Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Rumours


kinot-2
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Windoe said:

Would you trade JK and Domi/Danault for Eichel?
 

In a heartbeat.  Ive said that guys like JK or Suzuki are nearly untouchable in my books - a guy like Eichel would be the "nearly" part.  He's young (23), and already elite. On a good team he's probably a 90+ point player.  No contest, if you have an opportunity to acquire a guy like Eichel & it doesnt cost you your 3 best players or something, you do it. 

That said, I suspect you'd have to add in at least one more piece. 1st rounder maybe, or perhaps another quality roster player or prospect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, maas_art said:

In a heartbeat.  Ive said that guys like JK or Suzuki are nearly untouchable in my books - a guy like Eichel would be the "nearly" part.  He's young (23), and already elite. On a good team he's probably a 90+ point player.  No contest, if you have an opportunity to acquire a guy like Eichel & it doesnt cost you your 3 best players or something, you do it. 

That said, I suspect you'd have to add in at least one more piece. 1st rounder maybe, or perhaps another quality roster player or prospect. 

Yes you're totally right, after I posted it I realized there's no way JK + Domi/Danault (or even both of them) is enough for Eichel.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Laine... despite Lebrun's comments, lots of other media members suggesting Habs are still interested in him. It makes sense and despite the questions of attitude, he fits the team's needs to a tee (big RW who can snipe) and he would fit into the building Finnish contingent. Winnipeg's needs are pretty consistently rumored to be a 2C and a top-4 D man, preferably. I still think our best chance of making something work would be to include a third team like Minnesota, who are interested in Domi and who have Dumba to spare. I'm completely fine with including any of Domi, Danault, or our 2020 1st rounder in any trade for Laine but I don't see a RHD who fits the Jets' needs. I doubt we're willing to part with Weber and if we did that, we'd have to have a 2nd deal in place to replace him because our farm isn't strong at right D right now.

A few other points though that I think are important:

- The 1st is completely tradeable. You absolutely want to build through the draft, but this is not a lottery pick or top 10 choice. This is a mid-round 16th overall. We haven't had a ton of success picking outside the top 10 and I don't believe there's a game-changer at 16. If there is, it's a gamble. So I'm completely fine with dealing the 1st to get a game-changing young player. We're not talking about trading for a rental. A guy like Laine would be in your plans for 5-8 years. That could be significantly longer than that 1st rounder plays in the NHL. A gamble perhaps, but a good one to make.

- Danault is probably more expendable than people think. Rumors are that the Habs see Jake Evans as being a 3rd line two-way center down the line, the way they saw Danault stepping in to replace Eller. I'm not saying he is or isn't, but if the Habs feel they can run Suzuki and JK as their top 2 and then have a cheaper 3C option like Evans, it permits them to use both Domi and Danault as trade chips.

- Acquiring Laine improves your bargaining power with Gallagher. If Gallagher is a good 2RW at that point and if Petry took a hometown discount to stay, I think you could push Gallagher into taking something like a 6-year, 6.75M deal. Don't like the deal we're offering? With Laine, Gallagher would have to believe the Habs' threat to trade him next season. It adds to your bargaining power here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

On Laine...  It makes sense and despite the questions of attitude, he fits the team's needs to a tee (big RW who can snipe) and he would fit into the building Finnish contingent. 

A few other points though that I think are important:

- The 1st is completely tradeable. You absolutely want to build through the draft, but this is not a lottery pick or top 10 choice. This is a mid-round 16th overall. We haven't had a ton of success picking outside the top 10 and I don't believe there's a game-changer at 16. If there is, it's a gamble. So I'm completely fine with dealing the 1st to get a game-changing young player. We're not talking about trading for a rental. A guy like Laine would be in your plans for 5-8 years. That could be significantly longer than that 1st rounder plays in the NHL. A gamble perhaps, but a good one to make.

- Danault is probably more expendable than people think. Rumors are that the Habs see Jake Evans as being a 3rd line two-way center down the line, the way they saw Danault stepping in to replace Eller. I'm not saying he is or isn't, but if the Habs feel they can run Suzuki and JK as their top 2 and then have a cheaper 3C option like Evans, it permits them to use both Domi and Danault as trade chips.

- Acquiring Laine improves your bargaining power with Gallagher. If Gallagher is a good 2RW at that point and if Petry took a hometown discount to stay, I think you could push Gallagher into taking something like a 6-year, 6.75M deal. Don't like the deal we're offering? With Laine, Gallagher would have to believe the Habs' threat to trade him next season. It adds to your bargaining power here.

On attitude- Bergevin prides himself or his ego on knowing the character Fit of his team - it was precisely why he traded Patches for lack of effort and in a 2018 season ending failure to make the playoffs he singled out some effort as lazy - doomed from the start. That’s one of the reasons why I think he won’t make this deal (I get the comment on character can only get you so far and you need skill etc.), as Laine’s attitude is likely to cause problems - it was also the reason why he dumped Subban as there was a divisive split in the team in years prior to Weber

On points of importance 1) Suzuki was 13th overall - I’d say his chances of being a game changer are on the rise. This years draft is supposedly deep to 20th - I believe there are some game changing forwards in our range but I get the gamble of sure thing vs odds 2) I personally don’t see Evans as a 3rd C at all. Games I’ve watched 2018 - he was smashed head hit ice and concussed, then in qualifying round smacked hard in Philly and Pitts games - this 7th rounder draft choice needs to improve his vision, and presence.  Trade both Domi and Danualt?- that’s a lot of eggs in one Youthful hope basket with Suzuki, KK and Evans / Poehling - I think we need one veteran presence at Centre and Nate Thompson it is not. 3) I get that a GM has to show a commitment to winning to all of his players especially to a leader like Gallagher and the Price/Weber window closing but the 2021 season should show an upside trajectory - Gallagher and the vets should be enthused about the emerging talent - I still think 2021-22 is the season to go all in. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MB has done a couple of interviews in the past 24 hours. A few highlights of what he said:

- Trading for a player of the caliber of Laine means emptying your roster and he's not prepared to do that if the asking price is that high.

- Signing Hall or another big name free agent isn't in his plans either. Says it would not leave him enough money to re-sign his key young players and says anyways, he isn't focused on a player like Hall. He prefers to go after a bigger player who can score and be a physical force as well. Says trade likely a better option for this and they're looking into it but that there aren't a ton of guys who fit that bill who are available.

- Says spending will be focused on the core players and key younger guys.

- Says he is prepared to trade away prospects or picks but not the young prospects already with the team.

 

So putting that all together, this is what I'd infer:

- MB probably IS interested in Laine in terms of being a big goal scorer. But he will only budge if Winnipeg accepts a price that fits him. That means he'd likely part with picks including his 1st rounder, maybe guys like Domi, Tatar, or even Danault but won't trade other pieces Winnipeg might want.

- Sounds like it would take a lot to pry Suzuki, JK, or Romanov out of here. Maybe Caufield, Ylonen, Norlinder still in play for trades, although personally, I'd try to hang on to the latter two (I think Ylonen is vastly underrated and Norlinder has star potential).

- Sounds like he also isn't keen on giving out big money to all his impending UFA's. He re-signed Petry, but it sounds like Tatar isn't in the plans going forward and he may only have money for one of Gallagher or Danault. It sounds more like he's saving money for the likes of Suzuki, JK, etc.

- Wouldn't be surprised if he's targeting Josh Anderson in a trade. Wouldn't be surprised if he's snooped around for players like Huberdeau or OEL or Killorn or Kessel or so on. Sounds like he's in win-now mode. Reinforces that none of Weber, Petry, Price, etc. are going anywhere either.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

MB has done a couple of interviews in the past 24 hours. A few highlights of what he said:

- Trading for a player of the caliber of Laine means emptying your roster and he's not prepared to do that if the asking price is that high.

- Signing Hall or another big name free agent isn't in his plans either. Says it would not leave him enough money to re-sign his key young players and says anyways, he isn't focused on a player like Hall. He prefers to go after a bigger player who can score and be a physical force as well. Says trade likely a better option for this and they're looking into it but that there aren't a ton of guys who fit that bill who are available.

- Says spending will be focused on the core players and key younger guys.

- Says he is prepared to trade away prospects or picks but not the young prospects already with the team.

 

So putting that all together, this is what I'd infer:

- MB probably IS interested in Laine in terms of being a big goal scorer. But he will only budge if Winnipeg accepts a price that fits him. That means he'd likely part with picks including his 1st rounder, maybe guys like Domi, Tatar, or even Danault but won't trade other pieces Winnipeg might want.

- Sounds like it would take a lot to pry Suzuki, JK, or Romanov out of here. Maybe Caufield, Ylonen, Norlinder still in play for trades, although personally, I'd try to hang on to the latter two (I think Ylonen is vastly underrated and Norlinder has star potential).

- Sounds like he also isn't keen on giving out big money to all his impending UFA's. He re-signed Petry, but it sounds like Tatar isn't in the plans going forward and he may only have money for one of Gallagher or Danault. It sounds more like he's saving money for the likes of Suzuki, JK, etc.

- Wouldn't be surprised if he's targeting Josh Anderson in a trade. Wouldn't be surprised if he's snooped around for players like Huberdeau or OEL or Killorn or Kessel or so on. Sounds like he's in win-now mode. Reinforces that none of Weber, Petry, Price, etc. are going anywhere either.

Assuming he does actually make the moves to make this happen, Im fine with that.  I think its premature, but Id also be in favour of trading our older guys which MB is not. 

BUT he cant just sit by & go into the season with what we've got already & assume we will be competitve.  He needs to add.  He's made a couple of decent moves so far this year but we still have holes.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

MB has done a couple of interviews in the past 24 hours. A few highlights of what he said:

- Signing Hall or another big name free agent - it would not leave him enough money to re-sign his key young players and says anyways, he isn't focused on a player like Hall. He prefers to go after a bigger player who can score and be a physical force as well. Says trade likely a better option for this and they're looking into it but that there aren't a ton of guys who fit that bill who are available.

- Says he is prepared to trade away prospects or picks but not the young prospects already with the team.

So putting that all together, this is what I'd infer:

- MB probably IS interested in Laine in terms of being a big goal scorer. But he will only budge if Winnipeg accepts a price that fits him. That means he'd likely part with picks including his 1st rounder, maybe guys like Domi, Tatar, or even Danault but won't trade other pieces Winnipeg might want.

- Sounds like it would take a lot to pry Suzuki, JK, or Romanov out of here. Maybe Caufield, Ylonen, Norlinder still in play for trades, although personally, I'd try to hang on to the latter two (I think Ylonen is vastly underrated and Norlinder has star potential).

- Sounds like he also isn't keen on giving out big money to all his impending UFA's. He re-signed Petry, but it sounds like Tatar isn't in the plans going forward and he may only have money for one of Gallagher or Danault. 

- Wouldn't be surprised if he's targeting Josh Anderson in a trade. Wouldn't be surprised if he's snooped around for players like Huberdeau or OEL or Killorn or Kessel or so on. Sounds like he's in win-now mode. Reinforces that none of Weber, Petry, Price, etc. are going anywhere either.

Nice translation - thank you but I believe he is not going to go all in this year but is targeting moderate improvement and will make a much bigger splash next year after the Kraken Draft. 

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

BUT he cant just sit by & go into the season with what we've got already & assume we will be competitive.  He needs to add.  He's made a couple of decent moves so far this year but we still have holes.  

Agree on a few more changes - too many question marks on Suzuki, KK, Romanov stepping up to major ice time roles, Drouin's recovery to expectations (which is not assured) along with Edmundson and the 5-6 pairing RHD Juulsen/Fleury/Brook whoever that may be. Competitive to me for 2020-21 season means virtually assured of a playoff spot - no nail biting wild card which will be tough in the division with Bolts, Laffs and Ruins, and the ability/threat to score vs. the host of 1 goal losses last year when we had no offensive creativity!

So we need at least 1 more power forward and 1 more scorer. I had thought of Kessel from the cash / cap limit strapped Coyotes but they have no picks to trade and only prospect is RHD V Soderstrom - 11th overall last year. Moreover Kessel is in a scoring decline with an NMC which probably means the NMC is transferred to us and we protect him in the Kraken Draft. Besides what would Arizona want from us - picks or Danualt as they already had the Domi experience. I am against trading picks for aging veterans. 

Bergevin is definitely in a driver's seat with the cap limit teams of St. Louis, NY Islanders, Tampa Bay, Philadelphia, Washington, Pittsburgh, Vegas, Toronto. I would have said Columbus too but it looks like Brandon Dubinsky is done for his career with a chronic wrist injury which will give them LTIR relief and Liam Foudy could step up into his spot. I am hoping Bergevin stays patient and waits for all the needy of significant improvement teams like Edmonton / Calgary / Winnipeg / Minnesota / Carolina to blow their brains out in preparation for free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claremont said:

Nice translation - thank you but I believe he is not going to go all in this year but is targeting moderate improvement and will make a much bigger splash next year after the Kraken Draft. 

Agree on a few more changes - too many question marks on Suzuki, KK, Romanov stepping up to major ice time roles, Drouin's recovery to expectations (which is not assured) along with Edmundson and the 5-6 pairing RHD Juulsen/Fleury/Brook whoever that may be. Competitive to me for 2020-21 season means virtually assured of a playoff spot - no nail biting wild card which will be tough in the division with Bolts, Laffs and Ruins, and the ability/threat to score vs. the host of 1 goal losses last year when we had no offensive creativity!

So we need at least 1 more power forward and 1 more scorer. I had thought of Kessel from the cash / cap limit strapped Coyotes but they have no picks to trade and only prospect is RHD V Soderstrom - 11th overall last year. Moreover Kessel is in a scoring decline with an NMC which probably means the NMC is transferred to us and we protect him in the Kraken Draft. Besides what would Arizona want from us - picks or Danualt as they already had the Domi experience. I am against trading picks for aging veterans. 

Bergevin is definitely in a driver's seat with the cap limit teams of St. Louis, NY Islanders, Tampa Bay, Philadelphia, Washington, Pittsburgh, Vegas, Toronto. I would have said Columbus too but it looks like Brandon Dubinsky is done for his career with a chronic wrist injury which will give them LTIR relief and Liam Foudy could step up into his spot. I am hoping Bergevin stays patient and waits for all the needy of significant improvement teams like Edmonton / Calgary / Winnipeg / Minnesota / Carolina to blow their brains out in preparation for free agency.

I believe this is how how MB sees the team heading into the offseason:

- Goalies:  Set
- Defense: Mostly Set, maybe add one more depth guy
- LW: Set
- Centres: Set
- RW:  This is where it gets interesting.   Gallagher is a good #2 (or 1b)  Armia is a good 3rd liner.  MB needs to add someone at least as good as Gallagher (ideally, better)   Will he do so via trade (maybe dangling 16th OVA as part of it? Does he see Danault as expendable? Domi?)  Or maybe he targets a free agent like Hoffman, Kovalchuk, Dadanov. 

I actually have this sneaking suspicion that Dadanov may be MB's first choice. He's a RW, not huge but not a smurf and is very shifty.  He has quietly amassed 3 very good seasons since returning here from the KHL (182 points in his 225 NHL games since then).   He's an under-the-radar choice but I could see MB going for it.  The only real question mark is his age & what he's looking for in term. He's 31 so most likely he'll want 4-5 years which I think is too much for me.  If we could get him for 2-3 years Id definitely kick the tires.  He'd be a good band-aid solution until Caufield and Ylonen are ready (and puts less pressure on us to rush them).

If we do add either Dadanov or Hoffman I think we add Kovalchuk as well. If we manage to land a higher end RW then I think we may not have the $$ for kovalchuk too, although I guess it depends what we're sending back the other way. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Windoe said:

Line idea for the trade idea of:
Stamkos & Killorn for Gallagher & Danault & Kulak:

Domi-Stamkos-Tatar
Drouin-Suzuki-Armia
Killorn-Kotkaniemi-Lehkonen
Byron-Weal-Evans

Chiarot-Petry
Romanov-Weber
Edmundson-Mete/Juulsen

Stamkos and Killorn have NMC and NTC (16 team no trade) - I doubt that both players waive those clauses to come to Montreal where the taxes are significantly higher than Florida. Our best bet may be to pay LW Hoffman or Dadanov the money in free agency if we cannot swing a trade for a scorer. I believe Laine will go to Carolina where they have a plethora of defensemen including Jake Bean to offer Winnipeg. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe this group of free agents should be left for some else to over pay. If Dadanov came cheap then yes but no one else. 

If we can make a trade for Kyle Palmieri that would work for me. New Jersey is in a lot of trouble and may be willing to move him. If  Danault really wants to leave then we could work Zajac into the deal as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Windoe said:

Line idea for the trade idea of:
Stamkos & Killorn for Gallagher & Danault & Kulak:
 

Stamkos is an elite talent but has had some fairly significant injuries 2 of the last 4 years.  He's 30 years old now too so there's a concern the injuries will get worse not better.  Killorn is a decent middle six left wing but we have like 5 of those He's also older (31) so you're giving up 3 younger players for 2 older... not necessarily a bad thing but also not ideal. Personally, im not sure a move like this really helps us in any tangible way (despite adding an elite scoring threat) because it creates more holes than it fills. 

Our biggest issue is at RW and by moving Gallagher & not replacing him with another RW we actually are weaker there. Tatar is ideally 2nd line LW not a 1st line RW. 

I would certainly consider moving Danault (and / or Domi) for a RW but If you move Gallagher then you need 2 RW added imho. 

35 minutes ago, tony5775 said:

Believe this group of free agents should be left for some else to over pay. If Dadanov came cheap then yes but no one else. 

If we can make a trade for Kyle Palmieri that would work for me. New Jersey is in a lot of trouble and may be willing to move him. If  Danault really wants to leave then we could work Zajac into the deal as well. 

I tend to agree.  Like with most years, there arent a lot of great choices out there. Maybe some depth guys like a Nate Thompson type player but from an impact stand point the only guys who likely could help us are: 

Hall (Most likely way too expensive, plus he's LW where we dont really need help)

Krug (Probably too expensive if he even makes it to UFA)

Hoffman (Interesting, could be useful - are off ice issues a problem)

Dadanov (the most interesting to me but at his age I think he wants 4-5 years. If you could get him for say 2, id be all over it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Stamkos is an elite talent but has had some fairly significant injuries 2 of the last 4 years.  He's 30 years old now too so there's a concern the injuries will get worse not better.  Killorn is a decent middle six left wing but we have like 5 of those He's also older (31) so you're giving up 3 younger players for 2 older... not necessarily a bad thing but also not ideal. Personally, im not sure a move like this really helps us in any tangible way (despite adding an elite scoring threat) because it creates more holes than it fills. 

Our biggest issue is at RW and by moving Gallagher & not replacing him with another RW we actually are weaker there. Tatar is ideally 2nd line LW not a 1st line RW. 

I would certainly consider moving Danault (and / or Domi) for a RW but If you move Gallagher then you need 2 RW added imho. 

I tend to agree.  Like with most years, there arent a lot of great choices out there. Maybe some depth guys like a Nate Thompson type player but from an impact stand point the only guys who likely could help us are: 

Hall (Most likely way too expensive, plus he's LW where we dont really need help)

Krug (Probably too expensive if he even makes it to UFA)

Hoffman (Interesting, could be useful - are off ice issues a problem)

Dadanov (the most interesting to me but at his age I think he wants 4-5 years. If you could get him for say 2, id be all over it)

      just a couple of comments on Hoffman ( 30 ) and Dadanov ( 31) ....both shoot left although Dadanov is listed as a right winger but for comparison sake they aren't big players physically ...Hoffman has 60 pps in the last 6 years , Dadanov has 25 in a 3 year sample and is better defensively than Hoffman ..last 6 years for Hoffman scored 169 goals while last 3 for Dadanov he scored 81 ...last 6 for Tatar 142 and including 35 ppg ...so all in all Tatar is in or around the same size ( not big )  is 1 yr younger  but is better defensively . Tuna  is a +23 compared to Hoff at -19 and Dadanov a minus -3 ...Certainly swapping either one for Tatar wouldn't be much of a change ...keeping Tatar and adding one or the other might make some difference but not  over the top  .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

Certainly swapping either one for Tatar wouldn't be much of a change ...keeping Tatar and adding one or the other might make some difference but not  over the top  .

I woudlnt swap either of those guys (Hoffman or Dadanov) for any of our current top 6 - or possibly 9 - but the advantage of an UFA is that you dont lose anyone.   Both guys are natural RW.  Tatar has played there a bit (as has Byron or Lekhs) but has always been more comfortable on the LW.

Ideally you add a guy who is better than Gallagher so it goes  1st Line RW / Gallagher / Armia    for your top 3 right wingers, but I could live with Dadanov or Hoffman since we arent giving up assets to get either. So, Galagher / Dadanov / Armia     then you still have your full compliment of Drouin / Tatar / Lekhs at LW. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

      just a couple of comments on Hoffman ( 30 ) and Dadanov ( 31) ....both shoot left although Dadanov is listed as a right winger but for comparison sake they aren't big players physically ...Hoffman has 60 pps in the last 6 years , Dadanov has 25 in a 3 year sample and is better defensively than Hoffman ..last 6 years for Hoffman scored 169 goals while last 3 for Dadanov he scored 81 ...last 6 for Tatar 142 and including 35 ppg ...so all in all Tatar is in or around the same size ( not big )  is 1 yr younger  but is better defensively . Tuna  is a +23 compared to Hoff at -19 and Dadanov a minus -3 ...Certainly swapping either one for Tatar wouldn't be much of a change ...keeping Tatar and adding one or the other might make some difference but not  over the top  .

 

12 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I woudlnt swap either of those guys (Hoffman or Dadanov) for any of our current top 6 - or possibly 9 - but the advantage of an UFA is that you dont lose anyone.   Both guys are natural RW.  Tatar has played there a bit (as has Byron or Lekhs) but has always been more comfortable on the LW.

Ideally you add a guy who is better than Gallagher so it goes  1st Line RW / Gallagher / Armia    for your top 3 right wingers, but I could live with Dadanov or Hoffman since we arent giving up assets to get either. So, Galagher / Dadanov / Armia     then you still have your full compliment of Drouin / Tatar / Lekhs at LW. 

I agree that Dadonov could make sense as a target for MB. I wonder though how much the Radulov negotiations play in to how MB would handle a Dadonov contract. Radulov was about the same age then as Dadonov is now, both Russians, both wanting to be paid after coming off strong years, both potentially being sought after by teams with no state tax... last time around, MB's version of the story was that he offered the same contract but that Radulov bolted for the better net earnings because of the no-tax in Texas. So does that mean he'd be willing to give 4-5 years to Dadonov as well or has he soured on that type of negotiation and given the cap likely not going up, would he try to offer even less. I don't think 2 years gets it done. I think Bergevin would do 3-4 and his past handling of others suggests he's not afraid to give out contracts to players through their early 30's. So to me, something like 3 years, 5.75M AAV could be something that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

So to me, something like 3 years, 5.75M AAV could be something that makes sense.

I could live with that (Or a slightly higher AAV for 2 years) But I actually think Dadanov will be looking for 4+ years.  I guess the question is: how much will the Covid stuff affect teams and GMs?   Other GMs may be gunshy over contracts longer than a couple of years too in these uncertain times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I could live with that (Or a slightly higher AAV for 2 years) But I actually think Dadanov will be looking for 4+ years.  I guess the question is: how much will the Covid stuff affect teams and GMs?   Other GMs may be gunshy over contracts longer than a couple of years too in these uncertain times. 

Also important to remember a fair number of teams are up against the cap, having thought the number would continuously go up when they signed long-term deals over the past few years. Most pundits think there will be a lot of RFA's released this year because of this too. So on the one hand there may be less money handed out at free agency and on the other, there may be more (and younger) players available as free agents if some RFA's become UFA's instead. Could be a market that favors teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Also important to remember a fair number of teams are up against the cap, having thought the number would continuously go up when they signed long-term deals over the past few years. Most pundits think there will be a lot of RFA's released this year because of this too. So on the one hand there may be less money handed out at free agency and on the other, there may be more (and younger) players available as free agents if some RFA's become UFA's instead. Could be a market that favors teams.

For sure. And if we decide to go the trade route, we're in an enviable position.   We have a surplus of centres (including one offensive and one defensive- both in their primes - that would use as a bargaining chip) we have tons of picks and some intriguing prospects. Add to that, we have a glut of middle six, #4-6 dmen and you could offer some interesting packages to land that elusive top end player we've been after for a while.  Teams are also starting to think about the expansion draft & trading a player now rather than having to expose him (or someone else) may make sense for them. 

There should be absolutely no reason why we should go into next season without a fairly substantial improvement. I know that "trades are hard" but it will never be easier than right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of buzz around this trade idea between us and Tampa. Kilorn would be a pass for me, but Stamkos might be of some interest, so long as whatever injury he is dealing with now isn’t something in itself to be concerned with. But I don’t think I’d be willing to trade Gallagher to make it happen. But he is a legit goal scorer, decent price tag, 4 year term (I think). He’s listed as a C, but as a righty, I believe he plays a lot of RW as well. Not sure what it would cost to get him, but injuries aside, I like the idea of Stamkos more than I do Liane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

A lot of buzz around this trade idea between us and Tampa. Kilorn would be a pass for me, but Stamkos might be of some interest, so long as whatever injury he is dealing with now isn’t something in itself to be concerned with. But I don’t think I’d be willing to trade Gallagher to make it happen. But he is a legit goal scorer, decent price tag, 4 year term (I think). He’s listed as a C, but as a righty, I believe he plays a lot of RW as well. Not sure what it would cost to get him, but injuries aside, I like the idea of Stamkos more than I do Liane.

So tell me again as per my earlier post why Stamkos would waive his absolute NMC to move from Tampa (approx 38% tax rate) to Quebec (approx 52% tax rate)? Same with Killorn who has a 16 team No Trade Clause? I can think of about 14 points x $8.5 million or $4.45 million. This is a harsh reality of why we may have to pay a free agent like Dadonov a little more. The first two are very unlikely to happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, claremont said:

So tell me again as per my earlier post why Stamkos would waive his absolute NMC to move from Tampa (approx 38% tax rate) to Quebec (approx 52% tax rate)? Same with Killorn who has a 16 team No Trade Clause? I can think of about 14 points x $8.5 million or $4.45 million. This is a harsh reality of why we may have to pay a free agent like Dadonov a little more. The first two are very unlikely to happen. 

You make a good point. I have no idea why he would, it’s a stretch for sure. But trades do happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Not sure what it would cost to get him, but injuries aside, I like the idea of Stamkos more than I do Liane.

Id much rather have Laine even though i think right now - today & probably the next couple of years - Stamkos is the better player, that 8+ year age difference is a pretty major one.  I also think Stamkos would not only be more expensive, but would cost us more youth because TB is looking to shed salary so they would want high end cheap talent imho. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, claremont said:

So tell me again as per my earlier post why Stamkos would waive his absolute NMC to move from Tampa (approx 38% tax rate) to Quebec (approx 52% tax rate)? Same with Killorn who has a 16 team No Trade Clause? I can think of about 14 points x $8.5 million or $4.45 million. This is a harsh reality of why we may have to pay a free agent like Dadonov a little more. The first two are very unlikely to happen. 

I can answer the question with regards to why Killorn would waive. He grew up in Halifax and idolized THE Canadiens as a kid. So he could pull a Tavares and return to his "home town" team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, maas_art said:

Id much rather have Laine even though i think right now - today & probably the next couple of years - Stamkos is the better player, that 8+ year age difference is a pretty major one.  I also think Stamkos would not only be more expensive, but would cost us more youth because TB is looking to shed salary so they would want high end cheap talent imho. 

You might be right about the cost, I haven’t even tried to speculate what Tampa might want in return. Salary wise, $8.5 million probably isn’t too far off of what Liane is going to be looking for. Stamkos is only signed through the next 4 seasons, so I wouldn’t be so concerned with the age gap. Health is a bit of a concern, but on the positive side, with it only being 4 years opposed to the 8 years Liane would come at, it’s less time to worry about it. 
I like Liane, and am not opposed to trading for him. Liane is younger and healthier, so those are big +’s for him. Stamkos, IMO is better in every measurable category (youth and health aside). I like his skill set, I like his contract, I like his attitude. More so than I do Liane’s, Hall’s or Hoffman’s. I question the cost, but I question the cost of any of these potential targets. I’m not saying I’m sold on the idea, but it does spark an interest for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...