HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #90: 2024-2025 season part III

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

What will Hugo do?

View attachment 981680

Shave his head and call himself 'Kingpin'?

 

[salbutera]

Canes will end up in Quebec one day. There just won't be any good players left by then.

With the youth hockey interest level skyrocketing in the US - Oregon or Alabama will get an NHL team before Quebec

 

[le_sean]

Did it ever occur to you that you may have just outed them to Caps management? Maybe instead of Columbus or Rochester, they came to Montreal for the......night life.

I do find it odd that they wear Capitals branded clothing making it so obvious. They are basically asking to get noticed

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

With the youth hockey interest level skyrocketing in the US - Oregon or Alabama will get an NHL team before Quebec

The Oklahoma Tornados

 

[HuGort]

If we sign Bennett to a 8+ million dollar contract and he maintains his scoring average of 45 points a season, Hughes, Gorton and Bennett will be eaten alive by media and fans alike.

Newhook and Dach are on pace for 30 and 35 points and all of you want to catapult them to the moon!! Bennet having 40 point seasons at 8+ million per... yeah good luck with that!

Bennett is super aggressive on the forecheck. Cap is going way up, Habs have many ELC players coming in next few years. be a good contract averaged out.

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

...with Casey up in Jersey and playing well, they might revisit moving Nemec...

 

[Bacchus1]

Juuso Valimaki is on waivers. Could help to replace Guhle cheaply. And, with the Finnish connection in MTL, might find his groove.

On the other hand, KH looks happy to roll with what he’s got.

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

Juuso Valimaki is on waivers. Could help to replace Guhle cheaply. And, with the Finnish connection in MTL, might find his groove.

On the other hand, KH looks happy to roll with what he’s got.

...just give Struble a shot, kid deserves it...

 

[Bacchus1]

...just give Struble a shot, kid deserves it...

Vilimaki has more offensive potential than Struble. I like Struble for his grit and his calmness in clearing, but he isn’t really about to lead a power play or make good offensive dzone exits. Vilimaki has that potential and is still young for a D. Cost very little and could swap out with Struble in games where less oomph is needed.

He is a first rounder that hasn’t lived up to his potential, but he is still young at 26.

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

Vilimaki has more offensive potential than Struble. I like Struble for his grit and his calmness in clearing, but he isn’t really about to lead a power play or make good offensive dzone exits. Vilimaki has that potential and is still young for a D. Cost very little and could swap out with Struble in games where less oomph is needed.

He is a first rounder that hasn’t lived up to his potential, but he is still young at 26.

...we have LD puckmovers, many of them...why add another??...seems like a waste to me...

 

[Deus ex machina]

Vilimaki has more offensive potential than Struble. I like Struble for his grit and his calmness in clearing, but he isn’t really about to lead a power play or make good offensive dzone exits. Vilimaki has that potential and is still young for a D. Cost very little and could swap out with Struble in games where less oomph is needed.

He is a first rounder that hasn’t lived up to his potential, but he is still young at 26.

Struble is a good passer. I also see him as the one replacing Guhle.
I'm not sure why you would want someone for the PP.

Habs need a 7th D though and Valimaki could be of use.
Problem is, he has another year on his contract at 2M. So unless Habs see some untapped potential in him, they will probably pass.

 

[Kimota]

I find it strange that Carolina would trade for Rantanen without having an extension in place. As this plays out, I wonder if Rantanen has no intention of signing an extension with any team and plans to test FA. Makes me think Colorado knew that and that’s why they dealt him.

I mean they have showed stupidity before.

 

[Scriptor]

Good points but maybe the Canes aren’t giving good bonus money which makes a significant impact in terms of dollars and cents

The way the deal is structured, especially when it comes to those total amounts in the hundred Million range, will be different between richer teams and poorer teams.

Front weighted contracts both are an incentive for players in terms of future dollars and a higher cost at once for a more cash-strapped team. Some teams won't want or be able, even, to extend such a contract, butbthey might be more able to do so over time with money better spread out.

Bonus-laden contracts also pay the payer sooner on a yearly basis (before the season games even start) and, in Canadian jurisdictions, at least, offer fiscal advantages. They however, are lockout proof (player gets paid even if a lockout is declared) and some teams might not be able to absorb such losses as easily as others.

Montreal might be able to offer a more attractive contract structure than the Hurricanes, for example. That said, I don't think that Raantanen will want to come to Montreal, or that Hughes will offer such a contract to Raantanen.

 

[Scriptor]

That seems irrationally high risk.

Agreed.

8 X 12.5M in guaranteed money (100M), or two years with the risk of injury THAT WOULD STOP YOUR PAYDAY total at 28M, or 32M even (for those two years), just so you can get 20M more, over the long run?

Greed can be a big risk, but I can see how someone might be unsure to retire comfortably after earning 100M on their final contract.

 

[Scriptor]

I think Habs have to trade Dvo, Evans, Armia and Savard at a minimum.

They need spots for youngsters moving up and hopefully add some solid veteran experience. Next year try to move Anderson, Gally and Matheson and repeat.

This team needs to get better players, more veterans and more depth then current so the can insulate new kids coming and support/supplement existing core. At a minimum they’re bringing in Demidov, Beck, Kapanen, Mailloux and Reinbacher next year at one point or another. Not to mention players who may be pushing for spots like Tuch, Roy, Xhekaj as well. Also, with all the cash and prospect/picks, Habs will undoubtedly try to land a big fish or two via trade and/or UFA markets.

Too many players they need to rotate out to make space for better players.

There is a huge misconception that Montreal does not have good depth players.

In fact, while Gallagher, Anderson and Armia may be paid too much for the role that they play with the team at the moment (depth bottom-6 roles), they actually are quality depth players in those spots.

I would prefer a bigger body than Gallagher in his role, but both Anderson and Armia are fine at somewhere around 3M for Anderson and 2.5M-2.75M for Armia.

With better top-6 players, including the youngsters there with more experience, Anderson and Armia -- even Gallagher -- would be useful depth players.

It's more a question of Cap concerns than the quality of the players, really.

Speed, forechecking, PK skills and the odd goal on the rush from Anderson and puck-possession from Armia in the O-zone and good defensive awareness are both skill sets from these players that come in handy when wearing down opponents and supplying complementary scoring in the playoffs.

Let's be objective about the players on hand, including the value of Evans' strong two-way skills. He may not score regularly at the clip that he did during his pre-Christmas run, but hey is dynamic and drives the play forward even when he doesn't score. That, at least, gives you strong forechecking and time spent in the O-zone rather than your own zone.

Always harder for the opponent to score on you from behind their own blue line.

 

[Scriptor]

With the youth hockey interest level skyrocketing in the US - Oregon or Alabama will get an NHL team before Quebec

For Chrissakes, ALABAMA!?

 

[Beendair Donedat]

For Chrissakes, ALABAMA!?

You wouldn’t pay top dollar to watch the Mobile Mud Dogs?

 

[ReHabs]

There is a huge misconception that Montreal does not have good depth players.

In fact, while Gallagher, Anderson and Armia may be paid too much for the role that they play with the team at the moment (depth bottom-6 roles), they actually are quality depth players in those spots.

Correct. We have good depth players but they're far too good for their role and I find it is problematic in some ways itself.

We're a rebuilding team with a too-heavy bottom6 that helps steal too many points. They won't be a factor in the future team's success either so their success is largely "empty calories" if you'd forgive the metaphor.

Sure, they keep the team ticking and forward-facing but the under-performing young players have not taken a step forward so what does it mean for us to rank better than last year?

 

[Scriptor]

You wouldn’t pay top dollar to watch the Mobile Mud Dogs?

Female mud wrestling, maybe?

 

[Scriptor]

Correct. We have good depth players but they're far too good for their role and I find it is problematic in some ways itself.

We're a rebuilding team with a too-heavy bottom6 that helps steal too many points. They won't be a factor in the future team's success either so their success is largely "empty calories" if you'd forgive the metaphor.

Sure, they keep the team ticking and forward-facing but the under-performing young players have not taken a step forward so what does it mean for us to rank better than last year?

If you look at it strictly in terms of standings, with tanking as the reference point for success or failure, sure, they are even a poison for the game plan, if you will.

But if you look at it as a means of insulating developing youngsters and allowing them to progress in a more structurally sound environment where winning happens more than once in a blue moon, confidence has a greater chance of being nurtured and solid examples of sacrifice and team work abound, then a few veterans (even if overpaid) that accept their reduced role aren't exactly a cancer, or a hindrance when it comes to developing future stars.

Too many kids floundering as they are propelled too early into the NHL, or just young top Dawgs running the show, with no role models, doesn't build a strong foundation, or a concrete winning culture.

Crosby had Lemieux, even.

The Oilers, despite repeated top picks at the draft over numerous seasons, had a hard time getting off the ground because there was no veteran support for the kids.

That formative period was just an example of extremely bad management. You need not look further to see the ill effects of just going with youth during a rebuild.

I'm not saying to keep these veterans for more than the short term (this year when to comes to both Dvorak and Armia, as well as Evans, perhaps, depending on the return for the player in a trade and his contract demands). In both Anderson and Gallagher's case, I doubt that we are in the driver's seat when it comes to determining whether they will be here or not until the end of their current contracts?

I have a concern about offloading both Evans and Dvorak without plan in place to at least support then C-line with more experience than say Beck and F. Xhekaj, for example, but I can see Newhook, as bad as he is, playing a role down the middle in the bottom-6 along with Beck, starting next year.

That doesn't solve our need for a bonafide 2C, though and I don't see more of a role down the middle for Dach on a 3rd line. IMO, he becomes a winger or the Habs move on from him.

A few options to go with in the next two years, but management's hands are tied when to comes to Anderson and Gallagher, anyways. I really don't mind keeping Anderson for the next two years, personally, but, ideally, one of Anderson or Gallagher would be gone top open up a spot for a kid on the fourth line.

 

[salbutera]

If you look at it strictly in terms of standings, with tanking as the reference point for success or failure, sure, they are even a poison for the game plan, if you will.

But if you look at it as a means of insulating developing youngsters and allowing them to progress in a more structurally sound environment where winning happens more than once in a blue moon, confidence has a greater chance of being nurtured and solid examples of sacrifice and team work abound, then a few veterans (even if overpaid) that accept their reduced role aren't exactly a cancer, or a hindrance when it comes to developing future stars.

Too many kids floundering as they are propelled too early into the NHL, or just young top Dawgs running the show, with no role models, doesn't build a strong foundation, or a concrete winning culture.

Crosby had Lemieux, even.

The Oilers, despite repeated top picks at the draft over numerous seasons, had a hard time getting off the ground because there was no veteran support for the kids.

That formative period was just an example of extremely bad management. You need not look further to see the ill effects of just going with youth during a rebuild.

I'm not saying to keep these veterans for more than the short term (this year when to comes to both Dvorak and Armia, as well as Evans, perhaps, depending on the return for the player in a trade and his contract demands). In both Anderson and Gallagher's case, I doubt that we are in the driver's seat when it comes to determining whether they will be here or not until the end of their current contracts?

I have a concern about offloading both Evans and Dvorak without plan in place to at least support then C-line with more experience than say Beck and F. Xhekaj, for example, but I can see Newhook, as bad as he is, playing a role down the middle in the bottom-6 along with Beck, starting next year.

That doesn't solve our need for a bonafide 2C, though and I don't see more of a role down the middle for Dach on a 3rd line. IMO, he becomes a winger or the Habs move on from him.

A few options to go with in the next two years, but management's hands are tied when to comes to Anderson and Gallagher, anyways. I really don't mind keeping Anderson for the next two years, personally, but, ideally, one of Anderson or Gallagher would be gone top open up a spot for a kid on the fourth line.

Netting a 2nd / 3rd rounder for Evans / Armia and a 4th rounder for Savard in a weak draft class that lacks depth does absolutely nothing towards developmental growth for 53% this roster that’s part of the long term solution and needs to play & experience high intensity meaningful March / April games

 

[ReHabs]

needs to play & experience high intensity meaningful March / April games

Those games won't be meaningful or high intensity if the Habs are squarely out of the playoff mix. We know this from the previous three seasons -- in fact, we'll see the Habs win games against less-than-impressive opposition because of how meaningless the games will be by this point.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

The way the deal is structured, especially when it comes to those total amounts in the hundred Million range, will be different between richer teams and poorer teams.

Front weighted contracts both are an incentive for players in terms of future dollars and a higher cost at once for a more cash-strapped team. Some teams won't want or be able, even, to extend such a contract, butbthey might be more able to do so over time with money better spread out.

Bonus-laden contracts also pay the payer sooner on a yearly basis (before the season games even start) and, in Canadian jurisdictions, at least, offer fiscal advantages. They however, are lockout proof (player gets paid even if a lockout is declared) and some teams might not be able to absorb such losses as easily as others.

Montreal might be able to offer a more attractive contract structure than the Hurricanes, for example. That said, I don't think that Raantanen will want to come to Montreal, or that Hughes will offer such a contract to Raantanen.

All owners are rich. Some are just cheap bastards. So what if they are in a smaller market and generate less income. The franchise value keeps going up more than any income they make.

 

[salbutera]

All owners are rich. Some are just cheap bastards. So what if they are in a smaller market and generate less income. The franchise value keeps going up more than any income they make.

Franchise “valuation” only has meaning when someone is actually willing to fork over projected $$

Valuation inherently means little to nothing, similar to forecasting weather.

TBay had much higher valuation than what Vinik actually paid to buy them in a sweetheart deal, that included free waterfront land to make the deal look good, same Pegula in Buf etc..

 

[vokiel]

Trade thread is bleek. No players to sell for a return worth talking about, no interesting player on the market worth trading for.

What will Hugo do?

View attachment 981680

Hide behind a plant?