TheBuriedHab
Registered User
- Jan 27, 2010
- 8,387
- 4,358
I had both Tanev's up and was looking at the wrong one when I posted. Conroy should have waited longer to see if other GM's blinked. It's not like there are a lot of other defensemen available. Savard will go for more because Hughes doesn't have to trade him unless he gets an offer to good to pass up.Tanev is UFA
First round pick and an AAA prospect with retention.Kent Hughes definitely would have got a first round pick
I would think a 1st and a B prospect or a 2nd and an AAA prospect.First round pick and an AAA prospect with retention.
Sampling of takes on Twitter has 2 camps emerging.
Those who like D’Amico believe that Savard’s stock has risen based on market scarcity:
Vs those who perceive Tanev as setting a value predecent for Savard:
I still think that Savard is worth at least a late 1st , especially after the tanev trade .
Savard is younger
Cup winner
Not a rental
If the price is not met , we will gladly keep Savard and pair him with Xhekaj. Xhekaj seems to have improve a lot since he was paired with uncle Dave
If you retain 50%, next year at 1.7M is a big positiveThat part is a negative for the modern NHL trade
Agree. Nothing less than a first.Rather keep Savard than trade him for a 2nd. 3rd and B prospect. He's good player, important leader on team.
You know Oilers, Toronto and what other teams looking for defense help could have beat Dallas offer. They wouldn't so you know not getting much for Savard
Or door number 3:
The bundling option
Using our last 2024 retention slot PLUS our second of three 2025 retention spots makes sense only if we get a first-plus for Savard or a 2nd for Allen or Armia
If those trades are not available, we can use a 2024-only slot to broker a deal. We have a TON of cap space (over $15M) because Wideman, Dach and Dvorak can go on LTIR. So in addition to brokering a deal with retention, we can broker more with full cap space by taking on a big expiring dump.
The Tanev trade shows GM's don't have the guts to go for it. Now that he is gone some GM may cave and pony up for Savard.Good point, I too believe that the Habs retaining on Guentzel or any other high paid UFA-to-be in a 3-way trade is the likeliest scenario, especially considering that a 1st for Savard seems farfetched in light of the Tanev trade…
That won't happen. It would be 1st + b prospect level or he won't move. A price that Hughes can go to Savard and tell him the offer was just too much to turn down because it fit right in with the plan.I'll die on this hill and fight anyone : We should keep Savard and cash in on Matheson instead.
fight me.
Savard is great for the kids, Matheson isn't bad per say, but he isn't the big responsible brother on the ice that sacrifice himself for the cause. You need that.
Trading Savard for a 2nd + B prospect isn't worth it at all, specially when we could just get that same value next year out of him if needed.