Proposal: MIN - MON

FedorTyutin

Registered User
Jan 10, 2019
311
239
MIN receives

Mike Matheson


MON receives

Liam Ohgren


My rationale :
- MON will be looking to maximize Matheson's trade value. He has this yr + 1 to his contract. Lane Hutson will be taking his responsabilities on PP 1.
- Matheson is a useful d-man in every zone. Plays as number 1 in MON but ideal spot is number 3 (2nd pai LD, PP 2). It is also implied that he is quite a leader in the locker room.
- I guess MIN is in win now mode, with Kaprizov in his prime, before the end of his contract, and other young players performing.
- Brodin seems to have quite the injury. Now that left side is quite depleted.
- MON will be looking to add young talent up front. Grit has been identified as a lacking characteristic in the roster and prospect pool.
- I think MON will prefer adding young players that can play soon rather than a 2026 1st or later, since the selected players would add themselves to the group in a while. We want to become competitive while Suzuki and Caufield are in their prime.

Do we believe there is a deal to have here? Who would need to add? Or does it stay exactly like this? Let's exchange on the matter.

(Yes I use MON. I find it too funny when Friedman uses it and now there is no taking it back.)
 

Benstheman

Registered User
Nov 20, 2014
7,372
3,635
As a Habs fan I think I would do it. But I’m not sure if we wouldn’t prefer draft capital to use in other trade to fill more important needs.

But value wise, I think it’s fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FedorTyutin

Prior

Registered User
Jan 18, 2020
2,636
1,283
You can keep Matheson. He’s mostly worthless as it is and especially for the Wild, how they play, and how they are set when healthy. Nevermind as soon as Buium turns pro after the collegiate season. And they get the pleasure of moving a sound prospect.

Good luck to you continuing to play him on your top pair(s) though.
 

Hockeyfan200

Registered User
Jun 15, 2019
621
110
in what world think wild are trading a top prospect for a Dman thy ha have less than zero need or space for. Holy Crap No from wild

MIN receives

Mike Matheson


MON receives

Liam Ohgren


My rationale :
- MON will be looking to maximize Matheson's trade value. He has this yr + 1 to his contract. Lane Hutson will be taking his responsabilities on PP 1.
- Matheson is a useful d-man in every zone. Plays as number 1 in MON but ideal spot is number 3 (2nd pai LD, PP 2). It is also implied that he is quite a leader in the locker room.
- I guess MIN is in win now mode, with Kaprizov in his prime, before the end of his contract, and other young players performing.
- Brodin seems to have quite the injury. Now that left side is quite depleted.
- MON will be looking to add young talent up front. Grit has been identified as a lacking characteristic in the roster and prospect pool.
- I think MON will prefer adding young players that can play soon rather than a 2026 1st or later, since the selected players would add themselves to the group in a while. We want to become competitive while Suzuki and Caufield are in their prime.

Do we believe there is a deal to have here? Who would need to add? Or does it stay exactly like this? Let's exchange on the matter.

(Yes I use MON. I find it too funny when Friedman uses it and now there is no taking it back.)
wild jut used a bunch od assets on a Dman and a top D prospect coming from college who wild will need space for. Brodin will come back. So Montreal, Wild aren't taking on your dman when they don't need him
 

FedorTyutin

Registered User
Jan 10, 2019
311
239
Wild say no. If anything they’ll go after a center
Of course you'll need a center because you apparently won't keep almost ppg center, 9th ovr pick in 2020 Marco Rossi, who is in new rumors every day.

Just kidding, I get what you're saying. Jake Evans for Ohgren then?

Just kidding.

Seems especially unnecessary with the recent Jirecek acquisition / wild strong already
Although I think this is a fantastic acquisition by the Wild, I have a hard time seeing Jiricek having a greater impact in playoffs than Matheson in the following two years.
 

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,597
3,597
You can keep Matheson. He’s mostly worthless as it is and especially for the Wild, how they play, and how they are set when healthy. Nevermind as soon as Buium turns pro after the collegiate season. And they get the pleasure of moving a sound prospect.

Good luck to you continuing to play him on your top pair(s) though.
Lol. I don't care about tbe deal but I love how a big , fast D that was 8th in defenceman scoring last season and is top 20 this season is " mostly worthless"
 

Baksfamous112

Registered User
Jul 21, 2016
8,491
5,965
Habs has no choice but to keep Matheson. Savard is likely gone at the end of the year. If you trade Matheson, the oldest D in your line-up will be Guhle at 23.

That’s a recipe for disaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Habsrule

Prior

Registered User
Jan 18, 2020
2,636
1,283
Lol. I don't care about tbe deal but I love how a big , fast D that was 8th in defenceman scoring last season and is top 20 this season is " mostly worthless"
Lot of good all that is doing for Montreal. Go find some other franchise that thinks he’s worth what is proposed here. Now only if there was other minor things that mattered for defensemen, like actually being a defender. Which is amusing because the premise of this proposal centers around the Wild losing one of the elite defenders in the league for a stretch and to solve that, the best course of action is go target Matheson of all people.

Montreal has one defenseman on their roster that could play on Minnesota’s when all Wild defenseman are healthy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Digitalbooya

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,597
3,597
Lot of good all that is doing for Montreal. Go find some other franchise that thinks he’s worth what is proposed here. Now only if there was other minor things that mattered for defensemen, like actually being a defender. Which is amusing because the premise of this proposal centers around the Wild losing one of the elite defenders in the league for a stretch and to solve that, the best course of action is go target Matheson of all people.

Montreal has one defenseman on their roster that could play on Minnesota’s when all Wild defenseman are healthy.
I didn't say hes a fit for Minnesota. I was commenting on the fact that you think he's mostly worthless. He's a skilled offensive defenceman. Several teams would pay a significant asset to aquire him. Yiu calling him mostly worthless is just ridiculous
 

Prior

Registered User
Jan 18, 2020
2,636
1,283
I didn't say hes a fit for Minnesota. I was commenting on the fact that you think he's mostly worthless. He's a skilled offensive defenceman. Several teams would pay a significant asset to aquire him. Yiu calling him mostly worthless is just ridiculous
Skilled offensive defenseman that cannot play defense and need to be sheltered on a team worth a damn are not valuable. No team is giving up near what is proposed here. We’re not talking about some special offensive talent, this is Mike Matheson.
 

thefutures

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2017
2,957
2,915
Matheson and Gostisbhere are comparable, so 2nd or mid round pick in value, maybe call the Jets again like monahan trade and Chevy will do you another solid
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElPrimeTime

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,597
3,597
Skilled offensive defenseman that cannot play defense and need to be sheltered on a team worth a damn are not valuable. No team is giving up near what is proposed here. We’re not talking about some special offensive talent, this is Mike Matheson.
If you say so
 
  • Like
Reactions: Prior

Maurice of Orange

13:21 🏒🏒
Feb 5, 2016
10,849
7,371
Lol. I don't care about tbe deal but I love how a big , fast D that was 8th in defenceman scoring last season and is top 20 this season is " mostly worthless"
Matheson was 9th in defensemen scoring last season and is currently tied in 23rd place in scoring defensively this season.

The issue isn’t Matheson‘s scoring, but his game in the defensive zone leaves much to be desired however, Mike isn’t completely worthless as a 3rd pairing/depth defender to a contending team that may come calling at the deadline.

I would not do this trade as Ohgren could be gold after some development this season.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
31,980
10,821
Montreal, Canada
Was curious to see the proposal

Matheson AAV this year and next gives him a bit of value but not a top prospect. Like someone else mentioned, he's not much more valuable than a guy like Gostisbehere

Also, the Wild is really not a team that would need him, particularly with Jiricek, Buium, Hunt and Lambos in their pool
 

TBF1972

Registered User
May 19, 2018
8,442
6,921
Lol. I don't care about tbe deal but I love how a big , fast D that was 8th in defenceman scoring last season and is top 20 this season is " mostly worthless"
lol
when reading the thread about lane hutson, all the montreal fans call hutson already much better then matheson and msl is called out for playing matheson over hutson on the pp. obviously here now the tune is changing.
 

Drake1588

UNATCO
Sponsor
Jul 2, 2002
30,303
2,966
Northern Virginia
I don't really think the Wild are a great fit for Matheson, and really don't think they'd move a top prospect to add him.

Matheson is not a player the Habs can afford to let go, though. Assuming they're trying to improve, which I think is the case, they will need him unless they plan to go out and land 2+ veteran top-four defensemen over the summer. They are already fixing to have to replace pending UFA Savard. Dealing Matheson leaves them too thin back there in July.

Deal Savard at the deadline instead.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Please disable your adblocker on HFBoards.com

It looks like your adblocker is attempting to interfere with the intended operation of this site. Support us by allowing our site to function as we intended. Please disable your adblocker and add us to your allowlist.

Frequently Asked Questions
I'm not using a blocker. Why am I seeing this message?
You're likely seeing this message because an app or extension on your computer is blocking ads. The app or extension may be a "privacy" or "malware" blocker, or a VPN.

I disabled my blocker. Why am I still seeing this message?
It's common to have two or more adblocking extensions running at the same time. See the question above.