Permanent Trade Proposal Thread

[dlbalr]

Here's one that has been bouncing around my head for a few days (and will require some explanation):

 

To Montreal

F Vasily Podkolzin (two years, $1M AAV)

D Tucker Poolman (one year, $2.5M AAV)

 

To Vancouver

D Jayden Struble (one year, $867,500)

 

First, Poolman is an LTIR contract which I believe is uninsured so there's a real financial element for the Habs as they have to pay the full freight of the salary.  Also worth noting, they have the cap space to absorb this without actually needing to go into LTIR even after re-signing Xhekaj and Barron. 

 

Vancouver has said they don't want to pay a team to take Poolman's deal but with this resembling a bit of a hockey trade, maybe it would qualify.  Podkolzin hasn't done much in the NHL so far but is only a few years removed from being a well-regarded first-round prospect.  The addition of Daniel Sprong might have him on the outside looking in at a top-12 spot on their depth chart in the fall.

 

With this move, they free up considerable cap space and add a blueliner who can be stashed in the minors to start but has shown he can play at the NHL level.  He'd slot in as a probable replacement for Derek Forbort in 2025-26.  Is that, coupled with creating ample cap flexibility to aid in midseason movement enough to sell Podkolzin at non-peak value?

 

From Montreal's perspective, it comes down to if they want to move a defenceman for a winger and feel Podkolzin is an overall upgrade.  I have a piece coming for HW that highlights how Struble might be the odd man out in training camp so from a trade perspective, is he worth more now than after potentially having to start the season in Laval?

 

With the Habs having some surplus cap space and a desire to keep adding young pieces, this feels like the type of move they might want to try although I will admit that I'm not sure Vancouver would deem this sufficient enough even with the much-needed cap flexibility they'd create (possibly a full $3.5M if Struble started in the AHL).

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

21 hours ago, dlbalr said:

Here's one that has been bouncing around my head for a few days (and will require some explanation):

 

To Montreal

F Vasily Podkolzin (two years, $1M AAV)

D Tucker Poolman (one year, $2.5M AAV)

 

To Vancouver

D Jayden Struble (one year, $867,500)

 

First, Poolman is an LTIR contract which I believe is uninsured so there's a real financial element for the Habs as they have to pay the full freight of the salary.  Also worth noting, they have the cap space to absorb this without actually needing to go into LTIR even after re-signing Xhekaj and Barron. 

 

Vancouver has said they don't want to pay a team to take Poolman's deal but with this resembling a bit of a hockey trade, maybe it would qualify.  Podkolzin hasn't done much in the NHL so far but is only a few years removed from being a well-regarded first-round prospect.  The addition of Daniel Sprong might have him on the outside looking in at a top-12 spot on their depth chart in the fall.

 

With this move, they free up considerable cap space and add a blueliner who can be stashed in the minors to start but has shown he can play at the NHL level.  He'd slot in as a probable replacement for Derek Forbort in 2025-26.  Is that, coupled with creating ample cap flexibility to aid in midseason movement enough to sell Podkolzin at non-peak value?

 

From Montreal's perspective, it comes down to if they want to move a defenceman for a winger and feel Podkolzin is an overall upgrade.  I have a piece coming for HW that highlights how Struble might be the odd man out in training camp so from a trade perspective, is he worth more now than after potentially having to start the season in Laval?

 

With the Habs having some surplus cap space and a desire to keep adding young pieces, this feels like the type of move they might want to try although I will admit that I'm not sure Vancouver would deem this sufficient enough even with the much-needed cap flexibility they'd create (possibly a full $3.5M if Struble started in the AHL).

 

Very interesting, realistic proposal. Characteristic of your thoughtful approach, Brian.

 

The thing that worries me about Podkolzin is that he seems to be yielding diminishing returns. Even in the AHL, his PPG production has fallen off, not improved. Maybe the Canucks have mishandled him - the org was in chaos when he joined - and maybe he is worth taking a swing on but the apparent regression is troubling. And part of me wants to say “Harris not Struble”…but that’s another story and I await your piece with interest.

[dlbalr]

6 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Very interesting, realistic proposal. Characteristic of your thoughtful approach, Brian.

 

The thing that worries me about Podkolzin is that he seems to be yielding diminishing returns. Even in the AHL, his PPG production has fallen off, not improved. Maybe the Canucks have mishandled him - the org was in chaos when he joined - and maybe he is worth taking a swing on but the apparent regression is troubling. And part of me wants to say “Harris not Struble”…but that’s another story and I await your piece with interest.

 

I think he's someone who could benefit from a fresh start and a less rigid system.  He's learned the defensive side to a point, now can he re-learn the offence?

 

Harris also fits to a point but he's waiver-eligible and costs a bit more.  But if they prefer someone more proven who can play now, the general idea still works. 

 

Not sure when the Struble piece will run, maybe sometime this week coming up.  I'm trying to work ahead a bit when I can so I have a couple pre-written.

[DON]

Laine averaged 34.3g/82gm pace for last 3 years (but just 54goals total).

Wouldnt some contender likely offer more than Habs would?

Maybe a 3 team deal, with some bottom feeder eating part of Laine's $$$ for picks and/or something?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

2 hours ago, DON said:

Laine averaged 34.3g/82gm pace for last 3 years (but just 54goals total).

Wouldnt some contender likely offer more than Habs would?

Maybe a 3 team deal, with some bottom feeder eating part of Laine's $$$ for picks and/or something?

 

Just to add fuel to this smoking fire: https://www.si.com/onsi/breakaway/news-feed-page/posts/three-landing-spots-columbus-blue-jackets-patrik-laine

 

I don’t know who WASH could send the other way, but they’re pretty desperate to remain above water and don’t give a hoot about the future. It’ll probably be hard to outbid them, if they have assets of interest to CBJ.

[TurdBurglar]

2 hours ago, DON said:

Laine averaged 34.3g/82gm pace for last 3 years (but just 54goals total).

Wouldnt some contender likely offer more than Habs would?

Maybe a 3 team deal, with some bottom feeder eating part of Laine's $$$ for picks and/or something?

A contender likely won't have the cap space to absorb Laine's full contract and Waddell would prefer to not retain a big portion of Laine's contract.  It's a big gamble for a contender to take on that much cap space with big question marks on how much service they will actually get from him.  Even with a 3 team deal to absorb cap space, now you're paying extra for the same question marks.

 

The most likely scenario is Laine ending up on a non-contender, with no retention, for fairly cheap so he can use these last 2 years of his deal to assert he can play more than a handful of games a season.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

45 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Just to add fuel to this smoking fire: https://www.si.com/onsi/breakaway/news-feed-page/posts/three-landing-spots-columbus-blue-jackets-patrik-laine

 

I don’t know who WASH could send the other way, but they’re pretty desperate to remain above water and don’t give a hoot about the future. It’ll probably be hard to outbid them, if they have assets of interest to CBJ.

 

I saw that article. I agree that Washington could be a serious bidder for Laine although after adding Dubois, Mangiapane and Chycrun their cap situation is pretty tight. It would likely depend a lot on Oshie's injury situation. If Oshie doesn't go on LTIR then Washington would have a lot of juggling to do. 

 

Montreal is in a much much better situation cap wise to get Laine. 

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

39 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

A contender likely won't have the cap space to absorb Laine's full contract and Waddell would prefer to not retain a big portion of Laine's contract.  It's a big gamble for a contender to take on that much cap space with big question marks on how much service they will actually get from him.  Even with a 3 team deal to absorb cap space, now you're paying extra for the same question marks.

 

The most likely scenario is Laine ending up on a non-contender, with no retention, for fairly cheap so he can use these last 2 years of his deal to assert he can play more than a handful of games a season.

 

Agreed, Waddell might prefer not to retain but he won't get anything back if he doesn't retain. His choice I guess. You could make a pretty good argument that at 8.7M/year Laine is approaching negative value or maybe already there. 

[Plutarch]

On 7/29/2024 at 1:41 PM, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I saw that article. I agree that Washington could be a serious bidder for Laine although after adding Dubois, Mangiapane and Chycrun their cap situation is pretty tight. It would likely depend a lot on Oshie's injury situation. If Oshie doesn't go on LTIR then Washington would have a lot of juggling to do. 

 

Montreal is in a much much better situation cap wise to get Laine. 

Having ovi, magepane and laine?

That's a lot of shoot only guys. I don't think its a good place to revive his career tbh.

[tomh009]

To Edmonton: Struble

To Montreal: Ceci, 1st

 

A first seems pretty high but Edmonton would be getting a decent young D and dumping Ceci's contract, so a second-rounder doesn't seem like a fair return.

[Prime Minister Koivu]

22 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

To Edmonton: Struble

To Montreal: Ceci, 1st

 

A first seems pretty high but Edmonton would be getting a decent young D and dumping Ceci's contract, so a second-rounder doesn't seem like a fair return.

I'm humming and hawing about it. 
 

If I think of Struble being worth a second round pick on his own then this trade is decent. 

[Commandant]

Cody Ceci has 1 year at 4.4 million, so is likely a second round pick just to take him. 

 

So this would value Struble as a mid second rounder. 

 

On a value proposition I'd do it. 

 

BUT, I don't see how it helps our roster cause Struble can be sent to the AHL without waivers and we have a log jam of defencemen already, so Ceci just complicates that and kinda makes the Kovacevic trade pointless. 

[Prime Minister Koivu]

8 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Cody Ceci has 1 year at 4.4 million, so is likely a second round pick just to take him. 

 

So this would value Struble as a mid second rounder. 

 

On a value proposition I'd do it. 

 

BUT, I don't see how it helps our roster cause Struble can be sent to the AHL without waivers and we have a log jam of defencemen already, so Ceci just complicates that and kinda makes the Kovacevic trade pointless. 

Yeah it’s tough to decide which Dman to include in a trade like this. Harris plays both sides, Xhekaj is likely worth more than Struble and Barron is a righty. 
 

Perhaps the Oilers would take a guy like RHP instead - although they probably need a defender to replace Ceci

[Commandant]

I think it might be an issue where we aren't the team capable of helping the oilers in the instance unless they are willing to overpay. 

 

At fair value, it means adding a player to our roster that just doesn't solve any issues, and makes our current issue of too many defencemen worse. So in order to really be involved, the Habs would have to fleece Edmonton in some way. 

[tomh009]

26 minutes ago, Commandant said:

BUT, I don't see how it helps our roster cause Struble can be sent to the AHL without waivers and we have a log jam of defencemen already, so Ceci just complicates that and kinda makes the Kovacevic trade pointless. 

I don't think it helps the current roster at all, no. The value is just the first. Ceci could be sent to AHL in the worst case.

[TurdBurglar]

55 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

I don't think it helps the current roster at all, no. The value is just the first. Ceci could be sent to AHL in the worst case.

There's always the option to flip Ceci like DeSmith last season.  Although it's getting late in the offseason for such a move. 

[Commandant]

13 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

There's always the option to flip Ceci like DeSmith last season.  Although it's getting late in the offseason for such a move. 

 

DeSmith was a minor piece in a complicated 3-way trade. 

 

Ceci is the main piece in this trade.  So why wouldn't the oilers just trade him to the team who wants him instead of using the Habs as a middle man. 

 

The only way the middle man works is if the Habs retain on the contract (like they did with Petry to Detroit), but given there is only one retention spot left, that seems unlikely unless someone overpays again. 

[GHT120]

17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

DeSmith was a minor piece in a complicated 3-way trade. 

 

Ceci is the main piece in this trade.  So why wouldn't the oilers just trade him to the team who wants him instead of using the Habs as a middle man. 

 

The only way the middle man works is if the Habs retain on the contract (like they did with Petry to Detroit), but given there is only one retention spot left, that seems unlikely unless someone overpays again. 

OR ... trade Ceci* for a player (something the Oilers couldn't do because they are dealing Ceci to reduce their total cap hit) or for a "poor/bad/unwanted" contract (same issue for Oilers) and a little something-something.

 

* - or maybe even Savard

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

18 hours ago, Commandant said:

I think it might be an issue where we aren't the team capable of helping the oilers in the instance unless they are willing to overpay. 

 

At fair value, it means adding a player to our roster that just doesn't solve any issues, and makes our current issue of too many defencemen worse. So in order to really be involved, the Habs would have to fleece Edmonton in some way. 

 

I agree with this, getting the Oilers 1st rounder in 2026 (they traded their 2025 1st rounder) is likely not that big an enticement for Hughes at this point. He needs the young D to play. I think there are a number of other teams who are more likely to take on Ceci's contract for a year. 

[TurdBurglar]

16 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

DeSmith was a minor piece in a complicated 3-way trade. 

 

Ceci is the main piece in this trade.  So why wouldn't the oilers just trade him to the team who wants him instead of using the Habs as a middle man. 

 

The only way the middle man works is if the Habs retain on the contract (like they did with Petry to Detroit), but given there is only one retention spot left, that seems unlikely unless someone overpays again. 

Montreal has the freedom to take a salary-in salary-out trade, where Edmonton does not, limiting their options.  Any trade retaining salary for Ceci would limit the options they have for Dvorak or Savard.  Does that matter?  We don't know for sure, only can speculate.   

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

20 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

 Any trade retaining salary for Ceci would limit the options they have for Dvorak or Savard.  Does that matter?  We don't know for sure, only can speculate.   

 

I think it does matter unless the reward is really worth it. I am pretty sure Hughes will want to have 1 retention spot available at the trade deadline as that is usually when you get the best deals. 

[Commandant]

33 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

Montreal has the freedom to take a salary-in salary-out trade, where Edmonton does not, limiting their options.  Any trade retaining salary for Ceci would limit the options they have for Dvorak or Savard.  Does that matter?  We don't know for sure, only can speculate.   

 

It absolutely does matter.

 

How much? we can speculate that.  What would they need to use that last retention spot and not have it available at the deadline.  That's what we don't know.  But it matters and that's why I say they need an overpayment to do it. 

 

But as Ted Dibiase said, Everybody's Got a Price. 

 

 

[TurdBurglar]

30 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

It absolutely does matter.

 

How much? we can speculate that.  What would they need to use that last retention spot and not have it available at the deadline.  That's what we don't know.  But it matters and that's why I say they need an overpayment to do it. 

 

But as Ted Dibiase said, Everybody's Got a Price. 

 

 

 

Would having the retention spot at the deadline net more than the assets without Ceci than with Ceci + asset coming from a Ceci trade with retention? 

 

Completely hypothetical situation, if Montreal can get Ceci + 3rd for future considerations, then retain 50% to flip him for another 3rd, which is below value of what they should get.  That's 2 3rds for free, well $1.6m cap space for next season.  Would not making those trades and attaching the retention to Savard or Dvorak net 2 extra 3rds?  I doubt it, and this is on the low end of what Ceci should net in return in this example.

 

That's why I asked, does it matter if that last retention spot is available.  If it is, great, but if you can get more assets by using it elsewhere, keeping it for the deadline shouldn't be a priority.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

29 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

 

Would having the retention spot at the deadline net more than the assets without Ceci than with Ceci + asset coming from a Ceci trade with retention? 

 

Completely hypothetical situation, if Montreal can get Ceci + 3rd for future considerations, then retain 50% to flip him for another 3rd, which is below value of what they should get.  That's 2 3rds for free, well $1.6m cap space for next season.  Would not making those trades and attaching the retention to Savard or Dvorak net 2 extra 3rds?  I doubt it, and this is on the low end of what Ceci should net in return in this example.

 

That's why I asked, does it matter if that last retention spot is available.  If it is, great, but if you can get more assets by using it elsewhere, keeping it for the deadline shouldn't be a priority.

 

I understand your point. I just think that for Hughes to use up his last retention spot this early, nothing less than a 1st round pick would have to be involved as there is a reasonable chance of getting a 1st at the deadline.  I don't think Hughes is that interested in 2nd and 3rd round picks this early in the year. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

50 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I understand your point. I just think that for Hughes to use up his last retention spot this early, nothing less than a 1st round pick would have to be involved as there is a reasonable chance of getting a 1st at the deadline.  I don't think Hughes is that interested in 2nd and 3rd round picks this early in the year. 

 

Yes...this trade seems like a lot of bother - not to mention adding the completely redundant Ceci - for middling picks, considering that our organization has draft picks falling out of its blowholes.