JUST

 

AS

 

AN 

 

EXAMPLE

 

I don't know how to make it any clearer that my comment was an example and not an exact comment on this particular player and situation. 

 

 

 

You're the one who chose to call an analysis misleading then justify it by an equally misleading analysis.  Saying it's an example is moot, as obviously mine was an example as well.

[Commandant]

Just now, TurdBurglar said:

 

You're the one who chose to call an analysis misleading then justify it by an equally misleading analysis.  Saying it's an example is moot, as obviously mine was an example as well.

 

The point is that it's not just about points and analysis has to be deeper.... I never said that my analysis applied to the situation.  
 

We both agree that simply looking at points is not enough and analysis needs to be deeper.  I never said mine was deep, just that it was showing one example of what was missing. 

But please keep telling me how the analysis (which wasn't an analysis but just an example of one issue that needs to be explored), is misleading. 

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Who is the more valuable player - Guhle or Zegras? I’m not prejudging the answer, but I incline to the view that an all-situations 22-year-old d-man who has already shown he can eat tough minutes and do well, has more value than a 60-point C/W coming off a terrible season and with question marks around his work ethic and coachability. But I may be misreading things. 

100% agree. If we were to move Guhle, I'd want more.

 

The best case scenario for  Zegras is that he has a ceiling to be a 1B type of centre. The more likely scenario is that he is a 2nd line winger, and hopefully a high end second line winger - unless he shows commitment to becoming a more complete player. I think his floor may be that of a one dimensional, undependable 3rd liner. He has top 6 skill, but the question is does he have the work ethic to be a top 6 on a championship team?? 
 

Having said that, we have a need for at least one, potentially two 2nd line wingers, so he is a guy that could fill a huge hole in our lineup even as a winger.

 

The question is do you want to value him as a 1b centre when you are looking at the acquisition cost, or as a 2nd line winger??  from what he's shown, I wouldn't want to risk overpaying for him - we've seen that movie before with some of MB's deals.
 

on the other hand, I see Guhle's floor as a #4 dman, and his ceiling on a championship/serious contender teams as a #2 minute munching guy. I think he will be and may already be better than a guy like Nurse. 
 

IMO a top 2-4 Dman is usually more valuable than a second line winger. So I wouldn't move him for Zegras unless it's Anaheim adding a sweetener. I don't think going from #5 to #3 is enough of a sweetener, unless Chicago doesn't take Demidov. If We made that deal on the draft floor after Chicago picked a dman, or Lindstrom, I'd have to think harder on whether to move Guhle - but I still think od want more.

 

i would much rather try and move a guy like Matheson, the Winnipeg 1st round pick, and other assets like Savard, Armia (either, or both with retention as a sweetner), or Harris to other teams that said they are willing to move their #1 like Columbus, Utah, Ottawa, NJD, or Buffalo. If Demidov is gone either of the first three teams listed here were willing to make a deal, we could potentially get Iginla and a dman, or Iginla and Sennecke. If NJD or Buffalo are willing we could potentially get Eisrerman as the second pick. 
 

getting a second top 12 pick in this years draft could give us the long term core to build around.

 

I also think if the acquisition cost is low, we roll the dice on Laine. It would be great to see him with a healthy Dach to assess Dach with an elite winger.

 

[hab29RETIRED]

3 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

A 23 year old 60+ pts center vs a 22 year old top-4 LD.  Take the names off of it and everyone will pick the center as more valuable.  It's why the reported ask from Anahiem was Guhle/Reinbacher plus for Zegras. 

 

 

Taking on bad contracts with multiple years left is of no value to them.  If anything, they would be looking to get extra value by taking those 2 contract, not looking to takes on bad contract and trade down.  If they're trading down in the draft it's to acquire prospects, not to gain pet projects in hopes of flipping them. 

Well I don't see Anaheim asking for Anderson or Gallagher for Zegras. They are going to ask a lot. Question is, how many teams are going to pay a lot when a rebuilding team is willing to give up in a 23 year old?

 

who would you value more, a 60 point dman, or a 60 point centre? I'll pick the 60 point dman every time. I don't want to love Matheson, but if we get a high top 10 pick for him, I'd rather get another pick to try and get Iginla or Sennecke with that pick, rather then move Guhle for Zegras.