Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens

TRADE DEADLINE March 21st


Recommended Posts

On 3/18/2022 at 1:50 PM, BigTed3 said:

Well bottom line for me is that if Hagel is worth two 1st's plus, then Lehkonen is worth at least a 1st and a top prospect. Hagel is younger by 3 years but has much less experience. He's put together only one solid season thus far. Lehkonen is better defensively. Hagel's contract this year is better though Montreal can retain salary, but Lehkonen is likely to be significantly more expensive for the next two years if re-signed. I think Lehkonen's value is lower than Hagel's for that reason, but a team can't just say here's a 1st and a mid-level prospect after seeing what Hagel, Jarnkok, and Chiarot have gone for recently. Lehkonen is significantly more valuable than the latter two and has some advantages over Hagel too, even though his contract situation makes him slightly less valuable as a trade asset for a playoff team.

I think the issue is that Hagel being locked up for 2 more years plus potential upside due to his age is huge in terms of value, it's not just a minor check in his favor. The issue with Lehkonen is for the same reason we probably won't want to lock him up long-term (giving term & money to 3rd liners generally comes back to bite you) it makes even less sense for cash-strapped contenders to do the same. And the arbitration rights means even next year is iffy, so he's effectively just a rental. Now the acquiring team should be able to get something for his rights in the summer, although all the other teams know he's 1 year away from UFA with arbitration rights, so not sure how much his rights will be worth, so will anyone really be willing to pay much more than for a rental?

Now how much is Lehkonen worth as a rental? The problem with using Chiarot as a comparison is Florida likely did a major overpay based on some specific things they liked about him: based on how some evaluate Chiarot, it would make half the trade targets worth 10 first rounders :lol:. As you mentioned, we don't have to trade Lehkonen, so instead of looking at the market, we can really just ask "how much do we need to get back make trading him make sense?". Management should have an idea what sort of contract he's looking for, and Hughes should know the arbitration process well, which should both help inform their decision (are they worried about losing him for nothing after walking away from an arbitration decision?). I tend to agree unless we get two 1sts or equivalent, we should just keep him and consider a trade next year if he's on a one-year deal, but if there's a risk we lose him for nothing, then I'd be happy with something like a 1st + 3rd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Graeme-1 said:

I think the issue is that Hagel being locked up for 2 more years plus potential upside due to his age is huge in terms of value, it's not just a minor check in his favor. The issue with Lehkonen is for the same reason we probably won't want to lock him up long-term (giving term & money to 3rd liners generally comes back to bite you) it makes even less sense for cash-strapped contenders to do the same. And the arbitration rights means even next year is iffy, so he's effectively just a rental. Now the acquiring team should be able to get something for his rights in the summer, although all the other teams know he's 1 year away from UFA with arbitration rights, so not sure how much his rights will be worth, so will anyone really be willing to pay much more than for a rental?

Now how much is Lehkonen worth as a rental? The problem with using Chiarot as a comparison is Florida likely did a major overpay based on some specific things they liked about him: based on how some evaluate Chiarot, it would make half the trade targets worth 10 first rounders :lol:. As you mentioned, we don't have to trade Lehkonen, so instead of looking at the market, we can really just ask "how much do we need to get back make trading him make sense?". Management should have an idea what sort of contract he's looking for, and Hughes should know the arbitration process well, which should both help inform their decision (are they worried about losing him for nothing after walking away from an arbitration decision?). I tend to agree unless we get two 1sts or equivalent, we should just keep him and consider a trade next year if he's on a one-year deal, but if there's a risk we lose him for nothing, then I'd be happy with something like a 1st + 3rd.

The thing with Hagel though is that when you look at his career to date and his stats, there isn't much suggesting his upside is much more than it is now. His Corsi in his first season was a weak 46.3% and this year was 50.3%. His Fenwick's were 44.8% and 48.9%, and his expected GF% were 43.7% and 43.3%. And his relative Corsi was negative in both seasons, so we can't even blame that on playing on a weak team. He's been a fairly bad possession player thus far. To boot, he's been getting significant ice time with Chicago (17.5 minutes a game), and he was shooting at 22.3% in Chicago before being traded. It's only been one game in TB so far, but he played a tad over 10 minutes his first night out. So what I would ask would be the following:

1. How much room is there for growth based on ice time? Am I going to be able to play him more, expand his role, and have him produce more for me? To me, the answer is no. I don't think he's getting more than the 17.5 minutes a night he got in Chicago now that he's with TB, similar to how I thought Dvorak wouldn't get more ice time than he was already getting in Arizona.

2. How much of his success this season was due to strong play and how much was due to unsustainable luck? Well his possession numbers suggest he's not a player who drives play and his high shooting percentage (2.5 times what he had last year and 2.5 times league average) suggests that with the same number of scoring chances and shot attempts produced, his scoring numbers are going to come crashing down over time.

Now sure, there's a chance that he's just found another gear and that he'll be a 15-20% shooter for the next few years for Tampa, but it's unlikely. Very few shooters maintain a 22.3% shooting percentage (that would mean goalies having a save percentage of .707 against him). So I get what you're saying about how GMs might view Hagel, but the numbers suggest he isn't going to continue to ascend as a player going forward.

Conversely, Lehkonen is a strong possession player, and as I've posted before, his points per ice time at 5v5 are among the best in the league. So it suggests that there's actually room for him to produce more if he's used more often, albeit the caveat to that is that he may not be able to maintain the same production if asked to play a bigger role. He gets virtually no PP time, and he's stellar on the PK and on the forecheck. He's also a guy who has performed in the playoffs.

As I posted, I ultimately think Hagel has the higher trade value on account of his age and cost control. But Hagel, if he maintains 20-25 goals per year over the next 2 years is likely going to be paid more than Lehkonen 3 years from now and 4 years from now. So we're talking 2 years of better cost control, not 5 or 7. If you ask me who helps you win a Cup more on a contending team, my answer is Lehkonen. If you ask me who is more likely to continue giving you what you think they're going to give you this post-season and into the next couple of years, it's Lehkonen. So yeah, I completely understand why GMs value Hagel and overpaid for him, but I think you look at the Hagel deal and you can find reasons why Lehkonen's trade value shouldn't be too far off. And I think you look at the Jarnkok deal (2nd, 3rd, and 7th for a 30 year-old impending UFA) and I think Lehkonen at 26 and with cost control for this year and maybe one more year as an RFA and with better underlying numbers is way closer to Hagel in value than he is Jarnkok. I don't know if someone steps to the table with a reasonable offer, but if they do, then it's worth considering for the Habs. Ultimately, I think Lehkonen has more value to a team in the mix for a Cup the next year or two than he does to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what are we thinking about our players?  Chances any get moved?

Lehkonen?
Kulak?
Armia?
Savard?
Someone else?

I feel like we're going to see a couple of deals but I think it may be a guy we're not expecting... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, according to a few sources, we've been enquiring about both Lefreniere and Chychrun.  The "sources" mostly places like Eklund and twitter but there does seem to be a fair bit of chatter about it, so its certainly possible. Id be surprised if HuGo havent enquired about a lot of players tbh.  Doubt anything will come of it, but you never know!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, maas_art said:

So what are we thinking about our players?  Chances any get moved?

Lehkonen?
Kulak?
Armia?
Savard?
Someone else?

I feel like we're going to see a couple of deals but I think it may be a guy we're not expecting... 

Lehkonen yes. I think there's a good chance someone will offer a good deal for Lehkonen. I don't know if that means Hughes will trade him, but I think there's a good chance he does get moved.

Kulak yes. I think we'll end up with a draft pick and move him.

Armia no.

Savard no. Savard's value is just... In the toilet. I don't think anyone is even going to be interested in his services for a late round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, maas_art said:

So what are we thinking about our players?  Chances any get moved?

Lehkonen?
Kulak?
Armia?
Savard?
Someone else?

I feel like we're going to see a couple of deals but I think it may be a guy we're not expecting... 

I suspect nobody with term is moving today and Lehky stays put also. 

Kulak maybe,,, if he's told Hughes he's for sure testing the market,,, but the return will be minimal (3rd maybe) IMO.

Wideman will go if they get any offer at all. Even a 7th would send him packing IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maas_art said:

Also, according to a few sources, we've been enquiring about both Lefreniere and Chychrun.  The "sources" mostly places like Eklund and twitter but there does seem to be a fair bit of chatter about it, so its certainly possible. Id be surprised if HuGo havent enquired about a lot of players tbh.  Doubt anything will come of it, but you never know!

 

I hope we don't go after Lafreniere. He seems to be struggling to establish himself early in his career and I would be more inclined to keep our assets (prospects and picks) than trade for him. And I doubt NY is going to give him away for peanuts... It'll probably cost us our first rounder and a more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I hope we don't go after Lafreniere. He seems to be struggling to establish himself early in his career and I would be more inclined to keep our assets (prospects and picks) than trade for him. And I doubt NY is going to give him away for peanuts... It'll probably cost us our first rounder and a more.

Yeah kind of my feeling too.   I dont mind adding him for someone that's no longer in our plans but Im not giving up Caufield for him, for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I hope we don't go after Lafreniere. He seems to be struggling to establish himself early in his career and I would be more inclined to keep our assets (prospects and picks) than trade for him. And I doubt NY is going to give him away for peanuts... It'll probably cost us our first rounder and a more.

I certainly wouldn't trade them our 1st, but we do have Calgary's that i would consider. Not going to be much difference between that 1st and our 2nd. Definitely want to hold onto next year's firsts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maas_art said:

Yeah kind of my feeling too.   I dont mind adding him for someone that's no longer in our plans but Im not giving up Caufield for him, for example. 

I just cannot imagine NY giving him up for anything short of 1st round draft pick, prospect, and mid-late round draft pick. And I'm not giving those things away for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, H_T_L said:

I certainly wouldn't trade them our 1st, but we do have Calgary's that i would consider. Not going to be much difference between that 1st and our 2nd. Definitely want to hold onto next year's firsts.

I just don't imagine NY will have any interest in CGY's first rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I just don't imagine NY will have any interest in CGY's first rounder.

Me neither but that's as far as i'd go for a project and possible bust. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lehky and Kulak were both on the ice for the morning skate, this seems to indicate that they intend to have both after the deadline and in the game tonight. As usual things can ALWAYS change instantly but looks like Hughes has decided both are too valuable to move at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, campabee82 said:

Lehky and Kulak were both on the ice for the morning skate, this seems to indicate that they intend to have both after the deadline and in the game tonight. As usual things can ALWAYS change instantly but looks like Hughes has decided both are too valuable to move at this point.

I don't think it's a case of being too valuable, but more so of not getting any offers worth considering,,, if any at all in Kulak's case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

I don't think it's a case of being too valuable, but more so of not getting any offers worth considering,,, if any at all in Kulak's case

He also seems like a guy who likes to keep his cards close to his vest.  Keep them out & rival GMs think his plan is to move them. This way he sticks to his guns about "im only moving a guy if the return is right" philosophy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

TSN radio reporting that Kulak is going to the Oilers. Not sure of the return yet. 

From Frank Servelli.

Interesting.  I dont think we'll get a lot for him (which is why i didnt actually think we'd trade him) but who knows. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 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...