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

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, campabee82 said:

The ask has been rumored to be 2 1sts. Not sure if that is accurate or not but that is one thing I have heard. Also heard the Jets offered Nike + 1st so it seems like the rumored ask is close. I would offer 2021 1st + Poehling + 2nd or Struthers (prefer the 2nd) + either Byron or Chiarot to make cap work. Then go after Hall half retained or Dustin Brown to make a playoff run.

That was supposed to say Niku + 1st and I would offer 1st + Poehling + 2nd or Struble + Byron or Chiarot

Looking at how we can make cap work and get some decent help now and remain young enough for a couple of cup runs. We could make the following offers and remain under the cap by 2.9 Mil with Chiarot on LTIR for the rest of the season.

2021 1st + Struble + Poehling for Elkholm

Tatar + Lehkonen + 2021 2nd for Brown 1.875 Mil retained

Danault (Rags allowed to talk extension prior to trade) for Strome (1.5 Mil retained) + Schneider + 2021 4th (Ott)

Edited by campabee82
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

That was supposed to say Niku + 1st and I would offer 1st + Poehling + 2nd or Struble + Byron or Chiarot

Looking at how we can make cap work and get some decent help now and remain young enough for a couple of cup runs. We could make the following offers and remain under the cap by 2.9 Mil with Chiarot on LTIR for the rest of the season.

2021 1st + Struble + Poehling for Elkholm

Tatar + Lehkonen + 2021 2nd for Brown 1.875 Mil retained

Danault (Rags allowed to talk extension prior to trade) for Strome (1.5 Mil retained) + Schneider + 2021 4th (Ott)

If the Jets are offering their first round plus Niku - that is almost the same as our 1st + Mete - I am still high on Struble's upside still raw athletic ability - the kid is a physical beast, I also hate to part with Poehling as that leaves us still woefully weak at centre depth for Evans. Byron is covering Centre, but how much longevity does Byron have beyond this year?  I would have a tendency to toss in Lehkonen or a 2nd/3rd round on this deal vs. one of the current prospects. 

Dustin Brown is 36 with a 7 team NTC, 4 kids and 1 more year on a $5.9M contract. I can't see him waiving that, and with that mileage on him despite good results this season of 13g, 6A, not sure he is really worth pursuing for incremental upside over Tatar, and the cap room it would eat into for next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, claremont said:

If the Jets are offering their first round plus Niku - that is almost the same as our 1st + Mete - I am still high on Struble's upside still raw athletic ability - the kid is a physical beast, I also hate to part with Poehling as that leaves us still woefully weak at centre depth for Evans. Byron is covering Centre, but how much longevity does Byron have beyond this year?  I would have a tendency to toss in Lehkonen or a 2nd/3rd round on this deal vs. one of the current prospects. 

Dustin Brown is 36 with a 7 team NTC, 4 kids and 1 more year on a $5.9M contract. I can't see him waiving that, and with that mileage on him despite good results this season of 13g, 6A, not sure he is really worth pursuing for incremental upside over Tatar, and the cap room it would eat into for next year.

Like I said I would prefer just adding the second over Struble as well but if the Preds were willing to take the Niku + 1st the Jets were offering then the deal would already be done therefore by adding to the deal we can make it happen now. Poehling is good but so is Vejdemo so far this year, but with the Strome for Danault deal our C depth does not really take a hit. Imagine being able to line up Kotkaniemi-Suzuki-Strome-Evans with Hillis, Teasdale, Vejdemo, Ferrell, Gordin, Ikonen, and Oloffson all waiting in the wings.

Brown has a 7 team no trade list not a 30 team no trade list so they could ask him for his list and as long as Montreal is not on that list he really has no choice in the matter. The cap can be managed and his production would be limited anyway as he would be our 3 LW behind Drouin and Toffoli. I envision a lineup of 

Drouin-Kotkaniemi\Suzuki-Anderson

Toffoli-Suzuki\Kotkaniemi-Gallagher

Brown-Strome-Armia

Byron-Evans-Perry

Kulak-Petry

Ekholm-Weber

Edmundson-Romanov

Price

Allen

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

Like I said I would prefer just adding the second over Struble as well but if the Preds were willing to take the Niku + 1st the Jets were offering then the deal would already be done therefore by adding to the deal we can make it happen now. Poehling is good but so is Vejdemo so far this year, but with the Strome for Danault deal our C depth does not really take a hit. Imagine being able to line up Kotkaniemi-Suzuki-Strome-Evans with Hillis, Teasdale, Vejdemo, Ferrell, Gordin, Ikonen, and Oloffson all waiting in the wings.

I hear you on Strome. I am curious as to who you see as our strongest centre prospect after Poehling. At this position, you skate well, and either score / set up, or you back check and are a solid play killer. At 25 Vejdemo is in his 3rd season with the Rocket and hasn't done much. At 22 Poehling still has upside, and plays big but the skating has been suspect. Teasdale has been a winger but has grit. Cam Hillis is small, may cap out as a playmaker as might Sean Farrell. IMO the rest are cannon fodder, so I don't think we have as much depth as you may suggest in the prospect pool.

Centre is a tough call as we have previously talked about - There is not much on the F/A centre tree and we may have to give up a lot in trade pieces to get stronger depth at centre for KK and Suz. With all of our draft choices for 2021, the draft pundits should seriously look at best centres who can help in the next 2 years or less and move up to get into that stratosphere. (Beniers, Raty, Kent Johnson, Sillinger, McTavish, Lucius, L'Heurueux, Bourgault, Bolduc)

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, claremont said:

I hear you on Strome. I am curious as to who you see as our strongest centre prospect after Poehling. At this position, you skate well, and either score / set up, or you back check and are a solid play killer. At 25 Vejdemo is in his 3rd season with the Rocket and hasn't done much. At 22 Poehling still has upside, and plays big but the skating has been suspect. Teasdale has been a winger but has grit. Cam Hillis is small, may cap out as a playmaker as might Sean Farrell. IMO the rest are cannon fodder, so I don't think we have as much depth as you may suggest in the prospect pool.

Centre is a tough call as we have previously talked about - There is not much on the F/A centre tree and we may have to give up a lot in trade pieces to get stronger depth at centre for KK and Suz. With all of our draft choices for 2021, the draft pundits should seriously look at best centres who can help in the next 2 years or less and move up to get into that stratosphere. (Beniers, Raty, Kent Johnson, Sillinger, McTavish, Lucius, L'Heurueux, Bourgault, Bolduc)

Hav you seen Gordin's Numbers this year? I know the MHL is the equivalent of the OHL or QMJHL but his numbers are still respectable 23 g, 20 a 43 p in 49 games for a .877 ppg pace, and at 6'1" 194 lbs he can be a big physical 3C in the future as well. 

Gordin can open up shooting and passing lanes with deception, and he uses his backhand and forehand just as effectively to move the puck. He knows how to attract multiple opponents and has a knack for manipulating their feet to escape and attack inside the slot. Gordin can fire under pressure, off either leg, and from different puck positioning, too. -EliteProspects 2020 NHL Draft Guide

Byron is 5'9" and we are playing him at 4C so having Hillis or Ferrell as a future 3C wouldn't bother me in the least cause at least they have center experience. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

Hav you seen Gordin's Numbers this year? I know the MHL is the equivalent of the OHL or QMJHL but his numbers are still respectable 23 g, 20 a 43 p in 49 games for a .877 ppg pace, and at 6'1" 194 lbs he can be a big physical 3C in the future as well. 

Gordin can open up shooting and passing lanes with deception, and he uses his backhand and forehand just as effectively to move the puck. He knows how to attract multiple opponents and has a knack for manipulating their feet to escape and attack inside the slot. Gordin can fire under pressure, off either leg, and from different puck positioning, too. -EliteProspects 2020 NHL Draft Guide

Byron is 5'9" and we are playing him at 4C so having Hillis or Ferrell as a future 3C wouldn't bother me in the least cause at least they have center experience. 

I hope you are right on Gordin - He lit that league up in his draft year last year with even better stats do I hope the quality of play is a progression not a regression. At a 6th round draft choice, one would think the odds are against him but you never know

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

Hav you seen Gordin's Numbers this year? I know the MHL is the equivalent of the OHL or QMJHL but his numbers are still respectable 23 g, 20 a 43 p in 49 games for a .877 ppg pace, and at 6'1" 194 lbs he can be a big physical 3C in the future as well. 

Gordin can open up shooting and passing lanes with deception, and he uses his backhand and forehand just as effectively to move the puck. He knows how to attract multiple opponents and has a knack for manipulating their feet to escape and attack inside the slot. Gordin can fire under pressure, off either leg, and from different puck positioning, too. -EliteProspects 2020 NHL Draft Guide

Byron is 5'9" and we are playing him at 4C so having Hillis or Ferrell as a future 3C wouldn't bother me in the least cause at least they have center experience. 

But Gordin can't skate. Which make his accomplishments all the more impressive,  albeit,  in much more inferior leagues. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ekholm to Montreal rumours wont stop swirling. Its tempting because he would, by default, be our best LHD immediately.  He'd also force Chairot down the lineup to third pair where I think he'd actually excel.  

I dont think Chairot or Edmundson get scratched so that means one of Romanov or Kulak will be odd man out at #7, which is crappy - id rather have both of them + Ekholm.  If thats the case then we sort of get *slightly* better but not as much as if we played our actual 6 best defensmen in the top 6.  

Ekholm-Petry
Kulak-Weber
Edmondson-Romanov
Chairot 

Is a heck of a lot better than what we've seen but probably not what we would see if that trade was made.

Anyway, according to Marc Antoine Godin (of The Athletic) this is the offer:

Lehkonen
Tuch
Struble
1st (2021)

That seems like a crap-ton for Ekholm.  Dont get me wrong, Ekholm is a solid, reliable #3 dman in this league. On many teams he'd be a #2 and I think he can do fine there. I dont think he's the ideal compliment for Weber though and thats where we'd almost certainly play him.   I could live with Lehkonen (who is clearly not in our plans) and one of the other pieces but not all 3.   If they want say, Lehks + Struble + 2nd I do it.  Im not sure i give up a solid roster player + good prospect + 1st for soon to be 31 year old Ekholm.  On the flip side he is on a nice contract for  1 more year after this one so that is appealing as our young LHD have time to mature. 

If we did trade for him, you'd most likely see:

Ekholm-Weber
Edmundson-Petry
Chairot-Romanov

Better than what we have now, but imho not nearly as good as what i suggested above. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there's the 14 day wait period before he even plays a game for us. That's a lot to give up (prospects and high pic) for a guy who wouldn't be available to us until some time in April,, assuming we make the deal within the next few days. By then, we could be on the outside and looking to sell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Then there's the 14 day wait period before he even plays a game for us. That's a lot to give up (prospects and high pic) for a guy who wouldn't be available to us until some time in April,, assuming we make the deal within the next few days. By then, we could be on the outside and looking to sell.

Good point. I know the league has been trying to see if they can relax it to 7 with multiple testing phases but it all comes down to health canada.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Way too much to give up for a 30+ year-old #3 D man who is only signed for a year and a half more. I've said it before, but I don't see the point in trading for Ekholm as a player who will only help you in the short term and who doesn't put you over the top to win now. The smarter move is to try and dump Weber, Tatar, Armia, and possibly Price and build your roster around players who can be helpful for 5-7 years instead of 1 or 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Way too much to give up for a 30+ year-old #3 D man who is only signed for a year and a half more. I've said it before, but I don't see the point in trading for Ekholm as a player who will only help you in the short term and who doesn't put you over the top to win now. The smarter move is to try and dump Weber, Tatar, Armia, and possibly Price and build your roster around players who can be helpful for 5-7 years instead of 1 or 2.

I'm with you on this ... too big an ask for a player who is not going to tip the balance to winning a cup.  We're nowhere close and Ekholm barely budges that meter .

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

I'm with you on this ... too big an ask for a player who is not going to tip the balance to winning a cup.  We're nowhere close and Ekholm barely budges that meter .

Yeah, I've said it before, but if you're going all in and sacrificing the future, you need to be all in. It doesn't help to make an empty gesture to make it look like you're doing something. If you're not a top 5 team at the end of your moves, what's the point? I couldn't give a care whether we narrowly make or miss the playoffs, I want to be a team that dominates most nights, the way we played at the start of the season. The goal is to be the next Tampa or Vegas or Boston, not to be the next Calgary or Philadelphia.

My list for what this team needs to be a top 5 team this year:

- an elite center

- a top-pairing puck-moving LHD

- another depth RHD

Frankly, I don't think Ekholm answers the need we have on the left side. I also don't think we have the assets to mortgage to make all of those acquisitions. So at the end of the day, I don't want rentals or older players who are here for 1-2 years. Either find an asset who can help now but who can also help for the next 5 years (Werenski, Dumba, Bean types) or else build your team for 2-3 years from now when your elite center could end up being Suzuki or Kotkaniemi. You don't have to pay through your butt to wait 2 years for one of those guys to develop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Yeah, I've said it before, but if you're going all in and sacrificing the future, you need to be all in. It doesn't help to make an empty gesture to make it look like you're doing something. If you're not a top 5 team at the end of your moves, what's the point? I couldn't give a care whether we narrowly make or miss the playoffs, I want to be a team that dominates most nights, the way we played at the start of the season. The goal is to be the next Tampa or Vegas or Boston, not to be the next Calgary or Philadelphia.

My list for what this team needs to be a top 5 team this year:

- an elite center

- a top-pairing puck-moving LHD

- another depth RHD

Frankly, I don't think Ekholm answers the need we have on the left side. I also don't think we have the assets to mortgage to make all of those acquisitions. So at the end of the day, I don't want rentals or older players who are here for 1-2 years. Either find an asset who can help now but who can also help for the next 5 years (Werenski, Dumba, Bean types) or else build your team for 2-3 years from now when your elite center could end up being Suzuki or Kotkaniemi. You don't have to pay through your butt to wait 2 years for one of those guys to develop.

Absolutely right Ted - the problem is that MB seems dead set on making the playoffs and anything can happen which IMO is pretty flimsy odds when you get in as the 4th place team. Getting Eckholm is rather short sighted even if he does have 1 more year on his contract. His addition does however buy us one more year for Norlinder, Harris, Struble or Guhle (both sides development). Giving up the pieces mentioned previously in the Athletic article  - 2021 1st round - how are we possibly going to get an elite centre if we don't get fortunate in the draft? They are so hard to get in F/A or trades. Tuch - May and that's an emphasis on May turn out to be a decent LW as we don't have much in the pipeline to support Drouin / Toffoli unless we buy one in F/A. Sruble, I happen to like his to be tapped ceiling.  Lehtonen - he's expendable to me, Mete - he's expendable to me  Chiarot - he's expendable to me in the off season, but his heart and grit have value to the teammates so it could be Kulak as another odd man out. - Those just aren't valuable trade pieces, so I am with you on sticking to a longer term plan beyond a 1 year progression.  

Another Depth RHD? I want to see Brook be given a trial call-up - moving Romanov to the left side for a few games.   Fleury they will not risk playing him games this year for the fear of qualifying him in the Seattle expansion draft. If we don't have the confidence that Brook or Fleury can be a depth RHD, then think about moving them out in the years to come (hoping they don't become Ryan McDonaghs) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Way too much to give up for a 30+ year-old #3 D man who is only signed for a year and a half more. I've said it before, but I don't see the point in trading for Ekholm as a player who will only help you in the short term and who doesn't put you over the top to win now. The smarter move is to try and dump Weber, Tatar, Armia, and possibly Price and build your roster around players who can be helpful for 5-7 years instead of 1 or 2.

I think that's what Bergevin is looking at.  The short term.  They HAVE to make the playoffs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, maas_art said:

The Ekholm to Montreal rumours wont stop swirling. Its tempting because he would, by default, be our best LHD immediately.  He'd also force Chairot down the lineup to third pair where I think he'd actually excel.  

I dont think Chairot or Edmundson get scratched so that means one of Romanov or Kulak will be odd man out at #7, which is crappy - id rather have both of them + Ekholm.  If thats the case then we sort of get *slightly* better but not as much as if we played our actual 6 best defensmen in the top 6.  

Ekholm-Petry
Kulak-Weber
Edmondson-Romanov
Chairot 

Is a heck of a lot better than what we've seen but probably not what we would see if that trade was made.

Anyway, according to Marc Antoine Godin (of The Athletic) this is the offer:

Lehkonen
Tuch
Struble
1st (2021)

That seems like a crap-ton for Ekholm.  Dont get me wrong, Ekholm is a solid, reliable #3 dman in this league. On many teams he'd be a #2 and I think he can do fine there. I dont think he's the ideal compliment for Weber though and thats where we'd almost certainly play him.   I could live with Lehkonen (who is clearly not in our plans) and one of the other pieces but not all 3.   If they want say, Lehks + Struble + 2nd I do it.  Im not sure i give up a solid roster player + good prospect + 1st for soon to be 31 year old Ekholm.  On the flip side he is on a nice contract for  1 more year after this one so that is appealing as our young LHD have time to mature. 

If we did trade for him, you'd most likely see:

Ekholm-Weber
Edmundson-Petry
Chairot-Romanov

Better than what we have now, but imho not nearly as good as what i suggested above. 

Maybe open it up a little, and throw Byron their way and they give us a center. maybe Mikael Granlund?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, electron58 said:

Maybe open it up a little, and throw Byron their way and they give us a center. maybe Mikael Granlund?

Scratch Granlund. Insert Brad Richardson.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an interesting one.

Dale Weise has a Twitter account called "@habstonight" 

Now, ultimately, he's just another guy on twitter, but he is an ex hab & was with the team 12 months ago, so I dont think its a stretch to suggest he has some contacts who may know a thing or two.  Here's a couple of tidbits:

Hearing the #Habs would be open to a trade in the next 24 hours due to the extra days before games. Was told if something happens it will happen very soon.

I would not read into what MB said the other day, there is something in place and it's just about will they pull the trigger on it or not.

Maybe the other team was playing last night? (someone mentioned last night would be an even better time)


Will be interesting to see if something happens in the next day or so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Here's an interesting one.

Dale Weise has a Twitter account called "@habstonight" 

Now, ultimately, he's just another guy on twitter, but he is an ex hab & was with the team 12 months ago, so I dont think its a stretch to suggest he has some contacts who may know a thing or two.  Here's a couple of tidbits:

Hearing the #Habs would be open to a trade in the next 24 hours due to the extra days before games. Was told if something happens it will happen very soon.

I would not read into what MB said the other day, there is something in place and it's just about will they pull the trigger on it or not.

Maybe the other team was playing last night? (someone mentioned last night would be an even better time)


Will be interesting to see if something happens in the next day or so. 

Sounds like Eklund! :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question

Is now the time to go all in? Would you be willing to move prospect not in the NHL and not named Caufield to take a run at the cup?

Would you make any of the following or similar trades knowing you are potentially giving up the next big names for one or two immediate shots at the cup?

Garland + Brassard for Guhle + Lehkonen + 2021 1st + 2021 3rd (Chi)

Ekholm for Armia + Struble + Tuch + 2021 2nd (Mnt)

Subban (half retained) for Edmundson + Harris + 2022 2nd (this is for insurance incase either Weber or Petry go down in the playoffs cause lets face it if that happens we are dead in the water)

Our lineup would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Garland-Kotkaniemi-Toffoli

Tatar-Danault-Gallagher

Brassard-Evans-Perry

Byron, Frolik 

Ekholm-Weber

Kulak\Chiarot-Petry

Romanov-Subban

Chiarot (IR), Mete

Price

Allen

 

 

Edited by campabee82
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

I have a question

Is now the time to go all in? Would you be willing to move prospect not in the NHL and not named Caufield to take a run at the cup?

Would you make any of the following or similar trades knowing you are potentially giving up the next big names for one or two immediate shots at the cup?

Garland + Brassard for Guhle + Lehkonen + 2021 1st + 2021 3rd (Chi)

Ekholm for Armia + Struble + Tuch + 2021 2nd (Mnt)

Subban (half retained) for Edmundson + Harris + 2022 2nd (this is for insurance incase either Weber or Petry go down in the playoffs cause lets face it if that happens we are dead in the water)

Our lineup would be

Drouin-Suzuki-Anderson

Garland-Kotkaniemi-Toffoli

Tatar-Danault-Gallagher

Brassard-Evans-Perry

Byron, Frolik 

Ekholm-Weber

Kulak\Chiarot-Petry

Romanov-Subban

Chiarot (IR), Mete

Price

Allen

 

 

Probably no to Brassard, but Garland intrigues me. Still way too much. If I 'm giving up a first or 2, it has to be a 1/2 D coming back. Replace Struble with Mete. Unfortunately,  no way ever Bergevin brings back Subban,  after running him outta town before his NTC kicked in. Also, no way Bergevin trades Edmundson so soon. What would that convey to other UFA's? I'd do it though. How about targeting Dumba? I'd use some of those pieces that you mentioned. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, electron58 said:

Probably no to Brassard, but Garland intrigues me. Still way too much. If I 'm giving up a first or 2, it has to be a 1/2 D coming back. Replace Struble with Mete. Unfortunately,  no way ever Bergevin brings back Subban,  after running him outta town before his NTC kicked in. Also, no way Bergevin trades Edmundson so soon. What would that convey to other UFA's? I'd do it though. How about targeting Dumba? I'd use some of those pieces that you mentioned. 

Like I said none of the trades or targets really matter, the question is would you move all in and trade some\most of our prospects not in the NHL and not named Caufield and picks for 2 immediate runs at a cup? The trades above were just to outline the holes needed to fill in the lineup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...