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

TRADE DEADLINE - KOVY, THOMPSON, PECA, COUSINS TRADED


26NCounting
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Agreed with your very common-sense assessment. I'd say this is my view of cap and asset management:

- You can't win without drafting well. You look at the Pittsburgh and Chicago and Washington Cup wins and so on and they were fueled by rock-solid draft picks at the top of the draft. It doesn't mean they had great scouting more than just being the worst team in the league at the right time, but they did what they had to do to put the core of their teams together. You also look at stalwarts of the '90s like Colorado and New Jersey and Detroit and they were built on the backs of Joe Sakic's and Scott Niedermayer's and Martin Brodeur's and Sergei Fedorov's and Nik Lidstrom's and so on. Doesn't mean all the draft picks had to be 1st rounders, but many were, and the bottom line is that the large majority of teams that win Cups have their nucleus built around who they've picked.

- The need to build around draft picks is even more pronounced in the cap era. If a player is good, then by the time they're due for their 2nd or 3rd contracts, they're cashing in. The only way to be able to squeeze talent under the cap is to have a decent number of cost-controlled assets on your roster. That means having talent on ELC's or taking gambles on signing long-term deals on players before they hit their peak or getting lucky once in a while.

- If you want sustained success, you have to be willing to part with aging players while they're still good. No one is giving you a 1st round pick and their top prospect for 36 year-old Shea Weber or 34 year-old Carey Price or 35 year-old Tomas Plekanec or so on. For the most part (other than with a couple of crazy GM's), no one is giving you a player of value for nothing. So most trades a team makes are either trading players for comparable ones at a different position, or they're trades where a player has worn out his welcome and needs a fresh start, or they're trades where one team with a better chance at a Cup now acquires current talent in exchange for giving future talent to a team that wants to be competitive in the future. The thing in the cap era is that these cycles get shorter and shorter because more young players are playing impact roles and more older players are getting forced out of the game because they can't keep up with the speed and strength of the younger ones. So now, you can't swap your 32 year-old for a 22 year-old, you're looking more at swapping your 28 year-old for a 19 year-old...

- Every team also needs veterans and role players. The catch to it is when you consider all of the above, you have to be able to find guys who fit your schema and who fit your Cup window at the right time. You can't have 15 guys who are 23-27 and all on their 2nd contracts that are lucrative and long-term. You need to have a few rookies on near minimum-wage and a few vets on prove-it contracts and you need to look at acquiring a more expensive rental (maybe for half a season or with the other team retaining some salary) when the time is right to make your all-in push.

All that to say that IMO, the Habs aren't in a place where they can make an all-in push. If anything, it seems like Bergevin completely missed the boar when he had a chance to win with Price, Subban, Pacioretty, Plekanec, Markov, Gallagher, etc. as his core. This is why many criticized his Weber trade, because he shortened the window in which to win a Cup. He managed to salvage something from Pacioretty, but he went past prime on Plekanec and he is going past prime on some of his other vets like Price, Weber, Tatar, and Petry now. A 28-year old scoring winger with a reasonable contract left for 1.5 years is a fantastic asset for a team with Cup aspirations to acquire. A 32 year-old D man who is still playing like a top-pairing guy and has 1.5 years left on his contract is a great asset. But a 30 year-old winger who just signed a 7-year deal for over 6M is not. A 34 year-old D man who's signed for 5 years at 6.5+M is not. There is a real concern that when Tatar and Petry hit free agency soon, we're either losing them for nothing or we're re-signing them for contracts we'll regret or we're signing them and finding we're unable to recoup value in a trade. No one is saying those players don't have value. They're some of our best players currently. And if we could keep Tatar and Petry and Weber around on a series of 1-year deals at 5M a year each, it would make sense to keep them. It just isn't going to happen.

In Kovalchuk's case, you have one of those guys on a prove-it contract. He's already past prime, he's getting 35+ guaranteed contracts where teams aren't going to want to risk cap hits they can't get out of long-term. So he's almost assuredly going to have to sign a 1 or 2 year deal for his next contract. That means the contract can come with less invested risk, which means it can make more sense for us than signing a Tatar or Petry for 5-7 years. It doesn't mean you can't trade him now and re-sign him in the off-season, but he's maybe a guy where the contract demands aren't going to hurt you as much risk-wise.

Otherwise, the team should be basing its plan around the focus of winning a Cup with Suzuki, Kotkaniemi, Mete, Fleury, Primeau, Lehkonen, Poehling, Romanov, Ylonen, Brook, Juulsen, Caufield, and so on. You can still control cost on some of these players for a few more years. It gives you the flexibility to keep a few core veterans around, like a Gallagher or a Domi or a Danault or so on. It means that when you're ready, you can go out and trade a draft pick or prospect whose not ready to contribute in exchange for a veteran that puts you over the top, and the ideal guy to look for at that time will be a player in the same situation as a Tatar or Petry is now with us. Go find someone else's Tatar who can be a top 6 scorer. Go find their Petry, who can give you big quality minutes, and where neither guy is putting you on the hook for a long-term payment if you don't want it. If you're another team who is a top 5-8 challenger for the Cup, those two guys are exactly what you want to add, which is why it also makes sense for the Habs to capitalize on their value and bring in assets who will be able to assist in a Cup run for us in a couple of years.

Detroit? Yes Yzerman all the others were late round picks Datsyk, to win the cups traded for Vernon & Hasek at the end of their careers, obtained Chelios , Rafalski, Brett Hull end of the careers, Colorado Roy end of his Career Ray Bourqe end of his career hmmm old goalies and old defenseman.  Detroit though making the playoffs for 25 years with that record how many high first round picks does that get you?

We are in a cap era which does change things , but you still need balance. Cup finalist Boston, Cup Winner St. Louis , Washington, going back Vegas was probably the only real exception of a young team (older goalie) Most of all those teams weren't teams based around all youth. They all have a lot of veterans.

What the older ERA did have also was the old lottery. If you were a bottom team you were almost guaranteed the top pick maybe #2. We could bottom out and end up not having that top pick. We actually moved up last year it can easily go the other way.

So how does everyone feel if we tank and then end up drafting 6-7th anyway?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ Yes, like I said, the draft choices didn't always have to be 1st rounders, albeit it makes it easier to find stars that way, but the commonality is that most teams have core stars that they drafted themselves. I also added that you needed to supplement that with veteran acquisitions, but you can't expect to build a winner around players you traded for exclusively, especially when those guys are not on cost-controlled contracts.

Again, if we were closer to a Cup, you keep your Tatar's and Petry's and Weber's. Those would be the type of players you'd want to bring in. But this season has shown us we're too far away and that we don't have the line-up to be able to handle injuries and still be competitive. It's shown us we're still pretty reliant on Price to win games for us... in the past, it was because we had no offence. Now, we can score but we don't play much defence in our own zone and give up tons of scoring chances. Regardless, we haven't figured out how to be a better overall team in front of Carey, and our D depth isn't good enough.

I'll reiterate that from my point of view, I'm not advocating for a deliberate attempt to lose games. I'm saying be open to trading good veterans if you find good deals for them. I think if we let it be known we're open for business, we will find a better return for Petry than what LA got for Muzzin and a good deal to be had for Tatar as well. They have enormous trade value in my opinion because of the players they are but also because of how ideal their contracts are for the receiving team. If you get good deals that help you win in the future, IMO you take them. Ditto for finding trades for others, if they exist. I also think part of this is planning for next year and beyond, which means putting younger guys in roles you envision them playing in the future. If Suzuki and Kotkaniemi are your future top 2 centers, play them there. Give them better wingers than you are now, and put Danault in a 3C role. If you think Drouin-Suzuki-Gallagher or Domi-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher or Drouin-Kotkaniemi-Armia or whatever else is going to be a line for you next year, then put them together this year and let them gel. If you want to know where Lindgren stands as an NHL back-up option, give him 10-12 games more down the stretch. If you want to see what Jake Evans can do in the NHL, recall him and play him. If you want Poehling to be a center, trade Thompson and liberate a center spot for Poehling to slot into. None of these things means the team has to be bad. None of them means you advocate losing. It may be a by-product of it, or it may not be. But do what you need to do to maximize the trade return on your assets to set yourself up for the future and do what you need to to prepare players of the future as best as possible. Those should be the goals, and those goals should be the focus for the rest of the year, not trying to make the playoffs. There is zero purpose in trying to play Weber or Chiarot or Petry for 26 minutes a night and driving them into the ground and risking injury. There is zero purpose in playing Price in 25 more games and over-taxing him. There is zero purpose in playing Danault as your 1C when he's not likely the 1C for you 2-3 years from now.

Chances are we'll end up with a better draft choice doing this than if we push for the playoffs, but we'll also be better off in the future by stockpiling prospects and picks, giving our youngsters experience in appropriate roles, and evaluating other players to know if and where they fit into our future plans. And if we end up with a 1st overall pick, even better. If we end up with a 5th overall or 7th overall, we'll likely still get a decent player and one who has a better chance of being a key contributor sooner than if we pick 13th or 15th, still with no playoffs to show for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, campabee82 said:

I like how you gloss over the rest of the names on the list as if your right lol. However 392 current players voted and 33% said Price is the guy they want in goal for game 7 of the cup finals and Weber was the 2nd best D man in the entire league but what do they know right they only play with them or against them.

... that's 67% of the league that voted for somebody OTHER than Price as well.     And until or unless Price wins us a cup ... which given his age, Weber's age and how disorganized and misconstructed this lineup is ... is not going to happen with the Habs.   As Patrick Roy once said ... "he couldn't hear Roenick because his ears were plugged with his cup rings".  

To me, as BigTed said above, we're rapidly approaching the point where Price/Weber won't fetch a return and then we're stuck with them ... and I think any window we had to win with Price was just before or just after the Weber trade.   Since then they've been treading water and nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

Chances are we'll end up with a better draft choice doing this than if we push for the playoffs, but we'll also be better off in the future by stockpiling prospects and picks, giving our youngsters experience in appropriate roles, and evaluating other players to know if and where they fit into our future plans. And if we end up with a 1st overall pick, even better. If we end up with a 5th overall or 7th overall, we'll likely still get a decent player and one who has a better chance of being a key contributor sooner than if we pick 13th or 15th, still with no playoffs to show for it.

Nobody seems to get this.     Making moves or staying the course to make the playoffs this year simply hurts us more for the next few years than being realistic and setting the roster up for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

Nobody seems to get this.     Making moves or staying the course to make the playoffs this year simply hurts us more for the next few years than being realistic and setting the roster up for the future.

Seems to me we have been trying to build for the future for about 30 years and where has it gotten us? When is the future now? When JK is 25 then Domi is 30, Gallagher is 33, Danault is 33 is then they become the aging core. So then by these types of statements it's time to move them too. By my estimation and just by looking around the league at other elite players like Lundqvist, Chara, Giordano, Thorton, and Getzlaf. Price and Weber probably have 4-5 years before they become untradable. Most elite players play until they are 37-40 not cause they are on bad contracts and teams can't trade them but because they are still playing at a high level even if it's not the elite they were at in their 20's. I don't like the idea of trading someone just to get picks and prospects you said teams like the Avs drafted their elite tallent but that's not the case Forsberg, Bourque, Roy, Keane, Recci and Blake were all acquired via trades and were all major factors in the 13 division titles and 2 cups. So yes drafting players is one of the keys but so is keeping the elite tallents you have and aquiring others through trades and FA. Toronto has all of the elite tallent a team could ask for and are still just as likely as us to miss the playoffs and they tanked for years even if it wasn't by design. Their goalie is average and their D sucks, Tampa is at the oposite end they have a team that is in it for eachother and players taking a discount to stay together. They aren't trading their older players for picks and prospects they are working together to stay together as long as they can while still adding key players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

^^ Yes, like I said, the draft choices didn't always have to be 1st rounders, albeit it makes it easier to find stars that way, but the commonality is that most teams have core stars that they drafted themselves. I also added that you needed to supplement that with veteran acquisitions, but you can't expect to build a winner around players you traded for exclusively, especially when those guys are not on cost-controlled contracts.

Again, if we were closer to a Cup, you keep your Tatar's and Petry's and Weber's. Those would be the type of players you'd want to bring in. But this season has shown us we're too far away and that we don't have the line-up to be able to handle injuries and still be competitive. It's shown us we're still pretty reliant on Price to win games for us... in the past, it was because we had no offence. Now, we can score but we don't play much defence in our own zone and give up tons of scoring chances. Regardless, we haven't figured out how to be a better overall team in front of Carey, and our D depth isn't good enough.

I'll reiterate that from my point of view, I'm not advocating for a deliberate attempt to lose games. I'm saying be open to trading good veterans if you find good deals for them. I think if we let it be known we're open for business, we will find a better return for Petry than what LA got for Muzzin and a good deal to be had for Tatar as well. They have enormous trade value in my opinion because of the players they are but also because of how ideal their contracts are for the receiving team. If you get good deals that help you win in the future, IMO you take them. Ditto for finding trades for others, if they exist. I also think part of this is planning for next year and beyond, which means putting younger guys in roles you envision them playing in the future. If Suzuki and Kotkaniemi are your future top 2 centers, play them there. Give them better wingers than you are now, and put Danault in a 3C role. If you think Drouin-Suzuki-Gallagher or Domi-Kotkaniemi-Gallagher or Drouin-Kotkaniemi-Armia or whatever else is going to be a line for you next year, then put them together this year and let them gel. If you want to know where Lindgren stands as an NHL back-up option, give him 10-12 games more down the stretch. If you want to see what Jake Evans can do in the NHL, recall him and play him. If you want Poehling to be a center, trade Thompson and liberate a center spot for Poehling to slot into. None of these things means the team has to be bad. None of them means you advocate losing. It may be a by-product of it, or it may not be. But do what you need to do to maximize the trade return on your assets to set yourself up for the future and do what you need to to prepare players of the future as best as possible. Those should be the goals, and those goals should be the focus for the rest of the year, not trying to make the playoffs. There is zero purpose in trying to play Weber or Chiarot or Petry for 26 minutes a night and driving them into the ground and risking injury. There is zero purpose in playing Price in 25 more games and over-taxing him. There is zero purpose in playing Danault as your 1C when he's not likely the 1C for you 2-3 years from now.

Chances are we'll end up with a better draft choice doing this than if we push for the playoffs, but we'll also be better off in the future by stockpiling prospects and picks, giving our youngsters experience in appropriate roles, and evaluating other players to know if and where they fit into our future plans. And if we end up with a 1st overall pick, even better. If we end up with a 5th overall or 7th overall, we'll likely still get a decent player and one who has a better chance of being a key contributor sooner than if we pick 13th or 15th, still with no playoffs to show for it.

We do currently have 9 first rounders on this team with 4 being in the top 5 (a 1st, 2-3rd's 1-5th) So more isn't a sure thing. Lets say we trade off the veterans . Then if we are serious going for a draft pick shouldn't we send Suzuki, JK, Poehling Fluerry all down and just play Weise Alzner Peca others in the top six limit Gallagher Tatar and Domi Drouins ice time. Wouldn't that be the real way to tank . I'm sure the games would be fun to watch because at that point who cares? Why take the chance of the kids playing great and possibly ending up near a playoff spot anyway. It is a business also so does Molson refund the season ticket holders and all his advertisers? If we at least give an honest effort up close to the draft deadline and we're not close then fans and advertisers at least would understand. How about we win the 1st overall but really want to build for the future and leave the 1st in Laval and still play the plugs ect all next season so we have two years in a row of top choices like Edmonton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like the next 8-10 games will shape the look of this team.  If we win the bulk of them, MB stands pat (maybe does his usual tinkering) and we aim for the playoffs. 

If we are even close to (or below) .500 in the next 10 games or so, I think players are moved.  I could see guys like Petry and Tatar moved (although the deals would have to be substantial).


If we are to consider moving these guys id target teams that are in a win-now mode that may be more likely to give up young players.  Vegas, Pittsburgh, Edmonton

There are deals to be made out there (not sure if MB has the guts to make them) but players like Nicholas Hague, Samuel Poulin, Evan Bouchard - i think some of those guys are ou there.  The trick is finding that team that is sure they are a piece or two away from winning the cup & capitalizing on it. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to trade within the division but one of the most obvious suitors for Petry would be toronto.  They've been lacking a RD for ages & many of their D are playing in the wrong spots/above their skill level.  Bring in Petry & everyone (when healthy) slots into place.

Rielly-Petry
Muzzin-Barrie
Dermott-Holl
Marincin-Ceci

The key is what will they pay?  We'd likely get Kapanen as the roster player (most expendable, salary offset, young enough to grow with the core etc).  They are slim on prospects.  Id insist on Sandin but they might well try to give Robertson or a winger like Lljegren. I would expect/demand at least one more piece - most likely a pick. something like: 

Petry

for

Kapanen, Sandin, 2nd.

 

Helps them immediately, helps us down the road. Everyone wins. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I hate to trade within the division but one of the most obvious suitors for Petry would be toronto.  They've been lacking a RD for ages & many of their D are playing in the wrong spots/above their skill level.  Bring in Petry & everyone (when healthy) slots into place.

Rielly-Petry
Muzzin-Barrie
Dermott-Holl
Marincin-Ceci

The key is what will they pay?  We'd likely get Kapanen as the roster player (most expendable, salary offset, young enough to grow with the core etc).  They are slim on prospects.  Id insist on Sandin but they might well try to give Robertson or a winger like Lljegren. I would expect/demand at least one more piece - most likely a pick. something like: 

Petry

for

Kapanen, Sandin, 2nd.

 

Helps them immediately, helps us down the road. Everyone wins. 

They can have Scandella.:frech1:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I hate to trade within the division but one of the most obvious suitors for Petry would be toronto.  They've been lacking a RD for ages & many of their D are playing in the wrong spots/above their skill level.  Bring in Petry & everyone (when healthy) slots into place.

Rielly-Petry
Muzzin-Barrie
Dermott-Holl
Marincin-Ceci

The key is what will they pay?  We'd likely get Kapanen as the roster player (most expendable, salary offset, young enough to grow with the core etc).  They are slim on prospects.  Id insist on Sandin but they might well try to give Robertson or a winger like Lljegren. I would expect/demand at least one more piece - most likely a pick. something like: 

Petry

for

Kapanen,  Sandin, 2nd.

 

Helps them immediately, helps us down the road. Everyone wins. 

As much as I would hate helping Toronto .. I'm struggling to mentally fit Kapanen into our lineup long term.   He's a RW ... so he'd be behind Gallagher, and possibly Armia.   If we keep Suzuki on the right as well (for a Drouin-Domi-Suzuki) ... well ...

Petry, for

Ceci (UFA), Sandin, 2nd

That's getting a 1st round prospect (LD) and a 2nd for Petry ... I'm ok with this ... might even be able to squeeze a 1st instead of 2nd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

As much as I would hate helping Toronto .. I'm struggling to mentally fit Kapanen into our lineup long term.   He's a RW ... so he'd be behind Gallagher, and possibly Armia.   If we keep Suzuki on the right as well (for a Drouin-Domi-Suzuki) ... well ...

Petry, for

Ceci (UFA), Sandin, 2nd

That's getting a 1st round prospect (LD) and a 2nd for Petry ... I'm ok with this ... might even be able to squeeze a 1st instead of 2nd

After reading the articles from last nights game, there is no way the leafs are moving Sandin, the fans seem to think he is the second coming of bobby orr.  And to be perfectly honest I don't think I would want any D man that has gone through Toronto's farm system, they have no idea how to play D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

After reading the articles from last nights game, there is no way the leafs are moving Sandin, the fans seem to think he is the second coming of bobby orr.  And to be perfectly honest I don't think I would want any D man that has gone through Toronto's farm system, they have no idea how to play D

As opposed to our D?   I mean ... last night wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement for our guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

As much as I would hate helping Toronto .. I'm struggling to mentally fit Kapanen into our lineup long term.   He's a RW ... so he'd be behind Gallagher, and possibly Armia.   If we keep Suzuki on the right as well (for a Drouin-Domi-Suzuki) ... well ...

Petry, for

Ceci (UFA), Sandin, 2nd

That's getting a 1st round prospect (LD) and a 2nd for Petry ... I'm ok with this ... might even be able to squeeze a 1st instead of 2nd

Well my thinking is that Suzuki will be a full-time centre by next year. I believe Domi will transition back to full time LW.  So that puts Kapanen on the 2nd line, between Gallagher and Armia. He's also the youngest of the bunch & still could improve upon his 40-50point potential.  But for me Kapanen is more about them needing to shed salary, im fine with taking back Ceci but id want more than just a pick. Ceci is negative value (or at least neutral as he's UFA).  I think you could ask for Sandin, 1st, Ceci + another prospect (not a particularly highly touted one mind you).
 

2 hours ago, 26NCounting said:

After reading the articles from last nights game, there is no way the leafs are moving Sandin, the fans seem to think he is the second coming of bobby orr.  And to be perfectly honest I don't think I would want any D man that has gone through Toronto's farm system, they have no idea how to play D

Sandin is good. I think they would be very resistent to lose him but at the same time with their highly paid top 5 or 6 guys they are in for trouble. They need to try to start winning now & until they hammer down that RD spot that likely wont happen. Barrie on the top pair is an experiment that has clearly falied & everyone else capable of playing higher up is on their off-side. 

I wouldnt worry they've messed Sandin up just yet. Maybe another year ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

As opposed to our D?   I mean ... last night wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement for our guys.

Well in fairness he said D that have gone through their farm system - meaning their development - which only Mete and Fleury have done on our current D corps.  Our two "best" d - the vets, the leaders - were not great last night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/9/2020 at 7:58 AM, ramcharger440 said:

It is interesting, the team is riding a wave right now but who really knows what will happen?

Possibly if it looks like we are on a run and might/will? Make the playoffs. I would say though unless it's someone that is a definite need and good player moving forward , I would look for someone 'cheap" that was a UFA at the end of the season we weren't committed to long term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2020 at 5:54 AM, H_T_L said:

I guess it's time to ask THE question. Should we be buyers at the deadline???

Not that this is necessarily what i would do - but based on MB's history, its imho too early to tell.  A few weeks ago I said we need to probably play almost every game right up to the deadline to know. And I think thats even more clear now. We need to see how we do in that last handful of games leading up to the deadline. If we manage to win most of them, then i think we are (moderate) buyers. If we go on another losing streak we're definitely sellers.

Either way i dont think MB does much.  If we are sellers we'll likely sell of the Thompson and Weises for minimal return.  If we're buyers we'll likely acquire a few more "secondary pieces" at minimal cost. 

 

Most likely we'll see MB say something like "we're keeping Kovalchuk and Thompson - those are 'our rentals' by not trading them" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, arpem-can said:

  maybe Montreal should go hard at signing Hall in the off-season but it will be expensive and to a degree disruptive for a while but it'll cost probably $10 million and term ...anybody willing to do lose a couple of key players to do that ? ..I would 

Hall is an intersection cat. Tons of skill, lots to like about him. But he’s got a unique style to his play. I’m not sure he fits. And as much as I do like him, I think he tend to be just a bit over rated. Because of that, and like you said, probably looking at 10 million. That’s a lot of coin. I’m cheap, personally I’d prefer not to have any one player on the team that takes up that much cap. There are exceptions that I would make, of course. I just don’t think Hall would be one of those exceptions. But that’s just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Hall is an intersection cat. Tons of skill, lots to like about him. But he’s got a unique style to his play. I’m not sure he fits. And as much as I do like him, I think he tend to be just a bit over rated. Because of that, and like you said, probably looking at 10 million. That’s a lot of coin. I’m cheap, personally I’d prefer not to have any one player on the team that takes up that much cap. There are exceptions that I would make, of course. I just don’t think Hall would be one of those exceptions. But that’s just my opinion.

Bergevin is the same.  I think its the main reason he didnt offer Aho more money.  Price, sure, there's no comparables on the team, but if you start paying one guy $10 then there's trickle down to guys on the 2nd and 3rd lines (see toronto).  Its not to say you dont pay mcdavid & crosby crazy money but once you get past that 'elite' i think you have to be very careful.



On a different note, 3 different TB scouts at the game last night. Speculation is that they are looking hard for a top 4 RHD.  Petry?      They may have 2 first rounders (They have Vancouver's 2020 1st as long as the canucks make the playoffs) so they may be willing to part with one.  They have some intriguing prospects. Barre-Boulet was undrafted but has blossomed substantially since being signed by the bolts.  Cal Foote is exactly the sort of prospect id want. 

 

Id consider something like:

Petry 
for
Foote, Barre-Boulet, TB's 1st round pick 2020 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Bergevin is the same.  I think its the main reason he didnt offer Aho more money.  Price, sure, there's no comparables on the team, but if you start paying one guy $10 then there's trickle down to guys on the 2nd and 3rd lines (see toronto).  Its not to say you dont pay mcdavid & crosby crazy money but once you get past that 'elite' i think you have to be very careful.



On a different note, 3 different TB scouts at the game last night. Speculation is that they are looking hard for a top 4 RHD.  Petry?      They may have 2 first rounders (They have Vancouver's 2020 1st as long as the canucks make the playoffs) so they may be willing to part with one.  They have some intriguing prospects. Barre-Boulet was undrafted but has blossomed substantially since being signed by the bolts.  Cal Foote is exactly the sort of prospect id want. 

 

Id consider something like:

Petry 
for
Foote, Barre-Boulet, TB's 1st round pick 2020 

Lol yes, that is one of the areas I like the most about MB. Mostly he’s a pretty frugal GM. Not the most exciting feature, but it has kept us out of trouble.

And for sure, Tampa would make an interesting trade partner. I wish Foote showed a little more offensive ability, and if we’re going to trade Petry I’d prefer to get back something resembling the top LD we’ve all been wishing for. But regardless, Tampa has a lot of good pieces that we could work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I'd work backwards for a change, in terms of assessing who Marc Bergevin should try to acquire, rather than who he should trade. We know he has the option of trading Petry, Tatar, Domi, Weber, Price, Drouin, Danault, and Gallagher. They're all veterans on big contracts or due for raises in free agency and they are all guys who are aging and past prime or guys who could be replaceable for the money they would cost. But if we work backwards, we should think about who MB should try to target and then figure out what those GM's would take to make it happen, if anything at all. For me, the wish list would be (roughly in order for D men and then forwards):

 

1. Evan Bouchard (Edm)

2. Bowen Byram (Col)

3. Jake Bean (Car)

4. Noah Dobson (NYI)

5. Victor Soderstrom (Ari)

6. Philip Broberg (Edm)

7. Juuso Valimaki (Cal - if healthy)

8. Ville Heinola (Wpg)

 

 

1. Oliver Wahlstrom (NYI)

2. Henrik Borgstrom (Fla)

3. Jordan Kyrou (Stl)

4. Grigori Denisenko (Fla)

5. Krisian Vesalainen (Wpg)

6. Peyton Krebs (LV)

7. Joel Farabee (Phi)

8. Jack Studnicka (Bos)

9. Owen Tippett (Fla)

10. Ryan Suzuki (Car)

11. Kieffer Bellows (NYI)

 

For the sake of this exercise, I've only included prospects from teams who aren't rebuilding and thus might be willing to part with prospects (so no prospects from the likes of Ana, LA, Chi, Ott, etc.). Looking at the lists, it becomes clear that teams I would approach if I were MB would be Edm, Wpg, NYI, Car, Fla, and Col. Those are teams that might be willing to part with a 1st rounder and a good prospect in exchange for one of our guys, and if you're lucky, maybe it's even a 1st rounder that ends up being a lottery pick, since any of those teams other than probably Colorado could theoretically end up missing the playoffs too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • BigTed3 changed the title to TRADE DEADLINE - KOVY TRADED
  • 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...