Kudo Shinichi
Registered User
- Apr 20, 2012
- 21,535
- 28,986
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #85 - Offseason Editon
- Thread starter Lafleurs Guy
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Ezpz
No mad pls
- Apr 16, 2013
- 15,532
- 12,219
I don't think they re-signed Wilson, signed Patches, and traded for Eddy to tank. Backstrom missed half the season and is apparently ready to go now. I don't see a good team there but I think they're going to make the moves to try and compete. They're not rebuilding anything until Ovy retires and he's still at least two seasons from passing Gretzky.
Adam Michaels
Registered User
My guess it is for family reasons. If they stay in the East, the travel is easier for his and his wife's families to go to where they are. Whereas there is more distance to cover to teams in the west.
I do wonder if Chicago, Nashville, and St. Louis could be western teams he'd be willing to go to as they aren't far from either his or his wife's families.
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2003
- 11,356
- 12,928
Mantha is a soft, lazy p.o.s.
Why would Hughes want to clog up the forward position again after finally pinching off Hoffman into the toilet? Mantha is just a tall Hoffman with an even bigger cap hit. Petry is worth much more than Mantha as a puck moving RHD who was a recent major piece of a Stanley Cup finalist and at a significantly lower cap hit even if it is for another year. Mantha has been benched by every single coach that he has had and runs counter to Hughes' culture building philosophy.
That trade would make zero sense for Hughes.
Vachon23
Registered User
Lockin17
Registered User
- Jul 31, 2018
- 3,970
- 3,118
What about Nashville ??
They have a kick ass defense.
But their 2nd and 3rd line looks pretty sad.
Goalie is great.
So let's say Nash wants to add to their fowards core.
espacially center i guess.
Joakim kemell is a great target for MTL.
Our RW is pretty bad.
what would be the cost you guys think ?
Anderson (1.5mil retained) + Dvorak + Tuck
For
Kemell + Sissons
They have a kick ass defense.
But their 2nd and 3rd line looks pretty sad.
Goalie is great.
So let's say Nash wants to add to their fowards core.
espacially center i guess.
Joakim kemell is a great target for MTL.
Our RW is pretty bad.
what would be the cost you guys think ?
Anderson (1.5mil retained) + Dvorak + Tuck
For
Kemell + Sissons
Kudo Shinichi
Registered User
- Apr 20, 2012
- 21,535
- 28,986
They aren't going to move a potential top 10 pick, and even if they did it definitely wouldn't be for Petry.
- Jun 24, 2012
- 86,633
- 161,777
Would you do it if it meant jettisoning the disappearing Armia-POS we’re stuck with for 2 more years? At least, Mantha would only be a bitter pill for one season while this team is not looking to compete.
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2003
- 11,356
- 12,928
Armia would make a lot more sense for Montreal as unlike Petry he has zero trade value and Mantha would simply fill Armia's forward spot. Trading Petry for Mantha would be entirely asinine as it would not only undo the benefit of losing Hoffman but would add even more salary.
Ultimately everything still hinges on Petry because if Hughes keeps him he will almost certainly need to use off season LTIR on Price and could use the extra dollars on Mantha's contract to get closer to the cap and reduce dead cap space. If Petry is traded Hughes wouldn't do a Mantha/Armia deal because the extra dollars this season would make it nearly impossible to get to 10.5 M under the cap to put Price on the in-season LTIR (which is absolutely preferrable). Basically we either have both of Petry and Mantha or neither, it just doesn't work with them switching teams.
Petry's fate will determine whether the team needs to accrue or shed cap space this off season. In a vacuum I agree that Armia/Mantha seemingly might make sense but there are just too many variables in this equation right now that have yet to be determined for me or anyone else to even begin to guess where this is really headed.
This will be fun watching Hughes wriggle out of this predicament but I am confident that he will find a way. Ideally he moves Petry with no retention for a modest return and trades DeSmith or Allen in order to become cap compliant so that he can put Price on LTIR and weaponize the 10.5M of cap space during the season when other teams become desperate.
Last edited:
Yes, and?
They aren't rebuilding yet, presumably you acknowledge that if you think they'd want to trade an expiring UFA for a declining vet with an extra year
Petry has considerably more value than Mantha, even with the extra year... 1 for one makes no sense at all for us, and while I appreciate that a 1st is a stretch, if they value Petry as a reliable 2RD upgrade and buffer should Carlson miss time again, shedding Mantha while adding some cap room & improving the roster short term might just be enough to get that pick.
Mcdonaldz
Registered User
- Jul 26, 2021
- 433
- 456
He still was making 4m+ and was/is not a 4th line center so I would say no they were not looking at him to be 4th C
Kudo Shinichi
Registered User
- Apr 20, 2012
- 21,535
- 28,986
Yes, and?
They aren't rebuilding yet, presumably you acknowledge that if you think they'd want to trade an expiring UFA for a declining vet with an extra year
Petry has considerably more value than Mantha, even with the extra year... 1 for one makes no sense at all for us, and while I appreciate that a 1st is a stretch, if they value Petry as a reliable 2RD upgrade and buffer should Carlson miss time again, shedding Mantha while adding some cap room & improving the roster short term might just be enough to get that pick.
It's nowhere near enough to get that pick.
A team that just picked 8th overall isn't going to trade their next 1st-round pick a year in advance just to get rid of a bad contract that has 1 year left and to acquire a declining 35-year-old defenseman...
There were two 2024 1st round picks traded this offseason, and they were for a 100 pt defenseman and for a 25-year-old 40 goalscorer.
Kimota
ROY DU NORD!!!
Simarino
Registered User
- Oct 21, 2009
- 3,719
- 3,563
You dont go after a guy who's making 4.5M a year to be a your 4th line center
They paid what the needed to pay to get what they wanted to get , yeah.
It's a good deal for the Habs. I never tough that Pitlick would get us that return
Would Montreal accept this trade two years ago?
Crouse + Mcbain+ Bjugstad
for
Caufield + Jake Evans
Probably not because the Habs were entering tank mode and giving up a top prospect for depth doesn't make sense then.
Nashville wouldn't do that trade for the same reason.
Ok, did not know that. So does he have positive value at his contract and 1 year term?
OK, question answered with a NO.
Completely disagree. If Mantha has negative value, then we should not trade Petry non-retained for him, because Petry has positive value. He would help our team as our 2nd or 3rd best D-man at a cap hit appropriate to his value.
Possibly, if the add is an unprotected first PLUS.....
If Washington is trying to compete (as it seems they are with Ovechkin still playing), then Petry on their blueline for 2 years at $2.344M cap hit is worth a TON. An absolute TON.
I'd want a first and an A prospect, or two firsts, or one first and two seconds.
Probably still great for Washington is Petry at 40% retained ($2.812M), and that should cost an unprotected first, PLUS a second or B+/A- prospect.
Another option I thought of is:
Petry 40% retained and Armia (15% retained) - total hit for Caps $5.7M times 2 years
versus Mantha $5.7M for one year and a top-5 protected 1st rounder
The basis of any deal has to start with agreement that:
Petry will really help you compete for the next 2 years
Your player Mantha has negative value,
The deal I proposed gives you the money to add Petry and a good defensive forward / PKiller with a good playoff record ..... for no extra money.
Last edited:
Agreed
Not, it is not necessary at this time. Creative roster management makes it work. I and several others have posted how.
Hughes is not in any "predicament". He can be cap compliant with Petry and deSmith on the roster, and both add value if he can't trade them for a fair return.
The GM is quite rightly looking for a good trade fit to improve the team further before moving assets that have value.
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
- Mar 28, 2003
- 11,356
- 12,928
We are 5M+ over the cap right now, without moving anyone out what is the solution that you have come up with? I am assuming that you know that moving Armia to Laval won't provide cap relief.
If possible could you brief me on options that perhaps I am not aware of.
Kimota
ROY DU NORD!!!
An attempt at a proposal: Elias Lindholm for William Nylander
Now I don't know what Nylander is asking for but Lindholm is asking 9/per for 8 years to the Flames. If Nylander ask like for 11 then the Leafs could make that deal cause it would make them save a lot of money. Also Lindholm is a great defensive forward as well. Maybe the ingredient they need. Then again maybe the Flames would not be inclined to sign another crazy contract like they did for Huberdeau. But they make their team more talented with a younger player too.
Logically in the end, if I'm the Flames I trade him but not for a player that makes more. I trade him for a package, maybe get a player not as good but you also get a good prospect and a pick. Doing a sort of soft of rebuild. Maybe getting rid of Kadri as well.
Now I don't know what Nylander is asking for but Lindholm is asking 9/per for 8 years to the Flames. If Nylander ask like for 11 then the Leafs could make that deal cause it would make them save a lot of money. Also Lindholm is a great defensive forward as well. Maybe the ingredient they need. Then again maybe the Flames would not be inclined to sign another crazy contract like they did for Huberdeau. But they make their team more talented with a younger player too.
Logically in the end, if I'm the Flames I trade him but not for a player that makes more. I trade him for a package, maybe get a player not as good but you also get a good prospect and a pick. Doing a sort of soft of rebuild. Maybe getting rid of Kadri as well.
I saw this coming watching him play at the Memorial Cup. Ridiculously extended shifts no speed no stamina.
Armia and Petry are two players with targets on their backs. Hughes may be able to pull another rabbit out of his hat with Armia at TDL. He's a guy I could see us retaining on seeing Eddy will be off the books next year. In Petry's case I see no need to retain at all. His current salary puts him close enough to his true value as a puck moving RD.
- Status
