HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread 92 Waiting on the DRAFT Edition

[FF de Mars]

Anybody else would rather not make a trade? I'd rather wait for the piece to emerge from the team (2C). Feels like getting fleeced; at this point, I'd rather try Slaf.

 

[DiglettDangles]

We're not trading Guhle. They just gave him a 6 year extension and he'll be wearing a letter when Matheson's gone.

After yesterday's game:

 

[Deebs]

Anybody else would rather not make a trade? I'd rather wait for the piece to emerge from the team (2C). Feels like getting fleeced; at this point, I'd rather try Slaf.

The only player we have in the system that could possibly become a #2C is Hage and he's at least 3 years away from possibly being an effective/productive NHL'er imo.

Slaf is not that guy imo.

 

[Scriptor]

Guhle as a suggestion to get a young 2C back is that, to get a young 2C, you need to provide equal value at a different position for a similar time frame.

While Guhle being traded for a young 2C is not a requirement, taking him off the table in such a trade just limits te options to fill the 2C spot.

Maybe we can still get something back at RD by packaging a mix of Matheson, Mailloux, our first round and second round picks, some prospect not in our current core and not projected as a blue chip prospect for our future core..

Not trading Guhle is one thing, but would you be prepared to trade our two first round picks, Hage and Mailloux (two more first round picks), let's say, for a real top-6 C for the next 5 to 7 years playing at a high level?

Four years may seem far away, but that would be the start of a 2-year Cup window at the tail end of Suzuki's current contract.

While some will make the leap of logic that we should then wait three years before acquiring that 2C, to get more time with the acquisition as a solution, or that we should wait that length of time for Hage to develop instead, the reality that a 2C -- starting next season -- is likely what would help develop our younger players at the NHL level and provide the required progress to have a roster ready to challenge for a Cup in four years.

Finally adding a 2C in year four from now would not be as valuable to challenging for a Cup at that point. IMO, all the prospects would be further away from their projected ceiling and the C would only start gelling with the rest of the roster. It would take a few years, at least, to truly challenge for a Cup and we would have wasted all of Suzuki's current contract.

 

[FF de Mars]

The only player we have in the system that could possibly become a #2C is Hage and he's at least 3 years away from possibly being an effective/productive NHL'er imo.

Slaf is not that guy imo.

Slaf is being trained as a net presence winger, I get it. But why do we need another Suzuki (2C) by next year anyway? The cost will be astronomical. Wait for a UFA or maybe Hage or our 1st rounders or something.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Slaf is being trained as a net presence winger, I get it. But why do we need another Suzuki (2C) by next year anyway? The cost will be astronomical. Wait for a UFA or maybe Hage or our 1st rounders or something.

Suzuki is most certainly not a 2C lol

 

[Deebs]

Slaf is being trained as a net presence winger, I get it. But why do we need another Suzuki (2C) by next year anyway? The cost will be astronomical. Wait for a UFA or maybe Hage or our 1st rounders or something.

I don't see Suzy as a #2C, but to each their own. I don't want to wait 3-4 years to be a real contender but again, to each their own. We have the currency to make a trade and imo, we should make that happen this summer.

 

[Scriptor]

It's clear that the line up requires upgrade all around. It is more a question of priorities and opportunities. It's quite clear that another good offensive line is needed. But I think that beyond the search for a 2c, we need another LW. I'm of the view that Laine isn't a good fit for this team. If there is a chance to trade him @50% retain for something useful, I would be all ok with that. Also... can we get a 2c that can win faceoffs? Man... how many did we lose last night to a bottom feeder team??

People are saying, you can pull Savard out to get Guhle in the lineup because he's in the 1PK. Well... to me that is a problem. If you have to rely on Savard in ANY role, this mean your D group is weak. Savard is a good soldier, but he's getting old. Time to increase the level of skill on the backend.

CC - Suzuki - Slaf
XX - XX - Demidov
Dach - Newhook - Heineman
Gally - Evans - Anderson
(extra/AHL: Roy/Beck/Kapanen)

Guhle - Carrier
Hutson - XX
Xhekaj - Reinbacher
Struble

At some point, you move off Gally and newhook. You try to bring more physicality in these two spots.

Ideally, you move off Dach right fukcin' now as well. He's not any more of an answer on the Third line as he is in the top-6. I'd rather Laine on a third line than Dach.

Heineman - Newhook - Laine

We definitely need a 2C, but what would you do for the LW? Sign a UFA like Ehlers, along with a UFA 2C?

Does Montreal, even with the rising Cap ceiling, have enough Cap space (don't forget the rookie bonuses pushed to next season) to sign to such UFAs?

Dvorak (4.45M) + Armia (3.4M) = 7.85M going out
Cap going up from 88.7M to 93.2M = 4.5M
Ability to play a 20-man roster could save between 2.5M to 3M.

14.8M to 15.3M to play with. Beyond that, we'd need to move one of Gallagher or Anderson and there still needs to be calculated the rise in Hutson's salary the season before both Gallagher and Anderson's contracts come off the books.

Forget the Cap for a second and see how this might look:

Caufield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky
Ehlers - Bennett - Demidov
Heineman - Newhook - Laine
Anderson - Evans - Gallagher

Even if laine doesn't score thirty goals nat even strength, every opponent will have to pay attention to his presence on the ice and, in a third line role, he will still be able to be a PP presence on a much improved second wave, given the added talent in the lineu up front.

Suzuki can also play both PP waves as he is currently doing and Bennet can be used as a net from presence on one of the PP waves.

 

[Scriptor]

The only player we have in the system that could possibly become a #2C is Hage and he's at least 3 years away from possibly being an effective/productive NHL'er imo.

Slaf is not that guy imo.

When we say, at least, it is, at least, before he is an impact player. I don't expect that to happen -- especially at C -- within three years. I'd be looking at a 5-year mark instead and, at that point, Hage would only still be 23 years old. It would have been a helluva good development process with the kid.

 

[FF de Mars]

When we say, at least, it is, at least, before he is an impact player. I don't expect that to happen -- especially at C -- within three years. I'd be looking at a 5-year mark instead and, at that point, Hage would only still be 23 years old. It would have been a helluva good development process with the kid.

What about our own pick if we miss the playoffs or Calgary's? These are high picks. Hage might take another year and he might be better suited at the wing, who knows; but, the cream rises way faster than you think, you think it will take 5 years? And that center might already be in the system or will get drafted this spring. I'd rather be patient.

 

[Sorinth]

Anybody else would rather not make a trade? I'd rather wait for the piece to emerge from the team (2C). Feels like getting fleeced; at this point, I'd rather try Slaf.

I'm definitely of the opinion that any trade for a 2C has to be the right trade and not just a get anybody with a pulse type of trade. And I also don't really want to see a project style acquisition, but who is and who isn't a project is no doubt subjective so I guess that depends a bit on the name.

 

[sampollock]

We're not trading Guhle. They just gave him a 6 year extension and he'll be wearing a letter when Matheson's gone.

even though many here say "if guys are inj prone" they should go.

I say no way he goes

 

[Egresch]

I think the point is more that we're still at a highly unpredictable point of our rebuild with many unknowns and growing pains left. Trading away an unprotected first at this point carries a higher risk than you seem to consider, especially for a marginal asset in return.

Either way, the probability Hughes does that type of move is even lower that of us getting McKenna.

I do not think we should be so scared. Decision would also in the right timing. Draft is 27.6., free agency 1.7. After that, we could know if we have 2C or RHD. If we add physicality with Cuylle offersheet, we should not talk about lottery pick at all.
If you want to be successful, you need to take calculated risk.

 

[Kosseca]

Ideally, you move off Dach right fukcin' now as well. He's not any more of an answer on the Third line as he is in the top-6. I'd rather Laine on a third line than Dach.

Heineman - Newhook - Laine

We definitely need a 2C, but what would you do for the LW? Sign a UFA like Ehlers, along with a UFA 2C?

Does Montreal, even with the rising Cap ceiling, have enough Cap space (don't forget the rookie bonuses pushed to next season) to sign to such UFAs?

Dvorak (4.45M) + Armia (3.4M) = 7.85M going out
Cap going up from 88.7M to 93.2M = 4.5M
Ability to play a 20-man roster could save between 2.5M to 3M.

14.8M to 15.3M to play with. Beyond that, we'd need to move one of Gallagher or Anderson and there still needs to be calculated the rise in Hutson's salary the season before both Gallagher and Anderson's contracts come off the books.

Forget the Cap for a second and see how this might look:

Caufield - Suzuki - Slafkovsky
Ehlers - Bennett - Demidov
Heineman - Newhook - Laine
Anderson - Evans - Gallagher

Even if laine doesn't score thirty goals nat even strength, every opponent will have to pay attention to his presence on the ice and, in a third line role, he will still be able to be a PP presence on a much improved second wave, given the added talent in the lineu up front.

Suzuki can also play both PP waves as he is currently doing and Bennet can be used as a net from presence on one of the PP waves.

On Dach, I still hold some hope he can be useful. he's a big body that can skate and show that he can have an edge to his game. Now, I'm not ready to give him a key role until he can show that he can stay healthy and show a constant effort game after game. I can't watch Laine play 5v5 anymore. yes he's good on the PP, but he gives me shades of Hoffman. He's slow, can't use line mates and always the same entry at the blue line (and lose the puck). If I have to choose between him and Dach on the 3rd line, I prefer Dach. That said, the odds are pretty good that next season both are with the team, and Laine is the LW on the 2nd line.

Now in a scenario where Laine is gone and we need a 2LW: I like the idea if Ehlers, but I don't think it's a realistic signature as he's ask for too much and more likely will be going to a team competing for a cup. Same with Bennet. I also not too certain that Bennet is the C we need. All depend on the salary but I think that he's a future Gally where the contract wont look too good because the body is breaking down.

 

[Treb]

Anybody else would rather not make a trade? I'd rather wait for the piece to emerge from the team (2C). Feels like getting fleeced; at this point, I'd rather try Slaf.

Hughes said he's not waiting.

 

[Treb]

What about our own pick if we miss the playoffs or Calgary's? These are high picks. Hage might take another year and he might be better suited at the wing, who knows; but, the cream rises way faster than you think, you think it will take 5 years? And that center might already be in the system or will get drafted this spring. I'd rather be patient.

You're wasting time on the current window just to be greedy with assets.

Habs need to build now.

 

[themilosh]

You're wasting time on the current window just to be greedy with assets.

Habs need to build now.

It will be larceny if Hugo doesnt provide a $12M C this summer (whether 1C or 2C, it matters not) as we have need to strike while Demidov is being paid ELC.

 

[Habs7631]

Saw this thread started on the Sabres board. Their team YouTube channel posted a “behind the scenes” of the trade deadline with their management team. Sabres Imbedded, Trade Deadline 2025



Anyways, interesting video that shows GM Kevyn Adams and his team talking about the Cozens trade.

Adams kept repeating that they want to do a hockey trade. They don’t want to get younger, hockey trade is all they were looking for when it comes to Cozens. Told his team we have multiple offers on the table for Cozens.

He’s on the phone telling someone “it’s hard for me to trade a center and not get a center back”

They’re also talking about getting someone who plays intelligent and has a two way game.

Gonna copy one of the comment on the thread

“Adams kept emphasizing "from a hockey perspective", and "hockey trade" as justification. To me it sounded like there were higher value offers available, but they went with the one that got them the most experienced player.“

Interesting bit, Adams asks Ruff if he’s okay with Norris as their #1 or #2C. Interesting because you’d assume Tage is their #1C? Sabre fan in the thread talks about maybe Tage is a winger moving forward.

Other interesting piece is coach Ruff insisting that they need to change the room. Need a new culture.

Funny part is the Sabres doctor giving the green light regarding Norris injury history just for Norris to get injured again a few games as a Sabres.

Basically for Cozens, sounds like maybe we were one of the many offers on the table, but it doesn’t matter because they wanted nothing to do with futures/getting younger. They were only looking for a proven, two way center back. The only player on our team who fits that bill is Nick, and that obviously wasn’t gonna happen.

The negotiations talks with Ottawa for Cozens was going on for weeks. Looks like Cozens was on the market for a while.

Some other stuff regarding other smalls trade that doesn’t really apply to us.

 

[Wats]

Bergevin biggest downfall was letting the window close without knowing there was a window to add to the core. What he hoarded ended up being nothing from poor draftingand development. Let's see what Hughes does now that a lottery pick is no longer realistic and he has some built up expendable assets.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Why would we trade our two top pair Ds? Create a hole to fix a lesser one?

Don't. Have Hutson, Matheson and Guhle on three different pairs.

Build up the team's core, don't just make lateral moves.

Reinbacher will replace Savard and Guhle can replace one of Xhekaj or Struble.

Suddenly we have three top-4 pairings.

 

[Takeru]

I do not think we should be so scared. Decision would also in the right timing. Draft is 27.6., free agency 1.7. After that, we could know if we have 2C or RHD. If we add physicality with Cuylle offersheet, we should not talk about lottery pick at all.
If you want to be successful, you need to take calculated risk.

It's not about being scared, it's about taking calculated risk as you've pointed out. Calculated as in maximizing the return on asset spent.

An unprotected 1st from a team in our situation (likely in the mix but far from a shoo in playoffs team) holds more value than a physical middle 6 LW. I'm not opposed to spending it, just not for that type of return.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Pettersson can’t seem to deal with the “pressure” of playing in Vancouver. He’d be near suicidal in Montreal.

I think playing on a team with Suzuki, Caufield, Slaf, Laine, Demidov etc. will dramatically shield EP and give him tremendous cover if he’s not going well. Having the extra depth takes much of the pressure off as it’s shared by more players rather then just “the guy” on the team.

I think he’d excel in Montreal playing with this core and this coach in front of these fans.

 

[The Great Weal]

I think playing on a team with Suzuki, Caufield, Slaf, Laine, Demidov etc. will dramatically shield EP and give him tremendous cover if he’s not going well. Having the extra depth takes much of the pressure off as it’s shared by more players rather then just “the guy” on the team.

I think he’d excel in Montreal playing with this core and this coach in front of these fans.

The guy had 10 points in 8 games before he got injured, too. I'm not buying that he can't handle adversity. He had a 100-point season playing next to Kuzmenko and Beauvillier and is sound defensively. He wasn't good last playoffs and was injured, big deal, it happens. The question remains on the severity of his tendonitis, and if he's willing to deal with the media here after saying he doesn't like dealing with them (I believe Laine said the same thing however but it's different when you're not the top guy like how you said). I still don't think Canucks are going to trade him, especially for picks and prospects.

 

[JoelWarlord]

Guhle as a suggestion to get a young 2C back is that, to get a young 2C, you need to provide equal value at a different position for a similar time frame.

While Guhle being traded for a young 2C is not a requirement, taking him off the table in such a trade just limits te options to fill the 2C spot.

Historically you just don't see these kinds of trades all that often. Jones for Johansen was an outlier, usually when a team is trading a good young piece the package ends up being a 1st, a veteranish player, and some prospects depending on the player's quality.

Of course there are centers out there I would trade Guhle for, but I just can't see there being a realistic fit. 1 for 1 deals of that type are extremely rare, nobody is giving us a Robert Thomas type for him where it would be a no-brainer, and we're not trading Guhle for a 29 year old either. The organization are going to (IMO correctly) value him too highly for it to make sense.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Saw this thread started on the Sabres board. Their team YouTube channel posted a “behind the scenes” of the trade deadline with their management team. Sabres Imbedded, Trade Deadline 2025



Anyways, interesting video that shows GM Kevyn Adams and his team talking about the Cozens trade.

Adams kept repeating that they want to do a hockey trade. They don’t want to get younger, hockey trade is all they were looking for when it comes to Cozens. Told his team we have multiple offers on the table for Cozens.

He’s on the phone telling someone “it’s hard for me to trade a center and not get a center back”

They’re also talking about getting someone who plays intelligent and has a two way game.

Gonna copy one of the comment on the thread

“Adams kept emphasizing "from a hockey perspective", and "hockey trade" as justification. To me it sounded like there were higher value offers available, but they went with the one that got them the most experienced player.“

Interesting bit, Adams asks Ruff if he’s okay with Norris as their #1 or #2C. Interesting because you’d assume Tage is their #1C? Sabre fan in the thread talks about maybe Tage is a winger moving forward.

Other interesting piece is coach Ruff insisting that they need to change the room. Need a new culture.

Funny part is the Sabres doctor giving the green light regarding Norris injury history just for Norris to get injured again a few games as a Sabres.

Basically for Cozens, sounds like maybe we were one of the many offers on the table, but it doesn’t matter because they wanted nothing to do with futures/getting younger. They were only looking for a proven, two way center back. The only player on our team who fits that bill is Nick, and that obviously wasn’t gonna happen.

The negotiations talks with Ottawa for Cozens was going on for weeks. Looks like Cozens was on the market for a while.

Some other stuff regarding other smalls trade that doesn’t really apply to us.

It's already been reported that Montreal was in on Cozens, but didn't have a Norris to send back.