Again, I disagree. Development of our younger players will be genuinely affected in a positive way by having PLD in the lineup next season.
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #84: Off-Season edition
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
- Status
BergevinBurner
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2019
- 1,886
- 4,419
And IF we can get him at a favorable cap hit via sign and trade that'd be massive.
If he'd be willing to sign around 8x8 I'd be willing to trade a decent bit for him.
The alternative is letting him head to free agency where we'll be in a bidding war with god knows how many other teams. If he puts up a PPG pace next year then good luck getting him for anywhere near 8 million. He's going to be a 26 year old center with size and 1C upside, there's no way he doesn't receive offers in the 10+ million range.
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2003
- 11,117
- 12,287
Sergachev was really bad in his own end early in his career and still has too many absolutely mind boggling brain farts. He almost single handedly lost the series against the Leafs last year. Watching the games with Leaf fans and how they were excited every time he touched the puck in his own end was hilarious. He got his s**t together after that 1st round but it was really, really bad. He goes through phases where he just looks like a zombie and you can see the bad decisions forming in his head.
It took alot of sheltered minutes with zero media pressure for Sergachev to develop. I am still of the opinion that he would have busted in Montreal and would have been traded regardlessly. He very likely ends up as good as he is today but not in Montreal.
Hannibal
Fear the Weber
- Feb 11, 2007
- 11,095
- 8,614
Theres no way Jets are gonna hold on to Dubois for his final year of contract before UFA to try to compete one last year.
Letting a 25 years old Big top 6 center/winger go for free would be terrible asset management. They gonna trade him this summer.
Letting a 25 years old Big top 6 center/winger go for free would be terrible asset management. They gonna trade him this summer.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
I see what you mean and then I ponder about us not liking the idea of trading Romanov for Dach and I'm pretty sure our approach would have been trying to trade other parts to acquire and keeping Romanov.
Mailloux's top end potential is high. But what is the probability he reaches it? That's hard to say. If we knew he would turn into a Burns type, of course we would not do it. But we don't know which makes it a difficult decision. Do you think he has higher potential vs Sergachev? I don't.
Regardless, I'm not desperate to trade Mailloux in the Dubois trade package. Just not an automatic no. I do prefer other trade packages.
I would not have done it if the Florida pick was a lottery pick. But if the pick is later, why not? Especially if Florida makes the playoffs, then I have no issue. We have not drafted anyone with a first round pick later than 16th and who worked out since 2007 (Pacioretty).
Here is the entire list:
2009 Leblanc
2010 Tinordi
2011 Beaulieu
2013 McCarron
2014 Scherbak
2015 Juulsen
2017 Poehling
Before Pacioretty, the last player drafted later than 16th who worked out was Koivu in 1993.
So one hit in the last 20 opportunities.
Last edited:
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
What we are worried about is Mailloux turning into his max potential which his Burns? That's basically what we are discussing.
Habs got a good look at Mailloux in camp. No NHL games to evaluate like we did with Sergachev. I do trust Gorton/Hughes and they will will talk to MSL about Mailloux's potential. Just like they were willing to flip Romanov for Dach. But in Romanov's case, they had lots of NHL games to evaluate. With Mailloux, all they have is CHL and some sample size in training camp.
It's not probable Mailloux turns into a Burns. Possible but not probable. Would we gamble on that? Not sure but it's interesting talking about it. I don't think any of us are rushing to include Mailloux in the Dubois trade package.
If I had to bet money on it, I would say Mailloux ends up on the Barron development path.
Rebuilding is multidimensional. Under the right circumstances, not unlike with Dach last summer, a trade for Dubois’ rights falls within that paradigm, if only since bolstering the top-6 would greatly help developing the young core already in the NHL.
- Habs’ pick is top-5 and they draft a center who can play top-9 in the NHL next season;
- Florida’s pick is outside of the top-16 and accepted by the Jets as the main asset in the Dubois deal;
- Dubois is willing to sign for 8.5M AAV;
- Winnipeg also accepts to take back 1 NHL contract (Dvorak/Armia);
- The Habs add no more than B+ prospect as further incentive in that trade;
- Edmundson traded for futures (RHD?, picks?);
- Hoffman traded for future considerations;
- Look to trade Allen+ for a young goalie?
- Stay healthy…
Caufield - Suzuki - Dach
Slafkovski - Dubois - Anderson
Farrell - Carlsson - Ylonen
RHP - Evans - Gallagher/Armia
Matheson - Savard
Guhle - Barron
Xhekaj - Harris/Kovacevic
Allen
Montembault
I don't think either you or the poster you are responding to have any idea what a proper rebuild entails.
Nor does adding Dubois resemble the type of transaction that would be conducive to keeping the team in no man's land forever as a mid forever team, like you put it.
You act like Dubois is an almost 30 UFA closer to his demise and acquired for your best bluechip prospect and a top-5 draft pick. This would simply not be the case. We'd be talking about a B+ Center prospect easily eclipsed by Dubois and whatever else at the NHL level and about to be drafted, a mid to late 1st round pick and a 3rd pairing D, either a veteran or a rookie, whether it was Edmundson or Harris, the type of D we have in abundance already.
Just drafting and developing, short of nabbing a couple of generational players along the way, with no proper plan other than doing it over a long period of time is just a strategy to be in perpetual rebuild, like many examples that abound currently in the NHL. Even the lucky ones who have multiple generational players can't even get past the first round of the playoffs with any kind of consistency -- that's when they do make the playoffs...
I am rather fond of Beck, for example, and would rather keep him, but, if sacrificing Beck enables MON to land Dubois on a decent 8-year deal, I'd rather take what we know we can get now for Beck, a mid to later 1st round pick and one of Edmundson or Harris (preferably Edmundson).
IMO, with Dubois and Suzuki as Cs, plus Dach who could play wing or C, Beck gets immediately replaced by a superior Center via our own (not Florida's) 1st round pick in 2023.
I'd like someone who abhors adding Dubois as a 24-yr old, physical, legitimate top-6 (if not 1st line) C, to explain exactly what is taking the time to do things properly?
What does that look like? What is the plan behind that?
Try not to make it empty words without any actual plan behind them...
Because, if the answer is tank, draft high, tank again, draft high again, tank again, draft high again, tank again, draft high again, you have to realize that you don't necessarily need a GM to do that because there is not much planning going on here...
It's a magic bean recipe that will perhaps work, perhaps not...
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
We will see. I do talk about high point trade packages cause it's HF boards. However, I do trust Gorton/Hughes will manage their leverage well.
I'm not 100% on board with waiting till he is UFA cause I do think there is a possiblity that Dubois ends up asking for $9M+ with a higher cap (things can change in 1 year). It depends on cost to acquire. Panthers 1st and Beck is something I would consider. Panthers 1st and Harris is more in line with what Trouba returned. And remember, Gorton was the GM with the Rangers when that happened and they were in rebuild mode.
This is not a black/white situation and rebuilds are not always all about pieces that comes from the draft. If Dubois was age 28+, that would be a different story.
Sorinth
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 11,586
- 6,225
WeThreeKings
Demidov is a HAB
He was barely 6'0 when he was drafted and I do not trust that measurement. I'm 6'2" and I'm definitely taller and look taller in net than Hart.
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
The error in your narrative is assuming all rebuilds come from the draft and is the "right way". We are not trading a top 10 pick bud which is where most top end players come from. If we were doing what you want done, we would have traded Romanov for the 13th pick and not use it on Dach. Because you think all picks are hits.
* Nazar is going to be much better than Dach right?
* Panthers 1st and Beck are going to be much better than Dubois and it sounds like you think Dubois is 28+
Trading for Dubois is mistake because he hurts our chances at a top 5 pick this year? No, even without Dubois, we are tracking to pick in the 10-15 range and that could have very well happened this year if not for injuries to key assets in Caufield, Dach, Slaf, Monahan, Guhle, and Xhekaj... who were all helping us move up the standings.
Bottom 5 picks is going to be a thing of the past as we move forward... with or with out Dubois. If our roster with youth is injury prone, we are looking at a top 5 pick again next year cause our youth is not as good as we think it is. It's one or the other.
Last edited:
Sorinth
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2013
- 11,586
- 6,225
Seems like splitting hairs to make the record seem worse, especially since your post first talked about 13-32 and only then changed it to 16+
I'd take Gurianov instead of Ylonen (too SOFF) on your third line any day, but that os just semantics. The importance of your post is the realization that rebuilding is multi-dimensional/multi-functional/multi-faceted/multi-whatever.
Rebuilding through the draft is placing an emphasis on the draft, not ignoring other avenues as opportunities arise.
Adding extra 1st round draft picks and using them as assets to land a promising prospect or an established youngster is not some kind of affront t rebuilding through the draft, nor is trading a quality youngster from a position of strength for another quality youngster at a position of weakness.
Just how daft can some people be equating trading a youngster for a youngster with getting over-the-hill veterans in exchange for our best youngsters or future assets?
It's only bad if the trade is a horizontal trade -- LD for similar LD, C for similar C, Scoring winger for Scoring winger...
Filling needs at a position by trading assets from another position where you are already boasting depth is precisely the extension behind the thought, "Always draft the BPA."
At some point, you end up with multiple impact players at the same position and use one to land an impact player at a position of need.
When I see posters crying because Harris is included in a trade proposal, for example, I sincerely wonder how they can become sufficiently emotionally detached to make any worthwhile trades.ç
Sure, I like Harris, but I can also see that LD is sufficiently covered if we use him as leverage to address another position of need via a trade; Matheson, Guhle, Xhekaj already in the NHL and Hutson + Engstrom in the wings and both Trudeau and Struble likely decent enough third pairing and 7th D candidates.
It's really hard to converse about the rebuild with posters who fail to comprehend the multi-whatever nature of a rebuild, or those who get overly attached to decent but not great prospects.
Mailloux would have gone higher at the draft if...
...and, yes, Dubois is a far more proven and projectable player than Drouin was at the time.
Still think Mailloux is a risky add to a package for Dubois.
SlafySZN
Registered User
- May 21, 2022
- 7,480
- 16,172
I said many times, them acquiring Dach is not the same thing as getting Dubois.
Dach is in his development years.
Nico Cauzuki
Registered User
To do things the right way, we need to accumulate about 11 strong players. Right now, we have three (Suzuki, Caufield, Matheson), plus strong maybes in Dach and Guhle, and a wildcard in Slafkovsky.
We need to keep adding piece by piece. At some point the team will be a bubble team on the way up (not all bubble teams are on the way down or stagnant).
In order to avoid perpetual mediocrity, the club needs to avoid wasting cap space on support players like His Emptiness did (Byron, Armia, Hoffman, Gallagher extension). Signing RHP to 6 years x $5M as some here suggested will do WAY more to keep us in purgatory, than acquiring a real top-6 C and paying him $8M or so.
Building definitely carries the possibility of moving through bubble status. This is not to be feared, but embraced
Habs Halifax
Loyal Habs Fan
I understand your approach. You want to keep all futures and sign him for free a year later. That is part of what we may decide but it's not black/white.
The chances Beck turns into a top 2C is slim to none. So you might be complaining that we are trading a Poehling type.
The chances the Panthers pick ends up being a top 6F or a top 4D is there but it's hard to guess on. Will that pick be a Guhle or will it be a Beaulieu. You just don't know.
What happens if Dubois decides to sign with someone else in this summer? Or if he waits for us but then the cap grows substantially and his agent then asked for $9M - $10M instead of $8.5M?
Lets say we don't have Dubois because we don't trade for him. In 2+ years, we may be left with no Dubois and Beck/Panthers pick ends up being Poehling and Beaulieu.
The point here is it's not black/white and there is no "right way" to rebuild. If we were trading a top 10 pick, I'd be on your side
Even in the original post I said "especially if Florida does not make the playoffs".
It's a matter of probabilities.
The Great Weal
Phil's Pizza
- Jan 15, 2015
- 54,915
- 70,374
Can’t see Philly trading Hart for anything less than a top 15 pick. His stats suck lately but he was elite goaltender just recently. It would cost FLA 1st. I’d love to get him for a bunch of our prospects since I don’t think their prospect pool is any good but I doubt they’d accept that.
SlafySZN
Registered User
- May 21, 2022
- 7,480
- 16,172
I don't want Dubois, not even a year later.
And i also understand where you're coming from, but we're just not seeing the rebuild the same way. I think you're thinking about it in a way like we're done rebuilding in a year and they can trade picks or players like Ottawa did for immediate help (debrincat, giroux, chychrun). I think we're not there, at all.
Ah... Why would that make acquiring Dubois unattractive? He's still under 25 and it just means his development curve is better than Dach's...
It's quite unclear what way you see the rebuild. Right now, it's mostly in your hear.
It's not like adding Dubois is making multiple moves to become some inferior contender right away. It's about solidifying your foundation and your young core with a player you know can get the job done over the next eight years, not some roll of the dice people are creaming their jeans over with no idea what will actually become of the pick or prospect in three or four years.
We can strictly aim to chase a better future that never comes, or put some pillars in place who will help the players we pick and develop to progress closer to their ceilings over time.
Again, rebuilding is multi-dimensional and, as stated, Dubois is of the age for the young core and the offer does not include a top-10 pick from which odds are far greater that an impact player will emerge.
Beck, IMO, is a good prospect, but, with this year's draft, falls immediately 5th on our depth chart at C for a top-9 spot. Untouchable? Surely not.
Suzuki
Dubois
Dach
2023 1st round draft pick with MON's own pick
Beck
Mesar
Kidney
Dvorak
Evans
Last edited:
Are you worried Dubois will turn into Drouin or Desharnais?
Or are you worried that acquiring one good player will slightly dampen perpetual tanking?
If we REALLY want to tank, a good shot will be 2025 for Michael Misa. I think there is a way to make sure we get him.
We can probably acquire up to 15-17 first round picks in 2025 if we play our cards with focus and determination.
2025 Montreal pick
2025 Calgary pick
Edmundson trade with retention + a prospect
Savard trade with retention + a prospect
Anderson trade
Dvorak with Evans trade
Dach trade
Suzuki trade
Caufield trade
Matheson trade
Slafkovsky trade
Guhle trade
Harris trade
Trade whoever we pick first this year with the Habs own pick
Trade whoever we pick first this year with the Florida pick
Trade whoever we pick first in 2024 with our own pick
Hutson trade
Next, if we do not win the lottery with 15-17 cracks at it (50-50 probability), then we can trade a slew of picks to whoever won the lottery, and use what is left to re-stock the team.
I say if the Habs want to go all-in on a tank, then do it! Actually go all in!
Last edited:
- Status
