Proposal: Trade Proposal Thread: Part 63

[Lshap]

Continue...

Last thread

Click to read more...

 

[sampollock]

Any trades yet??

 

[Runner77]

Any trades yet??

Only tirades.

 

[sampollock]

Only tirades.

You warm yet?

 

[Runner77]

You warm yet?

Power just came back! Spent 4 hours in my car, my feet are frozen, the house is a fridge but the TV is working. Almost 11 hours at sub 16 C weather with no power. I got nothing done other than arguing in here, lol.

Nice to recover a sense of normalcy.

Now, let’s get some good trade chatter going!

 

[Habs Icing]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

 

[Lshap]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30-35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30-35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

Doesn't make the slightest bit of sense, for the reasons you mentioned. Can't believe they'd do that. How about the Habs finally, FINALLY, start acquiring 1st round picks.

 

[Kwikwi]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

Where do you see it is for a 2nd?

 

[The Great Weal]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

I could see him getting a 2nd+3rd if we retain 50%, but there's no rush to trade him since he's an RFA. If he were a UFA though then a 2nd+3rd is better than nothing.

 

[Scriptor]

Lehkonen is an asset as the add-on that confirms a good return in a package deal, whether it is with Chiarot, Chiarot and a prospect we likely won't sign or have too many of in terms of type of prospect (skilled, but small, for example, LHD, etc.) Chiarot, a prospect and a pick, Toffoli, Toffoli and a prospect, Toffoli, à prospect and a pick, Chiarot and Toffoli, Chiarot, Toffoli and a prospect, Chiarot, Toffoli, a prospect and a pick.

You get the picture. The trade can be smaller or bigger involve salary retention or not, but Lehkonen, as the other part of a deal, has more value than on his own, IMHO.

No, I would not trade Lehkonen simply for a 2nd round pick. But Lehkonen for a 1st round pick with another asset that could fetch a 2nd round pick on his own, sure. Rather the 1st round pick than two seconds.

The key is to accumulate 1st roun flicks, not a multitude of picks from 2nd to 7th like Bergevin had done. Then, it's a question of selecting boom or bust players with the multitude of picks to get some real skill for a player with an impact when we hit bullseye!

 

[Scintillating10]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

For 2-3 million should be able to sign a second tier UFA to replace Lek. It's a free 2nd

 

[Archijerej]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

No. It makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Lehkonen for Kravtsov = yes
Lehkonen for a 2nd = no

 

[Scriptor]

Lehkonen for Kravtsov = yes
Lehkonen for a 2nd = no

It might be a bit more than Lehkonen for Kravtsov, mind you. It could be Lehkonen and a 2nd.

I'd do it, if the 2nd was in 2023, not 2022 (because, for us, the 2nd is like another late 1st round pick -- too expensive on top of Lehkonen.

Would you do it if it was Lehkonen and a 2023 second round pick?

After all, Kravtsov was a 9th OA pick and it's not like he doesn't look to live up to that kind of pedigree.

Given that, this year's 2nd rounder might even be an appropriate add-on to Lehkonen if you are not trying to take advantage of the sourd relationship between the player and the Rangers' management.

Remember how the sour relationship between the Oilers and Pul-Garbage was like water off a duck's back, in the end?

 

[Sterling Archer]

It might be a bit more than Lehkonen for Kravtsov, mind you. It could be Lehkonen and a 2nd.

I'd do it, if the 2nd was in 2023, not 2022 (because, for us, the 2nd is like another late 1st round pick -- too expensive on top of Lehkonen.

Would you do it if it was Lehkonen and a 2023 second round pick?

After all, Kravtsov was a 9th OA pick and it's not like he doesn't look to live up to that kind of pedigree.

Given that, this year's 2nd rounder might even be an appropriate add-on to Lehkonen if you are not trying to take advantage of the sourd relationship between the player and the Rangers' management.

Remember how the sour relationship between the Oilers and Pul-Garbage was like water off a duck's back, in the end?

Agree. Maybe not a 2nd but an add on for sure. But as a basis, I wouldn't be traded Lehkonen for a 2nd when he's making as much as he is and he's exactly what you'd want your 2nd to turn into.

 

[Sasha Orlov]

Any trades yet??

Yes we traded Pezzetta and Oulette for McDavid

 

[MTL-rules]

Yes we traded Pezzetta and Oulette for McDavid

Only if they retained I hope.

 

[Runner77]

Yes we traded Pezzetta and Oulette for McDavid

Noooooooooooo, not Pezz!!!

 

[sampollock]

can't wait for the 1st trade....this board will explode!

 

[Deebs]

Yes we traded Pezzetta and Oulette for McDavid

Massive overpay.....#fireGorts

 

[Captain Mountain]

There's a lot of talk about trading Lehky for a 2nd. That makes no sense at all from an asset management perspective. Lehky was a 55 OA pick. He has been developed, is a bonafide NHLer, young, on a very good contract, and is an RFA. So we're trading all that for basically the pick he was drafted at. But we're forgetting that only 30, at best, 35% of second-rounders become effective NHLers. So we're trading a sure thing for a 30 - 35% chance of getting another sure thing. Does this make sense to anyone?

Don't really agree. If the Habs are rebuilding, then the math kind of changes:

1) Lehkonen turns 27 this year. He's still has plenty of good hockey left, but how old will he be when Montreal is in a position to actually compete again? 30? Better a pick that can be used or traded for a prospect that may fit the window better.

2) Lehkonen's QO is 2.3 mil. Bergevin left the team's cap in such a bad way that the Habs may not even have the cap space to pay him that. If the Habs are rebuilding, then they may be able to move other guys to alleviate the cap situation, but almost every team is either tight against the cap or unwilling to spend in the current economic environment. Its tough to clear salary. Habs probably need to move the guys that will get the best return rather than the guys they'd prefer to move.

Ideally, the Habs keep Lehkonen, but the Habs aren't in a position to do the ideal thing. Its why Bergevin was fired, the team is in a really bad spot. Plus, for all we know, Lehkonen gets something better in return. Drury thought Blais and a 2nd was worth Buchnevich, imagine what he may think Lehkonen is worth.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Latest on the defenseman market from Lebrun per the athletic

I disagree, wait it out.. you'll get a 2nd at the deadline. But you need to get a 1st here.

 

[sampollock]

Latest on the defenseman market from Lebrun per the athletic

View attachment 499114

View attachment 499115

I disagree, wait it out.. you'll get a 2nd at the deadline. But you need to get a 1st here.

2nd pick to a 1st? you wait

 

[DAChampion]

Lehkonen for Kravtsov = yes
Lehkonen for a 2nd = no

Why is it assumed that the Rangers are going to give away Kravtsov?

 

[Kwikwi]

Why is it assumed that the Rangers are going to give away Kravtsov?

they want to win, hes not providing anything to the team. The way he could provide help would be to play for them or acquire an asset for him.