Prairie Habs
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2010
- 12,160
- 13,169
If MTL didn't pay 1st+ for both Dach and Newhook that would hold a lot more weight
And those comparisons would hold more weight if Kakko was as valuable as those players
If MTL didn't pay 1st+ for both Dach and Newhook that would hold a lot more weight
Lmao no from Rangers.
He’s 23 years old…before last years leg injury he had 40 points in 80 games. We’ll hold him thanks.
Engstrom and Beck.And what would be the right price according to you?
Cause frankly, that's all I'd be ready to pay..
Kakko and Groulx for Kidney, Engstrom and F.Xhekaj
Engstrom and Beck.
You recognize Kakko is a PROVEN (so not anyone thinks) 40 point middle six winger who is very good defensively. The only difference in this is center vs. winger, but again Beck is not proven, and Kakko is.Ok, I personally think that at this point, Beck alone is at least worth Kakko.
He might not have a high offensive ceiling, but Beck has the pedigree to become a good middle six center and have good probabilities to reach his potential.
He has a clear identity which Kakko doesn't have.
Kakko was drafted to become a top 6 offensive winger, and failed, he's been drafted 5 years ago (as a top 2 pick).
Furthermore, winger is the easiest position to evaluate and develop as prospects... and still he's in no man's land in terms of his development.
What is he? What's his role?
He never developed into what he was drafted for, he's not a typical role player with defensive acumen, nor a physical player.
My offer was made because he clearly need a change of scenery.
But as I said in an earlier message, I totally get why NYR fans would prefer to keep him at this point.
As he won't fetch much in a trade, keeping him hoping he sees the light might be the team best option.
You recognize Kakko is a PROVEN (so not anyone thinks) 40 point middle six winger who is very good defensively. The only difference in this is center vs. winger, but again Beck is not proven, and Kakko is.
Kakko also doesn't clearly need a change of scenery. He needs to play better hockey. It doesn't work that you put him on a different team, and he's all of a sudden an NHL all-star. His skillset is what it is. If you think you are getting a player with true 2OA upside, you are probably in for a rude awakening once he gets to Montreal. He's not what he was advertised as.
The Rangers have no reason to trade Kakko while his value is the lowest. He's coming off an injury-riddled season. If you want him, you have to pay a higher price than the "buy low" price. The Rangers aren't trying to trade him, so to "go out and get him", it's going to take an offer we cant refuse.
I think you have a very warped idea of what Kakko is.Un
Yeah, just like Josh Anderson is a proven 27 g 47 pts player.
And very good defensively?
He might be ok, but not the type his coaches put against opposition's best players, in key moments...
As for the change of scenery thing, no, I don't dream about him suddenly becoming the next A. Ovechkin if he came to MTL.
But maybe being on a team that doesn't have a win now mentality, being used differently and being given opportunities he didn't have with NYR, with all their star players occupying the good spots on the PP and cie, yeah maybe he could take a step up... or not...
MTL have been good lately to maximize the development of acquired young players, that were stuck in a lower role with their former team...
But that don't mean they'd be 100% successful doing so neither.
Kakko's 22-23 season clears any year of Dach or Newhooks career, especially pre trade.And those comparisons would hold more weight if Kakko was as valuable as those players
I don't care. I'd rather get nothing for him than risk trading him for peanuts and him figuring it out somewhere else.You won't get much more than this for Kakko.
He had 19 pts in 61 games last year and he's not seen as a young prospect anymore.
It has nothing to do with value. It's about risk vs reward. If Kakko figures it out, the Rangers lose this trade. If he doesn't, they break even at best. There's no upside for the Rangers.Don’t let NYR fans come in here with their false outrage and convince you this is somehow unfair to the NYR side. Kakko isn’t worth anything more than a player like Struble at this point, but they have to believe he is due to him being a former 2nd overall pick and the sunk cost fallacy.
This would be a nothing trade for both sides, if we’re being realistic. Kakko is a youngish bottom-six forward and Struble is a youngish bottom-pairing defenseman. I literally would not care one way or the other whether this trade happened or not, and I don’t think it moves the needle in any direction for either side.
But again, NYR fans will tell you otherwise because he was drafted 2nd overall, and in their mind they “lose value” if they trade him for a player like Struble, even though that’s all he’s worth now. Let them pretend. Also, if this deal were to go down, the Habs don’t add anything; it would be a 1-for-1.
You can say the same thing about Struble. What if he “figures it out” and becomes a rock solid 2nd pairing D? Then the Habs lose this trade. He’s excellent defensively on a shit team, rarely makes mistakes, and plays with polish and poise. He showed quite a lot in his first NHL season - hit the ground running in a tough situation and came through 56 games looking sterling, like a seasoned pro, not like a guy who’d never played in the NHL before. There’s risk here for MTL too. It’s an even trade and I wouldn’t be excited for it. I wouldn’t necessarily be mad either, but like I said, it’s kind of a lateral move from all angles, and a gamble, for both sides. An unnecessary one, imo.It has nothing to do with value. It's about risk vs reward. If Kakko figures it out, the Rangers lose this trade. If he doesn't, they break even at best. There's no upside for the Rangers.
Struble ranked 206th/217 qualifying players in xGoals against/60 while on the ice. (by far the worst on the habs btw).You can say the same thing about Struble. What if he “figures it out” and becomes a rock solid 2nd pairing D? Then the Habs lose this trade. He’s excellent defensively on a shit team, rarely makes mistakes, and plays with polish and poise. He showed quite a lot in his first NHL season - hit the ground running in a tough situation and came through 56 games looking sterling, like a seasoned pro, not like a guy who’d never played in the NHL before. There’s risk here for MTL too. It’s an even trade and I wouldn’t be excited for it. I wouldn’t necessarily be mad either, but like I said, it’s kind of a lateral move from all angles.
He was a rookie playing bottom-pairing minutes on one of the worst defensive teams in the league. That’s going to skew things in certain areas. I love how you took a single obscure metric and used it as evidence against his entire game and potential. Also, given the context of the post, I was quite obviously speaking in relative terms, but I think you knew that and decided to pretend otherwise for the sake of your quippy little response.Struble ranked 206th/217 qualifying players in xGoals against/60 while on the ice. (by far the worst on the habs btw).
In what world are we pretending he's "excellent defensively".
What part of "by far the worst on the habs" did you miss?He was a rookie playing bottom-pairing minutes on one of the worst defensive teams in the league. That’s going to skew things in certain areas. I love how you took a single obscure metric and used it as evidence against his entire game and potential. Also, given the context of the post, I was quite obviously speaking in relative terms, but I think you knew that and decided to pretend otherwise for the sake of your quippy little response.