Trade Petry gone, Lindström in

[Kiwihab]

Would it not have been easier to retain $2m on Hoffman’s salary and try to move him? At least that’s only for one year. 

[DON]

39 minutes ago, Kiwihab said:

Would it not have been easier to retain $2m on Hoffman’s salary and try to move him? At least that’s only for one year. 

Maybe idea was posed to other GMs and no takers?

[tomh009]

2 hours ago, DON said:

Maybe idea was posed to other GMs and no takers?

Exactly. It takes two to tango.

[PMAC]

10 minutes ago, Kiwihab said:

Would it not have been easier to retain $2m on Hoffman’s salary and try to move him? At least that’s only for one year. 

Obviously it wasn’t, because they couldn’t give Hoffman away. I don’t understand why people are crapping on the finale of the Petry trade part 2. What’s not to like about Petry, Poeling, Pitlick and Hoffman with 2+ million salary retained (2seasons of Petry) for Matheson, a 2nd, two 4ths, Legarre(22); Gustav Lindholm(24 yr old RT D) and DeSmith?!  That’s an amazing return for an aging defender who wanted out, 2 4th liners and Hoffman- who most felt would need a draft pick added to get a team to take him. 
Thats 7 assets for one decent player and three spare parts.

[Kiwihab]

3 hours ago, DON said:

Maybe idea was posed to other GMs and no takers?

Maybe, but seems like not really worth all the effort to me. Got rid of Hoffman but basically spread his salary over two years with the Petry salary retention. Now they have an extra goalie which hopefully they can trade for something, but seems like a lot of moving parts that don’t leave us much better off (although we do have Hoffman’s spot open for a young guy, so maybe that). 

[Sir_Boagalott]

6 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

We get a 2nd and 4th round pick in 2025, supposed to be a better draft year than 2024 but perhaps hard to say at this point. 

 

2025 is supposed to be a strong year but 2026 might have been a better idea.  The Habs already have a ton of prospects so they don't need a ton of picks for the next year or 2.  Plus, they have other players to trade and they'll get even more picks.  It makes sense to offset picks to future years.

 

6 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

Certainly it showed how little value Petry has, agree on that.  Not sure it would have gotten worse, I guess we will see if he has a resurgence in Detroit. 

 

I was definitely hoping for more than what was received.   However, Petry is basically the reason why Pitts missed the playoffs last year.  Who knows what he will be like next year and the Wings might regret getting him.  

 

 

 

 

[Sir_Boagalott]

55 minutes ago, PMAC said:

Obviously it wasn’t, because they couldn’t give Hoffman away. I don’t understand why people are crapping on the finale of the Petry trade part 2. What’s not to like about Petry, Poeling, Pitlick and Hoffman with 2+ million salary retained (2seasons of Petry) for Matheson, a 2nd, two 4ths, Legarre(22); Gustav Lindholm(24 yr old RT D) and DeSmith?!  That’s an amazing return for an aging defender who wanted out, 2 4th liners and Hoffman- who most felt would need a draft pick added to get a team to take him. 
Thats 7 assets for one decent player and three spare parts.

 

When you put it that way I honestly can't disagree.  That finality of all that contract juggling is certainly worthy of the anniversary of Sam Pollocks death.  

[DON]

11 hours ago, Kiwihab said:

Maybe, but seems like not really worth all the effort to me. Got rid of Hoffman but basically spread his salary over two years with the Petry salary retention. Now they have an extra goalie which hopefully they can trade for something, but seems like a lot of moving parts that don’t leave us much better off (although we do have Hoffman’s spot open for a young guy, so maybe that). 

Yes, wasnt any big return; but, a crowded forward group now isnt as bad now with Hoffman and Pitlick gone.

I think was key point?

They arnt worse off today and Hoffmans spot is opened up, making bit more room for a Helineman-Ylonen-Farrell-Roy-RHP or whomever.

 

2023 Montreal Canadiens Top 25 Under 25: #13 Rafaël Harvey-Pinard (habseyesontheprize.com)

"With both Mike Hoffman and Rem Pitlick traded away, and with a new two-year deal in hand, it's a huge year for Harvey-Pinard. He'll have a chance, much like Jesse Ylönen, to earn a massive role with the NHL club heading into the preseason and it's hard to bet against him earning it now."

 

 

After the Jeff Petry Trades, How Are the Montreal Canadiens Better? - The Hockey News Montreal Canadiens News, Analysis, and More

 

"The revelation? The Montreal Canadiens were not on Jeff Petry's 15-team no-trade list. "I was under the impression that we were on Jeff Petry's no-trade list," said Hughes at his media availability on Tuesday. Once that was determined, the Canadiens were able to act as a broker to clear the way for Erik Karlsson to become a Penguin."

 

"The addition of Petry to a Canadiens blueline would have created obstacles for the promising group of young defensemen. But that was never in the cards, according to Hughes. The plan was to move the 35-year-old veteran before the start of camp."

 

https://www.pensburgh.com/2023/8/16/23833849/montreal-canadiens-role-in-facilitating-erik-karlsson-trade-jeff-petry-casey-desmith-rumors

 

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/hughes-seizes-opportunity-in-multi-piece-trades/c-345600872

 

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/stu-cowan-canadiens-hughes-tried-to-do-the-right-thing-trading-jeff-petry-again

[alfredoh2009]

18 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

What a strange trade. That's all Petry was worth? The good here I suppose is the optics that this management team will do players a solid. This could help them down the road when they're in the Ufa market. 

 

So end result is

Hoffman+Pitlick+ 2.3 mill cap space for 2 years

 

Lagare, Desmith, Lindstrom, 2nd, 4th. 

Bonus of some good karma with players?

 

 

Essentially - Hughes dealt Poehling, Pitlick and indirectly about half of Hoffman's salary for Mike Matheson, Gustav Lindstrom, Nathan Legare, Casey DeSmith, a 2023 fourth, and 2025 second and fourth-round picks. Asset Management 101.

— Grant McCagg (@grantmccagg) August 15, 2023

 

[alfredoh2009]

17 hours ago, TurdBurglar said:

I think you have Barron playing too high in the lineup.  I think it's setting him up for failure to put him on the top-4 pairing in his first full year in the NHL.  Also, Harris is LHD that plays RD and LD, so it's not Harris or Kovacevic on the 3rd pairing, it'll be closer to which 2 of those 3 are better.  As for the top 4, it'll depend on the coaching staff, but I see a real chance Matheson and Savard are the top pairing and Guhle and Harris/Kovacevic are the 2nd pairing. 

 

As much as I harped on Harris last season, I do think overall, he's better than Kovacevic.

you are probably right.

I am just glad that we can argue lineups back and forth having depth in all positions to disagree on: that is a good testament to how well the rebuild is going

[alfredoh2009]

17 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

You think Slaf will be in Laval?

 

unless he earns a spot. I am tired of handing him the lineup spot without his earning it.

 

I want him to become a great player for the Habs, and for this reason I prefer to have him in Laval to dominate North American hockey in that league

 

I don't see how he can crack the top-6 on the revamped Habs lineup

[alfredoh2009]

17 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

I took another look at it and this is what I came up with. 

 

Paying Hoffman for 1 year is similar to paying 50% of Petry for 2 money wise, kind of a wash except we give up a retention spot which could have been used on another player. 

 

We have DeSmith and Lindstrom for a year. Is that a positive or a negative?  Cap wise, likely a negative. Can they be traded for any kind of value, late round pick??

 

We get a 2nd and 4th round pick in 2025, supposed to be a better draft year than 2024 but perhaps hard to say at this point. 

 

I think when you combine the 2 then it's a slight positive. One thing you can say about Hughes is that he's not just sitting around.

 

 

 

but from a roster construction perspective: paying with cap money for NOT having Hoffman, Edmundson, Petry so that the Habs rookies and prospects have a chance to play in the NHL - that is worth every penny

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Hughes’ comment about Petry blocking the progression of young D just underlines what I suspected: the Habs have a philosophy that you can develop under-cooked guys in the NHL, as opposed to letting them marinade in the minors. I strongly disagree with this approach. Hopefully they are right and I’m wrong.

 

Regarding Slaf, that’s the most egregious case. He did show himself to be a strong kid, but he was clearly confused by the ice surface and the speed, which is why he kept getting clocked with hits out there. He also played a passive “just happy to be here” game that I hate seeing from a kid. At least with our young D, they may have benefited from time in the A, they may have been injury-prone due to playing over their heads, but every one of them seemed to bring a take-charge mindset. I didn’t see that with Slaf and I hate rewarding that passivity with a guaranteed roster slot. We did the same thing with KK - he of the flatlined development curve. 

[Commandant]

12 hours ago, Kiwihab said:

Maybe, but seems like not really worth all the effort to me. Got rid of Hoffman but basically spread his salary over two years with the Petry salary retention. Now they have an extra goalie which hopefully they can trade for something, but seems like a lot of moving parts that don’t leave us much better off (although we do have Hoffman’s spot open for a young guy, so maybe that). 

 

They spent no extra money and got a 2nd and 4th round pick out of all the moves..... plus a depth defenceman, and a longshot prospect and a goalie who can be flipped o or allow them to flip Allen. 

 

I don't see why this is bad. 

[huzer]

Definitely an organizational public perception shift from "if you want loyalty, buy a dog".

 

Given Hughes' comments in general about Petry, he wasn't really blocking anyone, as there was absolutely zero intent on keeping Petry. He was merely a key piece in a trade they wanted to make.

 

I said: ‘Listen, I know you didn’t go to bed expecting to hear from me this morning. I was probably one of the last people you expected to.’ I know they were as a family uptight. They’ve got four young boys and they were about to start school in two weeks. So I gave him my word. I said: ‘Listen, we saw an opportunity here to facilitate the trade between Pittsburgh and San Jose and to help ourselves. But we’re mindful that you’ve got a family and your own career and Montreal’s probably not the place you’re expecting to play.’ I promised him that we would work expeditiously to get him moved and that we wouldn’t drag this out trying to maximize every last piece of value in the trade. It probably took a little longer than we anticipated.”

 

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/stu-cowan-canadiens-hughes-tried-to-do-the-right-thing-trading-jeff-petry-again

 

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

21 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

I notice Detroit didn't qualify him so he became a free agent briefly before resigning with Detroit. I just don't get this trade. I have liked every move Hughes has made so far but not this one. He used up another salary retention spot, dead cap space for 2 years for a 4th round pick???  What am I missing here?

 

Gustav Lindstrom Contract, Gustav Lindstrom Cap Hit, Salary and Stats | Puckpedia

 

He seems to have the physical attributes to play in the NHL:

Lindstrom provides an impressive size/skating combo. He's got good wheels, as he displays in getting back into the play on his sequence. Video breakdown coming tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/Y40E62Kk9T

— Grant McCagg (@grantmccagg) August 16, 2023

 

[dlbalr]

22 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

I notice Detroit didn't qualify him so he became a free agent briefly before resigning with Detroit.

 

That was done to avoid giving Lindstrom arbitration eligibility, a move a lot of teams are making now.  Montreal will have a similar decision to make next summer.

[Commandant]

13 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

2025 is supposed to be a strong year but 2026 might have been a better idea.  The Habs already have a ton of prospects so they don't need a ton of picks for the next year or 2.  Plus, they have other players to trade and they'll get even more picks.  It makes sense to offset picks to future years.

 

 

I was definitely hoping for more than what was received.   However, Petry is basically the reason why Pitts missed the playoffs last year.  Who knows what he will be like next year and the Wings might regret getting him.  

 

 

 

 

 

The value of a pick is always higher the sooner it comes.  The longer you wait for a pick the more discounted it becomes. 

 

And Petry didn't have a great year, but "basically the reason why Pitts missed the playoffs last year." is such a ####ing overexagerration I don't know what to say to this.  But its a ridiculous comment. 

[alfredoh2009]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Hughes’ comment about Petry blocking the progression of young D just underlines what I suspected: the Habs have a philosophy that you can develop under-cooked guys in the NHL, as opposed to letting them marinade in the minors. I strongly disagree with this approach. Hopefully they are right and I’m wrong.

 

Regarding Slaf, that’s the most egregious case. He did show himself to be a strong kid, but he was clearly confused by the ice surface and the speed, which is why he kept getting clocked with hits out there. He also played a passive “just happy to be here” game that I hate seeing from a kid. At least with our young D, they may have benefited from time in the A, they may have been injury-prone due to playing over their heads, but every one of them seemed to bring a take-charge mindset. I didn’t see that with Slaf and I hate rewarding that passivity with a guaranteed roster slot. We did the same thing with KK - he of the flatlined development curve. 

 

I couln't agree more

[Commandant]

I also think you have to look at this summer's two trades together, but i wouldnt include the Petry-Mattheson deal in it.

 

Reason being is that the Habs were perfectly happy with the first deal and werent making more moves related to it until the karlsson thing came up.

 

This deal though was directly related to the other this summer.  Flipping Petry was always the plan

 

So its

 

Hoffman, Pitlick, out.

 

In

 

2.35m x 2 years retained, 2nd, 4th, legare, lindstrom, de smith.

[BCHabnut]

2 hours ago, huzer said:

Definitely an organizational public perception shift from "if you want loyalty, buy a dog".

 

Given Hughes' comments in general about Petry, he wasn't really blocking anyone, as there was absolutely zero intent on keeping Petry. He was merely a key piece in a trade they wanted to make.

 

I said: ‘Listen, I know you didn’t go to bed expecting to hear from me this morning. I was probably one of the last people you expected to.’ I know they were as a family uptight. They’ve got four young boys and they were about to start school in two weeks. So I gave him my word. I said: ‘Listen, we saw an opportunity here to facilitate the trade between Pittsburgh and San Jose and to help ourselves. But we’re mindful that you’ve got a family and your own career and Montreal’s probably not the place you’re expecting to play.’ I promised him that we would work expeditiously to get him moved and that we wouldn’t drag this out trying to maximize every last piece of value in the trade. It probably took a little longer than we anticipated.”

 

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/stu-cowan-canadiens-hughes-tried-to-do-the-right-thing-trading-jeff-petry-again

 

 

 

Word gets around with this sort of culture. I'm sure it's similar to corporate life.  I left a company where I had more stress and poor culture for a job with slightly less pay, and a very good culture. This is a good look for the organization.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

The value of a pick is always higher the sooner it comes.  The longer you wait for a pick the more discounted it becomes. 

 

And Petry didn't have a great year, but "basically the reason why Pitts missed the playoffs last year." is such a ####ing overexagerration I don't know what to say to this.  But its a ridiculous comment. 

 

Pittsburgh missed the playoffs because they lost at home to Chicago 5-2 on game 81.  How could you lose at home to Chicago in such a critical game!!  It really ticked me off because if Pittsburgh wins that game the Habs draft 14 or 15 instead of 31. 

 

Pittsburgh missing the playoffs was certainly a group effort, no way you can pin it on one guy. 

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

Pittsburgh missed the playoffs because they lost at home to Chicago 5-2 on game 81.  How could you lose at home to Chicago in such a critical game!!  It really ticked me off because if Pittsburgh wins that game the Habs draft 14 or 15 instead of 31. 

 

Pittsburgh missing the playoffs was certainly a group effort, no way you can pin it on one guy. 

 

They lost in game 82 to columbus too.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

They lost in game 82 to columbus too.

 

They did but the damage was done in game 81 as beating Columbus wouldn't have been good enough as Florida had the tiebreaker.  

[Prime Minister Koivu]

8 hours ago, huzer said:

Definitely an organizational public perception shift from "if you want loyalty, buy a dog".

 

Given Hughes' comments in general about Petry, he wasn't really blocking anyone, as there was absolutely zero intent on keeping Petry. He was merely a key piece in a trade they wanted to make.

 

I said: ‘Listen, I know you didn’t go to bed expecting to hear from me this morning. I was probably one of the last people you expected to.’ I know they were as a family uptight. They’ve got four young boys and they were about to start school in two weeks. So I gave him my word. I said: ‘Listen, we saw an opportunity here to facilitate the trade between Pittsburgh and San Jose and to help ourselves. But we’re mindful that you’ve got a family and your own career and Montreal’s probably not the place you’re expecting to play.’ I promised him that we would work expeditiously to get him moved and that we wouldn’t drag this out trying to maximize every last piece of value in the trade. It probably took a little longer than we anticipated.”

 

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/stu-cowan-canadiens-hughes-tried-to-do-the-right-thing-trading-jeff-petry-again

 

 

 

I frankly don’t mind a lesser return in a situation like this. It’s not as if squeezing Petry to play would have resulted in some massive return at the trade deadline. 
 

Classy move and Hughes seems to have a very good reputation as a good guy to deal with.