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

Rumours


kinot-2
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Frank Seravalli and Renaud Lavoie both reporting that Vince Dunn is on the outs with the Blues coaching staff and that he's officially on the trading block. He's a guy I was interested in even before he made the NHL and he'd be a great fit on the left side of our D. Would the Blues be interested in swapping him for a package that's build around any one of Chiarot, Edmundson (former Blue whom they loved there), Fleury, Mete, etc. Would they do it for one of those guys and a 2nd or 3rd rounder or one of those guys and a prospect like Poehling? I'd like our D a lot more if we traded say Chiarot or Mete and lined up instead with

Romanov-Petry

Dunn-Weber

 

as our top 4.

 

The only one that matches up cap wise from our team is Kulak. Dunn makes one million more then Mete so additional Cap needs to go the other way. We would gain Cap with either of the other 2 you mention on D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

The only one that matches up cap wise from our team is Kulak. Dunn makes one million more then Mete so additional Cap needs to go the other way. We would gain Cap with either of the other 2 you mention on D.

Kulak and a 2nd round pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

But how much better is Dunn vs Kulak? Would the difference, if any, be worth a 2nd round pick?

I think the difference is more than a 2nd but the real issue is. If they are officially putting Dunn on the block I would assume that means Terasenko is close to returning and they need cap space. So it can't just be a 1 for 1 + pick type of deal. I think you have to be bold and have confidence that you can get Dunn. Cause you are going to have to make room first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm wondering what happened there, the kid is still young and has 3 full, relatively productive NHL seasons under his belt. Usually that's not the kind of player you give away just like that. I saw the turnover vs. the Kings but unless him coughing up the puck is a regular thing, there has to be more to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm  hearing that Dunn was a healthy scratch tonight in their win over Vegas. Dunn - $1.875M. Conflicting opinions on his value, although it is said, that he is an offensive defenseman prone to the odd give away but, plays a good puck possession game. . Plus minus wasn't really that bad.  Hard to say, if it would be worth it or not. I'll leave it up to Bergy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, claremont said:

I like Dunn too - I’m not sure that the blues have enough cap room to absorb some salary and swap him for Mete and maybe a draft choice vs Chiarot 
I’m hoping Jake Bean plays enough qualifying games with Carolina who will likely protect Skej, Pesce and Slavin. They risk losing Hayden Fleury or Bean - maybe we could trade for one of those prospects 

 

13 hours ago, H_T_L said:

The only one that matches up cap wise from our team is Kulak. Dunn makes one million more then Mete so additional Cap needs to go the other way. We would gain Cap with either of the other 2 you mention on D.

I think you can make the cap work other ways with throw-in players, but my personal preference would be to swap out a bigger cap hit like Chiarot or Edmundson, yes.

 

7 hours ago, ChiLla said:

I'm wondering what happened there, the kid is still young and has 3 full, relatively productive NHL seasons under his belt. Usually that's not the kind of player you give away just like that. I saw the turnover vs. the Kings but unless him coughing up the puck is a regular thing, there has to be more to it.

The Blues media has clearly reported that there is a riff between Dunn and the head coach. Not sure why. But he's shown he can play at an NHL level and play in the top 4. He's a younger lefty and that's exactly what we're missing to complement Weber or Petry. As I've posted before, when Weber and Petry get more worn down, Chiarot and Edmundson are going to be more exposed, and I don't think we can keep running them as top 4 players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

The Blues media has clearly reported that there is a riff between Dunn and the head coach. Not sure why. But he's shown he can play at an NHL level and play in the top 4. He's a younger lefty and that's exactly what we're missing to complement Weber or Petry. As I've posted before, when Weber and Petry get more worn down, Chiarot and Edmundson are going to be more exposed, and I don't think we can keep running them as top 4 players.

Absolutely, I'm 100% interested in acquiring Dunn if the price tag is reasonable. Given the number of prospects we already have in the system and how good the team has played so far, I probably wouldn't mind including this year's first rounder in a potential deal. I know it's really early and we've seen the team going on hot streaks before but I have a feeling that we're not going to end up with a high draft pick this season. Getting Dunn would also probably mean Mete is expendable, so we could swap him for another pick if need be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, electron58 said:

I'm  hearing that Dunn was a healthy scratch tonight in their win over Vegas. Dunn - $1.875M. Conflicting opinions on his value, although it is said, that he is an offensive defenseman prone to the odd give away but, plays a good puck possession game. . Plus minus wasn't really that bad.  Hard to say, if it would be worth it or not. I'll leave it up to Bergy.

The odd giveaway is an understatement he averaged 40+ per season in all three seasons, this is typical of offensive defensemen though. The real issue is that the Blues play a defense first game and Dunn does not fit that mold and as such Burube and him clash. IMO if we are in on Dunn (which I am on the fence about right now) it would take a good prospect + 1st. Maybe something like Dunn for Tuch + 1st does it, but more likely we would need to add a 2nd as well just cause of our current standings in the points.

10 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

I think you can make the cap work other ways with throw-in players, but my personal preference would be to swap out a bigger cap hit like Chiarot or Edmundson, yes.

 

The Blues media has clearly reported that there is a riff between Dunn and the head coach. Not sure why. But he's shown he can play at an NHL level and play in the top 4. He's a younger lefty and that's exactly what we're missing to complement Weber or Petry. As I've posted before, when Weber and Petry get more worn down, Chiarot and Edmundson are going to be more exposed, and I don't think we can keep running them as top 4 players.

Exactly what I was thinking but you would HAVE to know that you were definitely getting Dunn before moving either player cause if you move one and the Dunn deal falls through our D takes a major hit. Perhaps it can be lessened with how well Romanov has played but it is still a huge risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Frank Seravalli and Renaud Lavoie both reporting that Vince Dunn is on the outs with the Blues coaching staff and that he's officially on the trading block. He's a guy I was interested in even before he made the NHL and he'd be a great fit on the left side of our D. Would the Blues be interested in swapping him for a package that's build around any one of Chiarot, Edmundson (former Blue whom they loved there), Fleury, Mete, etc. Would they do it for one of those guys and a 2nd or 3rd rounder or one of those guys and a prospect like Poehling? I'd like our D a lot more if we traded say Chiarot or Mete and lined up instead with

Romanov-Petry

Dunn-Weber

 

as our top 4.

 

Yeah i remember you and I talking about Dunn waaay back when - I think we were both pushing for a Dunn/Thomas for Pacioertty trade a few years back.

I still like him and I think he'd do well on our team but at what cost.  The biggest hurdle seems to be salary because both teams are tight against the cap.  I wonder about moving a player at a position we are strong at (centre) for the one we're weakest at (LD).  Since there's a worry we may not be on the same page as Danault what about:

Danault + Mete

for

Dunn + Barbashev

They get the best player in the deal and a young replacement for Dunn.  We get the best defensman in the deal & a young replacement for Danault.  Salary tradeoffs would be close. 


St. Louis gets one of the best 1-2-3 two way punches in the nhl.  We get an upgrade we've needed on LD for basically 5 years.   I think that Suzuki-JK-Barbashev-Evans & Poehling/Hillis/Vejedmo  would be ok down the middle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

Yeah i remember you and I talking about Dunn waaay back when - I think we were both pushing for a Dunn/Thomas for Pacioertty trade a few years back.

I still like him and I think he'd do well on our team but at what cost.  The biggest hurdle seems to be salary because both teams are tight against the cap.  I wonder about moving a player at a position we are strong at (centre) for the one we're weakest at (LD).  Since there's a worry we may not be on the same page as Danault what about:

Danault + Mete

for

Dunn + Barbashev

They get the best player in the deal and a young replacement for Dunn.  We get the best defensman in the deal & a young replacement for Danault.  Salary tradeoffs would be close. 


St. Louis gets one of the best 1-2-3 two way punches in the nhl.  We get an upgrade we've needed on LD for basically 5 years.   I think that Suzuki-JK-Barbashev-Evans & Poehling/Hillis/Vejedmo  would be ok down the middle. 

Yes, Dunn-Thomas was one of my "ideal trade returns" for Pacioretty and those were two guys we talked about repeatedly as the type of player Bergevin needed to target. In the end, the package he got worked out pretty well too though.

In terms of the trade we're talking about now, I'll say first and foremost that I don't think Bergevin will make a move. I think he likes where he is and if he wasn't willing to pull the trigger to go and get a big French Canadian 1C, he's not likely going to move a key piece off his roster to get a #3 D man. I think he also overvalues the likes of Chiarot and Edmundson and doesn't see the need at LHD that some of us see. It's worked out alright so far this season for him, but as I've stated, we've seen the same pattern of Petry and Weber carrying the D corps and then wearing down and the entire defence kind of falling apart when those two aren't fresh. I'm saying it now, but we'll be in trouble if we continue to play Chiarot and Edmundson in the top 4. There's room for one of those guys on a third pairing but they're otherwise filler. I talked two summer ago about how the guy the Habs should have offer sheeted wasn't AHo but rather Werenski and I stand by that now.

So getting back to Dunn, he'd be a great add to a position of need. You're right that we don't just have the luxury of adding him but as I noted, it doesn't make a ton of sense to retain Chiarot and Edmundson and just add Dunn, so ideally one of them would be shipped out. We'd need to add a pick or prospect to make that work though. I don't see MB moving Danault, but another option could be to move one of Armia or Lehkonen to make the salaries work. A third option would be to remember that teams can retain salary, so if we wanted to make a trade around Mete vs. Dunn, we could build something like Mete + a 2nd +/- another prospect or lower pick in exchange for Dunn with Stl retaining salary to even out the difference between what he and Mete are making. He's an RFA after this year, so Stl retaining salary on Dunn would only affect them for this one season.

There are definitely ways to make this work if MB is indeed interested. And we definitely have a spot to play with as far as protecting a D man for the ED. If we add Dunn to Weber and Petry as our protected list, it means we're still only losing one of Kulak, Chiarot, Fleury, or Edmundson and we can survive that if it comes to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the 4th Period:

During the “Saturday Headlines” segment on Hockey Night in Canada, Elliotte Friedman reported Mete has generated interest from multiple teams looking for help on their backend.Friedman noted that Montreal’s depth is the reason “Mete can't get into the lineup,” and the team doesn’t wait to put him on waivers to send him to their taxi squad because of the risk of losing him for nothing if another team puts in a claim.

A trade involving Mete may not be imminent, but that won’t stop teams from keeping tabs on the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

From the 4th Period:

During the “Saturday Headlines” segment on Hockey Night in Canada, Elliotte Friedman reported Mete has generated interest from multiple teams looking for help on their backend.Friedman noted that Montreal’s depth is the reason “Mete can't get into the lineup,” and the team doesn’t wait to put him on waivers to send him to their taxi squad because of the risk of losing him for nothing if another team puts in a claim.

A trade involving Mete may not be imminent, but that won’t stop teams from keeping tabs on the situation.

I definitely understand teams keeping tabs on the situation but I don't see a reason to move him. He's a young proven NHL defenseman who might improve. We need him for depth though and there is no reason to put him through waivers at this point. At this point this team is trying to win now, you don't trade a guy like him just to get a draft pick and we don't have the cap space to make any other kind of deal. 

its only a matter of time that someone will get injured, Mete will definitely get on the ice, its only a matter of when

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, habsisme said:

I definitely understand teams keeping tabs on the situation but I don't see a reason to move him. He's a young proven NHL defenseman who might improve. We need him for depth though and there is no reason to put him through waivers at this point. At this point this team is trying to win now, you don't trade a guy like him just to get a draft pick and we don't have the cap space to make any other kind of deal. 

its only a matter of time that someone will get injured, Mete will definitely get on the ice, its only a matter of when

True.  There's a pretty high probability he's left exposed at the ED though so we might well choose to move him prior to the end of the season rather than losing him for nothing.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

True.  There's a pretty high probability he's left exposed at the ED though so we might well choose to move him prior to the end of the season rather than losing him for nothing.   

But then you still have to expose someone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

True.  There's a pretty high probability he's left exposed at the ED though so we might well choose to move him prior to the end of the season rather than losing him for nothing.   

 

5 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

But then you still have to expose someone else. 

this and I don't think MB is or should be thinking this way. We may lose some players to free agency (I mean we will lose SOME without question) but I don't think you trade anyone. We're trying to win now. If we end up losing Tatar and Danault for nothing, then so be it. This team has a chance to go deep into the playoffs, its not time to manage assets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, habsisme said:

 

this and I don't think MB is or should be thinking this way. We may lose some players to free agency (I mean we will lose SOME without question) but I don't think you trade anyone. We're trying to win now. If we end up losing Tatar and Danault for nothing, then so be it. This team has a chance to go deep into the playoffs, its not time to manage assets

Yeah,,,, if we are indeed going for it then you have to consider guys we might possibly lose as our trade deadline pickups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, habsisme said:

this and I don't think MB is or should be thinking this way. We may lose some players to free agency (I mean we will lose SOME without question) but I don't think you trade anyone. We're trying to win now. If we end up losing Tatar and Danault for nothing, then so be it. This team has a chance to go deep into the playoffs, its not time to manage assets

Agree - Tatar and Danault are our rentals - they only have trade value if we slip out of playoff contention in which case major heads roll 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MuddyWaterMoose said:

https://www.gohabsgo.com/articles/sidney-crosby-to-the-montreal-canadiens/?fbclid=IwAR3a3NZKr640-iKdOg0A_GdD4IQZSoo8LmAzgvSRZMvNflkSsOIRxSXvb50

Would you do this trade?

Crosby for:

Philip Danault, Victor Mete, and a first round pick

Optional: throw in or replace someone with Drouin

lol of course I would make that trade! It's just not enough to get Crosby. First of all, if we were making this trade in-season, Danault would need an extension ready to be signed with the Pens (and he seems to want to test free agency), we would also have to include Drouin or someone else to make the cap numbers work out. I would make this trade in a heartbeat but there is NO way Pens would do this. I would happily throw in another first and Caufield and Guhle... and I still don't think it would be enough. They'd probably accept what I offered if you replace Danault with KK... maybe, and that's when I start thinking, is it really worth it anymore? Trading Crosby is going to be one giant headache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, habsisme said:

lol of course I would make that trade! It's just not enough to get Crosby. First of all, if we were making this trade in-season, Danault would need an extension ready to be signed with the Pens (and he seems to want to test free agency), we would also have to include Drouin or someone else to make the cap numbers work out. I would make this trade in a heartbeat but there is NO way Pens would do this. I would happily throw in another first and Caufield and Guhle... and I still don't think it would be enough. They'd probably accept what I offered if you replace Danault with KK... maybe, and that's when I start thinking, is it really worth it anymore? Trading Crosby is going to be one giant headache

Is it possible you are over valuing Crosby? I don't think it necessarily needs to be such a headache. I can get behind the idea that Pitt would want more tangible futures. So your suggestion of Caufield or Guhle makes sense, but beyond that, I can't see how that would not satisfy the Pittsburgh brass. I mean, currently they seem like a sinking ship. They just seem to be going nowhere while the teams around them seem to be getting better. Sid is in the back half of his career. It's not like this is McDavid who still has his best years to come. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, habsisme said:

lol of course I would make that trade! It's just not enough to get Crosby. First of all, if we were making this trade in-season, Danault would need an extension ready to be signed with the Pens (and he seems to want to test free agency), we would also have to include Drouin or someone else to make the cap numbers work out. I would make this trade in a heartbeat but there is NO way Pens would do this. I would happily throw in another first and Caufield and Guhle... and I still don't think it would be enough. They'd probably accept what I offered if you replace Danault with KK... maybe, and that's when I start thinking, is it really worth it anymore? Trading Crosby is going to be one giant headache

There is only one thing that MB has in his favor in any Crosby trade and that is Crosby would likely only waive for Montreal. He loves being in Pittsburgh and would retire there if given the option but the Habs were his boyhood team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MuddyWaterMoose said:

Is it possible you are over valuing Crosby? I don't think it necessarily needs to be such a headache. I can get behind the idea that Pitt would want more tangible futures. So your suggestion of Caufield or Guhle makes sense, but beyond that, I can't see how that would not satisfy the Pittsburgh brass. I mean, currently they seem like a sinking ship. They just seem to be going nowhere while the teams around them seem to be getting better. Sid is in the back half of his career. It's not like this is McDavid who still has his best years to come. 

I think they're at least going to want to build the trade around one bonified NHL star player. They likely want Suzuki, but MAYBE we can convince the KK is enough and load it with some picks and prospects. But if you're trading Crosby you want something tangible in return. I'd offer KK, Guhle, Caufield and a first, but ask them to retain 3-4 million in cap hit. I still don't think it would get it done though. 

he scored 100 points 2 years ago, and is still scoring a point per game level. He has all the intangibles too. I don't think I'm overvaluing him. 

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...