Proposal: Trade Proposal Thread: Part 77

[sampollock]

Man, would be good to know if price is done

 

[Mcdonaldz]

If Primeau becomes a top #1 starter how would that package look then?

But why on earth would the other team make this type of trade for a young goalie who has no shot at becoming a number one ?

 

[Kimota]

After listening to the Gally interview on 690 I'm convinced he wants out/wants to go to LA. Really pulled all the stops out for MB and little positives to say about KH

Because he complimented the GM that literally cried for him, that means he wants to go to LA? My God give it up guys, he's not leaving.

 

[calder candidate]

Even with retention, I cannot see Drouin or Byron getting much of a return at the TDL. So, if with retention the Habs get a 3rd round pick and without they get a 5th rounder, does it really matter? That's assuming that either of them are healthy at the TDL, of course (which certainly is not guaranteed).

Getting a 3rd vs. a 5th is a pretty big difference, You are still give the same player and getting double the return… unless you are able to use that cap space to acquire a better asset why would you not use it to maximize return on player that are not part of the futur / people are willing give away…

 

[JRichard]

Getting a 3rd vs. a 5th is a pretty big difference, You are still give the same player and getting double the return… unless you are able to use that cap space to acquire a better asset why would you not use it to maximize return on player that are not part of the futur / people are willing give away…

3rd vs 5th is not twice the return.
some draft classes (like 2015) have more nhlers coming out from the 5th vs the 3rd.
you get more chances of hitting with a 3rd but not by a whole lot.
Teams out of contention should eat cap to maximise value.

 

[Mcdonaldz]

Dubois was 3, Laine 2 that year

I was responding to a message that was mentionning dubois

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

The proposal you laid out

I meant the Calgary first not our 23’ first.

 

[jrom]

Moving up from 26 by spending extra draft picks makes a lot of sense, maybe a player to close a deal but I don’t get trades like 26th, Anderson, Romanov for a 2nd.

At this rate I’d prefer to spend less of those assets to get instead a young upcoming player like Mavrik Bourque, Jakob Pelletier, Jordan Spence vs an extra top pick in a deep draft not top-heavy.

 

[26Mats]

Moving up from 26 by spending extra draft picks makes a lot of sense, maybe a player to close a deal but I don’t get trades like 26th, Anderson, Romanov for a 2nd.

At this rate I’d prefer to spend less of those assets to get instead a young upcoming player like Mavrik Bourque, Jakob Pelletier, Jordan Spence vs an extra top pick in a deep draft not top-heavy.

I'm ok with trading vets to move up into the top 5. But I don't think it makes sense to trade Romanov to do so. You'd have to be a scout that really really has a strong read on a player to do something like that. And even then it's risky.

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

People who wants to trade extra assets for Petry or Anderson to get another top pick this year are losing it. Who cares we already have 2 picks. Why give even other prospects for a weak ass draft.

Anderson or Petry if they are traded to some teams like NJ Dallas or Detroit even Columbus , just ask for a cap dump and an unprotected 2023 picks , all those teams are trash and could be easily be top 10 a.k.a in the lottery for Bedard.

Giving Romanov + a first + 1 of the 2 for another clone of Puuljarvi is hilarious. Romanov is like our only legit dman that can play in a top 4 if Petry is traded and people want to trade him lmao.

Didnt we learn that Chariot Edmundson and Savard of this world cant play in a top 4 a whole season.

 

[calder candidate]

3rd vs 5th is not twice the return.
some draft classes (like 2015) have more nhlers coming out from the 5th vs the 3rd.
you get more chances of hitting with a 3rd but not by a whole lot.
Teams out of contention should eat cap to maximise value.

Pretty sure no team would trade a 3rd for two 5th, so I would say that a 3rd is twice as valuable has a 5th = twice the return, even if it wasn't exactly twice it is very close, I don't think that it was outlandish...
2015 and 2010 is the pretty much only year since 2003 where the 5th produce more NHL players than in the 3rd. Odds of drafting a NHL player in the 3rd are already pretty small let say 15.9% vs 9.6% maybe 6.3% isn't a big difference but it is still signifancant...

 

[26Mats]

People who wants to trade extra assets for Petry or Anderson to get another top pick this year are losing it. Who cares we already have 2 picks. Why give even other prospects for a weak ass draft.

Anderson or Petry if they are traded to some teams like NJ Dallas or Detroit even Columbus , just ask for a cap dump and an unprotected 2023 picks , all those teams are trash and could be easily be top 10 a.k.a in the lottery for Bedard.

Giving Romanov + a first + 1 of the 2 for another clone of Puuljarvi is hilarious. Romanov is like our only legit dman that can play in a top 4 if Petry is traded and people want to trade him lmao.

Didnt we learn that Chariot Edmundson and Savard of this world cant play in a top 4 a whole season.

Every year there are multiple players I want in the top 5/10. Some years I'm right about them. Some years not.

For example, the year Galchenyuk year, Washington drafted Filip Forsberg 10th and traded a 2nd for Ribeiro, I wondered if we couldn't have just traded aging, but still good, Plekanec for the 10th pick and gotten Forsberg in a more full rebuild. Washington ended up trading Forsberg for Martin Erat shortly thereafter. They would have been better with Plekanec than Erat and Ribeiro and we would have been better with Forsberg... I had also heard Timmins was high on Terravainen that year and was hoping we could trade a vet to get a late pick to grab him. But there are probably other prospects I wanted that ended up busting that I'm suppressing from memory.

 

[Whalers Fan]

Getting a 3rd vs. a 5th is a pretty big difference, You are still give the same player and getting double the return… unless you are able to use that cap space to acquire a better asset why would you not use it to maximize return on player that are not part of the futur / people are willing give away…

Two pennies are worth twice one penny, too, but neither is worth very much. Once you get past the 2nd round, draft picks become a real crap shoot.

 

[Draft]

We desperately need a top-2 RD that can run a PP. That should be top of the list for players we acquire.

I really think a Dvorak for Lundkvist trade should be considered. A bit on the small side, but I think we can work with it considering the other players we have. Rangers have a surplus of RD prospects and a clear need for a C like Dvorak.

 

[calder candidate]

Two pennies are worth twice one penny, too, but neither is worth very much. Once you get past the 2nd round, draft picks become a real crap shoot.

Are you arguing that we shouldn’t try to get better return for our assets… the draft is a crap shoot sure the odds keep dropping but you could still hit with any pick not sure why you would not take a shot and most importantly why you are not taking a shot away from on of your competitors…

 

[Whalers Fan]

Are you arguing that we shouldn’t try to get better return for our assets… the draft is a crap shoot sure the odds keep dropping but you could still hit with any pick not sure why you would not take a shot and most importantly why you are not taking a shot away from on of your competitors…

No, I am arguing that the Habs should be using those 3 retention spots to acquire 1st or 2nd round picks (or equivalent prospects), and not wasting them just to pry a later round pick out of a team for a mediocre player who will be gone and off the books at the end of the season anyway.

 

[RationalExpectations]

I decline. Spence is a solid young guy at RD but he don't turn the needle for me. I rather trade Anderson for a very good grade A not in the NHL yet or a very solid 1st rounder. Not a top 10 pick but definitely not a late 1st either.

I do like Kempe though. However, does he cost just as much as Anderson to sign? If not more?

I want a shot at getting a Suzuki type (pre NHL).

Anderson does not get a top prospect. I would expect a return close to what Toffoli for and only because some GMs love power forwards.

I have a hard time putting Romanov in a package for #2. It creates a weakness to fill a weakness presumably. It just doesn't move the needle in terms of building our team. Both of those assets should be part of our rebuild.

For #2, I'd much rather trade an established vet like Anderson, a goalie prospect trending in the right direction like Primeau and a later first like #26. I threw in earlier, that I would even do a conditional 2023 1st, top ten protected.

And I would take Slaf with that #2.

Slaf for Anderson, Primeau, #26 and 2023 1st (top 10 protected). That is hard for Jersey to turn down.

Slaf - Suzuki - Caufield
Roy - Wright - Farrell

Man, if Roy and Farrell both hit like they are trending....this would be super sexy in 3-4 years.

You're trending Anderson + for a guy with the upside to become Anderson AT 2nd OA Nemec is the choice in my opinion.

 

[26Mats]

Anderson does not get a top prospect. I would expect a return close to what Toffoli for and only because some GMs love power forwards.


You're trending Anderson + for a guy with the upside to become Anderson AT 2nd OA Nemec is the choice in my opinion.

This guy thinks Anderson is worth a lot...

Montreal Canadiens: Three Trade Offers The Habs Would Accept For Josh Anderson

The Montreal Canadiens will be busy this offseason and one player they need to decide on is Josh Anderson. Here are three potential trades they would accept

awinninghabit.com

I think we need to take back salary in the Edmonton proposal, which in itself probably shows he doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

[Belial]

Moving up from 26 by spending extra draft picks makes a lot of sense, maybe a player to close a deal but I don’t get trades like 26th, Anderson, Romanov for a 2nd.

At this rate I’d prefer to spend less of those assets to get instead a young upcoming player like Mavrik Bourque, Jakob Pelletier, Jordan Spence vs an extra top pick in a deep draft not top-heavy.

I think moving up in this particular draft is quite dumb as there's so much uncertainty due to an entire year of missed development.

I would just draft and hope for the best...

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think moving up in this particular draft is quite dumb as there's so much uncertainty due to an entire year of missed development.

I would just draft and hope for the best...

100% agreed, unless they REALLY want some specific guy, but then he better not fail.

Just stay put and roll the dice.

 

[calder candidate]

No, I am arguing that the Habs should be using those 3 retention spots to acquire 1st or 2nd round picks (or equivalent prospects), and not wasting them just to pry a later round pick out of a team for a mediocre player who will be gone and off the books at the end of the season anyway.

I don’t see many team giving 1st in order to clear cap space… you probably need to retain more than 5m$ to get a 1st, and we don’t actually have that much cap space to go around…
I would consider retaining on Drouin, Dadonov, Byron and Petry 3 of those are UFA so the spot will be free up next year.
Cap space value is pretty universal it all depends on how much and how long, Retaining x$ is basically worth the same regardless of the player, the player value is different but the gain from retaining will basically by constant across most player, if 1.7M$ is worth a 5th rd pick you will get the player value + the value of a 5th rd pick, maybe you get 1 better asset vs. 2 avg. but the total value won’t change much.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Here is a different way to look at the timeline, if it is true that VAN wants a top 4 D.

Petry for Miller and a 2nd, then trade Miller at the TDL for a first.

... Why would the Canucks want a 35 year old defenseman when the whole reason they're even trading Miller is he won't fit their retool timeline at 29? Not to mention, you do realize Miller has been pretty much a PPG player for the last three years. And you think the Canucks would add?

My dude, they'd demand Caufield and have every right to.

All that nonsense aside. Miller wouldn't fit our timeline. We're not ready to take the leap forward. If we were, we could just dump a pile of money at Kadri and not give up major assets. Better to let the next season or two play out and rebuild properly.

 

[BaseballCoach]

... Why would the Canucks want a 35 year old defenseman when the whole reason they're even trading Miller is he won't fit their retool timeline at 29? Not to mention, you do realize Miller has been pretty much a PPG player for the last three years. And you think the Canucks would add?

My dude, they'd demand Caufield and have every right to.

All that nonsense aside. Miller wouldn't fit our timeline. We're not ready to take the leap forward. If we were, we could just dump a pile of money at Kadri and not give up major assets. Better to let the next season or two play out and rebuild properly.

It was reported that Vancouver wants a top-4 D (and it makes sense). Petry is 34 but produced at a 57 point pace under MSL. He still has his legs.

If they want him, they pay the price, if not, no big deal. Always try to trade with someone who needs what you have.

As for our side, I stated Miller would be for sale at the TDL, and not a long-term investment.

Of course, Vancouver might not be interested. Or maybe they are willing to offer a 3rd or 4th instead of a second. That's when they negotiate.

 

[Whalers Fan]

It was reported that Vancouver wants a top-4 D (and it makes sense). Petry is 34 but produced at a 57 point pace under MSL. He still has his legs.

If they want him, they pay the price, if not, no big deal. Always try to trade with someone who needs what you have.

As for our side, I stated Miller would be for sale at the TDL, and not a long-term investment.

Of course, Vancouver might not be interested. Or maybe they are willing to offer a 3rd or 4th instead of a second. That's when they negotiate.

Petry is not waiving his NMC for Vancouver, so whether or not the Canucks will give up Miller for a package including him is irrelevant

 

[BaseballCoach]

Petry is not waiving his NMC for Vancouver, so whether or not the Canucks will give up Miller for a package including him is irrelevant

That is true, if Vancouver is on his list. His NTC is partial.