Proposal: Vancouver - Montreal

Wayfarer13

Registered User
Jun 21, 2020
426
173
My post on page two I think was a bit combative, regarding my view on your rebuild.

I think the ideal rebuild, well the penultimate of it is when you've essentially drafted the bulk of the core. After that you add as best as you can any missing pieces to core and the supporting cast in as quick of a time as possible. At that point adding more prospects on top of a core drafted 3-5 years ago keeps you in a perpetual rebuild like the Sabres and soon to be wings picks and prospects are just as valuable as currency.

Just my opinion but with different draft picks the habs could be close but I don't see a 1c 1d or 1g.
Maybe the recent goalie drafted gets there but he's 4-5 years away.
Hutson will never be a 1D, there's no way he's gonna be able to match up against teams best players. The rest of the D don't have #1 upside, some solid players for sure. Suzuki is a solid #2 but definitely not a #1.

Maybe things workout but I'm adamant you need to draft a 1c and 1d for a successful rebuild, they are just to hard to get any other way.
Not a fan of Dach or Newhook and love Demidov but not a fan of Hughes other top picks too many wingers and #4-#5 dmen, the easiest pieces to aquire
Man.You're going to be posting all winter on how this team is over rated
 

bud12

Registered User
Oct 8, 2012
2,035
378
hoglander had an outlier season because of his shooting percentage. what about suzuki's 17.8%?
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.
 

TBF1972

Registered User
May 19, 2018
8,237
6,731
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.
 

Johnsie19

Registered User
Jun 29, 2010
2,541
361
Ignoring Hoglanders unsustainable shooting percentage again? He's a 15 goal guy who had an unrepeatable outlier season
We'll see. If he ends up playing 16 mins a night in the top 6 we might see him hit 50+ points too.
 

Nevins

Registered User
Jul 12, 2014
2,505
1,930
Habs already have Caufield(5’8 ‘)´,Gally((5’9’’) and eventually Mesar((5’10’’)….
 

Nucklehead Supreme

Registered User
Jul 10, 2011
4,382
2,375
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.
Works for us, because no chance in hell we would ever give up that much anyways.
 

TesseractPrice

Registered User
Aug 1, 2019
503
688
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
 

Canucks LB

My Favourite, Gone too soon, RIP Luc, We miss you
Oct 12, 2008
78,118
32,713
Xhekaj and Jake Evans for Hoglander, Poolman (IR/LTIR), 2025 1st, and an extra 3rd or 4th round pick.

Hoglander and his 24 goals last season is a cheap top 9 option at $1.1M. Agitator, high energy, offensive skill and could be a complimentary piece to the top 6. Also has breakout potential.

Canucks need a right hand centerman and some depth on the left side considering we are thin. After Hughes, it’s Soucy and Forbort.
Wait canucks give hoglander AND a 1st?🫠
 

Frank Drebin

He's just a child
Sponsor
Mar 9, 2004
35,114
22,397
Edmonton
Xhekaj and Jake Evans for Hoglander, Poolman (IR/LTIR), 2025 1st, and an extra 3rd or 4th round pick.

Hoglander and his 24 goals last season is a cheap top 9 option at $1.1M. Agitator, high energy, offensive skill and could be a complimentary piece to the top 6. Also has breakout potential.

Canucks need a right hand centerman and some depth on the left side considering we are thin. After Hughes, it’s Soucy and Forbort.
I like it

I'd do it as a Habs fan
 

Habssince89

trolls to the IL
Sponsor
Apr 14, 2009
8,929
4,299
Vancouver, BC
I understand MTL fans frame of reference on what competent defensive play looks like is a bit skewed since they have been the worst defensive team in hockey over the last 3 years.
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
 

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,845
1,354
Ottawa
I can understand Montreal not wanting to give up fan favourites, with size, who give an F but we can’t afford to give up 24 goals for 1.1 million and a 1st for a bottom 6 centre and bottom pairing D.
 

CTHabsfan

Registered User
Jul 28, 2007
1,386
1,121
I can understand Montreal not wanting to give up fan favourites, with size, who give an F but we can’t afford to give up 24 goals for 1.1 million and a 1st for a bottom 6 centre and bottom pairing D.
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.
 

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,550
3,528
I can understand Montreal not wanting to give up fan favourites, with size, who give an F but we can’t afford to give up 24 goals for 1.1 million and a 1st for a bottom 6 centre and bottom pairing D.
He likely never scores 24 goals again (unless you think he'll continue to be top 5 in the league in shooting percentage)
 

kcunac

Registered User
Aug 31, 2008
1,845
1,354
Ottawa
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.
 

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,550
3,528
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
 
  • Like
Reactions: HabsAddict

Peter Griffin

Registered User
Feb 13, 2003
35,059
7,473
Visit site
He likely never scores 24 goals again (unless you think he'll continue to be top 5 in the league in shooting percentage)
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.
 

Qwijibo

Registered User
Dec 1, 2014
3,550
3,528
Why did Suzuki being brought up?

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
Aug 5, 2014
22,098
20,733
Denver Colorado
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.

Immm No they are taking Hoglander

Evan’s sucks
 

Beendair Donedat

Juice Arse 2.0
Dec 29, 2010
5,820
6,697
Truth or Consequences, NM
Just MTL fans massively overrating their depth players nothing new here
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.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Cyprus vs Kosovo
    Cyprus vs Kosovo
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $729.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • France vs Belgium
    France vs Belgium
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $50.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Israel vs Italy
    Israel vs Italy
    Wagers: 2
    Staked: $3,244.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Montenegro vs Wales
    Montenegro vs Wales
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $25.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Norway vs Austria
    Norway vs Austria
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad