Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

My suggestion is not that they are all moved.  Its that one of them could be moved.  I dont think its realistic that they would all be able to be dealt.  And the order was from most likely to least likely to be out the door in my opinion.

 

Thats assuming anyone is moved.

I don't think its realistic to move them all - Gallagher and. Anderson are probably unmovable without signs of an early resurgence.

I think Dvorak, Savard and Armia can be moved - but would probably require retention.

 

can always hope that HuGo continue to work th magic though!

 

i think unless we are in a legit wildcard position Armia and Savard are gone by the deadline and I think they probably would want to move Advil as well.

 

Savard will depend on the return and just how much progression and consistency we see from Barron, Mailloux, as well as the young lefties - Hutson, Wifi, Struble. I think if the kids over achieve, Laine rebounds to at least 25g+, and Dach is healthy and a legit 1a, we may actually be playing meaningful games right to the end of the season, and playoffs are a distinct possiblity. I can't remember since the the mid 80's where we had such a sting crop of young dmen - Chelios, Kurvers, Svoboda. Take away Chelios from the discussions and the current crop could be a lot better. Having said that Matheson is no Robinson and Savard is not Ludwig or Green.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don't think its realistic to move them all - Gallagher and. Anderson are probably unmovable without signs of an early resurgence.

I think Dvorak, Savard and Armia can be moved - but would probably require retention.

 

can always hope that HuGo continue to work th magic though!

 

i think unless we are in a legit wildcard position Armia and Savard are gone by the deadline and I think they probably would want to move Advil as well.

 

Savard will depend on the return and just how much progression and consistency we see from Barron, Mailloux, as well as the young lefties - Hutson, Wifi, Struble. I think if the kids over achieve, Laine rebounds to at least 25g+, and Dach is healthy and a legit 1a, we may actually be playing meaningful games right to the end of the season, and playoffs are a distinct possiblity. I can't remember since the the mid 80's where we had such a sting crop of young dmen - Chelios, Kurvers, Svoboda. Take away Chelios from the discussions and the current crop could be a lot better. Having said that Matheson is no Robinson and Savard is not Ludwig or Green.

I think Savard is worth more than you do.

He is not really that much overpaid if at all.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

i think unless we are in a legit wildcard position Armia and Savard are gone by the deadline and I think they probably would want to move Advil as well.

 

Armia won't be traded.  A 3rd liner, to be very generous, isn't going to fetch much at $1.7m (50% retention).  My guess is it'll be used for Savard to increase his return.  If by chance they pull off a deal without retaining Savard, Dvorak would be next in line for the retention spot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, TurdBurglar said:

Armia won't be traded.  A 3rd liner, to be very generous, isn't going to fetch much at $1.7m (50% retention).  My guess is it'll be used for Savard to increase his return.  If by chance they pull off a deal without retaining Savard, Dvorak would be next in line for the retention spot. 

I agree. Savard and Dvorak are clearly the prime TDL candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Armia scored 17g, plays PK, has size and presence on the boards, has previously played well in playoffs, and his cap hit will be prorated for the number of days remaining in the season.

 

If hes having a similar season to last year (on pace for 15 goals or so), i can see him traded without retention.

 

Same with savard.

 

The retention isnt necessary to move them... BUT with retention that may get us better picks/prospects.  That's the value.

 

i think for dvorak the retention may be necessary.  But if even with retention we are gettjng like a 4th round pick, it might just make more sense to use it to increase the Savard or Armia value and keep Dvorak and let him walk as UFA.

 

 

 

Lastly there is one other option.  If a team has an player who is struggling and is a UFA in 2025, we could take that contract as a substitute for retention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see no reason why Savard would need retention at all. The only players that would need retention I believe are Anderson and Gally, due to cap value and term of contract. Dvorak maybe as well  due to health concerns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

I see no reason why Savard would need retention at all. The only players that would need retention I believe are Anderson and Gally, due to cap value and term of contract. Dvorak maybe as well  due to health concerns. 

 

Yeah but with Anderson and Gally you are retaining for 3 years.  With Savard it's only 1 year and you would get a better return retaining, especially at the deadline when contenders are tight against the cap. 

 

I think with Anderson and Gally we just need to be patient and let time value decay the value of their contracts. Maybe Anderson has a rebound season and is easier to move. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

I see no reason why Savard would need retention at all. The only players that would need retention I believe are Anderson and Gally, due to cap value and term of contract. Dvorak maybe as well  due to health concerns. 

 

I agree you dont need it, but retention means a better return.

 

What a GM has to assess is.  Will i get more from trading

 

Savard @ 50%

 

Or

 

Two deals

Savard at full value

And Dvorak at 50%

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Commandant said:

Lastly there is one other option.  If a team has an player who is struggling and is a UFA in 2025, we could take that contract as a substitute for retention.

An option that we all too often neglect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Might be the gummies kicking in, but:

 

Rangers receive: Mike Matheson, Josh Anderson, Filip Mesar, and a 1st

 

Canadiens receive: Alex Lafreniere and Jacob Trouba

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:


Interesting proposal but Hutson has a chance at elite level and I think Catton tops out at very good. 

 

I would agree with that assessment. Hutson may very well turn into a superstar that we regret trading for the rest of our lives. He may also just be an offensive specialist that is deemed redundant by having Matheson and Mailloux on the roster. 

 

My thoughts are that Guhle should be anchoring the first or second line as a LD, with Xhekeji and one of Hutson/Matheson filling out the left side. 

 

The odds of Catton being a point per game player in the NHL are not favorable, but he can potentially fill a need as a 2nd line center if Dach doesn't pan out, or perhaps even be a great 2nd line LW which seems to be a need moving forward at this point in time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, illWill said:

Alright, off the gummies but may as well be on them:

 

Kraken receive: Lane Hutson

 

Canadiens receive: Berkley Catton

 

 

It is interesting, on one hand turning the 62nd pick into the 8th pick seems like good asset management as they are both still young but Hutson seems so dynamic. Or are we overvaluing Hutson because he is one of ours. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd keep Hutson personally. 

 

That said, trading a defenceman to Seattle for one of their forward prospects is a move that makes sense for both teams.  I just see it as something like an Engstrom or Struble on the Habs side, and lesser on the Seattle side too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Commandant said:

I'd keep Hutson personally. 

 

That said, trading a defenceman to Seattle for one of their forward prospects is a move that makes sense for both teams.  I just see it as something like an Engstrom or Struble on the Habs side, and lesser on the Seattle side too. 

 

I thought about having Wright as the piece coming back, but surely the memes of the past would come back to haunt us

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, illWill said:

 

I thought about having Wright as the piece coming back, but surely the memes of the past would come back to haunt us

 

I think something like Struble or Engstrom for a guy like Nyman, or Goyette could work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:


Interesting proposal but Hutson has a chance at elite level and I think Catton tops out at very good. 

Smallest d-man in the NHL,  Habs dont lack LH d-men and still could use more skill in top six.

 

Anyways, i like that the proposal isnt just another; a bunch of crap/mediocre guys for an elite player from another team.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Who in their right state of mind would want Hutson included in a "proposal" at this stage in his meteoric rise? 

 

The potential to have an impact on the Habs similar to Q. Hughes on VAN s immense.

 

Yes, we all hope Hutson can have a similar impact but that is not guaranteed. Just saying that if trading Hutson can help land a high impact forward then you have to at least consider it, especially with the depth they have at LD. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IN THE HEARTS OF MEN said:

Who in their right state of mind would want Hutson included in a "proposal" at this stage in his meteoric rise? 

 

The potential to have an impact on the Habs similar to Q. Hughes on VAN s immense.

Cory Pronman or someone not really sold on his future perhaps?

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.

×
×
  • Create New...