Toggle sidebar

HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #89: 2024-2025 season part II

HabsMD97 said:
Newhook wasn't a big mistake, every front office has those types of mistakes. We don't know whether anyone was actually going to pay a significant asset for Anderson + having him in the lineup or not makes 0 difference in the grand scheme of things for a rebuilding team with money to spare. If habs were tight against the cap and had to someone with value away bc of it, than you'd have a point.

Players with Pettersson's statistical profile are all hall of famers, I fully expect him to bounce back.

Lol yes i'm sure that's gonna stop us from resigning them, what a massive leap in logic
Click to expand...
Well Colorado dumped Rantanen because they didn't think they could afford him and re sign Makar.
 
Boss Man Hughes said:
Well Colorado dumped Rantanen because they didn't think they could afford him and re sign Makar.
Click to expand...

...well, it's a little more nuanced than that; they didn't want to follow the Leaf model and have 3 players eating up that much of the Cap as they felt it could harm them in filling out the team in other areas...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkovsKnee, Rapala and tazsub3
BigDaddyLurch said:
...well, it's a little more nuanced than that; they didn't want to follow the Leaf model and have 3 players eating up that much of the Cap as they felt it could harm them in filling out the team in other areas...
Click to expand...
Exactly. With Mackinnon already making big money they didn't want to have 3 players making big money. And they have Landeskog making 7 mil for years unless he has to retire.
 
What would you say if we traded Evans for a late 1st and ended up keeping Dvorak as the stop gap at center? We also extend Armia

Dvorak and Beck are the bottom 2C's and someone like Newhook is with Beck or Kapanen as center insurance? We end up having two bottom lines that are both used equally? Say what you want to say about that Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher line but they have been very good together.

Slaf / Suzuki / Caufield
Laine / Dach / Demidov
Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher
Newhook / XXXX / Armia

Beck or Kapanen fight for the last center spot. Roy and others are there in case of injuries.
 
Habs Halifax said:
What would you say if we traded Evans for a late 1st and ended up keeping Dvorak as the stop gap at center? We also extend Armia

Dvorak and Beck are the bottom 2C's and someone like Newhook is with Beck or Kapanen as center insurance? We end up having two bottom lines that are both used equally? Say what you want to say about that Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher line but they have been very good together.

Slaf / Suzuki / Caufield
Laine / Dach / Demidov
Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher
Newhook / XXXX / Armia

Beck or Kapanen fight for the last center spot. Roy and others are there in case of injuries.
Click to expand...
Heineken is missing.
 
Habs Halifax said:
What would you say if we traded Evans for a late 1st and ended up keeping Dvorak as the stop gap at center? We also extend Armia

Dvorak and Beck are the bottom 2C's and someone like Newhook is with Beck or Kapanen as center insurance? We end up having two bottom lines that are both used equally? Say what you want to say about that Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher line but they have been very good together.

Slaf / Suzuki / Caufield
Laine / Dach / Demidov
Anderson / Dvorak / Gallagher
Newhook / XXXX / Armia

Beck or Kapanen fight for the last center spot. Roy and others are there in case of injuries.
Click to expand...
If Evans gets moved out, I don't bother keeping Dvorak for next season. Moving on further from the bad part of the Bergevin era (panic acquisition we overpaid for once the offer for KK wasn't matched) would be more beneficial, IMO, regardless of how honest Dvorak's play may have been this season (definitely nothing more than structural, at best)

There,s two years left on Newhook's contract at a 2.9M Cap hit per season. I'm admittedly not a fan of Newhook, but that term and that Cap hit are perfect for Newhook being used as a stop gap C on a 3rd line.

Besides, although he sucks in the F/O circle and defensively, Newhook is a better player, offensively, when he has more room on the ice as a C to exploit his speed.

Beck is suited to play a 4th line role at C because of his F/O skills, his speed and his hockey sense, even if that doesn't exploit his offensive upside as much as would playing the 3rd line C position.

Kapanen is better suited for 3C duties because of the clear offensive upside from his play in Europe this season, but, as a 6'2" C with some weight on his frame -- and the possibility to add some more -- to go along with his hockey sense and defensive awareness, he could convert himself for shutdown duties on a 4th line.

If Carbonneau, a once 60 and 70 goal scorer in Juniors could use his sense of anticipation to become a Selke level forward, another more offensive C could od as such with the right motivation.
 
Do we go all in or we fold this year ?

With the lost of Ghule espacially.

All in
Trade for a RHD vet

Matheson- Vet
Hutson-Carrier
Wifi-Savard
Struble

Or we sell and fold.

Evans and Savard, Anerdson traded by the deadline.
 
DAChampion said:
A reasonable outcome.

The Habs will not be able to replace both of Evans and Dvorak next year.
Click to expand...
Sure they can, if Newhook plays 3C and a rookie plays 4C. Defensively, in the F/O circle and physically, Newhook might not be as good as Dvorak, but he would be better offensively, for sure, as demonstrated last season when he played C and had flashes of a 50-point forward over a full season..
 
Lockin17 said:
Do we go all in or we fold this year ?

With the lost of Ghule espacially.

All in
Trade for a RHD vet

Matheson- Vet
Hutson-Carrier
Wifi-Savard
Struble

Or we sell and fold.

Evans and Savard, Anerdson traded by the deadline.
Click to expand...
You're not moving Anderson at the deadline.

With Guhle healthy, you still don't "go for it" and management seems to be in agreement with that thought process.

You sell...

I know I'm on the outside, but you if you're not getting the offers you want for Savard, you say Carrier is available at 50% retained for the right deal, or listen if people come calling for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: the
Gaylord Q Tinkledink said:
You're not moving Anderson at the deadline.

With Guhle healthy, you still don't "go for it" and management seems to be in agreement with that thought process.

You sell...

I know I'm on the outside, but you if you're not getting the offers you want for Savard, you say Carrier is available at 50% retained for the right deal, or listen if people come calling for him.
Click to expand...
Imo, we would be stupid to trade Carrier. An excellent skating, Right shot D that can move the puck and be physical.....yeah, let's get rid of him. He's done nothing but played well for us.
 
Last edited:
It would be very good if the team plays meaningful games , as the season goes on, even if we dont make the post season The team knows its a rebuild but at this point we dont need the loser mentality settling in. At the same time, we see what happens, like with Ottawa, if the GM is wrong about where the team is and goes for it. So if we are still within striking distance of a playoff spot that means not trading UFA players for 3rd or 4th round picks, we keep the players for the playoff push. Now if we arent signing Evans and we can get a late 1st for him, trade him. We dont go out and give up a 1st for a short term D fix because Guhle is out.

So we dont go for it , but we dont throw in the towel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benstheman
BigDaddyLurch said:
...well, it's a little more nuanced than that; they didn't want to follow the Leaf model and have 3 players eating up that much of the Cap as they felt it could harm them in filling out the team in other areas...
Click to expand...
That is exactly what winning the cup will do.
They know what it takes and having a balanced lineup is a huge challenge to maintain.
 
Benstheman said:
Gallagher is there as a cap dump for the next 2 years. I would have them retaining 2 M$ per but not sure it's reasonable for 5 years.
Click to expand...

Its more reasonable than acquiring Seth Jones long term in his 30s. It wouldn't be disastrous with a rising cap, but Jones has one of the worst contracts in the NHL and he's likely to get worse over the next 5 seasons. Gallagher as a cap dump doesn't bridge the gap, especially since it means Montreal has more cap space when its unlikely they will be a contender and less when they could be a contender. Montreal would be better off keeping Gallagher for retention that works for them.

And while he's big and a right shot, he's not much better defensively than a guy like Matheson and doesn't have his wheels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom