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

[Habs Icing]

Me seeing Laine had requested a trade

You turn into Ben Affleck? The women must be after you.

 

[Miller Time]

What are those roles? Are you a MD, a surgeon or a physio?

These are simple questions.

The fact you are just escalating makes me think I'm on to something.
Stop deflecting.

----------------

Btw. just to point this out, so you are aware of your poor sucky logic skills, before I get to the rest.

I said: Sean Monahan is damaged goods.
You said (if I paraphrase your argument): "So you're saying any player who ever gets injured is damaged goods? That's ridiculous—players get injured all the time and recover just fine"

This is a textbook strawman where you exaggerate what I said and reply to a claim I didn't make.

As I thought, not able to stick to hockey... Nor offer anything close to a decent take.

Sucky?

Ignorance is bliss they say.
Enjoy

 

[WeThreeKings]

If I'm trading Matheson, I need something now, something tangible to have in my lineup right now.

For some reason people don't rate Matheson.

But remove his name/team from the picture for a second and imagine you have a great skating, 25+ mins/game, 62pt Dman signed at a very affordable 4.8M for this year AND next.

You'd think he'd be going for a lot more than “just” a pick in the 10-15 range.

He's not a perfect Dman, probably plays way more than he should, but IMO, he's a much more valuable asset than most give him credit for .

Funny part is there's a sizeable portion of the board slamming the table for a shorter Matheson without the skating at 5th overall.

 

[Gaud]

Is that actually said, or did 360 just infer that from something that has a fringe connection?

My verbal French f***ing sucks and that... account likes to take things out of context, or think less than reputable sources are legit

It does say that, and I'd say RDS is one of the better sources of knowledge in French Qc. The shows kind of follow themselves and have same information that seems to be verified from different sources (or they discuss it as a "this person reported it" when they cant).

There are a few speakers there that i roll my eyes at, but they are generally opinion guys and i wonder sometimes if they are there just because RDS wants to have a debate instead of having a bunch of dudes agreeing with each other. For example, i disagree with 95% of what Norman Flynn says but he is on weekly on one of those shows.

The issue here is that they arent saying much at all. I think when you have a Necas available, any DG shoudl call, if only to figure out what the deal is and the asking price. Lebrun says that the habs talked to Car about him, but not much else. I dont even think there was a timeline as to when they called, meaning it coudl have been years ago.

 

[Gaud]

Would you trade Wifi for Necas?

1 for 1? I would. Id probably do it even if a reasonable plus was needed.

Love Wifi, his physicality, attitude and fighting. I haven't seen anything that stands out in the rest of his game yet though, so unless the habs think he will progress into a top 4 role at D, i'd be ok with doing this trade. If losing a goon is a concern for the habs, id get one to put on the 4th line, where i think it makes more sense to have one anyways.

 

[Habs Halifax]

1 for 1? I would. Id probably do it even if a reasonable plus was needed.

Love Wifi, his physicality, attitude and fighting. I haven't seen anything that stands out in the rest of his game yet though, so unless the habs think he will progress into a top 4 role at D, i'd be ok with doing this trade. If losing a goon is a concern for the habs, id get one to put on the 4th line, where i think it makes more sense to have one anyways.

The problem I have with Necas is you have to give him a long term deal before he plays one game on our team. He's likely looking for a Suzuki contract.

 

[Andy]

If I'm trading Matheson, I need something now, something tangible to have in my lineup right now.

For some reason people don't rate Matheson.

It's been a long while now that Habs fans have trashed on offensive minded d-men.

 

[Gaud]

What are those roles? Are you a MD, a surgeon or a physio?

These are simple questions.

The fact you are just escalating makes me think I'm on to something.
Stop deflecting.

----------------

Btw. just to point this out, so you are aware of your poor sucky logic skills, before I get to the rest.

I said: Sean Monahan is damaged goods.
You said (if I paraphrase your argument): "So you're saying any player who ever gets injured is damaged goods? That's ridiculous—players get injured all the time and recover just fine"

This is a textbook strawman where you exaggerate what I said and reply to a claim I didn't make.

Wouldn't using the strawman fallacy to repudiate an argument be a fallacy in itself? Also, if you require him to state his qualifications to validate his arguments, wouldn't you also need to do so to refute them? Also, using this logic to counter his argument attacks his qualifications, not his argument. Finally, stating past arguments that were wrong does not make this one also wrong.

I dont really care about who is right and dont wish to weigh in between you two, i just thought the comment was odd.

 

[SOLR]

As I thought, not able to stick to hockey... Nor offer anything close to a decent take.

Sucky?

Ignorance is bliss they say.
Enjoy

So you are making medical claims - I know you are not a MD, a surgeon or physio because you would then know that you could be held liable for said stupid claims. And it's not because you are on a hockey forum that you should escape this reality.

I'm a patient of said injury.
Labrum tears are never fully healed.
Yes you can put them together, but they are more likely to reinjury and lead to further consequences.
I wasn't talking about a knee, a core, or something else. I was talking about Sean Monahan hip injuries. I have a tear in the meniscus and I have a bad ankle (all the same side), my hip is by far the worse problem I have. I used to be an elite soccer player, then I've been running pretty hardcore.

Monahan is knowingly taking the risk of further consequences. They all do it for the significant $ ( I do it to try to stay in shape). That's the first thing my orthopedic surgeon said to be me, "you are now damaged goods" I can do 99.9% of what I used to do, but my situation was very light, the tear was small. I'm guessing that Sean's 2 hips, are something at least on his mind. And he's noticeably losing speed.

And guess what, yes it's personal...duh...you can make that accusation all you want, I'm guilty of having the same experience and that experience informing my "bad take".

"Ignorance is bliss" wow, that's rich.

That's relevant to hockey matters and our rebuild, and my experience explains my take. I'm not saying he can't have a few more good seasons - we are rebuilding, I would not take a 3 to 4 years risks on that body. That's when our window is. In the short term, I prefer training younger and healthier bodies that have no overly damaged anatomy.

Wouldn't using the strawman fallacy to repudiate an argument be a fallacy in itself? Also, if you require him to state his qualifications to validate his arguments, wouldn't you also need to do so to refute them? Also, using this logic to counter his argument attacks his qualifications, not his argument. Finally, stating past arguments that were wrong does not make this one also wrong.

I dont really care about who is right and dont wish to weigh in between you two, i just thought the comment was odd.

Fair. I was just trying to go step by step, as I didn't want to get in a quote reply match. Read my last post.

 

[417]

Funny part is there's a sizeable portion of the board slamming the table for a shorter Matheson without the skating at 5th overall.

You talking about Zeev Buium?

 

[HabbyGuy]

I know this is the "trade thread" and trades are fun, but I believe the prudent thing to do is practice a little more patience. One more year to give everyone a better look and see what we really have in Dach, Newhook, Barron, et tal... We've done a great job I believe in doing this rebuild thus far, I know it's hard at times for fans, but I want to see it through and not possibly derail it by jumping ahead too quickly like other teams have done on numerous occasions.

Next season is when we want to start putting our chips on the table, after we get a clearer picture of what this team really looks like, when healthy and with 1 more year under it's belts. Even Slaf who looks as promising as one can look, still has question marks as to what he really is going forward.

Now is not the time to step on the accelerator. If we can make moves that make sense as a fit for this team, both to it core and financially then sure, by all means go for it, but other than that, it's status quo IMO.

I personally am not moving Matheson unless we're getting a core piece back, period. We need him as much as anyone on this team, atleast for this upcoming season. You literally can't replace what he brings on and off the ice at that cap hit.

 

[HabzSauce]

Let’s not acquire offensive help until we suffer injuries and are desperate and in a position of weakness, so our trade partners are sure to take us for a ride.

Nah. I prefer trading a dman now, from a position of strength.

We need to open up roster spots for our D. On LD this year alone we have Matheson, Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Struble. Even if you put Guhle on RD we still have too many. These kids need ice time. It's like the 3 goalie rotation fiasco all over again.

However it's gotta be for the right player. Necas and zegras rumors ain't it lol. I don't want either of them for what they will cost. I'm hoping Hughes can get creative again and pull something out of his hat like what he did with Dach trade

 

[417]

Last summer he was coming off of an injury shortened season... Not an 83 game + playoffs. Not the same at all.

I was just saying there's a fairly significant period of time where health/durability was a concern, so much so that he wasn't able to secure a more lucrative or lengthy contract last summer.

Credit to him he played 83 games + playoffs, which is why I think he's going to be looking for a very rewarding contract.

I don't think he's "top 6" in year 1.

He ideally slots in at 3C, unless they want to keep Newhook at C.(with Dvorak moved if possible).

Imo, With Dach/Newhook/J.Roy all top 9 and on bargain deals, and our overall cap structure, we can afford the "luxury" even with the Anderson/Gally anchors.

Sure they “can” afford, whether or not they should is another story. I'm just not about committing long term salary for short term options.

If he's not in the top 6 year 1 of his deal, he wont be in subsequent years and I'm not enthused at the idea of paying a 3rd line luxury option up to 5M/yr.

If they target and land some other big fish, then sure, might not work... But aside from that, it's very reasonable and fits our needs & cap situation imo.

Doesn't preclude that at all.

Upcoming expiring UFA deals give us:
+ 10M next summer
+ 14M summer of '26
+ Existing 9M$ this year
+ Any further cap increases.

Adding a quality veteran middle 6 asset at ~5M$ fits, even with internal RFA extension ls and a big ticket add next summer.

KH has done a masterful job setting is up to make a few key adds over the next 2-3 seasons. Wether Monahan is the best fit or not for one of those adds depends on many factors, but it definitely works.

I'm not totally against it, especially if they can get him for 2 years max all while ridding themselves of Dvorak in the process.

Again, not a mitigating factor, we have the flexibility to both add external assets and extend internal ones.

Agreed but I think Hughes is looking at a different age bracket when it comes to adding external assets.

See Dach trade, see Newhook trade.

Agree here... Like Monahan, Dach should be able to recover and be reliably healthy the next few years.

But imo, it would be a mistake and not in line with their stated approach to start this year without at least 1 addition to our top 9. Monahan wouldn't be my #1 priority, but I bet he's on the list that KH will be exploring heavily.

Agreed he wouldn't be my #1 priority, i’d circle back later in the offseason if he's still available, but it would have to be 2 year term max for me.

 

[red devil]

Based on what exactly?

Canadian team
Bottom 5 team in the league
High taxes
Major media scrutiny

 

[Adam Michaels]

Every morning on BPM Sports, they have a segment called "Attaque à 2 contre 1" where Gilbert Delorme and two other co-hosts debate/argue their points on a specific subject relating to hockey.

Today's subject: would you trade Matheson for Necas?

Delorme was arguing against moving Matheson because to him, it's hard tp find 60+ point defensemen who play 25+ minutes a game whereas the other two were arguing for such a trade because Matheson's value is as high as it can get now and you have to give something significant to get something significant in return. And in such a trade, you move from a position of strength to address a position of need.

I love Delorme and I understand his point, but his counter offer to acquire Necas was the 26th OA pick and then he named Harris. To which his co-hosts told him that will not get it done. Harris' value isn't enough to acquire Necas or any other Top-6 forward of impact.

 

[HabzSauce]

I personally am not Moving Matheson myself unless we're getting a core piece back, period. We need him as much as anyone on this team, atleast for this upcoming season. You literally can't replace what he brings on and off the ice at that cap hit.

Yup same. Give it one more year at least. I'd love to offload him while his value is at his highest, but nobody can skate and move the puck like he can on D right now. I think he helps us alot more than he hurts us right now.

Hutson (or maybe Buium if we draft him) will be Mathesons replacement once they are ready.

 

[Miller Time]

So you are making medical claims

Nope. Never did. Reading before replying is important.

- I know you are not a MD, a surgeon or physio because you would then know that you could be held liable for said stupid claims.

Now you're a detective slash legal expert policing a message board...

Might want to revisit your understanding of civil and criminal law.

Or perhaps start with basic reading comprehension

And it's not because you are on a hockey forum that you should escape this reality.

Nor escape bad takes and posters who love to keep chasing their own tail

I'm a patient of said injury.
Labrum tears are never fully healed.
Yes you can put them together, but they are more likely to reinjury and lead to further consequences.
I wasn't talking about a knee, a core, or something else. I was talking about Sean Monahan hip injuries. I have a tear in the meniscus and I have a bad ankle (all the same side), my hip is by far the worse problem I have. I used to be an elite soccer player, then I've been running pretty hardcore.

Explains a lot.

Newsflash. You and your experience is a personal experience, not a definitive statement on all sport injuries.

The world does not revolve around you, assuming so makes an ass out of.... and makes for a real sucky take

sorry to break it to ya

Monahan is knowingly taking the risk of further consequences. They all do it for the significant $ ( I do it to try to stay in shape). That's the first thing my orthopedic surgeon said to be me, "you are now damaged goods" I can do 99.9% of what I used to do, but my situation was very light, the tear was small. I'm guessing that Sean's 2 hips, are something at least on his mind. And he's noticeably losing speed.

Siri - show me a post that reflects a disconnect with the reality that the vast majority of elite athletes in contact sports have sustained injuries that cause permanent damage to their body... Yet continue to participate and perform in said sport regardless of reductions in physical capacity and heightened risk of long term health impacts.


As I stated at the start... Your posts reflect a lack of understanding of high performance sport. Your experience, as described by you, is not reflective of what elite athletes endure and push through.

And guess what, yes it's personal...duh...you can make that accusation all you want, I'm guilty of having the same experience and that experience informing my "bad take".

Nope. Not the "same" experience.

Not in the least. That you confuse this is the evidence of your lack of understanding.

"Ignorance is bliss" wow, that's rich.

No, it's bliss.

That's relevant to hockey matters and our rebuild, and my experience explains my take. I'm not saying he can't have a few more good seasons - we are rebuilding, I would not take a 3 to 4 years risks on that body. That's when our window is. In the short term, I prefer training younger and healthier bodies that have no overly damaged anatomy.

Finally... Hockey talk! I knew you could do it

I've outlined previously why I the risk/reward assessment on Monahan is worthwhile, in my opinion


3-4 years is likely what it would take to sign the player, I think his demonstrated value on/off the ice, and the Habs medical team's direct insight to his recovery, are the two crucial aspects that mitigate the obvious risk.

I can perfectly understand and appreciate why someone else would hold a different assessment. It's the weak attempt at framing an opinion as an objective fact that I called out in your initial response... Gross generalizations, especially those that are verifiably false, make for piss poor takes.

KH has made it quite evident that the organization is not content to stay status quo. Improving the roster, rather than the pick/prospect accumulation, internal cap re-organization & in-house asset assessment focus of the first 2 "rebuilding" years, appears to be the phase they are pushing towards.

I doubt they will rush into adding veteran players just for the sake of it/regardless of cost, but based on their asset management, roster building and culture fit approach thus far, Monahan checks several boxes. I won't be surprised at all to see him offered a deal, nor do I expect that we'd make the biggest offer. Based on some direct information about the person that I am aware of, and the public commentary he's made about his experience in Montreal (org., teammates, city) I would not be surprised to to see him choose the Habs offer even though it's not the longest term or highest $ value he gets.

If the Habs medical team says no way to a multi year offer, I'm sure KH will listen.

Pretty straightforward take. Hopefully you can understand it better this time around

 

[angusyoung]

A buddy mentioned that it's possible Montreal could get their hands on Zegras, can't go wrong getting a player of Greek descent,they go to battle. The Montreal Greek community won't let him falter and become a malaka.

 

[417]

Lebrun reporting that Hughes is only considering UFAs on short term deals.

If this is true, it makes total sense and places the Habs firmly in the “depth pieces” bracket of this year’s current crop of UFAs

 

[EveryDay]

I would love to add Nikolaj Ehlers to our team if we can't get Necas. In his last 236 games, he produced 200 points with a +55. Of course he's a little bit injury prone but I would check what could be the cost of acquisition.

Ehlers-Suzuki-Slafkovski
Caufield-Dach-5OV
Newhook-Beck-Roy

My order of preference would be the following:

Necas
Ehlers
Zegras

Laine

 

[ReHabs]

We need to open up roster spots for our D. On LD this year alone we have Matheson, Guhle, Xhekaj, Harris and Struble. Even if you put Guhle on RD we still have too many. These kids need ice time. It's like the 3 goalie rotation fiasco all over again.

However it's gotta be for the right player. Necas and zegras rumors ain't it lol. I don't want either of them for what they will cost. I'm hoping Hughes can get creative again and pull something out of his hat like what he did with Dach trade

You won’t be able to acquire Rantanen. What do you expect to acquire? Zegras and Necas are better than Dach.

 

[Kents polished head]

Debrusk will sign 4-5 years

I think Perron is the one who make the most since and we know that he wants to play here

I don't think DeBrusk is in a position to ask for 4 or 5 years. The guy didn't have what I would call a very consistent career so far and is not likely to be signed in the first wave of free agency.

I could see him taking a bet on himself on a short term deal that pays him a higher annual salary. In two years he'll still be 29 years old and ready to cash in.

Perron makes sense, but something tells me it's too obvious to actually happen.
The guy also has slowed down quite a bit and I wouldn't be sure what to make of it if it ended up happening.

Then again. We had RHP on our top-6 at some point last season. So it's not exactly a situation where the top-6 wouldn't be immediately improved by virtually any single player in that bunch, really.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You won’t be able to acquire Rantanen. What do you expect to acquire? Zegras and Necas are better than Dach.

Dach’s a beast. The only concern is health. I’d prefer we give him this year to show what he can do. If he goes down again we can re-evaluate but if healthy he’ll be a really solid player.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Man...let's just tank again , so much easier

 

[Kents polished head]

Lebrun reporting that Hughes is only considering UFAs on short term deals.

If this is true, it makes total sense and places the Habs firmly in the “depth pieces” bracket of this year’s current crop of UFAs

Define "depth pieces".

I think we already have more than enough "depth pieces" as things stand right now. Plus, guys like Dakota Joshua are probably expected to try and cash in on a long term deal after what was a career year for him. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's Elliotte Friedman who said that this summer, "depth players" like Joshua and William Carrier were going to be likely to get paid.

I think you're more looking at second-tier offensive guys on a "prove-me" contracts, or players who would have an incentive to sign a short-term contract like a 36 years old Perron.

One guy I didn't mention and who would fall into this category (and was mentionned by someone else here) is Vik Arvidsson.

In short, I don't think this team can afford to add yet another "depth player" on that mix. We already have too many of those (Evans, Pezzetta, RHP, Armia, Anderson, Gallagher, Roy, Heineman, Dvorak, Ylonen...)