Confirmed with Link: Jake Allen (50% retained) traded to the Devils for cond. 2025 3rd (2025 2nd if Allen plays in 40+ games and team qualifies for playoffs next season)

[26Mats]

Habs have one retention slot next year. Should be used on one of Savard/Armia/Dvorak.

Honestly, I like that we moved Allen. But I really don't want to go into next season with Armia and Dvo on the roster, on top of Anderson and Gallagher. I want to keep one retention spot for Savard, but I'd be open to using it on moving Armia or Dvo in the summer. Then, you move the other for a bad contract that you can bury in Laval.

 

[WeThreeKings]

To get value?

Are you prepared to give Mike 8 million in 2 years time for the duration of our competeitive window. He'll be an anchor.

If he continues to put up 50+ a year on 24 mins a night that's what he'll get. Klingberg stupidly turned down a $7 million x 8 offer from Dallas in a lower cap era.

Why would we be cashing out on Newhook for value? The value is the player, at his age, his ability, and contract now.

And no, I'm not prepared to give that to him, but it doesn't mean at all that we would need to retain on him now or later to move him. His current contract has value and does not require retention to move should we want to do it.

The cap is rising next year with a steep upward projection for the next few years, retention slots and current value contracts will not be a hindrance for actual valuable players that can help contending teams.

 

[nhlfan9191]

And the future? How do you know using this retention slot on Savard in the future wouldn't have gotten us more than what Allen got. In fact he's a vastly superior player so of course he'd get more. Armia is has 11 goals in 47 games which is nearly 20 goals in 82 games. He's also very good on the PK. He's a better player than Allen who's a disaster this year, and at 50% he'd be worth more too. Just because a 1st/2nd wasn't available for Savard/Armia this deadline doesn't mean that it won't be in the future given that most teams prefer vets on expiring deals.

The fact is that Allen's contract sucks. Not sure why many here are willing to go so out of their way to say otherwise. It happens, not every contract works out, but Allen's contract is a very bad one which is why we had to retain 50% and not get anything worthwhile as a guarantee in return. There's nothing wrong with pointing this out. It doesn't mean that Hughes is bad at his job or that this is something that will haunt the franchise for decades.

We don’t know if a 1st was available. I’m sure teams would’ve gave up a first for Matheson/Savard but Hughes views them as more valuable to the team right now.

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

Honestly, I like that we moved Allen. But I really don't want to go into next season with Armia and Dvo on the roster, on top of Anderson and Gallagher. I want to keep one retention spot for Savard, but I'd be open to using it on moving Armia or Dvo in the summer. Then, you move the other for a bad contract that you can bury in Laval.

For a moment I was naive, I was thinking Armia was going to be moved yesterday but it didn't happened. Maybe/surely for good reasons, he shows up one game out of 5. No serious team would bet on him and being stucked with his contract. He will be gone same time next year if he could have a decent year (and I'm still naive writing that).

Habs fans live in a closed jar and we think our sh*tty player are worth more than they actually are. Back to reality : no gm wants Armia, Dvorak and Anderson and never Gallagher who is by far one of the most overpaid near finished player in the NHL and nobody would touch him with a 20 feet stick. Gallagher will have to be buy out when it will not hurt the team so much and when salary cap will raise.

 

[StCaufield]

The worst part is they traded for Allen, who has a .892 SV% in 21 GP.

But Schmid is .895 SV% in 19 games. Daws is .890 SV% in 19 games.

So in the end, they acquired a goalie who is not that much better than what they already have.

I don’t think it’s easy to compare one of the youngest and sometimes worst D in the league to New Jerseys. They’re terrible too but still a much better team

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Honestly, I like that we moved Allen. But I really don't want to go into next season with Armia and Dvo on the roster, on top of Anderson and Gallagher. I want to keep one retention spot for Savard, but I'd be open to using it on moving Armia or Dvo in the summer. Then, you move the other for a bad contract that you can bury in Laval.

I think Armia still has a role on this team unlike Dvorak. I wouldn't be desperate to get rid of Armia that badly. Depending on how Free Agency goes. I'd trade Dvorak for future considerations or even explore buying him out.

 

[26Mats]

For a moment I was naive, I was thinking Armia was going to be moved yesterday but it didn't happened. Maybe/surely for good reasons, he shows up one game out of 5. No serious team would bet on him and being stucked with his contract. He will be gone same time next year if he could have a decent year (and I'm still naive writing that).

Habs fans live in a closed jar and we think our sh*tty player are worth more than they actually are. Back to reality : no gm wants Armia, Dvorak and Anderson and never Gallagher who is by far one of the most overpaid near finished player in the NHL and nobody would touch him with a 20 feet stick. Gallagher will have to be buy out when it will not hurt the team so much and when salary cap will raise.

I think we could trade all of Armia, Dvo, and even Anderson at 50% at some point. It may be too early now. I also think gallagher never, except maybe with retention for a player like Jack Campbell. But anyways, our 3 retention spots were up with the Allen deal.

Could a team have interest in Armia at a 1.75M cap hit this summer? I think so. Especially if we take back a contract of equal value. Same with Dvo and Anderson. But do we want to use our last retention spot on such a deal? Have to think Savard would get the most return at the TDL with 50% retained, so might want to save the retention spot for that. But then again, maybe we can use a 3rd party team to retain on Savard if we're out of retention spots...

 

[26Mats]

I think Armia still has a role on this team unlike Dvorak. I wouldn't be desperate to get rid of Armia that badly. Depending on how Free Agency goes. I'd trade Dvorak for future considerations or even explore buying him out.

Who would be your 3c and 4c if we were able to move Dvo?

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Who would be your 3c and 4c if we were able to move Dvo?

I think Evans is suited as a 4C, his problem is he never plays that role due to injuries. I dislike Dvorak so much I'd trade him anywhere and take on Faksa a cap dump with a pick going MTL's way (wouldn't buyout Dvo in this case). IMO at this point there is hardly a difference in quality of player and Faksa is still cheaper.

I think after a year in the AHL, Beck will be ready for the show so we just need a stopgap. I just hate what Dvo brings (or doesn't in this case). He's a problematic player in the same way that Anderson is. Doesn't make his linemates better and doesn't move the needle on the ice either.

 

[26Mats]

I think Evans is suited as a 4C, his problem is he never plays that role due to injuries. I dislike Dvorak so much I'd trade him anywhere and take on Faksa a cap dump with a pick going MTL's way (wouldn't buyout Dvo in this case). IMO at this point there is hardly a difference in quality of player and Faksa is still cheaper.

I think after a year in the AHL, Beck will be ready for the show so we just need a stopgap. I just hate what Dvo brings (or doesn't in this case). He's a problematic player in the same way that Anderson is. Doesn't make his linemates better and doesn't move the needle on the ice either.

I agree. Though I always wanted to see what Dvo could so on the wing. I find his biggest draw back is that he's not dynamic enough at moving around the ice to be a center. But he has some attributes of a good winger. But it seems we'll never see him tried on the wing. And anyways I want the sewing spots to go to the young guys.

 

[NORiculous]

I agree. Though I always wanted to see what Dvo could so on the wing. I find his biggest draw back is that he's not dynamic enough at moving around the ice to be a center. But he has some attributes of a good winger. But it seems we'll never see him tried on the wing. And anyways I want the sewing spots to go to the young guys.

The thing he is best at is faceoffs…

 

[26Mats]

The thing he is best at is faceoffs…

That maybe, but he has other attributes of a good winger. He has a pretty good shot, he dig I'm the corners. He can make plays with his linemates. He has some scoring touch around the net. He just, imo, can't wheel around the ice all that well, and play drive a line, no matter how good he is at faceoffs.

For example, if Roy is out or being tried on another line, I'd interested to see how Newhook - Dach - Dvo would work. Dvo could even take the draws when Dach is struggling in the faceoff circle.

 

[calder candidate]

Honestly, I like that we moved Allen. But I really don't want to go into next season with Armia and Dvo on the roster, on top of Anderson and Gallagher. I want to keep one retention spot for Savard, but I'd be open to using it on moving Armia or Dvo in the summer. Then, you move the other for a bad contract that you can bury in Laval.

I don't see why people are desperate to move Armia... I understand that he isn't a exciting player but he is still effective and when to the AHL and we never heard much in the media, I mean he is and was better player than Ylonen, Pezz, Gallagher, Pearson, might even argue Anderson and Evans... He is one of 3 players that are + playing over 14min. and 3 of those are on the PK. he isn't taking any ice time away from develloping player if anything he isulating them... We can wait at the TDL or even just ride out is contract.

 

[montreal]

I never understood the whole thought process with the 3 goalies as to me the easy answer at the start of the season was to send Allen to Laval to backup Dobes who badly needed him.

Allen and Dobes could have been a real nice combo to start the season and could have made things go more smoothly for Dobes I would expect.

While I'm a big fan of Hughes so far, I don't think the retention moves were very smart as a 3rd and a late 4th cost us 4,268,750M in dead cap space for the 2 picks next year (they had over 6M this year), guess it just doesn't really seem worth it to me but we'll see what they do with the picks as I do like that Hughes has 6 likely top 75ish picks in '25 unless NJ ends up several spots higher next year.

 

[Playmaker09]

Why would we be cashing out on Newhook for value? The value is the player, at his age, his ability, and contract now.

Correct. But not to us. To a contender.

To us its irrelevant if he's making 2.9 or 7 million. We have nowhere to spend it on, and aren't going anywhere until Anderson and Gallagher are off the books. Which is why I also don't care if we retain for 2-3 years to get what we want. Colorado, for example, had no issues retaining 50% on Barrie to get Kadri. In a previous post, I made the example of Necas vs Newhook at 50% to Carolina if it means they can re-sign Guentzel, while we get the better player in return.

In 3 years Newhook likely becomes just another middle-six forward in a sea of middle-six forwards asking for 6 million a year. His peak value is the next three years, which is exactly when we benefit from him and his low cap hit the least. Prop up his value like Monahan with first unit PP time and offensive minutes, then cash out at the right time for a top 6 upgrade.

And no, I'm not prepared to give that to him, but it doesn't mean at all that we would need to retain on him now or later to move him. His current contract has value and does not require retention to move should we want to do it.

Sure, but if it's a difference maker I'd do it. I'd love to get something around Wallstedt+ before he breaks out in the NHL for example, but Minnesota is still strapped with Parise and Suter buyouts. Matheson at 2.4 vs 4.8 could be the difference in a deal being able to be completed or not, and again I don't mind retaining in the next couple of years while we wait for the dead weight to clear.

The cap is rising next year with a steep upward projection for the next few years, retention slots and current value contracts will not be a hindrance for actual valuable players that can help contending teams.

Teams will spend to the cap regardless. All it means is some bad contracts will be handed out July 1, but we'll be right back in this position at next year's TDL where we'll still be stuck with Allen and Petry each eating up a slot, and teams needing retention to make a deal happen. Among others, if Anderson has a hot start next year, I want the ability to ship him off at 50% for something relevant.

 

[BargainBinSpecial]

Honestly, I like that we moved Allen. But I really don't want to go into next season with Armia and Dvo on the roster, on top of Anderson and Gallagher. I want to keep one retention spot for Savard, but I'd be open to using it on moving Armia or Dvo in the summer. Then, you move the other for a bad contract that you can bury in Laval.

It's going to be extremely difficult to move any of those guys either because of their term or caphit, in some cases both. Armia and Dvorak are gone after next year. Their value is low and the Habs will have only one retention spot open. I really don't see how HuGo can pull anything off with those 2, unless the Yotes are open to trade back Weber. I don't think the Habs want 2 guys on LTIR but maybe they will do it for 2 years.

 

[Captain97]

It's for next season only. NJ will certainly acquire a real starter. We only get that pick if they get injury struggle.

Allen barely crossed that mark here once and that was on a crappy club littered with injuries.

I blame Seravalli, in his original tweet he said it was over both years.

 

[26Mats]

It's going to be extremely difficult to move any of those guys either because of their term or caphit, in some cases both. Armia and Dvorak are gone after next year. Their value is low and the Habs will have only one retention spot open. I really don't see how HuGo can pull anything off with those 2, unless the Yotes are open to trade back Weber. I don't think the Habs want 2 guys on LTIR but maybe they will do it for 2 years.

Yeah, you could retain on one of them and then exchange the other for an equally bad contract. The advantage of trading for a worse player with just as bad of a cap hit and the same term is maybe it comes with a pick attached. But the big win in my books would be having them off the roster and thus opening up a spot for a young guy. But the key to that would be burying the bad contract you get in return in Laval.

 

[BargainBinSpecial]

I never understood the whole thought process with the 3 goalies as to me the easy answer at the start of the season was to send Allen to Laval to backup Dobes who badly needed him.

Allen and Dobes could have been a real nice combo to start the season and could have made things go more smoothly for Dobes I would expect.

While I'm a big fan of Hughes so far, I don't think the retention moves were very smart as a 3rd and a late 4th cost us 4,268,750M in dead cap space for the 2 picks next year (they had over 6M this year), guess it just doesn't really seem worth it to me but we'll see what they do with the picks as I do like that Hughes has 6 likely top 75ish picks in '25 unless NJ ends up several spots higher next year.

My guess is that the Habs were not big on Primeau, but didn't want to lose him on waivers. They probably also thought Allen was going to get swooped on waivers. The Habs wanted something in return on either Allen or Primeau. Allen was deceiving and HuGo tried to get rid of him without retention throughout the year. As we saw yesterday, the plan failed and the Habs got a pick for 50% of Allen's salary. Is it a win? Not sure. Monty and Primeau are not the answer. They need to draft more goalies.

I think Armia still has a role on this team unlike Dvorak. I wouldn't be desperate to get rid of Armia that badly. Depending on how Free Agency goes. I'd trade Dvorak for future considerations or even explore buying him out.

No point buying him out. There's one more yr left and the Habs have caproom with no hopes of making the playoffs for years. Just ride it out and hope for a pick à la Allen by next year's TDL.

 

[1909]

All this goaltenders drama for not much at the end. A third rounder + Habs have still to keep 50% of his salary (cap). That's exactly what most were thinking Hughes would get at best. In the meantime, Monty and Primeau lost precious time in net, Habs lost more games than they should had, and another season went down the drain again.

 

[Miller Time]

On Devil's board I read that their GM suggested he tried to trade for Allen earlier in the year, but Allen wouldn't waive...

Wonder if the offer was the same, higher or lower.

Either way, kinda sucks for Primeau that Allen blocked the trade

 

[Adam Michaels]

 

[Captain Mountain]

 

[Milhouse40]

Which is kinda weird as he wasn't playing that much in MTL this year neither

 

[lamp9post]

I think we could trade all of Armia, Dvo, and even Anderson at 50% at some point. It may be too early now. I also think gallagher never, except maybe with retention for a player like Jack Campbell. But anyways, our 3 retention spots were up with the Allen deal.

Could a team have interest in Armia at a 1.75M cap hit this summer? I think so. Especially if we take back a contract of equal value. Same with Dvo and Anderson. But do we want to use our last retention spot on such a deal? Have to think Savard would get the most return at the TDL with 50% retained, so might want to save the retention spot for that. But then again, maybe we can use a 3rd party team to retain on Savard if we're out of retention spots...

Good question. For me I'd rather keep the last retention spot until the deadline and try to maximize the return of a Savard deal. I see no urgency to move Armia this summer. We still need to ice a roster next year and if we retain salary to dump Armia, we would still need to find a replacement so I'm not sure I see the point. If the idea is to open up a roster spot for a younger player, Pearson is expiring and Ylonon might not be qualified so there will be roster spaces available through attrition. And there are sure to be injuries along the way.

Also, we can't trade Armia and Dvo at 50% retention because they both expire next summer and we only have one retention spot available until then.