HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #91: 2025 Trade Deadline edition
- Thread starter MarkovsKnee
- Start date
It’s all about what you can get. As much i like Hage, he’s not a sure thing.
Kudos to you bro! So many posters here think we can get top players for mid first rounders, prospect like Mailloux. You gotta give to get.
Benstheman
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2014
- 7,917
- 4,366
Would you give him in a package for Horvat?
To be fair, Hage has not more value than a mid 1st.
sampollock
Registered User
Vachon23
Registered User
Horvat no someone under 28
Yes he has since we have a better idea of his development
Benstheman
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2014
- 7,917
- 4,366
Well if that’s the case, he is untouchable for me. There you have it.
Yeah I would definitely draft the best C available this next draft and try to sign a UFA for 2-3 years to make the bridge for Hage and the prospect drafted.
How so? Hage had good D+1 so yea he’s worth more than someone who you have no idea how’s he’s going to développ, if he get injured in his d+1, etc. Maybe if you have a deep draft like 2003 its equal.
Vachon23
Registered User
I would move a 1st or Mailloux before him but if he’s the dealbreaker and I really want that player, he’s not untouchable
Schooner Guy
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2006
- 14,321
- 14,752
You can't bank on Hage becoming a top 6 center in 2-3 years. The NHL game is so much different than the NCAA and the odds are simply against it happening.
Last edited:
Benstheman
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2014
- 7,917
- 4,366
I know man , like the ones that said no way we get laine without Mailloux and a first …
even the PlayStation would not give you anything for a Harris type player
)
Benstheman
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2014
- 7,917
- 4,366
ReimanSum1908
Registered User
There is functionally no combination of reasonable assets in Montreal that I would not move for Byfield. Hage, Mailloux and our first after the lottery to avoid a freak occurrence? Done. Add in Florida's first? Done.
The picks are magic beans and Hage will, based solely on the odds, never amount to anything.
Benstheman
Registered User
- Nov 20, 2014
- 7,917
- 4,366
Byfield never live up to the expectations to be honest. I wouldn’t give up 4 x 1sts for him. Absolutely no way in hell.
ChesterNimitz
governed by the principle of calculated risk
- Jul 4, 2002
- 6,260
- 13,800
Trading Hage would be a huge error. You trade that potential at your franchise’s peril.
BergevinBurner
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2019
- 2,134
- 5,074
If a deal's there to be made around Dach+ for Cozens I'd do it, even if the plus is Calgary's first and a relatively decent prospect.
Both guys would likely benefit from a change of scenery, and not having Dach until next season probably wouldn't bother Buffalo since it'd just help them improve this years draft pick.
As far as his offensive upside goes, we know he almost hit 70 points in his 21 year old season. Even though he hasn't had a season that hot since, I'm sure he's going to be much more than a 40-50 point guy in his prime.
I feel like if we pass on him we're going to look back on it as a massive missed opportunity when the guy's in his prime. This season he's on pace for his best faceoff % yet at just over 50% and he's on pace for his most hits in a season by a significant margin(55 hits in 2022-23, 108 hits in 2023-24 and on pace for 200 hits this season), so he's doubled his hit totals for 2 consecutive seasons now. I don't think it's unrealistic to think he'll be a 60-70 point, big bodied, physical center in his prime that's reliable in the faceoff dot as well.
Both guys would likely benefit from a change of scenery, and not having Dach until next season probably wouldn't bother Buffalo since it'd just help them improve this years draft pick.
As far as his offensive upside goes, we know he almost hit 70 points in his 21 year old season. Even though he hasn't had a season that hot since, I'm sure he's going to be much more than a 40-50 point guy in his prime.
I feel like if we pass on him we're going to look back on it as a massive missed opportunity when the guy's in his prime. This season he's on pace for his best faceoff % yet at just over 50% and he's on pace for his most hits in a season by a significant margin(55 hits in 2022-23, 108 hits in 2023-24 and on pace for 200 hits this season), so he's doubled his hit totals for 2 consecutive seasons now. I don't think it's unrealistic to think he'll be a 60-70 point, big bodied, physical center in his prime that's reliable in the faceoff dot as well.
Last edited:
Hage is probably the guy getting trade with a first rounder if by any chance a young top6 C is available.
I’m pretty sure Hughes is gonna sign someone like Nelson / Bennett for a transition before some of our prospect step up. I do also think they gonna draft two centers with our first rounder this year. Our prospect pool is pretty thin in potential top 6 players after Demidov and Hage IMO.
sampollock
Registered User
I always try to asked myself why the other team would accept an offer I want to make them. And I see no reason why a playoff team like LA and Flo would want Hage for their young proven talent.
Who sais that? Was pretty well know Laine was a cap dump, fine it worked for us. Guys like Robert Thomas/Quinton Byfield/etc are really not in the same position Laine was before we acquired him.I know man , like the ones that said no way we get laine without Mailloux and a first …
even the PlayStation would not give you anything for a Harris type player
Vachon23
Registered User
- Jun 24, 2012
- 86,674
- 161,963
Hage is going nowhere. Hughes can dangle some other piece if he needs a deal done for a 2C. Some of the stuff being bandied about in here deserves to be tariffed.
Hughes had to work hard to move up in the draft to secure getting Hage and we’ve had gaping holes at the centre position for decades and now we’re just going to fake-dangle him?
Gravity
Generational Poster
I understand but we have plenty of other valuable assets that are expendable outside of Hage.
- Jun 24, 2012
- 86,674
- 161,963
It’s likely an off season deal. One thing is certain, Hughes cannot afford to get this wrong.
