HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #86: 2023-2024 Season

[sampollock]

What if moving Savard is the difference between finishing 6th, 7th, or 8th last versus 4th last?

That's the other side of the return, as Sam Pollock knew when he made trades to ensure we could get the number 1 pick and draft Lafleur. I wish we had trade vets at discounted prices last year to the Penguins, to help them in their playoff race with Florida. We could have had the 15th or 16th pick in the draft instead of the 31st pick. Anyways, I'm happy with Newhook.

Sam P always said in a trade " who got the better player" master mind of the 70's Sam won many trades
So if a 2nd pick is the diff for Savard , keep him.
KH needs to get this team to a top 5 pick.

 

[waitin425]

- Calgary might look to add an NHL defenseman.

Savard for Vancouver 1st?

LOL

 

[26Mats]

Sam P always said in a trade " who got the better player" master mind of the 70's Sam won many trades
So if a 2nd pick is the diff for Savard , keep him.
KH needs to get this team to a top 5 pick.

"Pollock wanted the first overall selection in the 1971 draft so he could take Guy Lafleur, so he made a deal with lowly California for that team's first choice figuring the Seals would finish last and Montreal would get the first pick. During the 1970-71 season, though, Los Angeles was playing even more poorly than California, so Pollock traded the aging but still valuable Ralph Backstrom to the Kings for two insignificant players. Backstrom's presence lifted the Kings out of last place, the Seals finished at the bottom, and the Habs drafted Lafleur. The rest, as they say, is history Pollock later managed Team Canada at the inaugural Canada Cup tournament in 1976. He was inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame two years later, his level of success unmatched and his reputation for hockey genius undiminished by time."

In the trade with the Golden Seals we got the best asset, their 1st round pick.

In the trade with Los Angeles, we clearly didn't get the best player or asset. But it helped our asset from the Golden Seals trade.

Similarly, if we trade Savard for a lesser asset, it could up helping another asset - our own 2024 1st. If that pick is top we could get a huge piece for the future: Celebrini, Demidov, Lindstrom, Eisetman, Levsjunov, etc... That piece could be much more important than a late 1st or having Savard's leadership for one extra year.

At any rate, it sounds like the player we want may fall out of the top 5 in this year's draft. And we may not be able to fall to bottom 4 or 5 in the standings any way. But I could see the argument for moving Savard to try.

 

[26Mats]

Savard for Vancouver 1st?

LOL

Trading Savard to Calgary for just the 2nd they got in the Dallas deal could turn out to be a genius move by Hughes.

Losing Savard could help on two fronts.
First it could help us fall to potentially 4th or 5th last in the standings this year, and allow us to draft one of Celebrini, Demidov, Lindstrom, Eiserman, etc...
Second, Savard could help Calgary be just competitive enough next year such that they don't finish bottom 10, but not competitive enough to make the playoffs. In that case, we would get their 1st in the 11th to 16th range, instead of Florida's 1st, which will likely be 20th or later.

 

[waitin425]

Trading Savard to Calgary for just the 2nd they got in the Dallas deal could turn out to be a genius move by Hughes.

Losing Savard could help on two fronts.
First it could help us fall to potentially 4th or 5th last in the standings this year, and allow us to draft one of Celebrini, Demidov, Lindstrom, Eiserman, etc...
Second, Savard could help Calgary be just competitive enough next year such that they don't finish bottom 10, but not competitive enough to make the playoffs. In that case, we would get their 1st in the 11th to 16th range, instead of Florida's 1st, which will likely be 20th or later.

Sure...would work for us.

Calgary would have to be absolute idiots to trade for Savard at this point. They need to tear down that bitch and rebuild.

I want that 11-16 pick as much as everyone else, but I suspect Calgary falls into the bottom 5 next year. Just a toilet bowl of a team.

 

[sampollock]

"Pollock wanted the first overall selection in the 1971 draft so he could take Guy Lafleur, so he made a deal with lowly California for that team's first choice figuring the Seals would finish last and Montreal would get the first pick. During the 1970-71 season, though, Los Angeles was playing even more poorly than California, so Pollock traded the aging but still valuable Ralph Backstrom to the Kings for two insignificant players. Backstrom's presence lifted the Kings out of last place, the Seals finished at the bottom, and the Habs drafted Lafleur. The rest, as they say, is history Pollock later managed Team Canada at the inaugural Canada Cup tournament in 1976. He was inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame two years later, his level of success unmatched and his reputation for hockey genius undiminished by time."

In the trade with the Golden Seals we got the best asset, their 1st round pick.

In the trade with Los Angeles, we clearly didn't get the best player or asset. But it helped our asset from the Golden Seals trade.

Similarly, if we trade Savard for a lesser asset, it could up helping another asset - our own 2024 1st. If that pick is top we could get a huge piece for the future: Celebrini, Demidov, Lindstrom, Eisetman, Levsjunov, etc... That piece could be much more important than a late 1st or having Savard's leadership for one extra year.

At any rate, it sounds like the player we want may fall out of the top 5 in this year's draft. And we may not be able to fall to bottom 4 or 5 in the standings any way. But I could see the argument for moving Savard to try.

yes get what you are saying
I feel that Savard is a solid vet to keep the young D learning and a DAD figure
so that is what I say keep him if the lowball offers come in

 

[26Mats]

Sure...would work for us.

Calgary would have to be absolute idiots to trade for Savard at this point. They need to tear down that bitch and rebuild.

I want that 11-16 pick as much as everyone else, but I suspect Calgary falls into the bottom 5 next year. Just a toilet bowl of a team.

Well they're right in that 11 to 16 range right now...

yes get what you are saying
I feel that Savard is a solid vet to keep the young D learning and a DAD figure
so that is what I say keep him if the lowball offers come in

Yes, he's really good with Xhekaj right now. And that is huge.

 

[Canadiens98]

If at the draft Celebrini, Demidov, and Lindstrom are off the board by the time we're picking ..

Is it out of the realm of possibility to trade Guhle for Zegras and pick one of the top dmen once again?

 

[waitin425]

Well they're right in that 11 to 16 range right now...


Yes, he's really good with Xhekaj right now. And that is huge.

Hanifin will be gone next year. That is a big piece to lose.

They are also where they are with Lindholm and Tanev in that lineup for more than half the season. Hubs continues to trend down and will likely end up around 55ish points for the 2nd straight year (as a 10.5 mil player). Kadri signed at 7 mil for the next 5 years, while already being 33. Kadri, Hubs, Mangipiane, Kuz, Backlund, Coleman. Just doesn't do it for me.

Weegar and Andersson as top pair on D.....barf!

Calgary looks like they are entering a very, very dark era in their franchise. They need to re-stock their cupboards.

 

[salbutera]

If at the draft Celebrini, Demidov, and Lindstrom are off the board by the time we're picking ..

Is it out of the realm of possibility to trade Guhle for Zegras and pick one of the top dmen once again?

I can’t see HuGo trading Guhle, but do see them flipping their 1st rounder for Zegras or another young player of that ilk

 

[sampollock]

Totatally agree with Hartley

Hartley says he would not proceed with the transaction, emphasizing Savard's importance as a mentor to the team's younger players like Kaiden Guhle and Arber Xhekaj . He believes that the Canadian still needs him.

However, he recognizes that if Hughes could get a young player of the quality of a future Nick Suzuki in return, it would be a game-changer. But for a simple draft pick, Hartley is skeptical because of the unpredictability associated with these selections.

He also points out that for a team like the Lightning, which is looking to strengthen its defense and which is interested in Savard, it would take a lot of trickery to convince him to join their ranks.

 

[Kosseca]

I think if a team offers a 2nd for Savard, hang up.

he is more valuable to the habs then a 2nd rounder. KH needs and will play hard ball, pay up or get lost

A very very good prospect or 1st overall. or get lost
yes it is a BIG ask to move him, but again he is valued high on this team, so why settle

I would add that there is a very high change that Savard be worth a 2nd next TDL. So not trading him now for that return makes more sense.

 

[calder candidate]

Well a performeNce vs the mighty panthers last night is good before the deadline . I see if not Savard then kovacevic to be traded .
And he will be traded for a second like kulak was .

If Savard or Kovacevic are worth a 2nd( which would be a late 2nd) Kulak wasn’t as reliable and was a rental, I rather we don’t trade guy on good deal if they will be worth the same next year, even if the only gets 3rd or 4th next year, the pressure need to be on the playoff team to make good of there opportunitie, KH doesn’t need to move he need to hold for maximum value not just the best offer. Because if someone flich on the other side it will be exponential more value vs. any value that might be lost…

 

[Kosseca]

If at the draft Celebrini, Demidov, and Lindstrom are off the board by the time we're picking ..

Is it out of the realm of possibility to trade Guhle for Zegras and pick one of the top dmen once again?

Problem with that is that from an hockey OP perspective, you are setting back the D corp by a few years. My understanding of the D available at the top of the draft is that, while very good, they may need a year or two before joining. So, on one hand you accelerate the forward side of the roster, but your D is still some years away from competing.

 

[vokiel]

If at the draft Celebrini, Demidov, and Lindstrom are off the board by the time we're picking ..

Is it out of the realm of possibility to trade Guhle for Zegras and pick one of the top dmen once again?

It's a pretty bad idea, because the dman you draft isn't a sure shot NHLer. Not in this draft anyway.

We'd be losing an important roster player for promises. You can't close a rebuild with doing these kind of moves.

 

[Kosseca]

If Savard or Kovacevic are worth a 2nd( which would be a late 2nd) Kulak wasn’t as reliable and was a rental, I rather we don’t trade guy on good deal if they will be worth the same next year, even if the only gets 3rd or 4th next year, the pressure need to be on the playoff team to make good of there opportunitie, KH doesn’t need to move he need to hold for maximum value not just the best offer. Because if someone flich on the other side it will be exponential more value vs. any value that might be lost…

I think that if a team is offering a 2nd for Kava, KH does the deal. Seems like a pretty good value for a waiver pickup

 

[Naslundforever]

I like Evan's. But I think his offense is limited. He seems to falter when in a good offensive spot more offen than not.

Though, in point of fact last just night, that made me wonder if he isn't the next Lehkonen. Put him with really good offensive players and the points may come out. But Lehkonen had to finally produce before a team took notice and went out and got him for a two way role.

They should have paid up big for Monahan!

Lehk and Evans played on the same team and Lekonen was the stand out player for sure. Evans is like a perfect boxing sparring partner, moves fast and well, but packs the power of a fly swapper and the inner anger of a bhuddist.. Centermen are hard to find, so I imagine habs keep him around, no idea who would fill his jersey right now.

 

[26Mats]

Hanifin will be gone next year. That is a big piece to lose.

They are also where they are with Lindholm and Tanev in that lineup for more than half the season. Hubs continues to trend down and will likely end up around 55ish points for the 2nd straight year (as a 10.5 mil player). Kadri signed at 7 mil for the next 5 years, while already being 33. Kadri, Hubs, Mangipiane, Kuz, Backlund, Coleman. Just doesn't do it for me.

Weegar and Andersson as top pair on D.....barf!

Calgary looks like they are entering a very, very dark era in their franchise. They need to re-stock their cupboards.

If I were a Flames fan I would want them to rebuild.

BUT, since they traded Linstrom they've been playing well. I'm hoping Conroy has this flames pride attitude. Get a bunch of players that want to play hard for the Jersey. And they end up doing so just enough to keep them a bubble team that misses the playoffs.

Note in the Lindstrom trade, he brought in Kuzmenko who had 39 goals two years ago and has 3 goals in 8 games with the flames so far. meanwhile Lindholm has 4 goals and 6 points with vancouver. Like the Dubois trade, sometimes a small piece ends up out doing a bigger piece.

And I see Andersson and Weegar as good players. The type that hopefully make a team a great bubble team

 

[26Mats]

Lehk and Evans played on the same team and Lekonen was the stand out player for sure. Evans is like a perfect boxing sparring partner, moves fast and well, but packs the power of a fly swapper and the inner anger of a bhuddist.. Centermen are hard to find, so I imagine habs keep him around, no idea who would fill his jersey right now.

I would overall agree with this. But in lehkonen's last year with us, Evans had 29 points in 72 games. Lehkonen had 29 points in 14 fewer games, 58 games. So while Lehkonen, in his best season as a Hab, outproduced Evans, he got way more oppurtunities with way better players.

I don't think Evans is nearly as good as Lehkonen offensively. But I think he could put up 40 points when getting the opportunities Lehkonen has been getting. Though that's not saying much. The guy we just picked up on waivers, White, put up 40 points playing with Duchene and Stone in Ottawa.

ultimately, Evans could be a good depth pickup for a team. I recommend him to any team for a 2nd round pick!

 

[Naslundforever]

I would overall agree with this. But in lehkonen's last year with us, Evans had 29 points in 72 games. Lehkonen had 29 points in 14 fewer games, 58 games. So while Lehkonen, in his best season as a Hab, outproduced Evans, he got way more oppurtunities with way better players.

I don't think Evans is nearly as good as Lehkonen offensively. But I think he could put up 40 points when getting the opportunities Lehkonen has been getting. Though that's not saying much. The guy we just picked up on waivers, White, put up 40 points playing with Duchene and Stone in Ottawa.

ultimately, Evans could be a good depth pickup for a team. I recommend him to any team for a 2nd!

He won’t hurt you I guess… He just has nothing that stands out and scores never. Is there really a contending team with no-one more exciting on their 4th line and no specific need? 40 pts seems like a stretch, that means he plays over offensive players (ewwww) and 40-60 pts are his best junior/college/ahl years.

 

[calder candidate]

I think that if a team is offering a 2nd for Kava, KH does the deal. Seems like a pretty good value for a waiver pickup

The value can’t be assessed based on what we paid the guy… what does he bring now and next year? He is a NHL RD, entering is prime, he can play on pretty much any team, he is a big guy, he is reliable, he his under contract for the next year getting close to league minimum. For a contender getting a reliable bottom pairing D with size for 2 playoff run is very valuable, it is definitely more valuable than a late 2nd which might never play in the NHL or not play soon enough to help win a cup…
If you get a 2nd next year than you argue getting a 2nd for a waiver pick than won’t resign with you or maybe earn to much of a raise and don’t have any leverage is good asset management but this year it would fell a bit desperate.

 

[Harry Kakalovich]

So I think the Savard thing is about more than just Savard. It's about Savard, Barron, Kovacevic, and maybe Logan Mailloux.

I can see the logic to keep Savard, but if the Habs do, they should probably trade either Barron or Kovacevic (and maybe both) either at the deadline or in the off-season, because none of those three are waiver exempt next year.

From a pure asset management POV I think trading Savard is the move (because I think there is very little chance they re-sign him). But, I do understand he provides a good role-model/mentor on the team. If the Habs also know they don't want to re-sign Barron and/or Kovacevic, then those two could also be moved, instead.

Bottom line, if they want to keep both Kovacevic AND Barron next year, I think they should trade Savard. If they don't want to keep both those guys, they should trade the one they don't want anymore.

 

[Kosseca]

The value can’t be assessed based on what we paid the guy… what does he bring now and next year? He is a NHL RD, entering is prime, he can play on pretty much any team, he is a big guy, he is reliable, he his under contract for the next year getting close to league minimum. For a contender getting a reliable bottom pairing D with size for 2 playoff run is very valuable, it is definitely more valuable than a late 2nd which might never play in the NHL or not play soon enough to help win a cup…
If you get a 2nd next year than you argue getting a 2nd for a waiver pick than won’t resign with you or maybe earn to much of a raise and don’t have any leverage is good asset management but this year it would fell a bit desperate.

I agree. You can't base the decision on the fact he was a waiver pick up. I over simplified my thinking and kinda just expressed view that this would good asset management given that he cost nothing to start with.

For me Kova is not part of the big plan. While he's useful this year, next year he may lose his spot to Barron that wont be able to go back to the AHL. So if you keep Guhle and savard, Kova is the odd man out. You will likely get offerd more for him at the TDL then at the draft

Now, if Barron or Savard are to be traded, then yeah, that change the calculus on Kava, you'll need him for the 3rd pair.

 

[Andy]

The team doesn't need anymore picks unless they are being used to bring in nhl ready talent.

Look at the Buffalos, Anaheims, Arizonas, Ottawa. Just perpetual pick collections, never any movement in the standings.

I'd be okay in trading Savard for picks if the intention is to flip those/there is an opportunity to flip those for nhl talent in the immediate future.

If it's just to collect late picks to draft prospects with low star conversion odds, I'd rather they keep Davey to help guide the youth on D.

 

[Captain Mountain]

The team doesn't need anymore picks unless they are being used to bring in nhl ready talent.

Look at the Buffalos, Anaheims, Arizonas, Ottawa. Just perpetual pick collections, never any movement in the standings.

I'd be okay in trading Savard for picks if the intention is to flip those/there is an opportunity to flip those for nhl talent in the immediate future.

If it's just to collect late picks to draft prospects with low star conversion odds, I'd rather they keep Davey to help guide the youth on D.

Ottawa's been trading picks for NHL ready talent for a couple of years now and its blown up in their face hilariously. That's why they haven't picked in the 1st round in the last two drafts. The last 1st round pick they used that doesn't suck (Boucher) was in 2020 (Stutzle and Sanderson).

Its about finding the right equilibrium, which I think is what the front office is trying to do. They've acquired 1sts and prospects, but they've also used those picks in trades to get players who are in the NHL. We'll start to see more of their plan this offseason (and even more the next) once they actually have cap space to work with.