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

[eklund the clown]

I don't think we make any trades anytime soon unless the injury bug hits yet again.We have to see what we have here and so far it's looking good.We should be 3-0

 

[sampollock]

I don't think we make any trades anytime soon unless the injury bug hits yet again.We have to see what we have here and so far it's looking good.We should be 3-0

Just need PL back..

 

[morhilane]

Again, the discussion here was about Matheson for Andersson.

Guhle - Andersson
Hutson - Savard
Xhekaj - Barron
Struble

Even with Andersson in the line-up, Guhle won't be moved to the left side. Savard is currently averaging 16 minutes TOI (Barron/Xhekaj get even lower minutes). Guhle will stay on the right side until the Habs have two RHD who can play 18-20+ minutes each. Matheson/Hutson provide those minutes on the left side already. Guhle provide it on the right side right now.

 

[Deus ex machina]

Again, the discussion here was about Matheson for Andersson.

Guhle - Andersson
Hutson - Savard
Xhekaj - Barron
Struble

I don't think that Guhle playing on the right side is a big deal.
He said it himself on L'Antichambre Saturday after the game and he seemed genuine about it.
Said he took reps on the right side all summer to get used to it and so far it seems to work fine.

I see him playing with Hutson for a long time.

I think Savard is more suited to play on the 3rd pair.
Too bad Struble is hurt because he looked good enough to play top 4.

I could see them trying those pairs when Struble returns:

Hutson - Guhle
Matheson - Struble
Xhekaj - Savard
Barron

With Andersson instead of Matheson, they'd have Struble playing the left side.

Hutson - Guhle
Struble - Andersson
Xhekaj - Savard
Barron

I'd be surprised if it happens anyway.
I don't think Matheson has that much value and Andersson will cost too much.
And, again, Matheson has a NTC, he's not gonna want to go to Calgary.

 

[WeThreeKings]

What do we need then?
Tougher 3rd liner

A legitimate top line forward, improved bottom 6ers and a 1RD, and a legit backup

 

[Treb]

Even with Andersson in the line-up, Guhle won't be moved to the left side. Savard is currently averaging 16 minutes TOI (Barron/Xhekaj get even lower minutes). Guhle will stay on the right side until the Habs have two RHD who can play 18-20+ minutes each. Matheson/Hutson provide those minutes on the left side already. Guhle provide it on the right side right now.

So what you're saying is that in that scenario you would go:
Hutson - Guhle
Xhekaj - Andersson
Struble - Savard

????

 

[BaseballCoach]

He's a natural LD and we have an imbalance of LD/RD.

Trading Matheson for a RD puts Guhle back on his more comfortable side and lessen the LD logjam.

I don't see how Matheson fit in this team past the short term.

We have too many RH centres in our core and near-core. Suzuki, Dach, Hage, Kapanen, Beck. I don't see how Suzuki fits long-term and he's the oldest of the guys. By the time many of the fans here are ready to compete, Suzuki will be needing a new contract that will take him to 38 years old.

Trade him now for a LH center. Celebrini or Jack Hughes will do, and if we have to add, then add.

 

[Treb]

We have too many RH centres in our core and near-core. Suzuki, Dach, Hage, Kapanen, Beck. I don't see how Suzuki fits long-term and he's the o,ldest of the guys. By the time many of the fans here are ready to compete, Suzuki will be needing a new contract that will take him to 39 years old.

Trade him now for a LH center. Celebrini or Jack Hughes will do, and if we have to add, then add.

Good job proving you're not discussing in good faith.

 

[Team_Spirit]

Hutson-Andersson would be sick ngl.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1845636414941089808

 

[BaseballCoach]

Good job proving you're not discussing in good faith.

Not agreeing with my opinion about Matheson does not mean I am arguing in "bad faith".

@Treb says he "can't see" Matheson fitting long-term. But many of the arguments to support that opinion would apply to Suzuki too, including the plus/minus stat some like to trot out for Matheson.

Of course, trading Suzuki-plus for Jack Hughes is not likely. I don't think trading Matheson-plus for some true 1st pairing RHD is likely either.

 

[morhilane]

So what you're saying is that in that scenario you would go:
Hutson - Guhle
Xhekaj - Andersson
Struble - Savard

????

Swap Xhekaj/Struble. Xhekaj is bad defensively, Struble is better in his own zone.

And Guhle or Andersson on the top line, not sure which one would be better with Hutson.

 

[ReHabs]

Of course, trading Suzuki-plus for Jack Hughes is not likely. I don't think trading Matheson-plus for some true 1st pairing RHD is likely either.

Have to agree here.

It's unlikely there is a sufficiently sexy RH dman prospect who is close enough to NHL-ready to be worth trading against Matheson.

I don't love Matheson but he could be a solid contributor to any winning team. That is to say, he's not the problem. We need to acquire or develop better d-men around him. Guhle is one of them. Maybe Hutson too. Need another RD.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Have to agree here.

It's unlikely there is a sufficiently sexy RH dman prospect who is close enough to NHL-ready to be worth trading against Matheson.

I don't love Matheson but he could be a solid contributor to any winning team. That is to say, he's not the problem. We need to acquire or develop better d-men around him. Guhle is one of them. Maybe Hutson too. Need another RD.

Yes, building means adding talent, not sideways moves, nor shedding salary for the sake of it.

 

[Treb]

Not agreeing with my opinion about Matheson does not mean I am arguing in "bad faith".

@Treb says he "can't see" Matheson fitting long-term. But many of the arguments to support that opinion would apply to Suzuki too, including the plus/minus stat some like to trot out for Matheson.

Of course, trading Suzuki-plus for Jack Hughes is not likely. I don't think trading Matheson-plus for some true 1st pairing RHD is likely either.

This is not about not agreeing, it's about you using completely outlandish comparables that make no sense. Not sure where you got the trading him for some true 1st pair RD either. Also, I never said Matheson was bad.

Matheson is not a fit because his skillset is redundant on the team and he will be overshadowed by other players. If he's not your main PMD/PP guy, his value to the team diminish greatly and this will only get worse if/when Mailloux, Reinbacher and Engstrom make the team. Same reason I don't think Barron will be a long term fixture either. For the next few years, the goal should be to find the best complements possible to Guhle and Hutson either via prospects/draft, trade or FA.

Matheson is not that but could help us get that, which is the point I've been making.

Yes, building means adding talent, not sideways moves, nor shedding salary for the sake of it.

Having better complementarity is not a sideway move.

Adding talent to add talent gives you the Leafs.

Getting players that complement each other gives you Tampa.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Matheson is not a fit because his skillset is redundant on the team

This is where we disagree. We had Robinson, and Savard, and Lapointe, and their skill sets definitely overlapped. Too many PMD!!

You can't have enough top-4 guys. Matheson would be a candidate for trade once we have Guhle, Hutson, Reinbacher and Mailloux or Engstrom all at top 4 calibre.

We're not there yet. Without Matheson, we have one, maybe two top-4 defencemen, not only today, but also next year. That's not enough, especially given that we don't have a generational forward.

We can re-evaluate at the 2026 Trade Deadline if Matheson won't extend at 2/3D value.