HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #88: 2024-25 Season

[Kosseca]

Then don't be surprised when CC, Nick and co are burnt out by all the losing and we become the Sabres 2.0.

If they are burnt out after an extra year of development, they should be indeed traded.

 

[le_sean]

So to correct you... I didn't "clasify" Hage as just a 3C. I said what if they are. Then what? That was the point.

What if Demidov signs a lifetime contract in the KHL?

I mean it’s pointless to create what if scenarios because it becomes ad infinitum. Talking for the sake of talking. Right now we have a player we picked at 21 that looks like he should have been taken closer to 10. Can’t we enjoy that rather than just think doom and gloom?

 

[Habby4Life]

Put a package together with Wifi in it and try to get a 3/4 RD.

If they won’t play him against the Rangers with Rempe in the lineup, just move him, stop holding him back.

 

[Habs Halifax]

What if Demidov signs a lifetime contract in the KHL?

I mean it’s pointless to create what if scenarios because it becomes ad infinitum. Talking for the sake of talking. Right now we have a player we picked at 21 that looks like he should have been taken closer to 10. Can’t we enjoy that rather than just think doom and gloom?

Post spin now because you didn't comprehend the main point well. I already told you, I like Hage just as much as you do but that's not the point. You are here to defend Hage who is 2 or 3 years away and the point is what is our plan if Dach is not the 2C we need. We have a gap. Come on man.

This is what you did and it's on you bud... The red table we have in the Kitchen might not be big enough for our family. Your reply to this would be... The table is not red, it's Bright red.

 

[le_sean]

Post spin now because you didn't comprehend the main point well. I already told you, I like Hage just as much as you do but that's not the point. You are here to defend Hage who is 2 or 3 years away and the point is what is our plan if Dach is not the 2C we need. We have a gap. Come on man.

It’s not a spin, it’s a reminder to myself that it’s pointless to discuss anything with Habs Halifax. Invented scenario after invented scenario and when you challenge him, he just says you don’t get it.

 

[Habs Halifax]

It’s not a spin, it’s a reminder to myself that it’s pointless to discuss anything with Habs Halifax. Invented scenario after invented scenario and when you challenge him, he just says you don’t get it.

False. Take a moment and go back to re-read. You just don't like being called out. You cherry picked a part of my post and ignored the main point and now your going to spin it because it's a post war about something stupid.

This is why I have to bold things. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN IF DACH CAN'T HANDLE THE 2C ROLE. Hage is 2 or 3 years away. Doesn't have to be confrontational and that is not some invented scenario. It's a real possible situation we might face.

 

[Toene]

If they are burnt out after an extra year of development, they should be indeed traded.

Yeah god forbid your players want to play for a somewhat competitive team. They should embrace getting dunked on most nights so a couple prospects can get a little better by getting hemmed in their zone.

Also, unless you think getting help on D or offense would somehow hurt the youngsters' development, these things are not mutually exclusive.

 

[le_sean]

False. Take a moment and go back to re-read. You just don't like being called out. You cherry picked a part of my post and ignored the main point and now your going to spin it because it's a post war about something stupid.

This is why I have to bold things. WHAT IS YOUR PLAN IF DACH CAN'T HANDLE THE 2C ROLE. Hage is 2 or 3 years away. Doesn't have to be confrontational and that is not some invented scenario. It's a real possible situation we might face.

Yeah not confrontational at all when you put it that way

Go take a nap man

 

[Habs Halifax]

Yeah not confrontational at all when you put it that way

Go take a nap man

You still never addressed the main point. Seems to me you are easily distracted. It's ok to not comprehend it because we are human but after it was clarified? NO! You deserve what you spit out now

You turned it into Hage only. That was not the main point. I agree with you, Hage has more potential than Kapanen and Beck but once again, he is years away. So yeah, I do think we have needs at center just as much as RD. It's close for me.

 

[Kosseca]

Yeah god forbid your players want to play for a somewhat competitive team. They should embrace getting dunked on most nights so a couple prospects can get a little better by getting hemmed in their zone.

Also, unless you think getting help on D or offense would somehow hurt the youngsters' development, these things are not mutually exclusive.

My argument is that you don't owe anything to the players. They get paid millions to play hockey. Deal have to be made in the context that they help the team progress, and keeping your players "happy" isn't the top of the list of drivers to make a deal. Certain deal may have this side benefit, yeah for sure, but a GMs shouldn't be driven by that.

I think that KH is taking that approach too... looking down the road, he saw no short or medium term help on the wing and acquired Laine. While this is a great boost that I'm sure pleased the young vets, it's a hockey move before anything else.

Am I against KH doing deal right now? no, I think that there are opportunities for him to improve the team, but these deal have to be in step with the rebuild and make sense not only for the short term, but long term success of the team.

 

[therocket9]

The player Montreal needs to trade is Newhook.....no spot in top 6 and top 9 with the forwards they have coming up....need more of a 2 way forward or physical forward for bottom 6.

 

[RationalExpectations]

The player Montreal needs to trade is Newhook.....no spot in top 6 and top 9 with the forwards they have coming up....need more of a 2 way forward or physical forward for bottom 6.

If Newhook cannot be a top 6 winger in one of the bottom 5 teams in the league, cannot be higher than Heineman Gallagher Anderson Dvorak then it means he is not bringing anything back which would justify trading him.

 

[Toene]

My argument is that you don't owe anything to the players. They get paid millions to play hockey. Deal have to be made in the context that they help the team progress, and keeping your players "happy" isn't the top of the list of drivers to make a deal. Certain deal may have this side benefit, yeah for sure, but a GMs shouldn't be driven by that.

I think that KH is taking that approach too... looking down the road, he saw no short or medium term help on the wing and acquired Laine. While this is a great boost that I'm sure pleased the young vets, it's a hockey move before anything else.

Am I against KH doing deal right now? no, I think that there are opportunities for him to improve the team, but these deal have to be in step with the rebuild and make sense not only for the short term, but long term success of the team.

So you're against improving the team... unless it improves the team? I fail to see your point. Morale is part of the game, btw.

 

[417]

My argument is that you don't owe anything to the players. They get paid millions to play hockey. Deal have to be made in the context that they help the team progress, and keeping your players "happy" isn't the top of the list of drivers to make a deal. Certain deal may have this side benefit, yeah for sure, but a GMs shouldn't be driven by that.

I think that KH is taking that approach too... looking down the road, he saw no short or medium term help on the wing and acquired Laine. While this is a great boost that I'm sure pleased the young vets, it's a hockey move before anything else.

Am I against KH doing deal right now? no, I think that there are opportunities for him to improve the team, but these deal have to be in step with the rebuild and make sense not only for the short term, but long term success of the team.

Why is wanting to win, exclusive of developing? Why does it have to be one or the other?

 

[Kosseca]

Why is wanting to win, exclusive of developing? Why does it have to be one or the other?

You make it sound like "wanting to win" isn't the default setting of an NHL player. They all want to win. As I said, deals have to be made in the context of the team progress (i.e. development), so no contracdiction here.

So you're against improving the team... unless it improves the team? I fail to see your point. Morale is part of the game, btw.

no, I'm against making trade for the sole purpose of making players happy. Morale can be manage by other means then trades.

 

[Andrei79]

Th

The player Montreal needs to trade is Newhook.....no spot in top 6 and top 9 with the forwards they have coming up....need more of a 2 way forward or physical forward for bottom 6.

He brings much needed speed and versatility to the lineup. I see no reason not to keep him.

 

[Deebs]

Th

He brings much needed speed and versatility to the lineup. I see no reason not to keep him.

Newhook is the least of our problems. He can move up and down the lineup.

 

[themilosh]

Vancouver hangs up, unless I missed something.

Well i must have proposed something right.. youre telling me Vancouver hangs up, fan boys are telling me that's insane.

So gentlemen... check your ego.. it is a fair trade. It addresses Vancouvers beed to win now, while ridding ourselves of all our <5.9" dead weight.. and salary, while adding a legit 1C; the EXACT position we require.

 

[themilosh]

Offersheets fail more often than not, and spark unnecessary drama between teams. They also require a lot of draft capital, and the Habs wouldn't be in a position to warrant losing those picks straight after this season.

Then there's also the fact that the Rangers and Lafrenière are trying to get a contract together right now that would pay him somewhere in the 8M$ range for multiple years. So chances are that he doesn't even make it to RFA status.

The final nail in the coffin of this idea would be that the Rangers are actually pretty okay cap-wise to match a REASONABLE offersheet for Lafrenière even if they sign Shesterkin to the close to 12M$ deal that he is reportedly looking for.

Fact of the matter is that with the rising cap it's actually easier now to find teams willing to take salary back for nothing than in the years directly post-Covid, with the flat cap. As proof, look no further than what okay-ish players with a relatively high cap-hit, like Ceci, got in exchange last Summer.

Following that logic, the Rangers could look to trade Jacob Trouba in 2025, on the last year of his current deal, and not have to pay through the nose and maybe actually get something in exchange for him.

They could also elect to keep Trouba and instead let one or both of Reilly Smith and Ryan Lindgren go as UFAs, replace them with cheap depth or prospects graduating form the AHL, and have enough for both Shesterkin's and Lafrenière's new deals.

So yeah, it was fun talking/posting about it but your scenario won't happen.

As far as trades concerning the Montreal Canadiens go, we'll get much more clarity in the next 10-15 games as to what the 2024-2025 season will be like and that will tell our management if/how they should shift their trading strategy and focus.

And as they progress through the season, our players/prospects will show their stuff in various leagues, allowing management to accumulate yet more insight regarding the prospects' likely NHL upside.

So yeah, stand pat for now. Revisit in a couple weeks/months when we have more information basically.

Im too lazy to check my post history.. but I was panned for offering CC for Laff and Kakko steaight up.. this is why the fan base (in here) needs to be considered flawed.

 

[Toene]

You make it sound like "wanting to win" isn't the default setting of an NHL player. They all want to win. As I said, deals have to be made in the context of the team progress (i.e. development), so no contracdiction here.


no, I'm against making trade for the sole purpose of making players happy. Morale can be manage by other means then trades.

Got you. But what I suggest isnt solely to make them happy. It's a perk, for sure, but it's also time they progress in the standings. We got 1 line, and a whole bunch of meh.

 

[417]

You make it sound like "wanting to win" isn't the default setting of an NHL player. They all want to win. As I said, deals have to be made in the context of the team progress (i.e. development), so no contracdiction here.

But you retorted stating that if Caufield and Suzuki are burnt out after an extra year of development, they should be traded.

So i'm assuming you made that comment in the context of not making any moves to help the team now and instead just suffer through another losing season.

So i'm asking you, why are development and competing exclusive for you?

Might be missing something, if so, my bad.

 

[vokiel]

Well i must have proposed something right.. youre telling me Vancouver hangs up, fan boys are telling me that's insane.

So gentlemen... check your ego.. it is a fair trade. It addresses Vancouvers beed to win now, while ridding ourselves of all our <5.9" dead weight.. and salary, while adding a legit 1C; the EXACT position we require.

You contradicted yourself: If he's a legit 1C, then Vancouver hangs up. Goal scorers like Caufield are plentiful every draft, unlike legit 1Cs like Pettersson.

 

[Kosseca]

Got you. But what I suggest isny solely to make them happy. It's a perk, for sure, but it's also time they progress in the standings. We got 1 line, and a whole bunch meh.

Ok, well on that we can agree and this is why I said before that I see opportunities for KH to improve the team. So in so far as the move he make are driven by making the team more competitive short and long term, it's more the fine by me.

At the same time i'm also realistic in the sense that we have still too many unknown variables when it comes to the line up... it's hard to say "this is the area that needs to be addressed". Today we find that RD is a weakness, but tomorrow it may be backup G or no2 C. Last summer I was firmly on the "get a RD" bandwagon. Now looking at how Dach is playing, I'm wondering if an offensive C isn't a bigger priority. While we lack RD right now, we have "maybe" option in Mailloux and Reinbacher in the 4 to 8 month away window. We dont at C beyond Hage, and he's at least 2 yrs away.

Anyway, all that to say, I think that next summer is a better window to make aggressive trades (unless something real good comes along before obviously). By then we should know more about Dach's potential to be a C, we will know more about all our D, we can get rid of some deadwook in Dvorak, armia and (hopfully) Anderson, and we will know more about Kapanen and Heineman hability to secure a meaningful role on this team.

 

[le_sean]

Newhook is the least of our problems. He can move up and down the lineup.

Yeah you need players like him that offer versatility. Winger or centre, speed, creativity. He’s solid and not someone that should be tossed aside.

If anything the Habs should be adding another player like him. There’s no speed up front.

 

[Kosseca]

But you retorted stating that if Caufield and Suzuki are burnt out after an extra year of development, they should be traded.

So i'm assuming you made that comment in the context of not making any moves to help the team now and instead just suffer through another losing season.

So i'm asking you, why are development and competing exclusive for you?

Might be missing something, if so, my bad.

If KH makes no deal (for any reason, he doesn't want or can't) this season to boost this line up and that this team finish again in the bottom 5 of the league (which a lot of analysts predicted before the start of season), you are telling me that it is ok for Suzuki or any other player to get mad that the GM/organization because the team wasn't competitive?? There should be no surprised that this team will struggle this year again.... massive holes in the line up and tones of young players.

If I recall correctly, they where asked when Gorton/KH came in if they wanted to be part of the rebuild and they all signed on to the plan. If they are now unhappy with the plan... well yeah, maybe you trade them. You can't fix all of habs problem overnight. That is just the way it is.

So, in other word, this comes down to staying with the rebuild plan and not taking shortcuts because it is difficult. If trade opportunity comes along that fit in the plan, go ahead. but dont pull a Ottawa.