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

Expansion Draft


campabee82
 Share

Expansion Draft  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Let's assume Danault, Lehkonen, Kotkaniemi, Gallagher, Taffoli, Anderson, Drouin, Weber, Petry, Fleury and Price are protected, and Armia and Tatar are left unsigned. Which of the Following would you rather lose to Seattle?

    • Chiarot
      1
    • Edmondson
      3
    • Allen
      2
    • Byron
      11
    • Mete
      5
    • Kulak
      2
    • Other
      3


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe both players have a no trade clause in their contracts, so they would have to approve the decision more so that MB (who for the love of god I hope isn't here)

Not Weber.   Price has a NMC and so does Petry. Weber can be left exposed without his approval. 

 

12 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

It makes no sense to protect Weber and Price (assuming Price agrees to it). Romanov doesn't need to be protected, but of the rest my own view is that Petry is miles ahead of everyone else in terms of value to the team, then Kulak, then some combination of Edmundson or Chiarot. And I'd personally rather protect Fleury than Edmundson or Chiarot, but that's another discussion. Bottom line is this... we know that cap space is an asset and teams have traded 6-7M cap space for 1st round picks. 1st round picks!

So imagine this... if Seattle were to tell you they were going to take Chiarot or Kulak or Fleury or Edmundson (one of those is going to be the last guy that won't be protected in order to protect Weber), would you in essence make this trade: give them Weber instead in exchange for keeping that player AND one of three things:

 

1. Using that 7.8M to spend on a UFA of your choosing (Dougie Hamilton? RNH? Landeskog? Hall? Or a run at an RFA like Werenski?)

2. Taking on another team's 5-7M expiring contract and acquiring a 1st round draft choice from them in doing so (if TB offered you Palat and a 1st rounder to take the contract off their hands to fix cap woes for next year in exchange for a 4th round pick, you would be able to take on his 5.3M cap money for one year and recuperate that 1st for doing so. Or Florida with Anton Stralman.)

3. Making a trade with another team to take on a player they know they would lose in the ED (eg trading for Jake Bean in Carolina and using our last protected spot on Bean instead of Weber).

I'd very easily part with Shea Weber if I had some type of contingency plan for his cap space, and Weber's cap hit is for another 5 years... worst case scenario in this case is that they don't take him, in which case you've still gone and protected your 4th favorite defenceman and only given them access to your 5th favorite instead. It's a no-brainer for me.

Likewise with Price, I'm comfortable going into next year with Allen and Primeau and 10M in cap savings if Seattle chooses to take him. I think they'd have more interest in Price than Weber, but that also depends on the NMC clause being waived. Honestly, I think Price would waive it to move close to home and be the MAF for Seattle. I think the hold-up would be MB.

I dont disagree with any of this but do you honestly see MB leaving Weber exposed?   Maybe this year has changed his mind (i mean you'd have to be blind to not see how badly SW struggled for more of the season) but I honestly wouldnt be surprised at all if MB still considers Weber untouchable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Not Weber.   Price has a NMC and so does Petry. Weber can be left exposed without his approval. 

I dont disagree with any of this but do you honestly see MB leaving Weber exposed?   Maybe this year has changed his mind (i mean you'd have to be blind to not see how badly SW struggled for more of the season) but I honestly wouldnt be surprised at all if MB still considers Weber untouchable. 

Leaving Weber exposed is the right and logical thing to do with respect to youth and value of other d-men. I would hope MB’s head would prevail over his heart and “mon capitaine” / respect attachments. Yes I could see him doing this as Petry (NMC) Kulak for value and likely Edmundson given his recent FA contract would be the choices. 
Seattle given its cap room and the financial low future cash value per season of Weber’s contract could still have a very tradeable asset if they even retained salary on him in the future. 
it does come down to how well does Weber perform in the playoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, claremont said:

Leaving Weber exposed is the right and logical thing to do with respect to youth and value of other d-men. I would hope MB’s head would prevail over his heart and “mon capitaine” / respect attachments. Yes I could see him doing this as Petry (NMC) Kulak for value and likely Edmundson given his recent FA contract would be the choices. 
Seattle given its cap room and the financial low future cash value per season of Weber’s contract could still have a very tradeable asset if they even retained salary on him in the future. 
it does come down to how well does Weber perform in the playoffs. 

I would hope MB is gone..... but we have mounted a comeback so........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I would hope MB is gone..... but we have mounted a comeback so........

My wish too - I think he gets a 1 year stay of execution - his promise to Molson was to get them into the playoffs and he will deliver on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claremont said:

Leaving Weber exposed is the right and logical thing to do with respect to youth and value of other d-men. I would hope MB’s head would prevail over his heart and “mon capitaine” / respect attachments. Yes I could see him doing this as Petry (NMC) Kulak for value and likely Edmundson given his recent FA contract would be the choices. 
Seattle given its cap room and the financial low future cash value per season of Weber’s contract could still have a very tradeable asset if they even retained salary on him in the future. 
it does come down to how well does Weber perform in the playoffs. 

I'd actually be shocked if Kulak is protected.  He should be, i agree, but i think the protection will be:

Petry (Mandatory)
Weber
Edmundson 

I think we leave Chiarot, Fleury and Kulak exposed.  Romanov is (thankfully) ineligible  

45 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

I would hope MB is gone..... but we have mounted a comeback so........

 

17 minutes ago, claremont said:

My wish too - I think he gets a 1 year stay of execution - his promise to Molson was to get them into the playoffs and he will deliver on that. 

Yeah id be shocked if he is gone.  I think if we had missed the playoffs there'd be a chance (even then i dont think its a guarantee) but now i think he's safe for at least a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Highly doubt MB leaves Weber exposed. He drools over the guy. I think in MB's head, the order in which he sees value in his D men is

1. Weber

2. Petry

3. Chiarot

4. Edmundson

5. Merrill

6. Kulak

I don't get it. I've gone over a dozen times what the stats show, and there is zero doubt in terms of added value to the team that Petry is #1 and Kulak is #2. Edmundson has better stats than the others but also now have to wonder whether Chiarot's stats will be better not playing with Weber. Going into the year, I would have said Chiarot was the better of the two players, as he's a better skater. He's had a really bad year, with bad penalties, poor D zone coverage, and little offence. But have to wonder how much of the first two issues come down to being paired with a pylon like Weber and the fact that neither guy can move the puck all that well.

Personally, if I were protecting 3 D men, it would be Petry, Kulak, and Fleury. Fleury would be my third because he's youngest, cheapest, and fills the RHD role where we lack organizational depth. I'd likely stick Chiarot next just because of the better speed and the fact his contract runs out a year earlier. Then Edmundson, then Weber. Weber isn't the worst of the D men, but his age/contract make him easily expendable, and I've outlined above what you could do with that cap money if you let him go.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kinot-2 said:

Lucic waived his NMC for the draft. 

Cause everyone knows that no one is taking Lucic. Hopefully Price realizes the same thing - that the Habs are better off by his waiving his NMC and the team protecting Allen. Price is not likely to be claimed, but if he is, it's not a terrible situation for him to walk into. He's not winning a Cup here in the next two years, so may as well go to a team with a fresh start, close to home, and out of the Montreal spotlight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I'd actually be shocked if Kulak is protected.  He should be, i agree, but i think the protection will be:

Petry (Mandatory)
Weber
Edmundson 

I think we leave Chiarot, Fleury and Kulak exposed.  Romanov is (thankfully) ineligible 

My answer for the vote is Edmundson .

To follow on with the relevant discussions...my current protection list

D Protection:

  1. Petry (Mandatory)
  2. Weber
  3. Edmundson 

F Protection:

  1. Anderson
  2. Drouin
  3. Evans (to be replaced with Danault if signed to a new contract between now and July)
  4. Gallagher (Mandatory)
  5. Kotkaniemi
  6. Lehkonen (to be replaced with Tatar if signed to a new contract between now and July)
  7. Toffoli

G. Protection

  1. Price (Mandatory)

Top candidates for the Kraken to draft : Allen, Fleury, Kulak, Chiarot, Byron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BigTed3 said:

Highly doubt MB leaves Weber exposed. He drools over the guy. I think in MB's head, the order in which he sees value in his D men is

1. Weber

2. Petry

3. Chiarot

4. Edmundson

5. Merrill

6. Kulak

I don't get it. I've gone over a dozen times what the stats show, and there is zero doubt in terms of added value to the team that Petry is #1 and Kulak is #2. Edmundson has better stats than the others but also now have to wonder whether Chiarot's stats will be better not playing with Weber. Going into the year, I would have said Chiarot was the better of the two players, as he's a better skater. He's had a really bad year, with bad penalties, poor D zone coverage, and little offence. But have to wonder how much of the first two issues come down to being paired with a pylon like Weber and the fact that neither guy can move the puck all that well.

Personally, if I were protecting 3 D men, it would be Petry, Kulak, and Fleury. Fleury would be my third because he's youngest, cheapest, and fills the RHD role where we lack organizational depth. I'd likely stick Chiarot next just because of the better speed and the fact his contract runs out a year earlier. Then Edmundson, then Weber. Weber isn't the worst of the D men, but his age/contract make him easily expendable, and I've outlined above what you could do with that cap money if you let him go.

 

Agree on what MB's likely order is and what it really should be.

I do think Edmundson may be better than Chiarot but honestly im not sure if you can judge either without seeing them in their ideal situation (ie, third pair dman).  Edmundson has better gap/positioning and Chiarot has better skating otherwise they're pretty interchangeable.

 

I do think Weber will bounce back (no way he's as bad as he's shown this year - i just dont believe you fall off a cliff that much in one season) but he's still a declining asset and I agree that based on salary & contract, he's got to be ranked lower in the evaluation dept. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Cause everyone knows that no one is taking Lucic. Hopefully Price realizes the same thing - that the Habs are better off by his waiving his NMC and the team protecting Allen. Price is not likely to be claimed, but if he is, it's not a terrible situation for him to walk into. He's not winning a Cup here in the next two years, so may as well go to a team with a fresh start, close to home, and out of the Montreal spotlight.

Even if Price waived it, do you really think MB would leave him exposed? Serious question, not rhetorical.   I just cant see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Even if Price waived it, do you really think MB would leave him exposed? Serious question, not rhetorical.   I just cant see it. 

That's why bergevin has to go.  He would not be looking into the best interests of the organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Even if Price waived it, do you really think MB would leave him exposed? Serious question, not rhetorical.   I just cant see it. 

If there was the slightest chance that he gets claimed i can't for the life of me see MB expose him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Agree on what MB's likely order is and what it really should be.

I do think Edmundson may be better than Chiarot but honestly im not sure if you can judge either without seeing them in their ideal situation (ie, third pair dman).  Edmundson has better gap/positioning and Chiarot has better skating otherwise they're pretty interchangeable.

 

I do think Weber will bounce back (no way he's as bad as he's shown this year - i just dont believe you fall off a cliff that much in one season) but he's still a declining asset and I agree that based on salary & contract, he's got to be ranked lower in the evaluation dept. 

 

Here are your 4 non-puck-moving D men in a nutshell:

 

- Chiarot: average advanced stats and bad relative advanced stats playing in a tough role on a good possession team

- Edmundson: good advanced stats but bad relative advanced stats playing in a moderate role on a good possession team

- Weber: average advanced stats and bad relative advanced stats playing in a tough role on a good possession team

- Merrill: bad advanced stats playing in a tough role on a bad possession team and bad advanced stats playing in an easy role on a good possession team

 

Clearly, Merrill is the worst of the 4. He was a bad defenceman on a bad team in Detroit and he's been the worst defenceman here since he arrived on a good possession team here, despite easier match-ups. He's essentially been given a favorable role and done terribly with it.

Weber and Chiarot have largely played together, so their advanced stats mirror each other. They're doing okay in absolute terms but pretty crummy when you compare them to their teammates in the same system. In other words, the team has done better with them on the bench than on the ice. There's an argument that part of this is because of a higher quality of competition except that doesn't explain everything because Kulak-Petry and Edmundson-Petry have done better when getting the tough match-ups and Chiarot and Weber when split up have each done better when paired with a puck-moving defenceman (e.g. Weber's stats with Kulak are better than with Chiarot and Chiarot's stats with Romanov are better than with Weber). Both Weber and Chiarot would probably be fine playing a third-pairing role with a partner who can skate and move the puck for them. The team should favor keeping Chiarot over Weber in an ED though simply because Chiarot is providing similar performance for much less money and term, and he's younger (so less anticipated drop-off going forward and probably an easier guy to trade than Weber if it came to that).

Edmundson is the wild card here. He had good possession numbers in Carolina, but everyone on the team had great numbers there. It was just a very strong team that was well-coached under Brind-Amour. If you look at his relative stats, the team was still better when he was off the ice than on it. So it looked like he was a bad defenceman being propped up by a good system. Here, it's been a tale of two situations. When paired with Petry, he's had fantastic numbers. But take him away from Petry and he fell apart and had awful numbers. So once again, it looks like his performance is largely due to his being propped up. He's doing well next to Petry, but it's kind of like Komisarek looking good next to Markov and looking awful when left to his own devices. At the end of the day, he's also a 3rd-pairing D man who needs to be paired with the right guy to support him. It's hard to make a direct comparison between Chiarot and Edmundson given the former's largely been paired with a partner who doesn't complement him and the latter has received the best possible circumstances to make him look good. As I said, given the toss-up, I'd angle to protecting Chiarot over Edmundson if only because his contract is a year shorter and he's a better skater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Cause everyone knows that no one is taking Lucic. Hopefully Price realizes the same thing - that the Habs are better off by his waiving his NMC and the team protecting Allen. Price is not likely to be claimed, but if he is, it's not a terrible situation for him to walk into. He's not winning a Cup here in the next two years, so may as well go to a team with a fresh start, close to home, and out of the Montreal spotlight.

Price's game is deteriorating and he seems to be missing a lot of games as the seasons go on. I don't think a GM wants to pay $10 million for that. The smart choice would be tp protect Allen if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, electron58 said:

If a player is on LTIR, does he have to be protected? He does not have a NTC or NMC. Asking for a Friend.

Correct me if I am wrong but I  think players who have been on the IR for 60+ games and are deemed to have potential career ending injuries are expansion draft exempt regardless of whether or not they need protection. So to answer you question yes and no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, electron58 said:

If a player is on LTIR, does he have to be protected? He does not have a NTC or NMC. Asking for a Friend.

 

6 hours ago, campabee82 said:

Correct me if I am wrong but I  think players who have been on the IR for 60+ games and are deemed to have potential career ending injuries are expansion draft exempt regardless of whether or not they need protection. So to answer you question yes and no. 

I don't believe they're exempt from being selected if not protected. I think what they're exempt from is being counted towards the minimum number of veteran players a team has to put forward as exposed. So a team couldn't just say we're exposing Marian Hossa and David Clarkson and count those as veterans for Seattle to choose from. But if Seattle wanted to, they could still choose those guys if unprotected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friedman is saying he's heard rumblings that Seattle will target players in their draft to hit close to the minimum required cap they're forced to attain at 48.9M. Apparently, their plan is to have the most cap flexibility they can and then use this to their advantage to try and wheel and deal afterwards (take on cap hit from other team in exchange for adding other prospects and picks). Would provide even more fodder for exposing all of Weber, Price, Byron, Edmundson, Chiarot, etc. If Seattle doesn't want to get tied up in spending money and they have to select 29 players for under 50M, I highly doubt they're taking a 7-10M player and I highly doubt they're using 3.5M on a depth player like Edmundson, Chiarot, or Byron. They're much more likely to take a young player like Fleury or Evans or a guy like Lehkonen or Kulak who's going to come in at a more favorable price point. My guesses of who they would choose among our guys on the bubble to be protected:

1. Allen

2. Evans

3. Lehkonen

4. Kulak

5. Fleury

Also key to remember that the Habs HAVE to expose 2 forwards and 1 D man with 40+ games this year OR 70+ games over the past 2 years. Jordan Weal falls 3 games short of that 2nd category and is also un-signed after this year, so he doesn't count. There also has to be one goalie who is signed or RFA and tendered, and McNiven will meet that criteria for us as long as we qualify him. So with that in mind, this would be my current draft protection (assuming Price waives his NMC)...

Goalie: Allen

Defence: Petry, Kulak, Fleury

Forwards: Gallagher, Kotkaniemi, Anderson, Toffoli, Evans, Drouin, Lehkonen

 

This leaves them to expose McNiven, Weber, Chiarot, Edmundson, Ouellet, Hudon, Vejdemo, Byron, and then UFA's Danault, Tatar, and Armia. They would meet the requirements for exposure on D and in goal but only have Byron meeting criteria up front. However, they'd have several options who would count to the games played totals as long as they were re-signed... Perry, Frolik, and Staal in addition to the UFA's above. So they could hand Perry or Frolik a minimum-wage deal again and they'd be good. Should they re-sign one of Tatar or Danault before the ED, I think it leaves Lehkonen dropping off the end and he'd probably be the guy Seattle selects if that's the case.

Again, I also still think there's room here for the Habs to acquire and protect another D man. Carolina is the obvious target here, with a plethora of D men under 30 but also having at least 5 forwards they need to protect (so they can't just protect 4 D men, 4 forwards). You'd guess that Slavin and Pesce are near-locks to be protected, so that leaves them with a choice of impending UFA Dougie Hamilton, 22 year-old Jake Bean, and Brady Skjei. Bean would be the best fit for us as a target, so maybe they'd be willing to swap prospects or take a 2nd round pick or take on a forward (whom they would be able to squeeze into their protected 7). Lehkonen and a 3rd for Bean?

Minnesota has Suter, Brodin, and Spurgeon all with NMC, so unless one of them waives it, Dumba is sitting there. Minnesota doesn't have a ton of talent to protect up front, so they could go 4F/4D but they likely want to protect Greenaway, Fiala, and Eriksson Ek, and they have Parise and Zuccarello sitting with NMC's I'm sure they'd part with one of those last two willingly, but it would also require that player waiving their NMC. If they refuse, the team would have to decide between exposing Dumba or exposing one of their 3 young forwards. We know Dumba's been rumored to be on the block before, so maybe Minnesota would just consider trading him for a forward (again, whom they can easily protect then under the 7-3 format). I said it last year, but with Weber and Petry aging and nothing much in the pipeline other than Brook and Fleury, RHD is almost more of a need for the Habs than LHD and Dumba would be a perfect fit at 26 years old for a guy who can play a top 4 role for you now and for the next 5 years (assuming re-signed) until you get some relief in your prospect pool. We know Minnesota wants forwards and particularly centers, so I wonder if Poehling having a good year would entice them to bite and grab a local boy. Poehling and a 2nd rounder for Dumba? Or Poehling and Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd the other way?

In St. Louis, Vince Dunn has been in rumors all year, and he's behind Faulk, Krug, and Parayko on the priority list for Stl. Another possible target for MB. Cal Foote in Tampa could be one too.

If I'm MB, a dream scenario would be

1. Poehling + Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd.

2. Turning around and dealing the 2nd rounder and a prospect like Fleury to Stl for Vince Dunn.

3. Re-signing Tatar using the money saved on Drouin to a 3 year deal 4.8M AAV.

4. Protecting Tatar in Drouin's place as well and protecting Petry, Dunn, and Dumba on the back end.

5. Once the draft is over, looking to trade one of Edmundson or Chiarot (assuming not selected) to a team that lost a D man and wants to try and recoup one.

 

At the end of this, we're sitting with a D corps that could look like this:

 

Romanov-Petry

Dunn-Dumba

Kulak-Weber

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Friedman is saying he's heard rumblings that Seattle will target players in their draft to hit close to the minimum required cap they're forced to attain at 48.9M. Apparently, their plan is to have the most cap flexibility they can and then use this to their advantage to try and wheel and deal afterwards (take on cap hit from other team in exchange for adding other prospects and picks). Would provide even more fodder for exposing all of Weber, Price, Byron, Edmundson, Chiarot, etc. If Seattle doesn't want to get tied up in spending money and they have to select 29 players for under 50M, I highly doubt they're taking a 7-10M player and I highly doubt they're using 3.5M on a depth player like Edmundson, Chiarot, or Byron. They're much more likely to take a young player like Fleury or Evans or a guy like Lehkonen or Kulak who's going to come in at a more favorable price point. My guesses of who they would choose among our guys on the bubble to be protected:

1. Allen

2. Evans

3. Lehkonen

4. Kulak

5. Fleury

Also key to remember that the Habs HAVE to expose 2 forwards and 1 D man with 40+ games this year OR 70+ games over the past 2 years. Jordan Weal falls 3 games short of that 2nd category and is also un-signed after this year, so he doesn't count. There also has to be one goalie who is signed or RFA and tendered, and McNiven will meet that criteria for us as long as we qualify him. So with that in mind, this would be my current draft protection (assuming Price waives his NMC)...

Goalie: Allen

Defence: Petry, Kulak, Fleury

Forwards: Gallagher, Kotkaniemi, Anderson, Toffoli, Evans, Drouin, Lehkonen

 

This leaves them to expose McNiven, Weber, Chiarot, Edmundson, Ouellet, Hudon, Vejdemo, Byron, and then UFA's Danault, Tatar, and Armia. They would meet the requirements for exposure on D and in goal but only have Byron meeting criteria up front. However, they'd have several options who would count to the games played totals as long as they were re-signed... Perry, Frolik, and Staal in addition to the UFA's above. So they could hand Perry or Frolik a minimum-wage deal again and they'd be good. Should they re-sign one of Tatar or Danault before the ED, I think it leaves Lehkonen dropping off the end and he'd probably be the guy Seattle selects if that's the case.

Again, I also still think there's room here for the Habs to acquire and protect another D man. Carolina is the obvious target here, with a plethora of D men under 30 but also having at least 5 forwards they need to protect (so they can't just protect 4 D men, 4 forwards). You'd guess that Slavin and Pesce are near-locks to be protected, so that leaves them with a choice of impending UFA Dougie Hamilton, 22 year-old Jake Bean, and Brady Skjei. Bean would be the best fit for us as a target, so maybe they'd be willing to swap prospects or take a 2nd round pick or take on a forward (whom they would be able to squeeze into their protected 7). Lehkonen and a 3rd for Bean?

Minnesota has Suter, Brodin, and Spurgeon all with NMC, so unless one of them waives it, Dumba is sitting there. Minnesota doesn't have a ton of talent to protect up front, so they could go 4F/4D but they likely want to protect Greenaway, Fiala, and Eriksson Ek, and they have Parise and Zuccarello sitting with NMC's I'm sure they'd part with one of those last two willingly, but it would also require that player waiving their NMC. If they refuse, the team would have to decide between exposing Dumba or exposing one of their 3 young forwards. We know Dumba's been rumored to be on the block before, so maybe Minnesota would just consider trading him for a forward (again, whom they can easily protect then under the 7-3 format). I said it last year, but with Weber and Petry aging and nothing much in the pipeline other than Brook and Fleury, RHD is almost more of a need for the Habs than LHD and Dumba would be a perfect fit at 26 years old for a guy who can play a top 4 role for you now and for the next 5 years (assuming re-signed) until you get some relief in your prospect pool. We know Minnesota wants forwards and particularly centers, so I wonder if Poehling having a good year would entice them to bite and grab a local boy. Poehling and a 2nd rounder for Dumba? Or Poehling and Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd the other way?

In St. Louis, Vince Dunn has been in rumors all year, and he's behind Faulk, Krug, and Parayko on the priority list for Stl. Another possible target for MB. Cal Foote in Tampa could be one too.

If I'm MB, a dream scenario would be

1. Poehling + Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd.

2. Turning around and dealing the 2nd rounder and a prospect like Fleury to Stl for Vince Dunn.

3. Re-signing Tatar using the money saved on Drouin to a 3 year deal 4.8M AAV.

4. Protecting Tatar in Drouin's place as well and protecting Petry, Dunn, and Dumba on the back end.

5. Once the draft is over, looking to trade one of Edmundson or Chiarot (assuming not selected) to a team that lost a D man and wants to try and recoup one.

At the end of this, we're sitting with a D corps that could look like this:

Romanov-Petry

Dunn-Dumba

Kulak-Weber

I have commented on Bean and Dunn trades in the State of the Habs folder and would agree with you that they would make great targets of value - I would even push Jordan Harris into the mix vs. Fleury with a pick for a Dunn or Bean. The Wild have had a great year this year - Since they have 2 first round picks, one 2nd and two 3rd round picks, that they can sweeten a retention deal with the Krakken to keep Dumba - I don't see a rising prospect like Poehling and a reclamation project like Drouin being enough for Dumba. Hey if we got one of your Bean / Dunn scenarios and keep Allen, that's a great achievement. Drouin is the enigma in terms of whether he reinvents himself in the playoffs and has some value, but would agree with your protection list although I think MB's pride makes him protect Edmundson over Fleury whose progression this year was rather flat in the AHL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, claremont said:

I have commented on Bean and Dunn trades in the State of the Habs folder and would agree with you that they would make great targets of value - I would even push Jordan Harris into the mix vs. Fleury with a pick for a Dunn or Bean. The Wild have had a great year this year - Since they have 2 first round picks, one 2nd and two 3rd round picks, that they can sweeten a retention deal with the Krakken to keep Dumba - I don't see a rising prospect like Poehling and a reclamation project like Drouin being enough for Dumba. Hey if we got one of your Bean / Dunn scenarios and keep Allen, that's a great achievement. Drouin is the enigma in terms of whether he reinvents himself in the playoffs and has some value, but would agree with your protection list although I think MB's pride makes him protect Edmundson over Fleury whose progression this year was rather flat in the AHL. 

My entire scenario is based on what I think the Habs should target, not what MB will do. I agree with you that he's not going to see it that way, and I fully expect him to protect Weber, Petry, and one of Chiarot/Edmundson. Personally, I don't care if we lose Chiarot or Edmundson because they fill the same role and you'll have the other one left over and 3.5M in cap savings. I don't see a need for both.

As for Minnesota, only suggesting that they've made Dumba available before in discussions and we know they're looking for some help at center long-term. They were supposedly interested in Domi at one time. Are they going to give up assets to Seattle just to retain Dumba? What if Seattle asks for a 1st to overlook him? They only stand to lose Dumba right now because of all their NMC clauses, not because he's not one of their top players. If they prevent Dumba from getting chosen without giving up the rest of their top 10, the next guy up after that is not a very strong player. So I think there's a chance to pry a guy out there who the team isn't in love with. Minnesota's two options might be

1. Give Seattle a 1st, keep Dumba, lose a relative nobody.

2. Trade Dumba for a package like Poehling/Drouin, keep their 1st, lose a relative nobody.

Maybe they have other options, maybe Seattle's asking price isn't that high, but as I said, the 5 NMC's are a huge obstacle for Minny and Seattle could hold them hostage. If I were the Kraken, I'd take Dumba in the ED over taking a nobody and getting a 2nd round pick. I'd only agree not to take Dumba if I got the 1st rounder. So a team like Montreal, which has space to spare to protect a valuable D man, can come in and take advantage of this. I think it would be a win-win for Montreal and Minnesota to make a trade like that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

If I'm MB, a dream scenario would be

1. Poehling + Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd.

 

Given that Poehling is from Minnesota, and if the Wild believe he can at least be a 3rd line, maybe 2nd line C I can see them going for this

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

If I'm MB, a dream scenario would be

1. Poehling + Drouin for Dumba and a 2nd.

3 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

Given that Poehling is from Minnesota, and if the Wild believe he can at least be a 3rd line, maybe 2nd line C I can see them going for this

 

 

That would be a great trade scenario!!!

Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...