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

[Deus ex machina]

Jensen and TVR are fringe types IMO. Ideally, you want them on the 3rd pairing. E Bear is not a top 4D.

Sandin is in terms of the offense he creates but he needs someone like Savard (not Jensen). Sandin is more weak in his own zone than Matheson is.

Caps have depth on D but they lack the pieces in their top 4D to shelter their goalie and it holds them back.

I would use Savard and the Jets 1st to get a piece now but not sure the 17th pick is it. Rather keep the Jets 1st, and trade Savard for a late 1st at the deadline. And if Hutson makes the Habs, Savard is the perfect partner. Only interested in moving Savard if it gives us a shot at someone who slips in that top 13 or top 14. At 15+, I find it fades and not worth it then.

Big dreams yes but we set our price and see who wants to talk. If it doesn't gain momentum, sure, no problem.

I said they have 4 RDs, not 4 top4 RDs.

I said that 3 of them don't have NTCs and thus can be traded (upgraded on).
Why would i try to trade them Savard otherwise?

I think you might've read too quickly...lol

Swapping 17 and 26 + getting 52 is worth 27th OA according to PuckPedia's calculator. Pretty much a late 1st.

 

[Captain Mountain]

I know, but just entertain me for a second lol

By young established player, someone like a Dach or a Newhook, from a team looking to take the next step.

Same answer. It sounds like the 6-10/12 group is pretty strong this year, so it depends whose available

 

[Habaneros]

Is tomorrow the day we can talk with UFA players ??

 

[1909]

Carlson, Jensen, TVR and Bear. That's 4, right?

I'd do something around Savard and 26 for 17 and 52.

Savard is going nowhere for the moment.

But any of Barron, Harris, Kovacevic or Struble could be involved in trades.

 

[BoneHutson]

Question for you guys.

Would you trade (A) Matheson + 1st (Winnipeg's pick) to move up to 10th overall?

or

Would you trade (B) Matheson for 1st round pick + young established player with potential who can step into your lineup right away?

If you were presented with both options, which would you take?

B except if a C is available at 10 which they highly value (imo only wingers worth moving up will be there at 10 aka Sennecke or Iginla).

So it comes down to whether you prefer Leonard to Sennecke and Iginla, and I do (not by much)

 

[jellybeans]

We’ll that’s just it, potential….they are not trading a 60+pt defenceman for a potential at 10th

Sure they would but Xhekaj and the 26th doesn't move you up to 10th.

 

[BoneHutson]

Hughes would never do this.

At 10th overall, it's not a sure thing...meanwhile, Matheson IS a sure thing in terms of what he brings right now and the value in his contract.

At 10th overall...you could end up with a Mikko Rantanen or a Tyson Jost...or an Evan Bouchard or Slater Koekkoek...or a Valeri Nichushkin or a Nick Ritchie,

There's not a guaranteed hit rate with a 10th overall, I think because we're so close to the draft people are horny for that 2nd prospect, but the odds of even making that trade, nevermind walking out of a single draft with 2 impact players in the 1st round are extremely low.

Exactly...he's at his peak, so not sure why so many would be willing to essentially trade him when Dmen traditionally/historically, get an excellent return, for what is essentially a lottery scratch ticket.

Not wanting to trade a guy like Matheson for a top 10 pick on the basis that the pick is essentially a lottery ticket is a big middle finger to your scouting staff and your development team imo. Then, why not trade away the 5th OA for an established player? At 10, if Bobrov says the guy available has the potential to be a gamebreaker (Sennecke or Iginla), you trade for him

I don’t think they are trading Matheson for a pick unless it’s top 5 and that ain’t happening either.

If you carefully listen to KH, he’s talking about making progress and moving forward so trading Matheson PLUS a 26th pick for a 10 pick doesn’t really fall within his short term vision.

If Matheson goes, expect an NHL top 6 FWD coming back our way

If Sennecke (or any guy ranked in their top 5-6) is there at 10 I guarantee theyd entertain the idea.

 

[BoneHutson]

10th overall this year is a great prospect. This would be an easy yes from me, 100%. I wouldn't have said the same about last years draft though

Nah, not last year. Last year there was only 8 maybe 9 solid players. The top 5 + Leonard, Michkov, Benson and mayyybe Dvorsky. This year, the talent all the way to 14 (and even 16) is insane

 

[sampollock]

ruuner77 has been awol. is he in vegas looking for rumors?????

 

[417]

Not wanting to trade a guy like Matheson for a top 10 pick on the basis that the pick is essentially a lottery ticket is a big middle finger to your scouting staff and your development team imo. Then, why not trade away the 5th OA for an established player? At 10, if Bobrov says the guy available has the potential to be a gamebreaker (Sennecke or Iginla), you trade for him

That's an odd way of looking at it....draft picks by nature, are all lottery tickets. Even scouts understand that.

Mike Matheson, is not a lottery ticket. You know exactly what you have with him and what he is a top 4, 60pt, 25+mins Dman who makes 4.8M for another 2 years. There's tangible value there. He's a proven commodity.

a 10th overall pick, attach whatever name you want to attach to it whether it be Iginla or Sennecke or whoever, is not.

They could end up being the next Rantanen or the next Jost.

Why not trade the 5th OA for an established player? I don't know...depends who that established player is. But if the Habs could get a young and established player whose a cornerstone piece they could build around, for the 5th OA, they'd do it.

But what team would do that???

If Sennecke (or any guy ranked in their top 5-6) is there at 10 I guarantee theyd entertain the idea.

I guarantee they wouldn't...not at this stage of their rebuild. They're not going to make their current lineup worse purely for the sake of a draft crush like fans do.

 

[Rapala]

My reasoning is that it is a bit similar to Newhook's situation when Colorado acquired Johansen. Right now, they have 4 C's competing for the top 3 spots (it looks like): PLD, Dylan Strome (who was their top guy last year and played pretty well for them), McMichael, and Lapierre.

They could always move someone over to the wing of course but I would assume if they drafted these guys as C's, they're more comfortable there and probably are more ideally fit to play there.

True but they probably want to see that internal competition run for at least a year before deciding the pecking order of 3 and 4. I know I would. 3C's don't always make for good 4C's Jake Evans is a perfect example IMO he only produces higher up the lineup and really hasn't embraced that 4C role at all. The year before he was tasked with it and pouted for most of the season last year he was the beneficiary of Dach and Dvorak both being out long term. It will be interesting to see what happens this year with Beck now coming into the fold as one who will embrace anything to become a Hab.

 

[Captain Mountain]

That's an odd way of looking at it....draft picks by nature, are all lottery tickets. Even scouts understand that.

Mike Matheson, is not a lottery ticket. You know exactly what you have with him and what he is a top 4, 60pt, 25+mins Dman who makes 4.8M for another 2 years. There's tangible value there. He's a proven commodity.

a 10th overall pick, attach whatever name you want to attach to it whether it be Iginla or Sennecke or whoever, is not.

They could end up being the next Rantanen or the next Jost.

Why not trade the 5th OA for an established player? I don't know...depends who that established player is. But if the Habs could get a young and established player whose a cornerstone piece they could build around, for the 5th OA, they'd do it.

But what team would do that???

I think the point is:

-Matheson is an established player now. We don't know what he will be when Montreal actually reasonably expects/hopes to be a competitive team. The logic behind potentially trading Matheson now is not dissimilar to trading Petry for him. Draft picks are a mystery box, but so is player aging. That doesn't mean you trade Matheson now, but if you trsut your scouting staff, you absolutely move the D-man in their 30s for a chance at a player who has a realistic chance to deliver what he has for a decade +. The only other consideration is that if you do move a Matheson and want to compete now, you probably want to add another veteran to eat some tough minutes.

-Odds are very high that the player you get by trading 5th OA is not going to be a young "cornerstone piece", because those players are almost never available and when they are, teams want both quality pick(s) and players.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Trading Matheson for the 10th would be sheer stupidity and I'm pretty sure HuGo would laugh at the suggestion.

I think the point is:

-Matheson is an established player now. We don't know what he will be when Montreal actually reasonably expects/hopes to be a competitive team. The logic behind potentially trading Matheson now is not dissimilar to trading Petry for him. Draft picks are a mystery box, but so is player aging. That doesn't mean you trade Matheson now, but if you trsut your scouting staff, you absolutely move the D-man in their 30s for a chance at a player who has a realistic chance to deliver what he has for a decade +. The only other consideration is that if you do move a Matheson and want to compete now, you probably want to add another veteran to eat some tough minutes.

-Odds are very high that the player you get by trading 5th OA is not going to be a young "cornerstone piece", because those players are almost never available and when they are, teams want both quality pick(s) and players.

The Canadiens traded Petry for Matheson because Petry wanted out and Montreal needed a veteran defenseman to fill his shoes while they rebuilt the club.

The idea of acquiring Matheson was never about the general future, it was always about the present.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Is tomorrow the day we can talk with UFA players ??

They got rid of that "legal" tampering period

 

[417]

I think the point is:

-Matheson is an established player now. We don't know what he will be when Montreal actually reasonably expects/hopes to be a competitive team. The logic behind potentially trading Matheson now is not dissimilar to trading Petry for him. Draft picks are a mystery box, but so is player aging. That doesn't mean you trade Matheson now, but if you trsut your scouting staff, you absolutely move the D-man in their 30s for a chance at a player who has a realistic chance to deliver what he has for a decade +. The only other consideration is that if you do move a Matheson and want to compete now, you probably want to add another veteran to eat some tough minutes.

I mean, at worst he'll be what other UFA-to-be top 4 Dmen are worth at that point? There are a number of examples I could list here, and that's when he'll be a pending UFA. So yes, he's an established player now and his value is highest now because he's signed for 2 years at a very, very, affordable rate of 4.8M/yr, he's productive, can play upwards of 22+ mins a game quite comfortably (yes he plays too much in Montreal, but that's actually a plus when looking at his value), can play both special teams, he can and should still be a great skater in 2 years from now.

I'm not sure why we wouldn't maximize THAT value, rather than just focus on drafting the latest draft crush we've been twerking over for the past 8 months????

These kind of players I just described, are just not available on the market...and that IS because of how valuable they are to their teams, teams just don't give that away. So why would we do just that by trading him AND another 1st round pick, to pick 10th??? Hell, the odds are decent that whoever we pick 26th might be just as good if not better than whoever gets picked 10th lol.

Trusting my amateur scouting staff to judge the value of a pro player on my team, doesn't make that much sense, we're conflating roles here. One has nothing to do with the other.

You trust your amateur scouting staff to provide reports on prospects, always understanding that there are no guarantees. You don't entrust your amateur scouting staff to judge the value of a current player on your roster.

-Odds are very high that the player you get by trading 5th OA is not going to be a young "cornerstone piece", because those players are almost never available and when they are, teams want both quality pick(s) and players.

Correct...I think that reinforces my point. I wasn't the one suggesting trading the 5th OA, I was just responding to the poster who asked me in a rhetorical fashion, "why not just trade the 5th OA".

 

[Saundies]

That's an odd way of looking at it....draft picks by nature, are all lottery tickets. Even scouts understand that.

Mike Matheson, is not a lottery ticket. You know exactly what you have with him and what he is a top 4, 60pt, 25+mins Dman who makes 4.8M for another 2 years. There's tangible value there. He's a proven commodity.

a 10th overall pick, attach whatever name you want to attach to it whether it be Iginla or Sennecke or whoever, is not.

They could end up being the next Rantanen or the next Jost.

Why not trade the 5th OA for an established player? I don't know...depends who that established player is. But if the Habs could get a young and established player whose a cornerstone piece they could build around, for the 5th OA, they'd do it.

But what team would do that???

I guarantee they wouldn't...not at this stage of their rebuild. They're not going to make their current lineup worse purely for the sake of a draft crush like fans do.

He was this last year, it's not who he is. He's not a 25+ minute a night on another other serious NHL team in the league because of his D. We played him that much because we have him, Savard, and a thousand kids back there. He even played on the PK for some ungodly reason.

The point is that he had a career year last year and he's not under contract for a significant amount of time. There are two ways to go about it -- we either extend him (please no) or we trade him and, optimally, you trade him when his value is either really high or at his highest.

We could wait a year and a half and trade him at the deadline, where he might get less points and play the same quality of D, leading to the rose colored glasses that some fans have for him to finally wear off a little bit (but also have other teams see the same).

Or, we could maximize his value, trade him now, and get a haul while he still has the perfume of his career year season. I vote the latter as I don't see his value ever being higher than it is right now.

 

[BoneHutson]

That's an odd way of looking at it....draft picks by nature, are all lottery tickets. Even scouts understand that.

Mike Matheson, is not a lottery ticket. You know exactly what you have with him and what he is a top 4, 60pt, 25+mins Dman who makes 4.8M for another 2 years. There's tangible value there. He's a proven commodity.

a 10th overall pick, attach whatever name you want to attach to it whether it be Iginla or Sennecke or whoever, is not.

They could end up being the next Rantanen or the next Jost.

Why not trade the 5th OA for an established player? I don't know...depends who that established player is. But if the Habs could get a young and established player whose a cornerstone piece they could build around, for the 5th OA, they'd do it.

But what team would do that???

I guarantee they wouldn't...not at this stage of their rebuild. They're not going to make their current lineup worse purely for the sake of a draft crush like fans do.

Yeah instead lets just waste Mathesons best years and then give him 7m a year until hes 38… Superb idea

 

[417]

He was this last year, it's not who he is. He's not a 25+ minute a night on another other serious NHL team in the league because of his D. We played him that much because we have him, Savard, and a thousand kids back there. He even played on the PK for some ungodly reason.

What difference does it make though? Players are traded for what they've done, the value to the team they are currently on.

If a team came calling for Matheson, it's because they view that he's a top 4 Dman capable of playing 20+ mins a game.

The point is that he had a career year last year and he's not under contract for a significant amount of time. There are two ways to go about it -- we either extend him (please no) or we trade him and, optimally, you trade him when his value is either really high or at his highest.

We could wait a year and a half and trade him at the deadline, where he might get less points and play the same quality of D, leading to the rose colored glasses that some fans have for him to finally wear off a little bit (but also have other teams see the same).

Or, we could maximize his value, trade him now, and get a haul while he still has the perfume of his career year season. I vote the latter as I don't see his value ever being higher than it is right now.

But that's what i'm advocating for...maximizing his value, not trading him AND another 1st round pick, to move up 16 spots.

That makes no sense lol

Whether you rate Matheson or not, just look at what worse Dmen or even comparable Dmen, have gotten traded for in recent years. Why would we minimize our best trade chip purely for draft horniness? lol

Yeah instead lets just waste Mathesons best years and then give him 7m a year until hes 38… Superb idea

It's actually wild you actually took the time to respond to that post, but didn't even bother reading it lol cause nowhere have I advocated keeping him, much less signing him for 7M a year until he's 38yr old.

You just went ahead and invented a whole story lol

 

[xposbrad]

B except if a C is available at 10 which they highly value (imo only wingers worth moving up will be there at 10 aka Sennecke or Iginla).

So it comes down to whether you prefer Leonard to Sennecke and Iginla, and I do (not by much)

It's time we start using some of our talent to accumulate 1 or 2 higher end ready to play guys. Matheson + Beck + Winnipeg 1st, should get us a first or second line prospect. If WSH is in win now, would they do that for Ryan Leonard? You couple a Ryan Leonard with our 5th pick this year, and then we go all out. I wouldn't be opposed to a Stamkos signing too then. We won't be sellers after this year.

 

[ChesterNimitz]

we

That's an odd way of looking at it....draft picks by nature, are all lottery tickets. Even scouts understand that.

Mike Matheson, is not a lottery ticket. You know exactly what you have with him and what he is a top 4, 60pt, 25+mins Dman who makes 4.8M for another 2 years. There's tangible value there. He's a proven commodity.

a 10th overall pick, attach whatever name you want to attach to it whether it be Iginla or Sennecke or whoever, is not.

They could end up being the next Rantanen or the next Jost.

Why not trade the 5th OA for an established player? I don't know...depends who that established player is. But if the Habs could get a young and established player whose a cornerstone piece they could build around, for the 5th OA, they'd do it.

This is draft time. Please keep logic out of your posts.

 

[Captain Mountain]

I mean, at worst he'll be what other UFA-to-be top 4 Dmen are worth at that point? There are a number of examples I could list here, and that's when he'll be a pending UFA. So yes, he's an established player now and his value is highest now because he's signed for 2 years at a very, very, affordable rate of 4.8M/yr, he's productive, can play upwards of 22+ mins a game quite comfortably (yes he plays too much in Montreal, but that's actually a plus when looking at his value), can play both special teams, he can and should still be a great skater in 2 years from now.

I'm not sure why we wouldn't maximize THAT value, rather than just focus on drafting the latest draft crush we've been twerking over for the past 8 months????

These kind of players I just described, are just not available on the market...and that IS because of how valuable they are to their teams, teams just don't give that away. So why would we do just that by trading him AND another 1st round pick, to pick 10th??? Hell, the odds are decent that whoever we pick 26th might be just as good if not better than whoever gets picked 10th lol.

Trusting my amateur scouting staff to judge the value of a pro player on my team, doesn't make that much sense, we're conflating roles here. One has nothing to do with the other.

You trust your amateur scouting staff to provide reports on prospects, always understanding that there are no guarantees. You don't entrust your amateur scouting staff to judge the value of a current player on your roster.

Well, at worst his game falls off a cliff (which happens to players in their 30s) and he's worth nothing.

The reason to not maximize his current value with the team is what it serves vs. what he can return. Because players like Matheson ARE available on the market, its core players like that in their early to mid 20s that aren't. And odds aren't good that who a team picks in the mid to late 20s vs. 10th range will be of the same quality (there's been a TON of research in that area).

Its not on the amateur scouting staff to judge the value of a pro player on my team. They're supposed to project what prospects can be in the NHL. Its on the pro scouting staff and coaching staff to give the information on internal pieces and its on upper management to parse the information and make a determination. You still have to trust your scouting staff.

I'm not against Montreal keeping Matheson (they need to replace his minutes at least partially if they trade him) or trade him for a young player instead, but its a no brainer fore a rebuilding team to move a player who doesn't fit your long term plans for age reasons for a pick/prospect/young NHLer who does. It just depends on the pick (and who is available there or the player/prospect.

Correct...I think that reinforces my point. I wasn't the one suggesting trading the 5th OA, I was just responding to the poster who asked me in a rhetorical fashion, "why not just trade the 5th OA".

Does it? The point is your getting less certainty/information for potential upside.

 

[jaffy27]

If Sennecke (or any guy ranked in their top 5-6) is there at 10 I guarantee theyd entertain the idea.

You can guarantee that…..?

Sure they would but Xhekaj and the 26th doesn't move you up to 10th.

Based on what?

Not interested in trading Xhekaj

 

[Habricot]

It's time we start using some of our talent to accumulate 1 or 2 higher end ready to play guys. Matheson + Beck + Winnipeg 1st, should get us a first or second line prospect. If WSH is in win now, would they do that for Ryan Leonard? You couple a Ryan Leonard with our 5th pick this year, and then we go all out. I wouldn't be opposed to a Stamkos signing too then. We won't be sellers after this year.

You know the more I think of the options now the less they are appealing to me at least.
Necas is not that great in my opinion and not sure he would look very good in a habs jersey plus the price to pay is quite high. I wonder if Washington is thin on D. If so a trade I would entertain would be Ghule for Leonard! 1 for 1. It gives them a very good piece on D. Does not disturb our d core that much and give us a very nice piece in front.

Also gives us the opportunity to shore up our D core in this year's draft if there is a player we like more then the remaining forward we have. In addition I would go after Pesce as a UFA...

This year it could give something like:
Slafkowski, Suzuki, Caufield
Armia, Dach, Anderson
Roy, Newhook, Leonard
Kapnen, Evens, Galagher

Matheson, Pesce
Hutson, Savard
Xekhaj, Mailloux

 

[Yoor]

Hughes would never do this.

At 10th overall, it's not a sure thing...meanwhile, Matheson IS a sure thing in terms of what he brings right now and the value in his contract.

At 10th overall...you could end up with a Mikko Rantanen or a Tyson Jost...or an Evan Bouchard or Slater Koekkoek...or a Valeri Nichushkin or a Nick Ritchie,

There's not a guaranteed hit rate with a 10th overall, I think because we're so close to the draft people are horny for that 2nd prospect, but the odds of even making that trade, nevermind walking out of a single draft with 2 impact players in the 1st round are extremely low.

Exactly...he's at his peak, so not sure why so many would be willing to essentially trade him when Dmen traditionally/historically, get an excellent return, for what is essentially a lottery scratch ticket.

Fully agree here, i don't quite get all the trade Matheson now talk. Who is going to replace the point production and the ice time he eats up? The young guys also need some mentors on the team. I would at the very least keep him for this season.

 

[SnapVirus]

Fans who wouldnt trade Matheson for the 10th OV. Are the same who wants to sign Perron/Stamkos and old folks. They dont understand competitive window and the point of a rebuild.