Nico Cauzuki
Registered User
you dont want a 24 years old top 6 center thats almost ppg plays with grit,wants to come back home and for free?
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #84: Off-Season edition
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
- Status
Gaylord Q Tinkledink
Registered User
- Apr 29, 2018
- 33,237
- 36,465
Free agency also means anyone can talk to him.
Losing him isn't a "oh well, so be it" you just lost a player that, well, let's face it you'd be super lucky to get with either 1st round pick.
Having this player wanting to come here and play and HuGo misses out on him is an offense that should result in both losing their job.
If it comes put the ask is both 1sts, top prospect and something else, then yeah, you pass.
If it's Florida's 1st, Dvorak and a mid prospect, you do that every day of the week.
Florida's pick is around 16th.
'03 14th - 18th
Seabrook - Great pick
Nilsson - Terrible
Bernier - Was a useful bottom 6 guy.
Parise - Great pick
Eric Fehr - Bottom 6 player
'04
Devan Dubnyk - Was really good towards the end of his career, but wasn't really good for the team that drafted him
Radulov - Was good for Nashville, who hardly had him and was better elsewhere.
Nokelainen - Good bottom 6er
Chipchura - Fringe/ solid 4th liner
'05
Sasha Pokulok - Absolute bust
Ryan O'Marra - same
Alex Bourret - Same
Hanzal - Good 2nd liner, really good 3rd line centre
Ryan Parent - 7th dman ?
'06
Grabner - Not a bad depth player
Riku Helenius - Nothing burger
Ty Wishart - Nothing
Trevor Lewis - Very nice bottom 6 player for a bit, now just a 4th liner
Chris Stewart - At one point the premiere power forward in the game, but that was after he was dealt.
'07
Shattenkirk - Very good point producing dman
Alex Plante - Nothing
Colton Gillies - bust
Cherepanov - RIP
Ian Cole - Was a top 4 dman, but a solid bottom 4 dman
'08
Zach Boychuk - Crypto scamming loser.
Erik Karlsson - Absolute stud offensively.
Joe Colborne - 4th line centre
Jake Gardiner - Turned out to be an alright dman for a bit
Pickard - AHL goalie
'09
Kulikov - Decent bottom 3, but mostly bottom pairing dman
Peter Holland - Tweener, but mostly an AHLer
Nick Leddy - Servicable NHLer
David Rundblad - Nothing special
Louis Leblanc - We all know
'10
Jaden Schwartz - Fairly good forward
Derek Forbort - Decent bottom guy
Tarasenko - Stud
Joey Hishon - Injuries, but didn't amount to much
Austin Watson - good 4th liner.
'11
Oleksiak - Solid defender
JT Miller - Really broke out with the Nucks, but was a solid player with Tampa and the Rangers
Joel Armia - We all know
Beaulieu - Solid bottom pairing/ number 7 guy
Mark MacNeill - Bust
'12
Girgenson - Decent bottom 6
Cody Ceci - Likely a number 4, always miscast.
Tom Wilson - Hate him, but he's a unique player
Hertl - Stud
Teravainen - Very nice player.
'13
Alex Wennberg - Mostly disappointing, but seems to have been better in Seattle ?
Ryan Pulock - Decent
Zadorov - Good bottom 3 dman
Lazar - Good energy guy
Mirco Mueller - Started off well, but quickly looked like a nothing player
'14
Julius Honka - Bust
Dylan Larkin - Very good
Sonny Milano - Fringe player
Travis Sanheim - Not too bad of a defender. Hard to judge where he is exactly at this point in his career.
Alex Tuch - Good new age power forward type player with size.
'15
Jake DeBrusk - Looking like a good 2nd liner
Senyshyn - Bust
Barzal
Connor
Chabot - All great picks
'16
Charlie McAvoy - Stud
Luke Kunin - Bottom 6 energy guy
Jakob Chychrun - Solid dman
Dante Fabbro - Bottom 6 pairing possibly
Logan Stanley - Bottom pair guy
'17
Cal Foote - Taking longer, but right now a bottom pairing guy
Erik Brannstrom - Bottom pairing guy
Juuso Valimaki - Seems to be doing better in Arizona, so maybe better than fringe ?
Liljegren - Bottom 3 dman
Urho Vaakanainen - Fringe ?
'18
Joel Farabee - Ok forward
Denisenko - Fringe
Martin Kaut - Back over in Europe, so fringe/bust
Ty Smith - Bottom pairing d
Liam Foudy - Tweener/4th liner
'19
Cam York - Developing, looks to be solid
Caufield - You all know
Newhook - Trending well, middle 6/ 3rd line centre
Krebs - Looking decent, middle 6 guy
Thomas Harley - Not the most promising look.
So for you and anyone else, which of those players taken around where Florida's pick is likely to be would you take over PLD ? I get there's more to the deal, but the 1st is likely the main piece.
Now, it would be better to get PLD for free and still keep that pick I agree 100% on that. However, imagine someone comes to you and says "Hey, your crush likes you" and you decide to not ask them out, because it's February 8th and you don't want to spend money on them for Valentine's day. You wait a bit longer and the 17th rolls around and you go to ask them out only to find someone else asked them out and now you're stuck with nothing.
The picks the habs have and the prospects the habs have, not all of them are going to become something and the probability that they become close to as good as PLD is going to be very low.
Are the habs going to be competing next year if they go for PLD and tweak the team a bit more ? No. They have possibly 2 1st round picks in that draft, too.
Who knows, maybe Montreal offers the Jets the 1st they got for taking on Monahan and everybody wins. Habs don't use Florida's pick, but the habs don't wait just incase things change.
SlafySZN
Registered User
- May 21, 2022
- 7,480
- 16,172
Lol no need to exaggerate to try to make a point when all i said was that i wouldn’t want them to give assets for him or that i don’t think it’s the time to get an UFA like him even a year from now.
But i guess wanting them to be patient and be smart with those kind of decisions means i want them to trade everyone for picks.
Vachon23
Registered User
At the end of the day, turning Ben Chairot into PLD would be a great asset management
The idea is more to address the folks who praise what Chicago did by trading Hagel, Dach and DeBrincat and "taking the tank seriously".
I'm happy to listen though: what is the reason not to want Dubois even for free as a UFA? Is it the chance he disappoints like Drouin or Desharnais? Or is there another reason to avoid acquiring talent?
Twisted Sinister
Living in Your Head Rent Free
- Oct 8, 2014
- 2,050
- 3,085
Dubois is an interesting cat. He's a bit of a loose canon in terms of his attitude on the ice and sometimes exhibits pouty body language when things don't go his way. Similarly, he has been known to have consistency issues and occasionally quits on a play.
He's also not the rugged physical presence some people seem to think he is. While he has size, and does use it to his advantage, particularly in terms of puck protection and making plays, he isn't a sandpaper guy that wreaks havoc.
Futhermore, he's never been a PPG player or anywhere close to that. This season is the closest and we'll see how that plays out.
As such, I'd consider him a second line C on an elite team. I'm not sure having two guys like that in PLD and Suzuki is the best idea. You ideally want a true number one to complement guys like that.
However, all that said, I'd definitely take the player if the assets we had to give up were reasonable. Florida's 1st plus Harris is fine. Anything past that would be too much in my eyes, especially if they're asking for Mailloux or Hutson.
The only way I wouldn't sign him if he's UFA is if he's asking a king's ransom that would hurt our cap going forward and make it impossible to ice an elite cup-winning team.
Thanks for your reasonable take.
I do think when you put good players with other good players, chances are some will get to 80 points+.
I agree with your approach on a Dubois UFA signing.
As for the trade price, there may be no real harm in adding other NHL players as long as they they are not cap bargains, and another B prospect without game-breaking ceiling is ok with me too.
Last edited:
Subban wasn't exactly a top prospect, because his defensive play was a bit in question. Like at the WJC you noted, where he was quite dynamic on the PP, but when his team had a 1 goal lead he didn't see any ice time in the last few minutes-because his coaches trust him in his own end.
His progression in the AHL made him a top prospect.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
If he asks for $9+ million, you simply don't sign him as a free agent.
Why do you think trading him for him a year before free agency somehow secures a lower price to sign him? How does that work?
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Or, draft whoever you want at your alleged #16 and then sign Dubois as a free agent.
Why are you pretending it's one of the other? You are acting like the Canadiens either use the pick, or the get Dubois. If Dubois *actually* wants to play here, you use the pick, and then sign him as unrestricted free agent.
It's odd that you are just removing that from the equation with your valentines scenario. Either he wants to play he or he doesn't. The strange notion that somehow trading for him a year in advance makes him suddenly decide to forgo free agency and sign a bargain deal seems like a hilarious pipe dream, but it's been floated multiple times in this thread. If he wants to play here, great, have him join as a free agent. If he doesn't, let's just continue with our rebuild by using high picks and seeing how our prospects develop.
And the list of draft picks you have provided isn't making the point you think it is... there's about a dozen guys there that I would prefer, along with whatever prospect would have to be added as well, to Dubois. This would be a dumb dumb move for the team.
Last edited:
Twisted Sinister
Living in Your Head Rent Free
- Oct 8, 2014
- 2,050
- 3,085
Hey, I definitely take him on my team. Worst comes to worst, we'll have an excess of centers so we can use whichever one isn't doing crazy well at that position on the wing.
I agree on the players and prospects. B is fine. Clear A guys that are part of the future should stick around.
Usually, adding RFA years to a contract drops the value a little. Also, having his rights allows us to sign him for 8 years rather than 7, which could also lower the cost a little.
FF de Mars
Registered User
If Dubois wants to win, he's not going to mind waiting, he's not going to mind the Habs drafting an extra 1st, and keeping those prospects! I'm sure he'd rather have an extra top4D like Mailloux on the team if he signs a long term contract, unless he's short sighted.
Sterling Archer
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2006
- 23,304
- 14,039
If Timmins wasn’t in charge for all those years I’d be more worried. New team in town and they did pretty well in their first draft last year, so I’d give them some new slack.
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,037
- 12,388
Some geniuses here really think the trick to acquiring good players is to wait for them to hit UFA and prove themselves to the Habs by signing a team friendly deal
wow if only the rest of us thought of that
wow if only the rest of us thought of that
Gaylord Q Tinkledink
Registered User
- Apr 29, 2018
- 33,237
- 36,465
I've explained it twice why it's not the best idea to wait.
I've explained why you don't tempt fate.
You're just "if he comes, he comes, if he doesn't oh well". This isn't some 4th liner.
If there's a dozen players there you'd prefer over, then you have a low view on PLD and would explain why you're not ready to trade for him.
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,037
- 12,388
No, you see, if PLD is worthy he will duly wait until he is a free agent and continue playing this crash and bang high impact physical sport on ice and blades with no job security beyond June 2024.
At which point he will calmly wait for the Habs to cycle through all their options and contract scenarios and then sign whatever deal the Habs propose with whatever cap space the Habs have left over. Out of the goodness of his heart he won’t ask for anything the Habs cannot fit in their cap structure.
Other teams are stupid for trading mid to low value first round picks for the rights of top-end players. The genius move is to simply not do that. Marc Bergevin was a similar thinking genius, perhaps ahead of his time.
FerrisRox
"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
I'm not willing to trade those assets for any pending UFA who has apparently expressed interest in signing here. It would be an idiotic waste of assets to do so. It has nothing at all to do with my opinion of Dubois. (Although I think it's odd you don't think there are 12 comparables on that list, you must hold him in extremely high regard. Karlsson, Miller, Hertz, Caufield, Chychrun, McAvoy, Chabot, Tarasensko, Connor, Barzal, Larkin, Radulov, Seabrook... That's more than a dozen. And that's supposed to "prove" that swapping that pick plus a solid prospect for Dubois is a low-risk choice? I couldn't disagree more.)
As for your "explanations" about why it's not the best idea to wait, it's only because you've decided that he doesn't actually want to come here, and instead he will sign elsewhere if the Canadiens wait.
Strangely, you've also decided that by trading for him a year before unrestricted free agency, he will promptly then sign a multi-year deal with the Canadiens at a reasonable rate.
Don't you see how silly it is that you have manufactured a fictional scenario that only allows for things to play out in one way, with zero evidence to support any of it??
- Jan 18, 2022
- 8,037
- 12,388
Who needs good players under 25 and in their prime when you could hold onto magic beans with a clenched fist.
Skip Bayless
The Skip Bayless Show
- Aug 28, 2014
- 21,795
- 25,498
I don't think you understand the vibes my guy.
We need to win 3 cups with a 100% homegrown team so we can troll the main boards for the next 3 decades.
Of course the person you replied to is exaggerating for effect, but it is still rather quizzical to me that you don't think the Habs are far enough along in the rebuild to trade for 25 y/o Dubois at a discount price this summer or even to sign him as a UFA at age 26 next year, while you simultaneously have no interest in trading 24 y/o Suzuki away. What kind of rebuild timeline makes it patient and smart to sit on a 24 y/o Suzuki signed for 7 more years at 7.875M this summer while making it foolishly impatient to trade for a 25 y/o Dubois who would sign for 8 years at approximately 8 to 8.5 at a depressed trade cost?
The asset cost itself for Dubois doesn't really work as a reason to justify keeping Suzuki while adamantly opposing a Dubois trade given that holding onto Suzuki carries a significantly larger opportunity cost. If Dubois is too much of a luxury for the Habs to justify right now, should we not also be considering the opportunity cost of not trading Suzuki for a significantly better return given he has much higher trade value with the contract + no trade restrictions? If we're taking a very long term asset accumulation view, if anything I'd say the pure asset maximization strategy would be to trade for Dubois and then move Suzuki for double what we paid to build around Dach, Dubois, Beck, our 2023 1st rounder, and the huge haul of futures we'd get for Suzuki. That's not what I want to do, but to me it seems only logical if we accept the premise that the Canadiens aren't far along enough to warrant trading for Dubois.
More broadly speaking I think the Canadiens' timeline supports being more aggressive, not less, and I think it's untrue to categorize the idea of trading for Dubois as grounded in impatience or a lack of strategic thinking. I have no delusions of the Canadiens being a contender next year. For me, the entire point of trading for Dubois comes from a medium and long-term strategic perspective about maximizing our competitiveness during Suzuki & Caufield's primes, alongside the Dach, Matheson, and Harris contracts, and the Slafkovsky, Guhle, Barron, Farrell, and 2023 1st round pick's ELCs while acquiring a player who's still young enough to be a contributor 5+ years into the future. I understand the rationale of committing to more asset collection when we don't have a franchise forward in place yet, but I'm skeptical that's necessarily worth sitting on all our ELCs until they get huge raises and waiting until Suzuki is 27 or 28 while accumulating other futures.
SlafySZN
Registered User
- May 21, 2022
- 7,480
- 16,172
All of this started because some people said he apparently wanted to play for the habs, as if he only would play for them. So then everyone suddenly wanted the habs to trade for him, because he's from here and WANT to play here.
But now you try to ridicule people for saying they wouldn't want to trade for him and would prefer for the habs to wait if he gets to the UFA market. As if he's the one who can't ''wait'' for the habs or he's making some favor for the habs to get him while he can go wherever he wants.
Which one is it?
Which rebuilding team gave a first round pick for the rights of a top-end player?
Last edited:
Beer and Chips
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2018
- 1,482
- 1,122
Being a Habs fan in the 80's and watching the Habs win 4 straight after losing the first 2 in 93, make no mistake...I ain't a Nords lover. I did like the rivalry though.
Milhouse40
Registered User
- Aug 19, 2010
- 22,550
- 25,650
1- The offer is not comparable, when there's multiple offers on the table, then you have to base your offer on other offer. Trading for him a year before anyone can talk to him assure that your offer is the only one on the table for him to look at.
2- 8 years. That 8 years is the best offer he could ever get from any teams for terms, even if the situation would drag until UFA period. As for the money, we see contract as 8y x 9M or 3y x 3.5M......but players\agent sees the value of the contract.
8 years at 8M is a $64M contract let say versus a 7 years at 8.5M is a $59.5M contract.
You have a $64M and a $59.5M contract in front of you.....which one do you prefer?
Deebs
Without you, everything falls apart
- Feb 5, 2014
- 17,429
- 14,373
- Status
