HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #85 - Offseason Editon

[Gustave]

Barzal is definitely an upgrade in our top 6.

I think Hubby on our first line will help carry the load for Coco and Suzuki. He’s a setup guy from the wing, just what the other two need.

Don’t get me wrong, his contract is an aberration! But is Gally’s… so if he can leave in a swap and we get a sweetener, I’m biting.

 

[TT1]

I think Hubby on our first line will help carry the load for Coco and Suzuki. He’s a setup guy from the wing, just what the other two need.

Don’t get me wrong, his contract is an aberration! But is Gally’s… so if he can leave in a swap and we get a sweetener, I’m biting.

a bad contract for 4 years or a bad contract for 8 years, the choice is obvious, there's gonna be better ways to get rid of Gally especially if his game picks back up

this isn't the type of situation where you get rid of something bad for something bad in hopes of getting a marginal sweetner, this is the type of situation where you make use of your cap space to move Gally

 

[WeThreeKings]

I think Hubby on our first line will help carry the load for Coco and Suzuki. He’s a setup guy from the wing, just what the other two need.

Don’t get me wrong, his contract is an aberration! But is Gally’s… so if he can leave in a swap and we get a sweetener, I’m biting.

Huberdeau's age doesn't line up very well..

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

cant believe some people actually want Huberdeau and that horrible contract....

 

[Miller Time]

cant believe some people actually want Huberdeau and that horrible contract....

Not sure that it's about wanting Huberdeau & his contract so much as it's wanting to take advantage of the situation...

If we can dump our own undesirable contracts and add sufficient assets from the flames to offset the (considerable) risk that he's done as a ppg top-line player, it's a worthwhile gamble... Upside that he does return to a top 6 lock is there, downside is buffered by the assets paid to take on the risk

 

[Captain Mountain]

I feel like many of you don't understand how much cap space we have this summer and especially next. We are literally swimming in cap space with nobody to sign at all. There are no good free agents either and the ones that are good have 0% chance of coming here. All our core guys are on sweetheart deals that are also not that far off from their fair value. We're closer to hitting the cap floor than the cap ceiling in the summer of 2025. We have 5 mil in dead cap, 10.5 in Carey cap, and still have over 5 mil to play with this year. We have 23 mil in the summer (before subtracting Pearson) with only Monahan to sign. We are absolutely in the position to take a gamble on an elite player falling out of favour. If we sell Dvo or Armia at the deadline we will be closer to 30 mil cap space.

Huberdeau, Kyrou, Couturier, Barzal, Hertl, whoever. Now is the time to take a chance. We have nothing even close to elite forward-wise coming up in the system.

Do you understand how much cap space Montreal has next summer? I get that people didn't want a rebuild or don't have the patience for one, but even if Montreal were to put Price on LTIR, they'd still be middle of the pack when it comes to cap space. Which is still good when compared to teams who need to re-sign guys, but Montreal will also likely carry a cap penalty next season for bonus overages.

That's also a wide range of names. Huberdeau's contract is truly awful and the term makes planning almost impossible. Barzal and Kyrou aren't even close to being available. Hertl's contract isn't great either, but he has a NMC and its hard to imagine he'd waive it to go to Montreal. Couturier is good if he stays healthy, but like most of these guys, you're betting big that they can defeat father time, which is how Bergevin got the team into the mess they're in in the first place. And none are elite players either.

On top of my first post, I'll add that many people don't understand how bad half of our top 6 is. RHP, Gally, Pearson, Anderson, Slaf, and Newhook are not long-term solutions. If Newhook and Slaf top out as a third line because our top 6 is too deep, that makes our team stronger, not weaker. It gives Slaf the chance to play against weaker D and develop his game slowly.

Even If Huberdeau, as an example, skates on the third at ES and plays PP1 and puts up 2 points a game, who cares that he doesn't play with Suzuki or Caufield? Monahan is second on the team in points from the third line. He's carrying two corpses to respectable numbers. He gets his extra minutes from doubleshifts, OT and special teams.

Roy is the only top 6 prospect coming up any time soon and he wouldn't be hurt by a couple years in the AHL/3rd line. Does anyone realistically think we're getting Draisatl or McDavid? Does anyone think Marner, Rantanen, Chrychun, Hedman or Boeser will actually hit the market in 2025? We have a lot of depth prospects but we don't have anyone projecting to be a top line player. We also don't have enough desirable assets to trade for a guy that isn't out of favour with their organization. Like would anyone trade Guhle for Boldy or something along those lines? Do we think anyone else has Guhle's upside as a #1D in our organization?

Or would everyone just prefer we sign Toffoli to another 3-4 year deal this summer?

This doesn't make sense. Putting aside the whole rebuild thing (which is the most important consideration):

-We know Gally, Pearson and Anderson aren't long term solutions, but we don't know if RHP, Slaf and Newhook will be long term solutions, that's part of the rebuilding process. And most of these names aren't long term solutions either.
-MSL doesn't really match lines against specific D pairs.
-I'm not sure why anyone would expect Huberdeau would get anywhere close to 2 points per game on PP1 and the 3rd line.
-I know that there's been... loud... takes on Gallagher on here for a while now, but he's not being carried by Monahan. Gallagher has been fine when healthy (worse than his peak, but still effective), but the problem has been health, not ability.
-Part of rebuilding is accruing assets. Which would then help you make trades.

Montreal should pursue UFAs or veterans through trade if they're cheap/using cap space as leverage, but going after veterans on contracts that go into their late 30s is a bad idea. The VAST majority of players don't last in the NHL that long.

 

[Nico Cauzuki]

Not sure that it's about wanting Huberdeau & his contract so much as it's wanting to take advantage of the situation...

If we can dump our own undesirable contracts and add sufficient assets from the flames to offset the (considerable) risk that he's done as a ppg top-line player, it's a worthwhile gamble... Upside that he does return to a top 6 lock is there, downside is buffered by the assets paid to take on the risk

Even if we give our worst contract which is Gallagher its still a horrible idea Huberdeau is old and signed for another 8 years thats 4 more years then Gally

Calgary are not benching him for fun Hubby legit plays like he doesnt care no hustle at all Flames reward him with a big contract and yet he shows zero passion on the ice lots of talent but no heart

so hell no to Huberdeau

 

[TT1]

the teams that would realistically do the type of trade that we want are Philly/CBJ/Flames/Sharks/Preds, i don't think Edmonton is ready to give up on their core just yet

the most interesting players (without taking on too much term on 30+ year old players) from those teams are Werenski and Rasmus Andersson imo, i don't see too many interesting forwards being available, Werenski would be my prime target

Barzal would also be good of course but i doubt NYI wants to move him, they still need a competitive team for attendance and just traded for Horvat

 

[WeThreeKings]

I think the worst part of Huberdeau is even if you got him back to producing at a reasonable rate; there's no way the remaining 3-4 years of it will be good and that's right in line with our best chances to make noise relative to the current core.

 

[sampollock]

On top of my first post, I'll add that many people don't understand how bad half of our top 6 is. RHP, Gally, Pearson, Anderson, Slaf, and Newhook are not long-term solutions. If Newhook and Slaf top out as a third line because our top 6 is too deep, that makes our team stronger, not weaker. It gives Slaf the chance to play against weaker D and develop his game slowly.

Even If Huberdeau, as an example, skates on the third at ES and plays PP1 and puts up 2 points a game, who cares that he doesn't play with Suzuki or Caufield? Monahan is second on the team in points from the third line. He's carrying two corpses to respectable numbers. He gets his extra minutes from doubleshifts, OT and special teams.

Roy is the only top 6 prospect coming up any time soon and he wouldn't be hurt by a couple years in the AHL/3rd line. Does anyone realistically think we're getting Draisatl or McDavid? Does anyone think Marner, Rantanen, Chrychun, Hedman or Boeser will actually hit the market in 2025? We have a lot of depth prospects but we don't have anyone projecting to be a top line player. We also don't have enough desirable assets to trade for a guy that isn't out of favour with their organization. Like would anyone trade Guhle for Boldy or something along those lines? Do we think anyone else has Guhle's upside as a #1D in our organization?

Or would everyone just prefer we sign Toffoli to another 3-4 year deal this summer?

that is so true. this team needs soild top 6 guys. if that comes thru UFA or trades, who knows. Draft picks are great, but love to see us go for a stud in a trade. Hard to do, not a playstation move , but Kent needs offense. Roy is that only guy that is poised for top 6 so far, with all those prospects still lacking frt end talent.

I think the worst part of Huberdeau is even if you got him back to producing at a reasonable rate; there's no way the remaining 3-4 years of it will be good and that's right in line with our best chances to make noise relative to the current core.

his contract is to much for Kent to swallow.

 

[Ezpz]

Do you understand how much cap space Montreal has next summer? I get that people didn't want a rebuild or don't have the patience for one, but even if Montreal were to put Price on LTIR, they'd still be middle of the pack when it comes to cap space. Which is still good when compared to teams who need to re-sign guys, but Montreal will also likely carry a cap penalty next season for bonus overages.

That's also a wide range of names. Huberdeau's contract is truly awful and the term makes planning almost impossible. Barzal and Kyrou aren't even close to being available. Hertl's contract isn't great either, but he has a NMC and its hard to imagine he'd waive it to go to Montreal. Couturier is good if he stays healthy, but like most of these guys, you're betting big that they can defeat father time, which is how Bergevin got the team into the mess they're in in the first place. And none are elite players either.



This doesn't make sense. Putting aside the whole rebuild thing (which is the most important consideration):

-We know Gally, Pearson and Anderson aren't long term solutions, but we don't know if RHP, Slaf and Newhook will be long term solutions, that's part of the rebuilding process. And most of these names aren't long term solutions either.
-MSL doesn't really match lines against specific D pairs.
-I'm not sure why anyone would expect Huberdeau would get anywhere close to 2 points per game on PP1 and the 3rd line.
-I know that there's been... loud... takes on Gallagher on here for a while now, but he's not being carried by Monahan. Gallagher has been fine when healthy (worse than his peak, but still effective), but the problem has been health, not ability.
-Part of rebuilding is accruing assets. Which would then help you make trades.

Montreal should pursue UFAs or veterans through trade if they're cheap/using cap space as leverage, but going after veterans on contracts that go into their late 30s is a bad idea. The VAST majority of players don't last in the NHL that long.

The issue is there is a time limit on Nick and Cole's primes. They're only a few years younger than Toronto's core who are about to have their window slammed shut in 2025, and possibly this summer if Nylander walks and they can't find some top 4 D options. If we'd drafted Cooley or Michkov we wouldn't have this time limit as our D are super young, but we drafted a middle-six player in Slaf and a guy who's going to hit his prime as Nick likely exits his and likely becomes a 2C. Dach's knee injury is unfortunate because it's not one that is easy to recover from, and may prevent him from becoming an actual #1C.

I don't like the excuse everyone uses every time we draft an underperforming player relative to their position that they're still young so it's ok. Why did no one else's top 10 picks have this issue? Tkachuk was immediately a top six player. Hughes was immediately a #1 Dman. Cooley and Mintyukov now the same. It's ok to simply admit we made a bad pick or that we didn't put our pick in a position to succeed. These aren't fifth round picks. Our management either overvalued Slaf or they overvalued what Suzuki, Caufield, and Dach were as a core that made them think a complementary piece was ok first overall. It's already turned into the 2020 draft where there's going to be ten+ guys in the first better than the 1st overall. It's happened a ton recently where the third pick is the best. Cooley, McTavish, Stutzle, Draisatl, Huberdeau, Toews, etc..

We gave Bergevin 10 years and it never got better. It was pretty obvious after the McCarron pick that he was a buffoon. A fluke run at the end on the back of Carey's career that led to him being kept instead of fired let him absolutely murder the team with bad extensions and signings before leaving too.

 

[Gustave]

cant believe some people actually want Huberdeau and that horrible contract....

I get it from your point of view; but I figure if we are going to digest two dudes being underwhelming and costing a lot, might as well go for a disappointing one that will « undoubtably » outproduce them. Plus get a sweetener, obviously.

I think there’s merit to entertaining it. No one is taking Gally man, no man. And Andy is …. Andy. So why the f*** not get what I feel is still a top 3 player in Hubby coming in from a place he doesn’t gel and doesn’t want to be? Plug him up top, see what happens.

@WeThreeKings Agreed he doesn’t fit the age group… but it’s Gally and Andy going back so same difference. If Price goes… even better.

Like Miller said, if we get Wolf out of this…. Game on. I’ll settle for Pelletier myself, but hey, a pup that fits the age group is a pretty good idea to try.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I get it from your point of view; but I figure if we are going to digest two dudes being underwhelming and costing a lot, might as well go for a disappointing one that will « undoubtably » outproduce them. Plus get a sweetener, obviously.

I think there’s merit to entertaining it. No one is taking Gally man, no man. And Andy is …. Andy. So why the f*** not get what I feel is still a top 3 player in Hubby coming in from a place he doesn’t gel and doesn’t want to be? Plug him up top, see what happens.

@WeThreeKings Agreed he doesn’t fit the age group… but it’s Gally and Andy going back so same difference. If Price goes… even better.

Like Miller said, if we get Wolf out of this…. Game on. I’ll settle for Pelletier myself, but hey, a pup that fits the age group is a pretty good idea to try.

I don't think its the same difference because Anderson and Gally's money is off when their term ends 4 years earlier than Huberdeau's.

It helps us short term but hurts us long term when we are in a spot building for the long term.

 

[TT1]

also we have more than enough cap space to retain up to 50% on Gally in a deal... common sense ppl

Gally @ 3.25M for 3-4 years is moveable (even to a contender), i rather take the 3.25M hit

 

[Habs 4 Life]

Huberdeau just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.. 7 years left at 10.5 million that brings him to what 37-38 years old?

Beauvillier on the other hand, UFA to be, 26 produces well enough to be on a top 9, sign me up. Ask Vancouver for a pick as well and if he does do as well as planned flip him come deadline

also we have more than enough cap space to retain up to 50% on Gally in a deal... common sense ppl

Gally @ 3.25M for 3-4 years is moveable (even to a contender), i rather take the 3.25M hit

We do, but there is no point right now in doing such a move.

 

[TT1]

Huberdeau just doesn't make any sense whatsoever.. 7 years left at 10.5 million that brings him to what 37-38 years old?

Beauvillier on the other hand, UFA to be, 26 produces well enough to be on a top 9, sign me up. Ask Vancouver for a pick as well and if he does do as well as planned flip him come deadline


We do, but there is no point right now in doing such a move.

i don't think people do if we're talking about moving Gally for Huberdeau because we have the capspace to do so for marginal pieces in Wolf/Pelletier (relative to what we're taking on in return)

the difference is 3.25M for 4 years or 10.5M for 8 years, how is this even a conversation? you're talking about handicapping the team for the entirety of Suzuki and Caufield's contract with that type of move, it would be a disaster trade

 

[Sorinth]

i don't think people do if we're talking about moving Gally for Huberdeau because we have the capspace to do so for marginal pieces in Wolf/Pelletier (relative to what we're taking on in return)

the difference is 3.25M for 4 years or 10.5M for 8 years, how is this even a conversation? you're talking about handicapping the team for the entirety of Suzuki and Caufield's contract with that type of move, it would be a disaster trade

Well it wouldn't be for marginal pieces, if we were to take on Hubredeau's contract it would have to be for something very valuable. Suppose for example it gives us Calgary's pick this year unprotected. Is the dead weight not worth a top-5 pick?

 

[Habs 4 Life]

i don't think people do if we're talking about moving Gally for Huberdeau because we have the capspace to do so for marginal pieces in Wolf/Pelletier (relative to what we're taking on in return)

the difference is 3.25M for 4 years or 10.5M for 8 years, how is this even a conversation? you're talking about handicapping the team for the entirety of Suzuki and Caufield's contract with that type of move, it would be a disaster trade

I'll believe it when it's reported. I doubt the Flames on top of that add Pelletier.

Gallagher and what is also being sent to Calgary in return?

 

[eklund the clown]

Well another typical post of acquiring a french Canadian player that would hurt this team for years to come .How many times have we heard this nonsense on here?The guy is 30 years old and make 10 mil / year and seems washed up .What possible sense would Hugo have in making this trade?We are still trying to get rid of Bergevin's idiotic contracts ,not add more.

Well it wouldn't be for marginal pieces, if we were to take on Hubredeau's contract it would have to be for something very valuable. Suppose for example it gives us Calgary's pick this year unprotected. Is the dead weight not worth a top-5 pick?

10.5 mil for 8 years is a lot of dead weight

 

[Habs 4 Life]

Well it wouldn't be for marginal pieces, if we were to take on Hubredeau's contract it would have to be for something very valuable. Suppose for example it gives us Calgary's pick this year unprotected. Is the dead weight not worth a top-5 pick?

Pretty sure Calgary gladly hangs on to their pick as well as Huberdeau. They should consider a rebuild down there, the fact that we already own one of their picks is probably driving them crazy.

The most they do is retain on Huberdeau, say a 25%. They're not adding a 1st in my opinion or even their top prospect

 

[TT1]

I'll believe it when it's reported. I doubt the Flames on top of that add Pelletier.

Gallagher and what is also being sent to Calgary in return?

i don't think you get my point, that's not what i'm saying at all

i'm saying trading for Huberdeau is a very very very bad idea, even if it's for Gally

 

[eklund the clown]

No team in their right mind will take on Huberdeau contract

 

[Sorinth]

Pretty sure Calgary gladly hangs on to their pick as well as Huberdeau. They should consider a rebuild down there, the fact that we already own one of their picks is probably driving them crazy.

The most they do is retain on Huberdeau, say a 25%. They're not adding a 1st in my opinion or even their top prospect

Yes I think this hypothetical trade never happens because Calgary refuses to pay the price needed to actually move Huberdeau. Even if they cleared his caphit for free they couldn't spend that money in a meaningful way and would still need to tank so trading a top pick just sets them back further.

 

[Habs 4 Life]

i don't think you get my point, that's not what i'm saying at all

i'm saying trading for Huberdeau is a very very very bad idea, even if it's for Gally

My bad, I thought you wanted to acquire him

 

[Captain Mountain]

The issue is there is a time limit on Nick and Cole's primes. They're only a few years younger than Toronto's core who are about to have their window slammed shut in 2025, and possibly this summer if Nylander walks and they can't find some top 4 D options. If we'd drafted Cooley or Michkov we wouldn't have this time limit as our D are super young, but we drafted a middle-six player in Slaf and a guy who's going to hit his prime as Nick likely exits his and likely becomes a 2C. Dach's knee injury is unfortunate because it's not one that is easy to recover from, and may prevent him from becoming an actual #1C.

I don't like the excuse everyone uses every time we draft an underperforming player relative to their position that they're still young so it's ok. Why did no one else's top 10 picks have this issue? Tkachuk was immediately a top six player. Hughes was immediately a #1 Dman. Cooley and Mintyukov now the same. It's ok to simply admit we made a bad pick or that we didn't put our pick in a position to succeed. These aren't fifth round picks. Our management either overvalued Slaf or they overvalued what Suzuki, Caufield, and Dach were as a core that made them think a complementary piece was ok first overall. It's already turned into the 2020 draft where there's going to be ten+ guys in the first better than the 1st overall. It's happened a ton recently where the third pick is the best. Cooley, McTavish, Stutzle, Draisatl, Huberdeau, Toews, etc..

We gave Bergevin 10 years and it never got better. It was pretty obvious after the McCarron pick that he was a buffoon. A fluke run at the end on the back of Carey's career that led to him being kept instead of fired let him absolutely murder the team with bad extensions and signings before leaving too.

Why on earth would you think Toronto's core will have their window slammed shut in a couple of years? Your timetables don't make sense. You're saying Suzuki and Caufield will exit their primes in their later 20s so the solution is the get a bunch of 30 year olds and hope they're effective into their mid to late 30s?

And if you're going to selective pick guys who broke out right away, then yeah, you're going to have a tainted view of things. You'll also have a tainted view if you ignore management saying that Slaf would take time to develop to argue that actually, the plan was that he would be a core piece in his teens.

Who cares that guys like Dach, Mittelsdadt, Cozens, Byfield, Rossi, Kotkaniemi, etc. took time to develop. The important thing is that Montreal add veterans so that they can try to sneak into the playoffs now. Do some players not live up to their draft position? Absolutely. Can you know that 10 games into their D+2 season? No.

You're advocating a Bergevin process to avoid a Bergevin situation that doesn't exist. With a group that doesn't have the talent Bergevin inherited. Management's plan is to make Montreal a consistent contender. That doesn't mean that anyone is the core right now.