Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

Hes in his third NHL season.  Xhekaj doesn't have anything to learn in Laval.  He needs to go through his growing pains in the NHL.

 

If the Habs can add a D who is part of.the solution next season and the season beyond that too... then great.  But im not in favour of adding someone to get an extra win or two now at the expense of long term development of the young D. 

 

Its the same principle as Ive said when its suggested they abandon the hybrid system.  The goal of the team should be to build the best roster to win the cup long term, not win a few extra games this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

 

 

I think that most who supported claiming Fabbro were primarily looking at getting Xhekaj a long-stretch with big minutes in Laval for his development ... possibly also getting Guhle off the right-side.


Yes, it was clear to most of us on the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:


Yes, it was clear to most of us on the forum.

 

Why you want to do it is clear. 

 

What isn't clear is if it's the right decision, and my opinion is that the thinking is flawed because it takes minutes away from younger defencemen for a guy who will be a Free Agent in July. 

 

That's my opinion, and the forum is for sharing opinions... Now you can either debate it or make an insult like telling me to fly a kite or something cause my opinion disagrees with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Commandant said:

What isn't clear is if it's the right decision, and my opinion is that the thinking is flawed because it takes minutes away from younger defencemen for a guy who will be a Free Agent in July.

What might Hughes have been considering in the Fabbro opportunity?

+ Might help stabilize the defence for this season

- Would take opportunity away from the young D to learn the system

- Might not be able to play at high level any more (or play the system)

- Would take away a contract slot and some cap space

 

To me, it seems that the negatives/risks are significantly bigger than the positives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

What might Hughes have been considering in the Fabbro opportunity?

+ Might help stabilize the defence for this season

- Would take opportunity away from the young D to learn the system

- Might not be able to play at high level any more (or play the system)

- Would take away a contract slot and some cap space

 

To me, it seems that the negatives/risks are significantly bigger than the positives.

 

I like the cap space concern; it suggests that we wants the flexibility to make a significant move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Hes in his third NHL season.  Xhekaj doesn't have anything to learn in Laval.  He needs to go through his growing pains in the NHL.

Maybe the problem is that this is his third NHL season and he has a total of 17 AHL games, all in his second season ... an undrafted player looks surprisingly good in his first TC and stays in Montréal his entire first season ... he may have been basically just trying to keep his head above water ever since rather than actually learning ... he likely needed a full season in Laval his first year so he could work on needed skills instead of just trying not to fail.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

[...] Now you can either debate it or make an insult like telling me to fly a kite or something cause my opinion disagrees with you. [...

 

Kites are nice, not an insult

 

Charlie Brown Flying his Kite | Charlie brown and snoopy, Charlie brown ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

 

Kites are nice, not an insult

 

Charlie Brown Flying his Kite | Charlie brown and snoopy, Charlie brown ...

 

Again, please refrain from this B.S.

 

If you want to talk hockey, thats the purpose of the board.

 

This is just crap.

 

Either talk hockey or dont respond at all.  But if you want to post this shit, go to kitesworld.net

 

Its just spam at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Again, please refrain from this B.S.

 

If you want to talk hockey, thats the purpose of the board.

 

This is just crap.

 

Either talk hockey or dont respond at all.  But if you want to post this shit, go to kitesworld.net

 

Its just spam at this point.

Kite, kite, kite, kite, kite, kite, …. :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Commandant said:

I think too many here are fixated on the idea of what Fabbro could be, and not the reality of what he is. 

I think the reality of our defense means that the reality of fabbro would likely help.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Why you want to do it is clear. 

 

What isn't clear is if it's the right decision, and my opinion is that the thinking is flawed because it takes minutes away from younger defencemen for a guy who will be a Free Agent in July. 

 

That's my opinion, and the forum is for sharing opinions... Now you can either debate it or make an insult like telling me to fly a kite or something cause my opinion disagrees with you. 

I think that our d needs more vets. To steady the ship a bit and stop destroying young players confidence.

 

Have a player commit to the AHL until the deadline when Savard is likely moved. Then we still Fabbro to be a vet defensive guy.

 

Also... he'd have been free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Plutarch said:

I think that our d needs more vets. To steady the ship a bit and stop destroying young players confidence.

 

Have a player commit to the AHL until the deadline when Savard is likely moved. Then we still Fabbro to be a vet defensive guy.

 

Also... he'd have been free.

 

He wouldnt have been free.

 

As Brian explained, post trade deadline we likely get out of LTIR, which means for guys on rookie contracts still (Slafkovsky, Hutson) etc... if they hit any of their bonuses, they can be counted this year.  With Fabbro, any bonuses hit will he a cap penalty we would absorb next season.

 

The AHL time is not the same development as NHL time and Hutson, Xhekaj, Barron and Struble all need NHL minutes more than AHL minutes.

 

The 50 man contract spot is also an issue as we want empty spots for a different waiver claim or for a College/CHL free agent.

 

So there is always a cost.

 

If it was truly no cost, then our management would have claimed him.  They didnt which means, like any move, there is both upside and downside, and they felt the downside was bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Commandant said:

As Brian explained, post trade deadline we likely get out of LTIR, which means for guys on rookie contracts still (Slafkovsky, Hutson) etc... if they hit any of their bonuses, they can be counted this year.  With Fabbro, any bonuses hit will he a cap penalty we would absorb next season.

 

 

I wasn't aware of this. Good information to know. Plus just paying him 2.5M gives us less flexibility should we want take on another contract. Always some sort of cost. 

 

I am absolutely fine with not taking Fabbro, would rather see the kids play, make mistakes and hopefully learn. It doesn't look like a playoff year anyway. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be more clear. (Hypothetical numbers for easy math).

 

If we are in LTIR and our elc bonuses are 1.5 million.  We get a 1.5 million penalty next year.

 

If we finish the season 1 mill in cap space, we take 1 mill of the bonuses this year and 500k is a penalty.

 

If we finish with 1.6 in cap space and bonuses are 1.5.  We have no penalty.

 

What the cap space will be depends on trades, call ups, signings, etc... and the bonuses are based on performance so we cant give real numbers today but its a consideration

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

[…] would rather see the kids play, make mistakes and hopefully learn. It doesn't look like a playoff year anyway. 

If only a kid like Barron would be allowed to play and make mistakes :spamafote:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

If only a kid like Barron would be allowed to play and make mistakes :spamafote:

 

But how many mistakes can one D-corps be allowed to sustain? 

 

I targeted Barron earlier this season (in my admittedly inexpert ‘eye test’) as a guy who was disproportionately responsible for several bungled, easy plays to clear the puck out, leading directly to sustained pressure in our own zone. He seems to have had more trouble than even the rest of these Keystone Kops at adapting to The System. 

 

I think the Habs have concluded that his ceiling is limited and are unwilling to make a bad team situation worse by dressing him as a charity case.

 

If they are wrong about that - if Barron blossoms elsewhere as a second-pairing guy - then it will prove to be a major error in judgement by this group. But right now, I think that’s where we’re at.

 

He’ll probably be given one more chance, dressed for a handful of games, and if there’s no improvement, he’ll be dealt…eventually.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DON said:

Feel safer with Struble or Xhekaj defending, than i do Barron.

 

Barron is a better offensive defenceman though.  Maybe that doesn't matter on a team with Matheson and Hutson though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

 

Barron is a better offensive defenceman though.  Maybe that doesn't matter on a team with Matheson and Hutson though. 

MAB was OK in offensive zone also.:nuts:

Just seems Barron dosent have 'it', but maybe just needs more game time? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright, these are fun. Flame away

 

To Pittsburgh: Josh Anderson, Mike Matheson, Owen Beck, and a 2nd

 

To Montreal: Evgeni Malkin and Kris Letang

 

We help solve our righty-lefty issue on defense and Letang comes home. Malkin jumps into 2nd line center and everyone else falls into the correct place. 

 

Pittsburgh also gets help with righty-lefty with their offensive-defensemen, they also shed Letang's contract, and improve on D if Matheson can play like has has since he left them. They lose their 2nd best center but they get much younger. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, illWill said:

Alright, these are fun. Flame away

 

To Pittsburgh: Josh Anderson, Mike Matheson, Owen Beck, and a 2nd

 

To Montreal: Evgeni Malkin and Kris Letang

 

We help solve our righty-lefty issue on defense and Letang comes home. Malkin jumps into 2nd line center and everyone else falls into the correct place. 

 

Pittsburgh also gets help with righty-lefty with their offensive-defensemen, they also shed Letang's contract, and improve on D if Matheson can play like has has since he left them. They lose their 2nd best center but they get much younger. 

 

It is fun. I think if Pittsburgh is going to rebuild they will want more young talent for Malkin than Beck and a 2nd. 

 

For the Habs it's a nope. Certainly improves them in the short term but it's the kind of trade you make when you are a legitimate cup contender. 

 

Thanks for proposing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, illWill said:

Alright, these are fun. Flame away

 

To Pittsburgh: Josh Anderson, Mike Matheson, Owen Beck, and a 2nd

 

To Montreal: Evgeni Malkin and Kris Letang

 

We help solve our righty-lefty issue on defense and Letang comes home. Malkin jumps into 2nd line center and everyone else falls into the correct place. 

 

Pittsburgh also gets help with righty-lefty with their offensive-defensemen, they also shed Letang's contract, and improve on D if Matheson can play like has has since he left them. They lose their 2nd best center but they get much younger. 

 

I have no desire to give up Owen Beck and a Draft Pick for players who are 38 years old (Malkin) and 37 years old (Letang).   Add in that if we do trade Matheson (which i don't think we should), given his offence and his contract, he would fetch a mint. 

 

There is no quick fix for this team.  Need to keep buidling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2024 at 7:34 PM, Commandant said:

 

He wouldnt have been free.

 

As Brian explained, post trade deadline we likely get out of LTIR, which means for guys on rookie contracts still (Slafkovsky, Hutson) etc... if they hit any of their bonuses, they can be counted this year.  With Fabbro, any bonuses hit will he a cap penalty we would absorb next season.

 

The AHL time is not the same development as NHL time and Hutson, Xhekaj, Barron and Struble all need NHL minutes more than AHL minutes.

 

The 50 man contract spot is also an issue as we want empty spots for a different waiver claim or for a College/CHL free agent.

 

So there is always a cost.

 

If it was truly no cost, then our management would have claimed him.  They didnt which means, like any move, there is both upside and downside, and they felt the downside was bigger.

I'm not convinced Xhejak couldn't benefit from ahl time but the ltir penalty next season is a fair reason not to.

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...