- Jun 24, 2012
- 84,006
- 151,572
Evolution of Ryder, Halak and a 2nd.Assuming Hughes even wants Laine, would Columbus take a package of Mesar, Harris and our 2025 second for Laine retained by $1.5M?
Evolution of Ryder, Halak and a 2nd.Assuming Hughes even wants Laine, would Columbus take a package of Mesar, Harris and our 2025 second for Laine retained by $1.5M?
I wouldn't trade any picks from '25 draft. Until deadline at least, when have better idea where pick might be at.Any of you interested in packaging our second first next year on top of the WPG pick this year?
That’s should be enough for a good young top 6 forward, no? Of course depending on who’s available...
- WPG 2024 1st round pick
- CAL/FLA 2025 1st round pick
- Mailloux/Mesar or both
And in case no young nhl forward are ready, do you think that offer would be good enough to get a second top 15 pick in this year draft?
Any of you interested in packaging our second first next year on top of the WPG pick this year?
That’s should be enough for a good young top 6 forward, no? Of course depending on who’s available...
- WPG 2024 1st round pick
- CAL/FLA 2025 1st round pick
- Mailloux/Mesar or both
And in case no young nhl forward are ready, do you think that offer would be good enough to get a second top 15 pick in this year draft?
Matheson would get us the most after the season he just had. We’re talking a top prospect and a good 1st. For example, theoretically if Buffalo wanted a pmd, they would give up a first for him to get a lot closer to win now mode.I would think some teams highly value Mailloux. I think he does get us into the top 15, I'm not sure I would want to trade him for 15th OA. It depends who is still on the board.
In terms of dmen trade value, I think it goes in this order:
Reinbacher
Guhle
Hutson
Mailloux
Matheson
Xhekaj
Savard
Engstrom
Struble
Barron
Harris
Kovacevic
In terms of value to us, projecting their careers, it's very hard to do. How good will Hutson and Mailloux be? How do weigh Xhekaj's toughness versus Mailloux's offense and skating? But I have Hutson 1, Reinbacher 2, and Guhle 3.
Matheson would get us the most after the season he just had. We’re talking a top prospect and a good 1st. For example, theoretically if Buffalo wanted a pmd, they would give up a first for him to get a lot closer to win now mode.
The thing is, Kent generally doesn’t treat people like assets. He treats them as emotional beings whose desires are valid. If Matheson doesn’t want to be traded, he probably stays. Kent might tell Matheson he needs to make room for younger players amd that he has to move him, and then he would try to find a fit where Matheson chooses, which may not be Buffalo (or whomever can offer us the best package).
Longterm, treating players with respect will benefit the team as it will attract free agents.
Engstrom. Trudeau.I would try to get Colton Dach for a D with the same value.
CHI : Colton Dach
for
MTL : Adam Engstrom or William Trudeau
Teams who will need Matheson: The ones getting injuries on their left side.
Otherwise, he's not moving next season, but the one after.
I don't see Matty being here long term but I guess if we keep him throughout his contract and he takes a friendly deal, anything is possible.I'm not sure Matheson is moving next season.
I could see us going with the following dcore long term:
Matheson - Guhle
Hutson - Reinbacher
Xhekaj - Mailloux
If we deviate from that, it may be more due to the salary cap than it not being good enough to win a championship.
I don't see Matty being here long term but I guess if we keep him throughout his contract and he takes a friendly deal, anything is possible.
I can't see Guhle staying on the right side for the long term either at least I hope not as we wouldn't be utilizing him to his full capacity imo.
I do like Arber on the 3rd pairing. I think he's most effective at that spot.
In terms of Lane, Reinbacher and Logan...I just haven't seen enough of them to peg them anywhere for the long term at this point. Reinbacher has all the makings of a stalwart for us.
For this year alone I want our 3 LD to be Matheson, Guhle and Arber. Who and where the others fit in on the right side is still up in the air. Savard has a spot for sure, just waiting for the other two. I wouldn't doubt there could be a move or two made this summer to free up some spots.
Why would Calgary do that?? LooAnderson + Gallagher + CGY 1st for Huberdeau (1 mil retained) + Andersson
Ryder and Halak at least had decent valueEvolution of Ryder, Halak and a 2nd.
and Habs wouldn't do it either. Even though i am a big Andersson fan and think we will need a guy exactly like him, those 4 extra years on Hubby contract are just a killer for our contending window. We just can't take him.Why would Calgary do that?? Loo
Absolutely not. There will be only 1 year left on Anderson's and Gally's contracts when we enter our contending window. And one of them could easily be bought if needed that last summer.Would you guys do
MTL : Gallagher + Anderson
for
CGY : Huby
Indeed, Halak yielded a top center prospect and am enforcer prospect.Ryder and Halak at least had decent value
Has Lane ever played RD? I assume it's just an error and you meant LD but just making sure- For sure I need to see more of the young guys to say definitively that that could be a dcore of a contender. But it is what I would project and then you make changes as needed.
- I definitely have Hutson as my #2 RD going into camp. It's his spot to lose.
Caufield and Hutson are NOT one dimensional. They are not the best defensivley but not one dimensional and they can help the offensive in several ways.Looking at teams like Boston, Vegas, Florida, Rangers, Jets in playoffs and considering the fact that we already have Caufield and Hutson in our system, could we please just stop talking about Zegras trade? There are certain elements that bring you success in NHL playoffs and having bunch of one-dimensional offensive players is certainly not the case.
why would mtl do that Gallagher and Anderson contracts have 3 years on them. Huberdeau has 7 left at 9.5M if 1 m retained. awful for Mtl.Why would Calgary do that?? Loo
I'm assuming it's got more to do with the fact that Calgary is including their stud dman making peanuts in this trade for whatever reason.why would mtl do that Gallagher and Anderson contracts have 3 years on them. Huberdeau has 7 left at 9.5M if 1 m retained. awful for Mtl.
Calgary would do it to get out of that contract and get their pick back
It helps, but a stud d making peanuts is not enough to overcome the risk in 7 years of an already declining asset that even with 1M retained is eating up more than 10% of your CapI'm assuming it's got more to do with the fact that Calgary is including their stud dman making peanuts in this trade for whatever reason.