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

[BaseballCoach]

A good prospect in return

Nasme a prlospect opf ours trhat would be equazlly good as the value you would not accept less than.

 

[HuGort]

Monahan put up 7pts in his last 10 games... Better than any fwd not named Nick.

He's played all 33 games & is 2nd in goals, 3rd in toi (among fwds).

If he holds up health wise all year, it would be crazy not to re-sign him on a 2-4 year deal if he's keen on coming back, which he seems to be, unless he expects Mtl to beat the best UFA offer he gets.

I suspect we'll re-sign him for a very team friendly deal, and it will prove to be a massive bargain for us.

Yup, two years is most I would offer. But hate to give up the good trade return we can get for Monahan also. It's not easy choice

 

[Tyson]

You have to have a solid nucleus of good veterans. Monahan is such a player.

 

[Hins77]

It depends the offers we get at deadline. If there's an overbid because of his contract and the offer is a quality prospect and a 1st then i think it's the other way around it would be crazy to not trade him.

We need top 6 now but we also need top 6 in four years from now when Slaf / Guhle will be entering their prime and Caufield / Suuzki will be in the middle of it . Let's say teams get crazy and NYR offer Othmann and a conditional 1st for Monahan (1st if scf and 2nd if not) do you really say no to that?

I agree. And cap space is also something really valuable. So if we trade Monahan vs a good return, we also gain cap space wich is something valuable. I wouldnt like to sign Monahan 4/5 years. Some of our players will ask for big raise soon and we will handcufff ourselves for upcoming UFA

 

[The Great Weal]

I'm sure Canucks would pay up for Anderson, he's exactly what they need. The thing is even if his contract sucks, it's gonna sting to trade away a big, physical speedy player when we would probably have to take back someone like Garland too.

 

[SwiftyHab]

I don’t consider him as part of the future, given his frailty. I’d offer 6m/2yrs, but he’s going to get more on the market, especially in term of years. This could be his Cashing In contract. I don’t want any part of that.

To sell him, I’d settle for a 2nd round pick if it’s a buyer’s market but it’s usually a seller’s market and Monahan would be among the more desirable deadline pieces so hopefully we can get multiple assets.

The problem with multiple assets is that we don’t have many chairs left other than a top 6 forward. We have a ton of prospects and picks. We need a high end quality player that can score in our top 6.

best case scenario here is we can get more picks and middle six prospects that we can trade for what hopefully turns out to be a high draft pick that can hopefully be that top 6 scoring winger. Maybe two of those

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

You have to have a solid nucleus of good veterans. Monahan is such a player.

We see eye to eye about this, and it is the minority view on this forum. His hips and groin don't seem to be bothering him right now. Hopefully the medical team is able to help him train to limit their impact. To me, much depends on that and whether we can get a comparable player in return, even as a draft pick. I find that outcome unlikely, but I can live with being wrong about it.

 

[LaP]

You have to have a solid nucleus of good veterans. Monahan is such a player.

A nucleus is usually a small group. Gallagher, Anderson, Monahan, Matheson, Savard, Allen, Dvorak is not a nucleus it's a core and it's way too many with the incoming kids. At one point we are not playing pokemon you can't keep em all. Choice will have to be made and the logic should be the better offer will be accepted the name doesn't matter that much.

We have Slaf, Caufield and Suzuki for the first line and Newhook and Dach for the 2nd line. If you sign Monahan for 3-4 years this means you logjam either the 2nd line or 3rd line cause you already have Gallagher and Anderson for the 3rd line. So you'll either have no spot left for the 2nd line (Dack, Newhook and Monahan) or no spot left for the 3rd line (Gallagher, Anderson and Newhook/Monahan) so only one spot left for kids for the next 3-4 years. If you do that you must be 100% sure this core (not nucleus) is already strong enough to win a cup as it is with only one addition possible. <--- and i'm not even counting Dvorak here assuming he's already gone ....

 

[Sterling Archer]

Canucks look like they have a ton of great prospects. Seems like every WJHC clip has one of their prospects in it. Given they’re a western conference team and in the thick of being a contender needing to sign EP and stay competitive, I think they could Jake a great trading partner. Maybe target guys like Willander, Raty, Brzustewicz or Lekkerimäki for some veteran, playoff type players could work.

 

[vokiel]

Suppose we're in line to make the playoffs, who do we target to buy? I was thinking without too much reflection: Tarasenko and Dumba.

 

[morhilane]

Supposed we're in line to make the playoffs, who do we target to buy? I was thinking without too much reflection: Tarasenko and Dumba.

Nobody, this team is still in a rebuild even if they manage to sneak into the playoffs. Hughes should still be selling at the deadline regardless unless he can't get what he wants.

 

[vokiel]

Nobody, this team is still in a rebuild even if they manage to sneak into the playoffs. Hughes should still be selling at the deadline regardless unless he can't get what he wants.

I was thinking he could pull a sleek move like Berg when he got Czerkawski. Nevertheless I agree, that we should sell, but they always do the opposite of what I'm thinking. So ... Might as well sell them on buying.. ah..

 

[McGees]

No to Monahan.
Remember when people thought re-signing Gally and Petry was a good idea too?
No thanks.

 

[Milhouse40]

Supposed we're in line to make the playoffs, who do we target to buy? I was thinking without too much reflection: Tarasenko and Dumba.

Even if by miracle the Habs are in-line to make the PO......if anything you don't give up asset for players without terms, a move like Tampa has done with a guy like Hagel is the only thing that would make senses.

But the Habs will not make the PO.

 

[BLONG7]

We see eye to eye about this, and it is the minority view on this forum. His hips and groin don't seem to be bothering him right now. Hopefully the medical team is able to help him train to limit their impact. To me, much depends on that and whether we can get a comparable player in return, even as a draft pick. I find that outcome unlikely, but I can live with being wrong about it.

I think of Markov years back, a few crazy bad luck injuries, and then played 5-6 seasons with no injuries to finish off his career.................sign Monahan to a good deal for both he and the team....
If his injuries reoccur he goes to LTIR anyhow.

 

[MilesNewton]

A nucleus is usually a small group. Gallagher, Anderson, Monahan, Matheson, Savard, Allen, Dvorak is not a nucleus it's a core and it's way too many with the incoming kids. At one point we are not playing pokemon you can't keep em all. Choice will have to be made and the logic should be the better offer will be accepted the name doesn't matter that much.

We have Slaf, Caufield and Suzuki for the first line and Newhook and Dach for the 2nd line. If you sign Monahan for 3-4 years this means you logjam either the 2nd line or 3rd line cause you already have Gallagher and Anderson for the 3rd line. So you'll either have no spot left for the 2nd line (Dack, Newhook and Monahan) or no spot left for the 3rd line (Gallagher, Anderson and Newhook/Monahan) so only one spot left for kids for the next 3-4 years. If you do that you must be 100% sure this core (not nucleus) is already strong enough to win a cup as it is with only one addition possible. <--- and i'm not even counting Dvorak here assuming he's already gone ....

i think signing monahan for that long would be a problem considering his medical history disc, groin hip (2) and wrist past injuries i think at this point his value is as trade bait,

 

[BLONG7]

No to Monahan.
Remember when people thought re-signing Gally and Petry was a good idea too?
No thanks.

A clown did that..............the current regime would never do that..............a deal with the team and player in mind is very possible...Monahan actually contributes.

 

[eklund the clown]

The only way i would trade Monahan is to have some type of agreement if that is possible to resign him next year.He has been great here and a great mentor for the kids and you need that type around.You can't play all kids and prospects.Need veterans also

 

[eklund the clown]

Hughes has to find a way to get rid of Gallagher, Savard, Allen, Dvorak and Armia

 

[Balthazar]

A clown did that..............the current regime would never do that..............a deal with the team and player in mind is very possible...Monahan actually contributes.

He's not talking about GM's. The large majority of this message board wanted to re-up Petry and Gallagher.

 

[Whalers Fan]

Hughes has to find a way to get rid of Gallagher, Savard, Allen, Dvorak and Armia

David Copperfield couldn't make Gallagher's contract disappear.

 

[26Mats]

Hughes has to find a way to get rid of Gallagher, Savard, Allen, Dvorak and Armia

We're stuck with Gallagher until we buy him out or trade him at 50% retained.

The other 4 will be off the books by the end of next season, finally. Savard should be able to be traded by the end of this offseason, if not trade deadline.

 

[EXPOS123]

The only way i would trade Monahan is to have some type of agreement if that is possible to resign him next year.He has been great here and a great mentor for the kids and you need that type around.You can't play all kids and prospects.Need veterans also

While I agree with this school of thought, the reality is there are dozens of veterans available in free agency every season who have the same profile.

To somehow believe Monohan is a veteran so indispensable that we have to resign him is being oblivious to the fact that there will be vets available who can do just as good a job at the same or possibly lower salary and on a one year basis

 

[Miller Time]

While I agree with this school of thought, the reality is there are dozens of veterans available in free agency every season who have the same profile.

To somehow believe Monohan is a veteran so indispensable that we have to resign him is being oblivious to the fact that there will be vets available who can do just as good a job at the same or possibly lower salary and on a one year basis

In what UFA year where there "a dozen" players with Monahan's profile?

Better yet, name an offseason with 6.

 

[Miller Time]

No to Monahan.
Remember when people thought re-signing Gally and Petry was a good idea too?
No thanks.

I don't recall anyone who thought Gally's extension was a good idea, quite the opposite actually... One of the rare times when there was near unanimous agreement that it was a bad contract. The only question/debate I recall was about how long before he hit the wall/it became an anchor.

Petry's deal was different imo. His decline was far less obvious. Don't think anyone thought he'd be a borderline NHLer/healthy scratch before it was up...

Either way, if you're suggesting that no player should be signed past 30, I suspect the Knights were pretty happy to have Marchessault, Smith & Pietrangelo last year