Jump to content

Permanent Trade Proposal Thread


dlbalr
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, the rationale for trading Gio is "asset management" based on the premise that his skill-set is declining and somewhat redundant given the rise of Gally and Bournival. To this it was replied that no team with any chance of making the playoffs will trade its captain. So the "C" was indeed the main issue.

That said, the scenario of trading him was raised before the team went on the current tear. It's one thing to debate trading Gionta when your team is a bubble team, but if you're at or near the top of the conference on deadline day, it becomes a fairly crazy thing to do, no question about that.

In the end, a playoff team needs to get better, that's the point of trading. A playoff team is trying to improve their lot for this particular run. It is not that Gionta shouldn't be traded, it is hard to assure yourself that you are a better team than when you started, if he were included in trade. Not impossible but difficult.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know enough about medicine to know the extent to which Markov's injury history makes him vulnerable to similar injuries in the future. If he's 10% more vulnerable, then no biggie. If the thing is held together with duct tape and 90% likely to get blown out again, then it's valid to ask whether we can count on him as a core piece for the next, oh, three years or so.

That he played over 80 games last season and has looked superb over 30 games this year tends to reinforce confidence that his knee is good.

There is a very strong case to be made for keeping Markov around as a life-long Hab. He commands universal respect from his colleagues, and will - if healthy - probably age gracefully because of his exceptional hockey IQ. This is a guy who was developed from within the organization, has been committed to it for 15 years, and remains a massive contributor. He is a standing example to Emelin in particular and the D in general, and we have no obvious replacement from within the organization. I'd ship out a quality mercenary like Gio waaay before I ship out Markov (and as we know, the suggestion to deal Gionta at the deadline has been met with nearly universal opprobium, mainly because of a letter on his jersey).

Besides all that, we're battling for top spot in the conference. Trading Markov under those circumstances would be an unforgivable act of undermining the team. I say #79 retires a Hab, unless we fail to contend toward the end of his next contract and he requests a move to a contender in order to win one, a la Ray Bourque.

When you say Markov retires a Hab, has zippo to do with whether (objectively) he should ever be traded and more to do with sentimentality, which is bad business practice, but a "nice to see happen". if can work out that way. But he also has already received huge cash for "not playing" many many games, Habs do not "owe him".

Wouldn't trading Markov and picking up Kulikov, be "smarter" move long-term?

I am on the fence about all the above, but hanging on to, or resigning vets past their prime tends to not play out well for most teams. But there are the Lidstrom's and such who play superb till their are 40+ and maybe Markov is worth the risk (at the moment he is playing all-world)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think its bad practice to trade anyone when ur like 10-0-1

Would seem like that. Or you could say, this team is so good and played years without Markov, they will get by fine with a different younger top 4 d-man in his place?

And depends if you look at it as 10-1 over couple weeks, or it has been since 21 years (1993) since the team really won anything? Which is more important to focus on?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would seem like that. Or you could say, this team is so good and played years without Markov, they will get by fine with a different younger top 4 d-man in his place?

And depends if you look at it as 10-1 over couple weeks, or it has been since 21 years (1993) since the team really won anything? Which is more important to focus on?

totally only 20 years (as I was born like the month they won last :D).

but seriously they just need to stay the course of making steady improvements.don't fuk with chemistry and don't lose a mentor (someone who was offensively gifted and became defensively sound for almost his whole career, i'm sure PK benefits from him). I just don't want to take risks when it looks like we can take the steady path and become a real contender in the next 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think its bad practice to trade anyone when ur like 10-0-1

I would disagree, we deal from strength. If we are 10-0-1 then we have a good team and people value our players more. Why must we trade when we are in a slump? We should always be looking to improve the team. Let's face it this isn't the habs team that lost only 8 games in a season. We need to improve, and get that damn #25.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 20 years ago serge Savard trades Chelios because he was afraid of his knees. How did that deal work out for us??

2 major reconstructive surgeries to one knee, being Old-Timer Softball age (which comes with the mandatory locked-in salary issue) and a sky-high rental market value at the moment, must make it tempting to at least see what return he might bring, if looking long term?

And many keep saying, Habs are not contenders this year (which I disagree with), so one group of Habfans would be all for trading him, I assume?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've had how many years of proving this team is sub-par without Markov but hey, let's get rid of him for a guy that has four points in 30 games, doesn't play PK and has the second worst +/- on a terrible blueline (in contrast, Brian Campbell is a -2 and averages 27 minutes a night).

If you seriously think Kulikov is going to replace:

- 19 points in 31 games

- +13

- 25 minutes a game

- 4 minute average on PP minutes

- 2 minute average on SH minutes

You're sorely mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 20 years ago serge Savard trades Chelios because he was afraid of his knees. How did that deal work out for us??

Savard traded Chelios cuz he slept with Corey's wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over 20 years ago serge Savard trades Chelios because he was afraid of his knees. How did that deal work out for us??

Chelios was leaving anyways, Savard maybe could of gotten more?, but he said he was tired of constant criticism and co-captain BS, so not a good example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've had how many years of proving this team is sub-par without Markov but hey, let's get rid of him for a guy that has four points in 30 games, doesn't play PK and has the second worst +/- on a terrible blueline (in contrast, Brian Campbell is a -2 and averages 27 minutes a night).

If you seriously think Kulikov is going to replace:

- 19 points in 31 games

- +13

- 25 minutes a game

- 4 minute average on PP minutes

- 2 minute average on SH minutes

You're sorely mistaken.

Mistaken about trading an older d-man for a young cheaper healthy one, who some say is a good prospect that might be got for cheap? And a Bruin/Ranger/Detroit team may pay big for a Markov? A bit of short term pain for long term benefit?

And you could be sorely mistaken if Markov crashes and burns and sits in pressbox till he collects his last cheque in April and back to Moscow for good for dick-all return.

Not that i want to see him gone at all, but is an option (smart, risky, terrible, debatable?), thats all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a good 0% of chance that a trade Markov - Kulikov will happen anyway. Markov has a 14 teams NTC and you can bet all you have that Florida is one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a good 0% of chance that a trade Markov - Kulikov will happen anyway. Markov has a 14 teams NTC and you can bet all you have that Florida is one of them.

No, Markov would be destined for Boston, Rangers, Detroit, Chicago or some other contender or big market. And Kulikov would be a separate trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of Capitals fans disappointed in Brooks Laich right now. The organization might not share the same opinion, but if available, Bergevin should be all over Laich healthy or not.

I too am disappointed in him, he has not played well on my pool team. He has 3 more years at $4.5 M after this with what appears to be recurring groin issues (that's what cost him most of last year and has him hurt again now). If he is going to be out for a while, he will be one of the more untradeable players in the league. I'd stay away.

Also worth noting is that the holiday roster freeze is fast approaching. It kicks in Thursday night so no trades after then until the 28th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if it were Diaz (UFA) Beaulieu and a 1st for Hossa why in the name of god do we want to make that trade? Given the cap ramification Beaulieu alone would be enough and even then I would hesitate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see Chicago giving up Hossa. He's still a first line player for them, and they are a legit cup contender. Why for a guy who would be their 5/6 defenceman a prospect and a pick. They are in win now mode and are fine cap wise right now. With the cap increasing they should be able to manage it going forward too (and even if they are forced to dump salary they aren't doing it til after the season).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see Chicago giving up Hossa. He's still a first line player for them, and they are a legit cup contender. Why for a guy who would be their 5/6 defenceman a prospect and a pick. They are in win now mode and are fine cap wise right now. With the cap increasing they should be able to manage it going forward too (and even if they are forced to dump salary they aren't doing it til after the season).

Sure, maybe not best proposal (for several reasons), but a "impact" offensive guy may do wonders, at cost of some defensive depth. And I know you aint fond of the Byfuglien but I still think he might be an interesting addition and you may have smart reasons to not want to deal for him neither, but just a thought..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need an impact offensive contributor, there is little doubt about that. The question is who is out there and how do we get them.

Some guys I would look at

Ryan Callahan (UFA to be, Rangers are going nowhere, but is a heart and soul guy, is he resigning in New York? Could be just a dream)

Thomas Vanek (Do the Isles want to recoup some of the futures they gave up for him?)

Marian Gaborik (almost surely will be traded, price is an issue, both short and long term)

That said, I'd need to be confident I was locking the guy up to a contract before making the deal. In some ways I might just want to run with what I have and wait til the summer to make a run at them, cause I don't think this is our year anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evander Kane is the guy I'd target. Signed for 5 more years.

If there is a way to get him without giving up Galy squared, maxpac, Markov, Subban, price, Eller, Tinordi and bealieau, I'd make the deal in a heartbeat. Yes, that means I'd include pleks in a deal for him.

Word is winnepeg, like Edmonton is looking to add veteran leadership and consistency.

Pleks, gorges, pateryn, Diaz, Bourque ,and a second for Kane and bogosian.

We need an impact offensive contributor, there is little doubt about that. The question is who is out there and how do we get them.

Some guys I would look at

Ryan Callahan (UFA to be, Rangers are going nowhere, but is a heart and soul guy, is he resigning in New York? Could be just a dream)

Thomas Vanek (Do the Isles want to recoup some of the futures they gave up for him?)

Marian Gaborik (almost surely will be traded, price is an issue, both short and long term)

That said, I'd need to be confident I was locking the guy up to a contract before making the deal. In some ways I might just want to run with what I have and wait til the summer to make a run at them, cause I don't think this is our year anyway.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...