Man.You're going to be posting all winter on how this team is over rated
Proposal: Vancouver - Montreal
- Thread starter LemonSauceD
- Start date
Suzuki shooted at 16% the year before and he is a playmaker, not a shooter so even if it drop, he will still produce on the scoreboard. Hoglander the year before was at 10.3%. He doubled his shooting %.Not even close to being comparable. You're in the Rhp outlier season zone right there.
suzuki is a very good player. i just like to see arguments to be used consistently regardless of the team colors. a principal a lot of fans struggle to apply.
We'll see. If he ends up playing 16 mins a night in the top 6 we might see him hit 50+ points too.
habs_24x
Registered User
No one is saying arber is worth more than what van is offering or not. Truth is hoglander and a late first doesn't move the needle for Montreal. They'd rather keep arber.
Nucklehead Supreme
Registered User
- Jul 10, 2011
- 4,389
- 2,378
Works for us, because no chance in hell we would ever give up that much anyways.
Near as I can tell the only person interested in this deal on either side is the OP.
The value is decently fair, but I don't see a fit for either team TBH (with the exception of Evans)
In the Habs perspective, Hoglander is nice, as is the pick, but Montreal is already quite small in the top 9, they'd favour a bigger less skilled player. He'd be nice depth but that's it. Losing Evans would destabilize the roster quite a bit; he may not be the most talented player in terms of offence, but he's reliable and play a very ungrateful role. He's a cement/buffer player who helps holding the team together
For the Canucks, Evans makes a lot of sense, he's good depth for the playoffs if they want a great 4th line and an insurance policy in case of injury. Xhekaj doesn't though; he'll need at least 50 more games with a forgiving coach to grow his game and I don't see how the contending Canucks are that, they'd want a reliable guy. The idea of what Xhekaj could be is enticing, but he's not that player yet (or might never be honestly)
If you want a reliable, physical 3rd pair LD to gear up for a playoff push, there isn't a single one on the Habs. The one you'd want is Guhle, but he's orders of magnitude more expensive than any guy discussed here... Unrelated and not saying he should be your target, but I see a lot of people talking about (and bashing) Jordan Harris. I get it, he's 5'11, is not physical at all, and has very little in terms of offence... and he's one of the most reliable dmen on the team. Look at the guy's possession metrics, they're good. In a year or two, he'll be a good addition on a 3rd pair for contender with an already big d corp. A bit like Kulak honestly, less physical but better in transition
In the Habs perspective, Hoglander is nice, as is the pick, but Montreal is already quite small in the top 9, they'd favour a bigger less skilled player. He'd be nice depth but that's it. Losing Evans would destabilize the roster quite a bit; he may not be the most talented player in terms of offence, but he's reliable and play a very ungrateful role. He's a cement/buffer player who helps holding the team together
For the Canucks, Evans makes a lot of sense, he's good depth for the playoffs if they want a great 4th line and an insurance policy in case of injury. Xhekaj doesn't though; he'll need at least 50 more games with a forgiving coach to grow his game and I don't see how the contending Canucks are that, they'd want a reliable guy. The idea of what Xhekaj could be is enticing, but he's not that player yet (or might never be honestly)
If you want a reliable, physical 3rd pair LD to gear up for a playoff push, there isn't a single one on the Habs. The one you'd want is Guhle, but he's orders of magnitude more expensive than any guy discussed here... Unrelated and not saying he should be your target, but I see a lot of people talking about (and bashing) Jordan Harris. I get it, he's 5'11, is not physical at all, and has very little in terms of offence... and he's one of the most reliable dmen on the team. Look at the guy's possession metrics, they're good. In a year or two, he'll be a good addition on a 3rd pair for contender with an already big d corp. A bit like Kulak honestly, less physical but better in transition
Canucks LB
My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
- Oct 12, 2008
- 78,895
- 33,820
I understand you think being snarky means you're right. The guy has great mobility and hands for someone his size. I doubt you knew that
I can understand Vancouver not wanting to make this trade, but it has a Marc Bergevin "win the trade, without really addressing team needs" vibe for Montreal.
He likely never scores 24 goals again (unless you think he'll continue to be top 5 in the league in shooting percentage)
The point is he’ll score more than Evans and we need scoring more than role players. Trading a first and low cost scoring for role players is generally a bad idea and particularly for the Canucks.
Not saying Evan’s and X aren’t good players, they’re great and I’m sure would excel during the playoffs but not for our first rounder and our cheap scoring. We have these type of players and MTL does not. Definition of a poor match.
Montreal has several players that can fill the role that Hoglander would fill. That's the point. He doesn't fill a need for Montreal. Xhekaj does
David Bruce Banner
Acid Raven Bed Burn
Canucks need to stop giving up picks to fix Benning's "legacy". We've done enough and any more is just kicking the can further down the road.
ColbyChaos
I am a made up country
Peter Griffin
Registered User
Why does he need to shoot 20% again to score 24 goals? He played about 12 min/g last season, with very little PP time and a big percentage of his ice-time with the likes of Sam Lafferty and Nils Aman. It wouldn’t be surprising that with more ice-time and better, more consistent linemates he was able to generate more shots and opportunities and still scored 20+ goals with a more average shooting percentage. The guy has a lot of offensive talent.
Breakers
Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
Why did Suzuki being brought up?
Hoglander vs. Evan’s is such an easy comp. Every GM is taking Hoglander
Hoglander vs. Evan’s is such an easy comp. Every GM is taking Hoglander
In a vacuum, yes. But there's the question of need and fit. You don't build a roster in a vacuum. If you have a team with several options at wing (and several forwards on the smaller side), it's not out of the question to take the less talented player who is a C and fills a role the other guy can't.
Breakers
Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
Beendair Donedat
You sold a dead bird to a blind kid????
Nope.
Montreal fans have repeatedly said, we already have too many small guys up front - see Gallagher, Caufield, Harvey-Pinard - adding another guy in that size category doesn’t work.
Adding another small guy and giving up the one consistent physical presence on the team, who many feel has more to offer in the talent department as well, isn’t worth it for the team make up.
We don’t need more first round picks - we have two more in the upcoming draft, and will likely get another one when David Savard is moved at the deadline - and while Hoglander is a very talented player, we’re looking for some bigger guys with snarl to fill out the roster. Not giving up on the one we have already.
It’s just not a fit for either team, that’s all, and that’s okay.
