Confirmed with Link: Artturi Lehkonen (50% Retained) Traded to Colorado for a 2024 2nd Round Pick & Justin Barron

[26Mats]

Lehkonen is a much better player than Prust, Moen, etc. ever were.

Armia, when he's on, is in the same tier as Lehkonen.

let's hope the world championships lifted his game to another level that translates to this upcoming season. And then when Lehkonen signs his new deal, Armia's cap hit of 3.5M won't seem so bad.

Maybe try Drouin-Dvo-Armia to get Drouin and Armia's trade value up.

 

[Whitesnake]

Armia, when he's on, is in the same tier as Lehkonen.

let's hope the world championships lifted his game to another level that translates to this upcoming season. And then when Lehkonen signs his new deal, Armia's cap hit of 3.5M won't seem so bad.

Maybe try Drouin-Dvo-Armia to get Drouin and Armia's trade value up.

Key word...when he's on. Which he isn't often. Which means that he isn't as effective. I don't remember Lehky being off in effort, in forechecking. Missing nets? Sure. Maybe if he would have had decent linemates sometimes, we wouldn't care about him missing the nets as often....

 

[Captain Mountain]

Armia, when he's on, is in the same tier as Lehkonen.

let's hope the world championships lifted his game to another level that translates to this upcoming season. And then when Lehkonen signs his new deal, Armia's cap hit of 3.5M won't seem so bad.

Maybe try Drouin-Dvo-Armia to get Drouin and Armia's trade value up.

Armia could even be more effective just due to his size. The issue is consistency. Unless he's playing hurt, you know EXACTLY what you're getting with Lehkonen. Armia is tougher because he runs extremely hot and cold in terms of on-ice impact.

I also wouldn't play Drouin-Dvo-Armia, I don't think Dvorak is capable of elevating linemates like that and it hard to figure out the situation that line would be used in.

 

[Milhouse40]

Getting fair to solid value for a core player like Lehkonen isn't a trade we should be making. Not only is he good/cheap, he also brings leadership/character to a team, that's invaluable. We probably would have been able to lock him up long term @ 3.5M.

For me an overpayment would have been 2 1sts. Personally, i would have traded Anderson.

Lehkonen is.....Eller.
Both elite 3rd line player able to play well in all 3 zone, able to move up in case of injuries and perform well, both showing up big time in the PO and both able to pinch in offensively, both center pieces on the middle 6.

Eller was traded for 2 x 2nd
Lehkonen was traded for an NHLready ex-1st round pick + 2nd round pick
The value was very solid.

I would have give money and terms to Lehkonen ahead of many players on this team......but a lot people don't seems to realize the cap hell Bergevin left behind him and keeping Lehkonen wasn't a possibility,

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Getting fair to solid value for a core player like Lehkonen isn't a trade we should be making. Not only is he good/cheap, he also brings leadership/character to a team, that's invaluable. We probably would have been able to lock him up long term @ 3.5M.

For me an overpayment would have been 2 1sts. Personally, i would have traded Anderson.

- We absolutely should make that trade
- He’s cheap - for now. Contract coming up.
- Leadership can be found elsewhere
- Even if we could lock him at 3.5 (we couldn’t) we’re still wasting years of his prime.

We won’t be contenders for at least two or three years. Makes no sense to hang into a guy and waste his prime. Barron is younger, cheaper and will come into his prime by the time we’re hopefully contending again. Plus we get the pick.

This is what rebuilding looks like. You pick a direction and you DO it.

 

[SirClintonPortis]

Lehkonen is a much better player than Prust, Moen, etc. ever were.

How much better are we talking about here? Top 6 regular?
For the circumstances involved, letting him go was obviously the right move. We can't make the playoffs for him to have his playoff moments.

 

[Captain Mountain]

How much better are we talking about here? Top 6 regular?
For the circumstances involved, letting him go was obviously the right move. We can't make the playoffs for him to have his playoff moments.

He was, in terms of overall impact, Montreal's best player this season. He has always been somewhat of an analytics darling who took a leap starting last year. He's playing a clearly defined top-6 role (or is a top-6 regular) on a team that has lost twice in the entire playoffs. To compare him to Prust or Moen is frankly ridiculous.

It makes sense that Montreal let him go and hopefully Barron and the 2nd pans out. But its a shame Montreal never had a real contending core here. Having guys like Lehkonen is great, but having guys like MacKinnon or Makar are non-negotiable.

 

[Habnot]

Here's the thing, Lehkonen absolutely moves the needle. We have a large sample size of that. He's just not a core player. And Montreal can't win anything without players who are among the best in the league in their position. And its going to be a while until they're at that point.

That doesn't make sense - he both moves the needle and is not a core player? Got it.

We all agree that he is a solid third line player. Seems to me if you get a 1st and a 2nd for a third line player you make that trade every day and twice on Sunday.

 

[Habnot]

Getting fair to solid value for a core player like Lehkonen isn't a trade we should be making. Not only is he good/cheap, he also brings leadership/character to a team, that's invaluable. We probably would have been able to lock him up long term @ 3.5M.

For me an overpayment would have been 2 1sts. Personally, i would have traded Anderson.

DIsagree on that one. Anderson brings something that is not easy to find - size, skating, sand paper and scores more than Lekky. Give your b*lls a tug if you think that Leky is easier to replace on any team.

 

[Captain Mountain]

That doesn't make sense - he both moves the needle and is not a core player? Got it.

We all agree that he is a solid third line player. Seems to me if you get a 1st and a 2nd for a third line player you make that trade every day and twice on Sunday.

How does that not make sense? He's a clear top-6 forward on a cup finalist team that has lost twice all playoffs. He clearly moves the needle. He's also not a core player, which is a star player that you don't move.

I'm so tired of these "solid third line player" descriptions of players, since they make no god damn sense. Its the exact same arguments that people made with Danault. Lehkonen is not a solid third line player. He's a play driving, shutdown middle-6 winger who can not look out of place on a third line of contender or can do what he's done in Colorado, which is play on a line with Landeskog and Kadri/Mackinnon and fit like a glove.

 

[Paddy17]

What's your idea of a good trade? One where we completely rip-off the other team?

Lek is doing what most of us hoped he'd do. Playing a good supporting role on a contending team that wanted scoring depth. The Avs got what they wanted and we shouldn't be upset about it.

What matters to us is the return. Lek would've been wasted here. It makes way more sense to do what we did and get futures. By all accounts Barron is a great prospect and we've got a pick to go with it. This is the definition of a win/win trade.

And I hope Leky continues to score. Power to him. I'll always remember him for his huge goal last year. I wish him nothing but the best. But I'd still make that trade today without any hesitation. I mean that's a great return for a player like Lek. Were people actually expecting to get more?

Exactly. I don't get people that base the success of a trade based on what the player we traded does with their new team.

What matters is what the player was doing for us when he was here, and where he fits into where we are going in the future. Then you assess the value based on what you got in return for him. What he does after is irrelevant to the value of the trade.

 

[Habnot]

How does that not make sense? He's a clear top-6 forward on a cup finalist team that has lost twice all playoffs. He clearly moves the needle. He's also not a core player, which is a star player that you don't move.

I'm so tired of these "solid third line player" descriptions of players, since they make no god damn sense. Its the exact same arguments that people made with Danault. Lehkonen is not a solid third line player. He's a play driving, shutdown middle-6 winger who can not look out of place on a third line of contender or can do what he's done in Colorado, which is play on a line with Landeskog and Kadri/Mackinnon and fit like a glove.

He's playing second line minutes because of injuries. True top 6 players are not easy to come by - Montreal wouldn't of traded him if he was.

 

[Captain Mountain]

He's playing second line minutes because of injuries. True top 6 players are not easy to come by - Montreal wouldn't of traded him if he was.

What on earth are you talking about? Colorado's forward group has been relatively healthy and Lehkonen has been playing top-6 basically throughout the playoffs.

This is a massive misconception of the distribution of talent in the NHL right now. "True top 6 players" isn't really a thing. There are 1st line forwards (ranging from stars to lower end 1st liners), middle six forwards and depth forwards.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

Colorado is such a powerhouse offensive team, it wouldnt surprise me if Lehkonen scores 45-50 pts the next few seasons playing in the top 6.

You look at players they got before and after joining the avs:

Kadri went from a 50-60 pt player to being on pace for a 100 pts this season.

Nichushkin went from looking like bust to a 50+ pts player.

Burakovsky went from 30 pts to 60 pts.

Toews went from 30+ pts to 50+ pts.

45-50 pts wouldve been unrealistic for Lehkonen on the habs, but it could be doable with the avs.

 

[Captain Mountain]

Colorado is such a powerhouse offensive team, it wouldnt surprise me if Lehkonen scores 45-50 pts the next few seasons playing in the top 6.

You look at players they got before and after joining the avs:

Kadri went from a 50-60 pt player to being on pace for a 100 pts this season.

Nichushkin went from looking like bust to a 50+ pts player.

Burakovsky went from 30 pts to 60 pts.

Toews went from 30+ pts to 50+ pts.

45-50 pts wouldve been unrealistic for Lehkonen on the habs, but it could be doable with the avs.

It turns out starting off with an elite player or two at forward and D and then aggressively acquiring every analytics darling in the NHL is a good model for sustained success. Who knew?

 

[Andrei79]

It turns out starting off with an elite player or two at forward and D and then aggressively acquiring every analytics darling in the NHL is a good model for sustained success. Who knew?

Don't the Panthers and Hurricanes both have excellent analytics experts in management as well ?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Well I don't entirely agree. 'Cause based on that type of analysis, that's why we kept saying how Bergevin was so great in his trades. Yet, was unable to build a team. If you trade for known commodity, as young as they are (in comparison with draft picks in the future), you still have an analysis to do. They went and acquired Barron, Smilanic and Heineman the way they go and draft players. With the extra help that those 3 guys weren't 17 year old.

So as I say, right now it's fine value. Chiarot is awesome value. Good with both Toffoli and Lehkonen. But great for both teams even if picks and young players are bringing nothing? We will really look back at it in 5 years and still claim it was a great trade?

Shouldn't we analyze trades the way we analyze draft picks? Was the Oilers choosing Yakupov a great pick? Because he was a consensus? Yet, people in here keep laughing at the Brule pick saying that the ones who wanted him look bad...NOW....well Brule had clearly numbers to justify the pick no? Well I think trades should be analyzed the same way. And just like draft day, WINNERS when it just happens it's a game. It's not reality.

Habs won the 2012 draft. Never seen this board so ecstatic. Guess how it's looking now...just saying...we should reserve our rights to review the moves. No matter what they are. Very good value? Yes. Great trade for both teams? We will see.



I know I don't want him back. I wouldn't be against keeping him. But based on how far we are....chances are we'd need Lehky when he'll be 30 years old. And at the pace he's playing, kid won't be as effective at 30.

A few things here:

- No, I don’t think we should look at things as though its a draft pick. We are receiving value for something we’ve given up in return. In this case - it’s futures. And the return was more than commessurate with what we gave up. That’s how trades should be looked at. It’s why I hated the Subban trade no matter what. If Subban gets hurt- that’s unpredictable. In the moment we made the trade it was simply horrible.

- 2012 through MBs tenure those picks didn’t pan out. Again though, is that scouting or development? Depending on the year you may get a different answer. But we’ve covered this ground before.

- To your point about MB winning on individual moves but not building a team - I fully agree. But in this case it’s part of a concerted move to rebuild. The team has picked a direction and I applaud it.

- Finally, as an aside… could we have gotten more for the player? I find this unlikely. I’m surprised we got what we did. If we were discussing the Tofoli trade however, I’d give you a different opinion.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Lehkonen is a much better player than Prust, Moen, etc. ever were.

That x100 million they are not even close to Lehkonen. Lehkonen would have been perfect for the Leafs or Edmonton but the smartest GM snagged him at little cost.

How much better are we talking about here? Top 6 regular?
For the circumstances involved, letting him go was obviously the right move. We can't make the playoffs for him to have his playoff moments.

Blake Coleman/Zach Hyman good.

 

[Captain Mountain]

Don't the Panthers and Hurricanes both have excellent analytics experts in management as well ?

They have that reputation. And Carolina is also known as a team that aggressively targets analytics darlings.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

That x100 million they are not even close to Lehkonen. Lehkonen would have been perfect for the Leafs or Edmonton but the smartest GM snagged him at little cost.

Little cost? I don’t think so. He paid a premium. And… it looks like it was worth it.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Little cost? I don’t think so. He paid a premium. And… it looks like it was worth it.

Their offer was good but it was not great either. I do think the Avs got themselves a steal with him. Never mind he is RFA too.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Their offer was good but it was not great either. I do think the Avs got themselves a steal with him. Never mind he is RFA too.

So… what do you think we could’ve gotten for him? Barron’s a very good prospect (the equivalent of a mid to late first at least) and we got a second.

What do you think we could’ve gotten otherwise?

 

[Whitesnake]

A few things here:

- No, I don’t think we should look at things as though its a draft pick. We are receiving value for something we’ve given up in return. In this case - it’s futures. And the return was more than commessurate with what we gave up. That’s how trades should be looked at. It’s why I hated the Subban trade no matter what. If Subban gets hurt- that’s unpredictable. In the moment we made the trade it was simply horrible.

- 2012 through MBs tenure those picks didn’t pan out. Again though, is that scouting or development? Depending on the year you may get a different answer. But we’ve covered this ground before.

- To your point about MB winning on individual moves but not building a team - I fully agree. But in this case it’s part of a concerted move to rebuild. The team has picked a direction and I applaud it.

- Finally, as an aside… could we have gotten more for the player? I find this unlikely. I’m surprised we got what we did. If we were discussing the Tofoli trade however, I’d give you a different opinion.

All of this though is about what we are able to do, as a team, with Lehkonen's value. Bergevin was unable to build a team so that most people wouldu really appreciate Lehkonen's talent. Same with Eller. SAme with Danault. Again, not saying Hughes is entirely at fault here. It's more about how we were as a management able to build a team so that we'd be able to see the maximum of each player. We wasted Price's years. We wasted tons of players talent. And as a result, we needed an extraordinairy year, in all the ways possible (we won the Campbell trophy), to reach a Finals.

As far as scouting vs development, yeah we beat that to death and it's not over. One thing is sure though...Bergevin was supervising everything. He didn't appreciate where 1 or the other or both were going, he had the power to do something with this. He didn't. Or when he did, it was MUCH too late.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

All of this though is about what we are able to do, as a team, with Lehkonen's value. Bergevin was unable to build a team so that most people wouldu really appreciate Lehkonen's talent. Same with Eller. SAme with Danault. Again, not saying Hughes is entirely at fault here. It's more about how we were as a management able to build a team so that we'd be able to see the maximum of each player. We wasted Price's years. We wasted tons of players talent. And as a result, we needed an extraordinairy year, in all the ways possible (we won the Campbell trophy), to reach a Finals.

As far as scouting vs development, yeah we beat that to death and it's not over. One thing is sure though...Bergevin was supervising everything. He didn't appreciate where 1 or the other or both were going, he had the power to do something with this. He didn't. Or when he did, it was MUCH too late.

Do you not think we maximized Lek’s trade value? I think we knocked it out of the park on that return.

Tofoli? Different story.

 

[Whitesnake]

So… what do you think we could’ve gotten for him? Barron’s a very good prospect (the equivalent of a mid to late first at least) and we got a second.

What do you think we could’ve gotten otherwise?

True that on the Hughes point of view, it's the Toffoli trade that makes me cringe more. You had to find a way to get Pelletier, or Zary or Coronato out of the Flames even if it means a worst draft pick.

For Lehky, well I was a fan. Big time. So it frustrates to see him leaving period. Not because I absolutely wanted to keep him. We don't have the team to use him properly. But because.....we are not the team. And when it will come the time to be THE team...we will NEED a Lehky. And maybe more than 1. So because I'm a fan, I guess I would have overrated his return. A 2nd in 2024...is fine in itself. Colorado will still be a top team but at least, we give as many years as we can so that they might not be as dominant. And Barron is a fine prospect. I will say he was not on my list to be drafted. But he surprised me already. I don't believe he's top 2 though. That's pretty much all I said. Which was then intrepreated as...he sucks. But that's our board. lol

So on a Hughes perpective, I thought we had enough at one point to get an A- type of prospect. I don't think we did. Future will tell. I do think Barron could be a solid 4 though.