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

The Trade Deadline


H_T_L

Recommended Posts

Does set Stars as being a seller though, which means Sharp is almost certainly going to be traded soon. My guess is Dallas would probably take a 2nd rounder for him. Would be nice if we could sell them one of our expiring contracts though to get it done (i.e. Sharp for a 2nd and DD), since Dallas doesn't need cap space for rest of season. A deal like that gives us a 2nd line LW and cap space/roster spot to maybe make another deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Does set Stars as being a seller though, which means Sharp is almost certainly going to be traded soon. My guess is Dallas would probably take a 2nd rounder for him. Would be nice if we could sell them one of our expiring contracts though to get it done (i.e. Sharp for a 2nd and DD), since Dallas doesn't need cap space for rest of season. A deal like that gives us a 2nd line LW and cap space/roster spot to maybe make another deal.

 

Sharp vs. Vanek.... what're your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

See to me, Markov and Plekanec are no longer part of the core. You're not building around these guys any more, they're more role players just being paid a lot of money. The core IMO is Price, Weber, Petry, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Galchenyuk, and Radulov. That's the foundation of your line-up. Danault, Lehkonen, McCarron, and Beaulieu could become part of that core, but they're not there yet. The rest of the guys are role players IMO.

Two non-core players taking ~$12M. :|

Desharnais, Emelin, and Shaw, could be considered part of that group (not necessarily by merit).
Radulov is still a "mercenary" until we sign him to an extension. Plekanec and Markov are remnants of the previous core.
IMO, the fact that all our core players come from pre-Bergevin, trade, or FA, is quite telling. Not one player drafted and developed under Bergevin/Therrien has become part of our core in 5 years?

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Does set Stars as being a seller though, which means Sharp is almost certainly going to be traded soon. My guess is Dallas would probably take a 2nd rounder for him. Would be nice if we could sell them one of our expiring contracts though to get it done (i.e. Sharp for a 2nd and DD), since Dallas doesn't need cap space for rest of season. A deal like that gives us a 2nd line LW and cap space/roster spot to maybe make another deal.

Wouldn't mind Sharp, not super excited about the rental aspect, but it would be better than doing nothing. I'm hoping some "doesn't have to be dealt, but you can talk me into trading him" surprise happens. Wings didn't need to deal Jurco, for example.

--------------

Seems to be a lot of RH D-men out there this time around, after them being fairly scarce in recent years. Any value to us in Wideman? (Either as a replacement for a departed Pateryn or off-side scenario)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sharp vs. Vanek, I don't know that there's a big difference between them. Sharp would take up more cap hit, but if the Stars retained some salary (which they'd almost invariably have to unless they accept taking DD) it's probably moot. Both guys have posted similar possession numbers, with Sharp having a slightly better Corsi and Vanek having a slightly better % of scoring chances for. They're PP value seems to be similar too. The one difference is that Sharp has a very low PDO whereas Vanek's is high, suggesting there's probably more room to see Sharp's numbers improve. Sharp is a little older but truthfully, I'd be surprised to see either guy stay on past the end of the season or make a legitimate contribution here long-term, so I think that's again moot. To me, it simply comes down to which guy you can get for cheaper in a trade.

As for D men, again, I don't think we need to address the right side at all, unless the plan is to trade Weber for another top-pairing D man. But I'm fine with Weber-Petry-Pateryn down the right. What needs addressing is the left. Markov and Beaulieu are fine, but we could do to upgrade on Emelin on the first pairing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if anyone reported this already, but yesterday Bob McKenzie stated that Stl had had deals in place with three teams but that all fell through because he wouldn't sign long-term deals with them. One was Edm according to McKenzie. Elliotte Friedman adding today that the others were Arizona and Tampa, and that Tampa was the one who offered Shattenkirk 6M x 7 years. Rumor is that Shattenkirk wants to go to the Northeast and is only considering about 8-10 teams, including Mtl, Ott, Tor, Bos, and NYR among others. As I said, would be an interesting add in a sign-and-trade IF we can then parlay Weber into another great asset (and I think Edmonton could be a real target here to trade Weber to). For example,

Emelin and a 1st round pick to Stl for Shattenkirk and a 4th round pick

Weber to Edmonton for RNH and Nurse

 

Would leave us with something like

Pacioretty-RNH-Radulov

Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Gallagher

Carr-Danault-Shaw

Byron-Plekanec-McCarron

 

Markov-Petry

Nurse-Shattenkirk

Beaulieu-Pateryn

Suddenly, your D is a lot younger and more mobile and you have 5 guys who could be playing here for the next 5 years, with Sergachev to step in for Markov...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Not sure if anyone reported this already, but yesterday Bob McKenzie stated that Stl had had deals in place with three teams but that all fell through because he wouldn't sign long-term deals with them. One was Edm according to McKenzie. Elliotte Friedman adding today that the others were Arizona and Tampa, and that Tampa was the one who offered Shattenkirk 6M x 7 years. Rumor is that Shattenkirk wants to go to the Northeast and is only considering about 8-10 teams, including Mtl, Ott, Tor, Bos, and NYR among others. As I said, would be an interesting add in a sign-and-trade IF we can then parlay Weber into another great asset (and I think Edmonton could be a real target here to trade Weber to). For example,

Emelin and a 1st round pick to Stl for Shattenkirk and a 4th round pick

Weber to Edmonton for RNH and Nurse

 

Would leave us with something like

Pacioretty-RNH-Radulov

Lehkonen-Galchenyuk-Gallagher

Carr-Danault-Shaw

Byron-Plekanec-McCarron

 

Markov-Petry

Nurse-Shattenkirk

Beaulieu-Pateryn

Suddenly, your D is a lot younger and more mobile and you have 5 guys who could be playing here for the next 5 years, with Sergachev to step in for Markov...

 

 

woooo do i ever like that, dont stop ted, get us rid of shaw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Not sure if anyone reported this already, but yesterday Bob McKenzie stated that Stl had had deals in place with three teams but that all fell through because he wouldn't sign long-term deals with them. One was Edm according to McKenzie. Elliotte Friedman adding today that the others were Arizona and Tampa, and that Tampa was the one who offered Shattenkirk 6M x 7 years. Rumor is that Shattenkirk wants to go to the Northeast and is only considering about 8-10 teams, including Mtl, Ott, Tor, Bos, and NYR among others. As I said, would be an interesting add in a sign-and-trade IF we can then parlay Weber into another great asset (and I think Edmonton could be a real target here to trade Weber to). For example,

Its great reasoning & a wonderful plan (and fair for all sides) but do you honestly think Bergevin will even consider trading Weber right now? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Its great reasoning & a wonderful plan (and fair for all sides) but do you honestly think Bergevin will even consider trading Weber right now? 

No. The problem is that as a GM, he's far too invested in Weber as being his stamp on the team. And he's got way too much pride to admit that he made a major mistake with the Subban0Weber trade. An objective outside view would tell you the team as a whole isn't doing any better this year than last year with respect to responding to leadership or character, and on ice, Weber's point production and possession numbers are simply inferior to what Subban brought and is bringing to Nashville. Weber is still an effective player, but he's no Subban, he requires a much more specific partner to complement him, and most importantly, he's on an awful awful contract. If we have the opportunity to get younger and faster and move a bad contract in exchange for good talent, the positives outweigh the negatives here.

There is only one real downside to swapping out Weber-Emelin for RNH-Shattenkirk-Nurse (for example) and that's the cap recapture penalty. Because Weber is still making a big salary this year, if he retires early, we would get hit with a recapture penalty against our cap in the future. In order to avoid that, we would need to keep Weber on our roster for another 3-4 years to bring that cap recapture penalty down as his salary drops. But otherwise, it just makes sense to look for a move like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

No. The problem is that as a GM, he's far too invested in Weber as being his stamp on the team.

 

This. As much as I want to believe MB would pull the trigger on a trade involving Weber if it truly made sense for us, I just don't see that happening. Maybe CJ will be involved here before the deadline; he's all about what makes the TEAM better objectively. I have a feeling CJ will start barking now that he's got somewhat of a grip on his roster, I just hope somebody (MB) listens to him and acts on it. He's not invested or attached to anyone on this roster, and some fresh eyes evaluating could swing MB one way or the other. If there's any coach in the league with the stones to step up and make something happen with their GM, it's CJ.

Think about it, if you're CJ and you just signed in Montreal for 5 years... when will it be easiest to make yourself look good? I actually believe the answer to that is this year or next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think this belongs here. I went over to Colorado's forum and asked a simple question: What would it take for Montreal to land Duchene? I was curious to hear their thoughts. Two responses stood out...

- Same ask as everyone else really. We'll want Sergachev, you won't want to deal him. So then you move to Juulsen + 1st + forward prospect and maybe +. The issue here is the Habs don't seem to have the forward prospect depth that we'd want to make the deal. And I'm pretty sure they don't want to move Galchenyuk. Even if Ottawa wouldn't move Chabot, the rumored package is still a better one than Montreal will put together

 

- I mean, if MB called Sakic up tomorrow and said here's Galchenyuk + Juulsen + another prospect along the lines of, say, Scherbak and a pick I think you could get it done. Obviously, it would get done tomorrow if you went Sergachev + Galchenyuk, no picks or additions required. And that's a gamble you could make if you want to do the proverbial chips in the middle type move. The problem as I see it for you guys is simple really. Are you making a cup run over the next couple of years or not? If you are then Duchene helps you tremendously along that path. He's the only real 1C available. To what end does MB need a deep playoff run after already firing his coach to save his own job? Hard to say. I'm on the outside looking in on that one. I just don't know how much time you guys have left with Price before things get really crazy with the cap up there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

 

:7072:Wonder who we could give them???:ph34r:

Mentioned it in the rumors, but I'm wondering if something involving RNH + Fayne for Plekanec + Emelin (although Desharnais, Plekanec, Danault, and Mitchell are options as well). I don't know if Fayne works for us, but it could bring the cost down if the Oilers want to clear him off their books. We could move him at the end of the season, or dangle him for the expansion draft, since we have to expose one defenseman under contract for next year, and he qualifies. I don't know enough about Fayne to compare him to Pateryn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Let's be realistic there isn't an interest in DD . So why not put him on waivers and send him down .

We know MB tried to trade him last trade deadline in 2016. We know DD has been on the trade block most of the season. The fact he was benched for 6-7 games tells me the Habs have kind of given up on trying to showcase him for a trade. The fact Ribeiro cleared waivers and asked for a trade and no one wanted him when he's such a similar player on the same contract tells me there's no market for DD. We're stuck with him. The question is whether saving 900k or so on the cap by sending him down makes a difference to us. It only does if you have someone to replace him. I'd personally still rather have Desharnais in the pressbox than Flynn: if a Galchenyuk or Plekanec goes down to injury again, DD is a better fill-in whereas Flynn doesn't really add much and just about anyone can fill on on the 4th line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

We know MB tried to trade him last trade deadline in 2016. We know DD has been on the trade block most of the season. The fact he was benched for 6-7 games tells me the Habs have kind of given up on trying to showcase him for a trade. The fact Ribeiro cleared waivers and asked for a trade and no one wanted him when he's such a similar player on the same contract tells me there's no market for DD. We're stuck with him. The question is whether saving 900k or so on the cap by sending him down makes a difference to us. It only does if you have someone to replace him. I'd personally still rather have Desharnais in the pressbox than Flynn: if a Galchenyuk or Plekanec goes down to injury again, DD is a better fill-in whereas Flynn doesn't really add much and just about anyone can fill on on the 4th line.

It's not even 900K when you factor in the salary of the guy you call up to replace him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

We know MB tried to trade him last trade deadline in 2016. We know DD has been on the trade block most of the season. The fact he was benched for 6-7 games tells me the Habs have kind of given up on trying to showcase him for a trade. The fact Ribeiro cleared waivers and asked for a trade and no one wanted him when he's such a similar player on the same contract tells me there's no market for DD. We're stuck with him. The question is whether saving 900k or so on the cap by sending him down makes a difference to us. It only does if you have someone to replace him. I'd personally still rather have Desharnais in the pressbox than Flynn: if a Galchenyuk or Plekanec goes down to injury again, DD is a better fill-in whereas Flynn doesn't really add much and just about anyone can fill on on the 4th line.

No market, but he can be used to balance against picking up salary in a trade. That's best case scenario for us at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RicochetII said:

No market, but he can be used to balance against picking up salary in a trade. That's best case scenario for us at this point.

Exactly. Would be even better if we could dump Plekanec's salary for next year, but I'd take getting rid of DD to be able to acquire a better assets for this season too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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