HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #87: 2024 Season Finale

Status
Not open for further replies.

417

When the going gets tough...
Feb 20, 2003
52,457
30,308
Ottawa
Well I mean if it would be for a 2 year thing, one of those years wouldn't really count given that Slavin and Orlov will be playing ahead. That just leaves the last year. If it was a 2 year thing of having him be in the top 4 it could maybe make more sense where they want to go on another run before Slavin leaves, but either way there's really no valid reason for Carolina to do this.
What about the fact Matheson > Orlov and and that Slavin/Orlov might be gone after next year and they could re-sign Matheson and transition for that Russian kid I hear good things about?

Orlov played mostly on their 3rd pair this year at just over 17 minutes a game.

Mathieson is just a better player and I didn't even mention th cap flexibility he would give them the next 2 years because of his great contract.

There's a lot of reasons why they would/should be interested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaffy27

Deus ex machina

Registered User
Sep 12, 2023
640
535
I feels like its worst this year, just because the media (and some fans) are pushing for the Habs to make a big splash this off-season.

What I don't get is why the majority of the proposals are for soft offense only forwards. Are anyone watching the playoffs and what HuGo has been saying???
It's because they're the only players made available by their teams. The good ones are almost never available. That's why they have to draft them.
 

ML16

Registered User
Aug 28, 2020
455
416
Montreal
Hughes is going to ask the price for anyone available out there, this help defining the market price for his own players.

But a few weeks before the 2022 draft, media-insiders were saying that Hughes was calling everyone to find another 1st round pick in the top 10 (ended up #13 and was used in the Dach trade).

In the last week, I heard/read a few of the same media-insiders saying that Hughes is trying to trade up (from Winnipeg 1st)/get another selection in the top 15.

Another top 15 pick could be interesting indeed, but in order to move up in that range, the Habs would surely need to use #26 OA (WPG’s 1st) + #57 OA (COL’s 2nd) + a 2025 2nd (OR maybe a young D) ; a steep price, even in the quality > quantity perspective the Habs should adopt at this stage.

I don’t know prospects well enough, but I guess a few potential « fallers » could make such moving up gamble worthwhile? Sennecke? Bransegg-Nygaard? Connelly?

This being said, I think the likelier outcome is that #26 OA and/or #57 OA will be packaged along with a young LHD (Struble or Harris) for a young top-9 forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dutronc

Gaylord Q Tinkledink

Registered User
Apr 29, 2018
33,358
36,588
A name no one is talking about and there has been rumours before....

Jordan Kyrou.

I bet you that is the target this off season.
St. Louis wants to be competitive.

He's a skilled, but smaller player, but he is locked on long-term.

Doesn't really fit all that well if they're wanting that experienced player that fits nicely into the top 6.

Pretty much everyone doesn't fit the best, but if the Habs do acquire someone, it's probably someone we're not talking about.
 

HuGort

Registered User
Jun 15, 2012
21,601
10,614
Nova Scotia
I would offer Matheson + jets 1st/Mesar + Trudeau for Necas

And roll with this next season

Slaf - Suzuki - Caufield
Necas - Dach - Newhook

Guhle - Savard
Hutson - Xhekaj
Struble - Harris

Could even have a Hutson - Reinbacher pairing if it looks great in camp
Way too much. At 25 and more than 350 NHL games Necas is pretty well what you going to get. Not much upside there. About 25 goals, 50 points with defensive issues.

Going to have to pay Necas a lot of money. Jets pick and a throw in far as I'm bidding for Necas's services..
 

A Loyal Demidog

Marc Bergevin's Bitch
Oct 20, 2016
9,782
11,977
A name no one is talking about and there has been rumours before....

Jordan Kyrou.

I bet you that is the target this off season.
I like it. But there are 2 things:

1. Would St. Louis be willing to trade him?
2. What would it cost us? I would not trade our 5th overall pick for him. But I know he's going to cost A LOT.
 

Habs Icing

Formerly Onice
Jan 17, 2004
20,003
11,868
Montreal
Oh no, breaking the salary structure of a bad team.

It’s just following a market that is established by a bunch of factors. If we are determined in keeping Nick Suzuki our best player, we are not going to accomplish anything.
I'm not against breaking the Habs' salary structure, but not for Necas. If you break it for Necas, you're digging a hole in the ocean(a pointless move). Necas is not the player Suzuki is no matter how much you try to extrapolate Necas' numbers. With Necas on the team, Suzuki is still the best player and deserves the top dollar regardless of inflation. If you get a better player than Nick then you give that player the top dollar.

It seems Arthur Kaliyev asked for a trade..

1 for 1 : Barron vs Kaliyev ?

For me its a yes and if I was a LAK fan, I probably say yes too.
I see many posters are in a hurry to unload Barron. That's a mistake in my view. I would give him at least half the season to show any improvement before contemplating any trade.
 

Habs Icing

Formerly Onice
Jan 17, 2004
20,003
11,868
Montreal
Matheson for Necas makes A LOT of sense for both teams IMO.
I'm not for or against that trade. It seems we're trading Matheson's offense for Necas's. A wash. Also, with that move, we eliminate half the veterans on defense. Is that a smart move?
 
Last edited:

Benstheman

Registered User
Nov 20, 2014
7,284
3,516
I'm not for or against that trade. It seems we're trading Matheson's offense for Necas's. A wash. Also, with that move, we eliminate half the veterans on defense. Is that a smart move?
I think Hutson can replace Matheson's offense from the back end. Maybe not 5 vs 5 but on the PP, no problem. Also, that brings Guhle back to his natural side, which i think is the most important thing going forward. But yeah, that veteran presence on D will be thin. Maybe they target an RHD UFA comes july 1st??
 

Habs Icing

Formerly Onice
Jan 17, 2004
20,003
11,868
Montreal
I think Hutson can replace Matheson's offense from the back end. Maybe not 5 vs 5 but on the PP, no problem. Also, that brings Guhle back to his natural side, which i think is the most important thing going forward. But yeah, that veteran presence on D will be thin. Maybe they target an RHD UFA comes july 1st??
Actually, you don't bring Guhle to the left side if you replace Matheson with Hutson.
 

Milhouse40

Registered User
Aug 19, 2010
22,561
25,681
I think Hutson can replace Matheson's offense from the back end. Maybe not 5 vs 5 but on the PP, no problem. Also, that brings Guhle back to his natural side, which i think is the most important thing going forward. But yeah, that veteran presence on D will be thin. Maybe they target an RHD UFA comes july 1st??


Hutson can replace, but we're looking to add on offense from the backend, not replace it.

Matheson finished the year Top 10 in the league for point production for D and he's being paid a ridiculously low amount on top of it.

Matheson for Necas? What Carolina is adding?
If we trade Matheson is for full freaking value and a Top 10 D in the league is worth a lot more than a 50pts winger
 

417

When the going gets tough...
Feb 20, 2003
52,457
30,308
Ottawa
I'm not for or against that trade. It seems we're trading Matheson's offense for Necas's. A wash. Also, with that move, we eliminate half the veterans on defense. Is that a smart move?
It would be a risk but you’d be adding a long term asset at the cost of a valuable short term one.

I think when we sit here and imagine trade proposals, I always try to give up something I'd rather not give because you have to give quality to get quality. This idea that you can pool up a bunch of prospects/players/picks you don't super value to get a player you do value, isn't realistic.

The Jets 1st round pick + Harris + Anderson, essential what amounts to our undesired trade commodities (based on a lot of what I read here or online) isn't going to bring the kind of return we think or hope for.

So yes, it would hurt to lose Matheson, who again I value very highly, but I'd do it for Necas and figure out how to fill that void with our many LHDs and picks we have over the next few years.

Necas could be a fixture on our top 6 for the next 6-8 years, Matheson isn't projected to be.

I doubt it would be a 1 for 1, but as the framework of a deal, there's something rhere IMO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad