Proposal: MTL & NAS
- Thread starter Lockin17
- Start date
Voight
#winning
Oddbob
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2016
- 16,665
- 11,216
High enough of a piece. I do think a 2nd was a boatload to get rid of a guy that should have received at least a 3rd rounder on his own.
- Aug 13, 2007
- 35,889
- 16,424
Preds are already going to have to dump cap, so will not be making a trade where cap comes in for futures.
I came here basically to say this. If 2 of the pieces (Dvo and Anderson) are Mtl's "trash" , why would they help Nash win?
Savard frees up Josi or other D on those defensive missions (PK). He sacrifices himself by blocking shots and all that.. but he is a third pairing D in Nashville. The TDL madness tends to get GMs to overpay but no way are you getting a first rounder during the season.
Dvo is fine on a 4th line, he is just overpaid. At 50% you may just get a taker, but it is just going to be a "letting him go" kind of a deal instead of a "getting rid of him" one. You will not get a 2nd rounder.
Anderson's value is garbage right now - I think Mtl needs to change that 4th to a 2nd rounder in return for Nashville's. Also, why?
Matheson is a different matter. I hope Mtl trades him simply because he had a whole bunch of points and his value is (IMO) higher now than i think he can maintain. I doubt Nashville is looking at him and thinking "this is the guy we need to push us over the top!"
Armourboy
Hey! You suck!
The real problem for us becomes that to create the cap space needed to fit just about any of these guys you gotta move someone who is either equal, better, or has a future that looks better. That makes zero sense for us.
The exception to that might be Schenn, but kind of based on what we have seen and heard over the last year there is no one that really believes Trotz would move him.
Porter Stoutheart
Seen Stamkos?
- Jun 14, 2017
- 16,060
- 12,504
I guess if the offer was something like Savard @ 50% for Fabbro, then that saves us a little bit on the Cap and gives us back a RD player the coaching staff might be more inclined to use. Not sure why Montreal would want to effectively be paying $4.25M for Fabbro or use up their last retention spot for that trade, but ok.
I don't think even Dvorak @ 50% for Glass would be that interesting for us, even if it saved the Preds a little on the Cap, we could save more by just waiving/demoting Glass, which would be better for the Preds than adding Dvorak at $2.25M.
Anyway, those are the absolute limits of what the Preds could even consider in deals for these types of players, and it's a far far cry from the OP's ideas.
AtlantaWhaler
Thrash/Preds/Sabres
- Jul 3, 2009
- 20,215
- 3,458
1) Nashville is at or over the cap and needs to make space
2) Nashville isnt going to give up any of their better prospects like Svechkov or a 1st for Matheson or Savard. With the forward additions and Skjei, we are looking good for offense. Maybe the addition somewhere of a defensive dman might make sense but overall i dont see the need either of them.
3) Dvorak may help the bottom 6 but never stays healthy. Sissons is a capable 3C as well. Just no need to really add that caphit or spend the draft capital for a fairly lateral move.
4) Anderson and his contract can eff right off.
2) Nashville isnt going to give up any of their better prospects like Svechkov or a 1st for Matheson or Savard. With the forward additions and Skjei, we are looking good for offense. Maybe the addition somewhere of a defensive dman might make sense but overall i dont see the need either of them.
3) Dvorak may help the bottom 6 but never stays healthy. Sissons is a capable 3C as well. Just no need to really add that caphit or spend the draft capital for a fairly lateral move.
4) Anderson and his contract can eff right off.
Leaving aside your valuations and whether these proposals make any sense, I don't think anything like this is seriously considered given that Montreal only has one retention slot left. Given the wealth of prospects and picks they still have coming, they won't use their last slot to pick up another 3rd rounder. I suspect it would be used in a true hockey deal where they would need it to balance salaries in obtaining a player they're going to add directly to their roster. This is not Arizona or Buffalo where they're in a perpetual rebuild. They have guys there with a plan who have demonstrated they're not going to waiver from it. I don't think any of these trades further their goal (not that they're against selectively acquiring more assets).
