Player Discussion Artturi Lehkonen Part 2

[Natey]

Both Lehk and Anderson are players that other teams value and so I would move them if another team is willing to give us a future that has the potential to be in the future more than they are now and will be in the future.

For Lehkonen that price is a 1st or a good prospect.

For Anderson, that price is a Suzuki-level prospect when we got him in the Pacioretty trade. I wouldn't accept a non-lottery 1st for Anderson. And, for a lottery pick, it would have to be on draft day where I knew the player I wanted to roll the dice on.

Suzuki level prospect for Anderson?! HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA

Holy shit. I'm f***ing dead.

The "scoring power forward" with 54 points in 121 games as a Montreal Canadiens player. That doesn't even add the 4 points in 26 games before he came here.

Give me a wet hot dog bun and you can have him. Lehkonen does 100 times more... and is also scoring more this year despite having very little offensive talent.

If teams are actually offering value for Anderson, who is overpaid and signed for 900 years.... Take it and run.

 

[26Mats]

Suzuki level prospect for Anderson?! HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAA

Holy shit. I'm f***ing dead.

The "scoring power forward" with 54 points in 121 games as a Montreal Canadiens player. That doesn't even add the 4 points in 26 games before he came here.

Give me a wet hot dog bun and you can have him. Lehkonen does 100 times more... and is also scoring more this year despite having very little offensive talent.

If teams are actually offering value for Anderson, who is overpaid and signed for 900 years.... Take it and run.

Yes, according to insiders, team's have been callongbavout Anderson and been told he's not available...

Yes Lehk is scoring more, but not more than Anderson...

 

[Natey]

Yes, according to insiders, team's have been callongbavout Anderson and been told he's not available...

Yes Lehk is scoring more, but not more than Anderson...

28 points, +2
24 points, -20

LOL

 

[Vachon23]

28 points, +2
24 points, -20

LOL

Do you like Armia ?

 

[Natey]

Do you like Armia ?

Not at all.

Well about one game every 50 when he looks like the best player in the NHL

 

[_habsfan9]

I want to keep lehkonen, he has too much in his toolbox for us to give away a player like him.

 

[Vachon23]

Not at all.

Well about one game every 50 when he looks like the best player in the NHL

Ok I first thought your where that guy who was in love with Armia and was bashing Anderson

 

[26Mats]

28 points, +2
24 points, -20

LOL

Anderson has more goals.

But I'm neither of Lehkonen or Anderson's biggest fans. We're loaded in the bottom 6 and I want more offensive hockey iq than either have in the top 6.

 

[Natey]

Ok I first thought your where that guy who was in love with Armia and was bashing Anderson

No. Anderson is a lot better than Armia.

Lehkonen is a lot better than both though.

 

[Natey]

Anderson has more goals.

But I'm neither of Lehkonen or Anderson's biggest fans. We're loaded in the bottom 6 and I want more offensive hockey iq than either have in the top 6.

Anderson has far easier matchups and far better linemates and he barely has more goals. He's got less points. And his +/- is f***ing hilarious.

 

[26Mats]

Anderson has far easier matchups and far better linemates and he barely has more goals. He's got less points. And his +/- is f***ing hilarious.

Yet Anderson has the higher trade value right now. Take that to the bank.

 

[Natey]

Yet Anderson has the higher trade value right now. Take that to the bank.

So you think based on Sunday insiders who have never been wrong..... I have a suspicion we wouldn't get anything good for him.

Anyway, I won't respond again about Anderson. This thread is for a good player.

Lehkonen.

 

[Rapala]

Yet Anderson has the higher trade value right now. Take that to the bank.

According to who? The buzz I hear is the calls are mostly for Lehkonen. We should be moving Anderson if this is the case. Because if we are not it means the value isn't what management thinks it should be. The same will apply for Lehkonen. Just because we are at the bottom doesn't mean we have to move assets if management don't like the offer on players we have rights to after this season.

 

[26Mats]

So you think based on Sunday insiders who have never been wrong..... I have a suspicion we wouldn't get anything good for him.

Anyway, I won't respond again about Anderson. This thread is for a good player.

Lehkonen.

Yeah, let me know when Lehk finally hits 20 goals and 40 points, then we can compare the two - and not just based on a recent hot streak LMAO

 

[1909]

I am sick and tired to read that Habs must trade Lehkonen because of his actual value. The guy is valuable for this team and will be for years to come. IF Hughes trades him, it's gonna be to a contending team, meaning a 1st round pick between 20th and 32nd at best. And this coming draft is pretty shallow talent wise. Maybe, Habs will never see that pick on its roster or will end up with McCarron-Tinordi-Juulsen type of talent.

When you have hard working, willing, skilled payers like Lehkonen or Danault, you just keep them.

 

[montreal]

I am sick and tired to read that Habs must trade Lehkonen because of his actual value. The guy is valuable for this team and will be for years to come. IF Hughes trades him, it's gonna be to a contending team, meaning a 1st round pick between 20th and 32nd at best. And this coming draft is pretty shallow talent wise. Maybe, Habs will never see that pick on its roster or will end up with McCarron-Tinordi-Juulsen type of talent.

When you have hard working, willing, skilled payers like Lehkonen or Danault, you just keep them.

this draft is not shallow on talent, it's lacking it at the top in terms of no McDavid or Crosby type player but in the 20's you could land someone very good. Just because we picked McCarron/Tirordi/Juulsen doesn't mean anything since new management team. If I get offered a 1st for Leks I would take it and I've been one of his bigger fans all along unless Hughes/Gorton plan on contending next year or two then I would take the 1st and run.

 

[Vachon23]

this draft is not shallow on talent, it's lacking it at the top in terms of no McDavid or Crosby type player but in the 20's you could land someone very good. Just because we picked McCarron/Tirordi/Juulsen doesn't mean anything since new management team. If I get offered a 1st for Leks I would take it and I've been one of his bigger fans all along unless Hughes/Gorton plan on contending next year or two then I would take the 1st and run.

I hate when I see: it’s a bad year for the draft
1) They are gems in each draft, the important it‘s to find them and develop them
2) You never know how good a draft will really be before 5 years after and each year I hear much the next draft will be better

 

[26Mats]

I am sick and tired to read that Habs must trade Lehkonen because of his actual value. The guy is valuable for this team and will be for years to come. IF Hughes trades him, it's gonna be to a contending team, meaning a 1st round pick between 20th and 32nd at best. And this coming draft is pretty shallow talent wise. Maybe, Habs will never see that pick on its roster or will end up with McCarron-Tinordi-Juulsen type of talent.

When you have hard working, willing, skilled payers like Lehkonen or Danault, you just keep them.

I honestly respect your opinion because I respect Lehk. But Danault is a center and capable of putting up far better offensive numbers than lehk.

Second, we have tons of bottom six players now and in the prospect pool, but only so many top 6 players. That's why I'd take a future that has a boom or bust possibility over Lehk, like a late 1st. Imo, we need as many darts to try to improve the top 6 as we can get.

Sure, I'd rather trade Armia or Byron, or Gallagher or Drouin. But they won't get us a 1st. And I'm fine with Pitlick, Byron, Ylonen, RHP, Armia, and Pez, Gallagher, Hoffman, Dauphin, Heinamen, Mysak, etc... to fill our 4 bottom six winger spots going forward. I think we're a ok in the bottom 6 winger department - as in filled way past the brim.

 

[Rapala]

Yeah, let me know when Lehk finally hits 20 goals and 40 points, then we can compare the two - and not just based on a recent hot streak LMAO

Was Anderson's one season in six not an outlier? because for the most part he's struggled to put up 25 points and has not been above 30 in any other year.
As I said in a previous post Arturri Lehkonen does a heck of a lot more for this club than Josh Anderson. I'm astounded how many people don't see it or don't equate importance to what he does. He drives the net far more than the bigger bodied Anderson. He camps in front of the net Anderson doesn't. He has a ferocious forecheck and backcheck creating turnovers. Where Anderson attempts to get a loud hit in with no real impact on the outcome of the game. He is the model of consistency where Anderson is the opposite. He has a very high IQ and under rated play making skills. Just try to tell me this isn't what I've been seeing these past couple of seasons since Anderson has become a Hab because I'll call you a liar. Those scales are weighted pretty heavily in favor of the player who will command less $$$.

 

[26Mats]

Was Anderson's one season in six not an outlier? because for the most part he's struggled to put up 25 points and has not been above 30 in any other year.
As I said in a previous post Arturri Lehkonen does a heck of a lot more for this club than Josh Anderson. I'm astounded how many people don't see it or don't equate importance to what he does. He drives the net far more than the bigger bodied Anderson. He camps in front of the net Anderson doesn't. He has a ferocious forecheck and backcheck creating turnovers. Where Anderson attempts to get a loud hit in with no real impact on the outcome of the game. He is the model of consistency where Anderson is the opposite. He has a very high IQ and under rated play making skills. Just try to tell me this isn't what I've been seeing these past couple of seasons since Anderson has become a Hab because I'll call you a liar. Those scales are weighted pretty heavily in favor of the player who will command less $$$.

Lehk is not consistent offensively. Lehk has lower goals and points in his career and has played more games - much lower goals.

Aside from offense, Lehk is phenomenal defensively. Anderson brings a much needed physical presence.

They're very different players. I'm not interested in comparing really. I'd trade both for the right futures and think Anderson has higher value on the trade market.

What I will debate you on is the following contention of mine: we are loaded in the bottom 6 and thin in the top 6. I would trade vets for futures that can possibly be top 6. Lehk is not a top 6 forward. Anderson may prove to be. Ideally I want our top 6 forwards to have more offensive hockey IQ than Anderson. That's why I'm also open to moving him.

 

[Rapala]

Lehk is not consistent offensively. Lehk has lower goals and points in his career and has played more games - much lower goals.

Aside from offense, Lehk is phenomenal defensively. Anderson brings a much needed physical presence.

They're very different players. I'm not interested in comparing really. I'd trade both for the right futures and think Anderson has higher value on the trade market.

What I will debate you on is the following contention of mine: we are loaded in the bottom 6 and thin in the top 6. I would trade vets for futures that can possibly be top 6. Lehk is not a top 6 forward. Anderson may prove to be. Ideally I want our top 6 forwards to have more offensive hockey IQ than Anderson. That's why I'm also open to moving him.

Let me know when to look for that much needed physical presence because it isn't there most nights.

 

[Rapala]

Lehk is not consistent offensively. Lehk has lower goals and points in his career and has played more games - much lower goals.

Aside from offense, Lehk is phenomenal defensively. Anderson brings a much needed physical presence.

They're very different players. I'm not interested in comparing really. I'd trade both for the right futures and think Anderson has higher value on the trade market.

What I will debate you on is the following contention of mine: we are loaded in the bottom 6 and thin in the top 6. I would trade vets for futures that can possibly be top 6. Lehk is not a top 6 forward. Anderson may prove to be. Ideally I want our top 6 forwards to have more offensive hockey IQ than Anderson. That's why I'm also open to moving him.

Anderson is a bottom six player on the very good teams in this league. This is where WE need to make our improvements. Moving guys out of the top six who obviously don't belong. WE have a slew of them. You don't move the parts that are working you move the ones that aren't. The only time you do is if the move will fill a greater need higher up the food chain.

 

[Natey]

Let me know when to look for that much needed physical presence because it isn't there most nights.

Also funny that Lehkonen can't have untapped offensive potential despite being 14 months younger... but the one who will not be named may still prove they're top-6!

 

[26Mats]

Also funny that Lehkonen can't have untapped offensive potential despite being 14 months younger... but the one who will not be named may still prove they're top-6!

Well Anderson has scored like a top 6, Lehk hasn't. Anderson averages over 20 goals per 82 games. Lehk isn't even close. The potential is if Anderson can continue to do that. I'm not holding my breath on lehk all of a sudden being able to.

 

[danyhabsfan]

We trade Toffolo for a 1st when he had a 4.25M contract.



So you're telling you'd keep Lekhonen and basically give him Toffoli money to stay with us.

So Lekhonen over Toffoli for you...


72M for 16 players next season already.


You give Lekhonen 4M and we'll have 5.5M left for 6 players...




Asset management. Sell high.
He's a 3rd-4th liner on a hot streak.