Proposal: MTL and CGY

[Lockin17]

Why can't Ghule be a stud on Montreal's blueline ? This seems like the complete opposite of what a management team that is trying to accelerate the rebuild would do .

Habs have tons of stud on LD.
Ghule's value is high atm and could help a team do a reset instead of a rebuild.
Flames fit the narrative.

 

[Flamesfan62]

No thanks. Will definitely be better value at our pick than Guhle.

 

[bud12]

No thanks. Will definitely be better value at our pick than Guhle.

The chance that the #9 pick will be better than Guhle are slim.

 

[Lockin17]

No thanks. Will definitely be better value at our pick than Guhle.

Don't think so ,, might but the chances are slim.

 

[Wayfarer13]

Awful. No one's gifting Montreal a top 10 pick, let alone two of them

Remember Hughes is the GM so don't rule out that he can pull it off

 

[Junohockeyfan]

Habs have tons of stud on LD.
Ghule's value is high atm and could help a team do a reset instead of a rebuild.
Flames fit the narrative.

They don’t. Struble/Xhekaj/Harris plus prospects do not have top pairing potential. Only Guhle does. Lane Hutson projects to be a 2nd pairing offensive dman.

Struble /Harris are bottom pairing. They don’t have a lot of upside. Their floor however is 3rd pairing.

Habs would be stupid to trade Guhle.

 

[Wayfarer13]

Montreal fans still trying to bend us over even more on that Monahan trade
You made out good - Don't get greedy

Greed or what we want plays no bearing here.There is a spectrum of what the return will end being.Optimism I personally find to preferable to pessimism as an option.

 

[dgibb10]

The chance that the #9 pick will be better than Guhle are slim.

I'd put it at about 50%.

Looking at 2019 and earlier picks 9-12 for a quick look
2019: Zegras*, Boldy
2018: Bouchard, Dobson
2017: Tippett, Necas, Villardi*
2016: Sergachev
2015: meier, Rantanen, Crouse*
2014: Ehlers, Fiala
2013: Horvat, Nichushkin*
2012: Trouba, Forsberg
2011: Hamilton, Brodin
2010: Granlund, Fowler

* indicates guys I'm not sure about

I'd say those guys peg over what Guhle projects as.

And the advantage with the pick is the 2 extra ELC years you get that Guhle has already used up

 

[Lockin17]

They don’t. Struble/Xhekaj/Harris plus prospects do not have top pairing potential. Only Guhle does. Lane Hutson projects to be a 2nd pairing offensive dman.

Struble /Harris are bottom pairing. They don’t have a lot of upside. Their floor however is 3rd pairing.

Habs would be stupid to trade Guhle.

Matheson/Ghule
Hutson
Wifi
Struble
Engstrom
Would be our left side for the next 4 years.

Either Matheson or Ghule as to go

 

[FLAMESFAN]

Who's this Ghule guy? What's with you Montreal fans and getting players names wrong over and over again? Guy's on your team, you should know how to spell his name!

As for the trade I would maybe do it if it was just the 9th for Guhle. Then I'd love to see the Flames pick up a couple top 6 guys and keep Markstrom. No rebuild, and no top pick for Montreal next year!

 

[bud12]

I'd put it at about 50%.

Looking at 2019 and earlier picks 9-12 for a quick look
2019: Zegras*, Boldy
2018: Bouchard, Dobson
2017: Tippett, Necas, Villardi*
2016: Sergachev
2015: meier, Rantanen, Crouse*
2014: Ehlers, Fiala
2013: Horvat, Nichushkin*
2012: Trouba, Forsberg
2011: Hamilton, Brodin
2010: Granlund, Fowler

* indicates guys I'm not sure about

I'd say those guys peg over what Guhle projects as.

And the advantage with the pick is the 2 extra ELC years you get that Guhle has already used up

They are plenty of guys you listed that I wouldn't take over Guhle.

 

[dgibb10]

They are plenty of guys you listed that I wouldn't take over Guhle.

Such as?

I'm assuming your qualms are about Tippett, Necas, Ehlers and the guys I have starred?

 

[bud12]

Such as?

I'm assuming your qualms are about Tippett, Necas, Ehlers and the guys I have starred?

Yup. Maybe even Sergachev.

 

[Lockin17]

Who's this Ghule guy? What's with you Montreal fans and getting players names wrong over and over again? Guy's on your team, you should know how to spell his name!

As for the trade I would maybe do it if it was just the 9th for Guhle. Then I'd love to see the Flames pick up a couple top 6 guys and keep Markstrom. No rebuild, and no top pick for Montreal next year!

I keep making that mistake , don't know why .....

 

[dgibb10]

Yup. Maybe even Sergachev.

I'm going to strongly disagree about Sergachev tbh.

Point is generally you can find a guhle caliber player or better at 9 if you draft well enough.

Guhle for 9th would be fair. (it's even where I have him in a redraft).

Should MTL trade Guhle 1 for 1 for the 9th overall. I'd certainly say no based on their timeline and general approach so far, unless they are WAY higher on the likes of Xhekaj, Harris, and Struble than I am (I view them as 6/7 dmen)

 

[Anardil]

Guhle is a hit or two away from an early retirement if he doesn't learn to protect himself.

 

[treple13]

You can argue Guhle for a 9th pick. Calgary will say no. But trying to pretend you can get a probable top 10 pick on top of that? That's a little far I'd think

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Habs have tons of stud on LD.
Ghule's value is high atm and could help a team do a reset instead of a rebuild.
Flames fit the narrative.

Habs don't have a lot of LD studs, they have Guhle and Hutson, everyone else is either a stopgap to let those players develop or a depth player. Also last I checked Montreal is the team trying to exit their rebuild, trading Guhle would be counterintuitive to that goal.

Flames fit the narrative if the price is right, Guhle for 9th OA is probably close to fair but LD is not Calgary's primary need. Calgary has a 1LD in Weegar long term, are very likely to re-sign Kylington, have 2 very solid young LD prospects in Poirier and Morin, and then also have defensively 2nd/3rd pair potential guys like Solovoyov, Grushnikov, Kuznetsov, and Jurmo.

 

[Baksfamous112]

Habs don't have a lot of LD studs, they have Guhle and Hutson, everyone else is either a stopgap to let those players develop or a depth player. Also last I checked Montreal is the team trying to exit their rebuild, trading Guhle would be counterintuitive to that goal.

Flames fit the narrative if the price is right, Guhle for 9th OA is probably close to fair but LD is not Calgary's primary need. Calgary has a 1LD in Weegar long term, are very likely to re-sign Kylington, have 2 very solid young LD prospects in Poirier and Morin, and then also have defensively 2nd/3rd pair potential guys like Solovoyov, Grushnikov, Kuznetsov, and Jurmo.

I don’t know what’s with my fellow Habs fans wanting to trade Guhle, especially for futures. We don’t have the quality at LHD to replace him and as you said, we’re trying to exit our rebuild and trading Guhle not only don’t make sense from a need perspective but it doesn’t make sense from a timeline perspective.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

I don’t know what’s with my fellow Habs fans wanting to trade Guhle, especially for futures. We don’t have the quality at LHD to replace him and as you said, we’re trying to exit our rebuild and trading Guhle not only don’t make sense from a need perspective but it doesn’t make sense from a timeline perspective.

I mean if the original trade was legal it obviously favors Montreal because it would guarantee them Calgary's likely but not for sure 2025 1st along with their 2024 1st

 

[Baksfamous112]

I mean if the original trade was legal it obviously favors Montreal because it would guarantee them Calgary's likely but not for sure 2025 1st along with their 2024 1st

Yeah I mean the value is there for sure although you never know where the 2025 pick will land. Look at Philly this year they were supposed to fight with Chicago and San Jose for the highest chance at Celibrini and they almost made the playoff.

Meanwhile, you’re setting your club back a couple of years by moving your 2nd best D. Suzuki’s 24 (going 25), Caufield, Dach & Newhook 23. They all entering their prime soon and have good contracts. Wasting another 2 years in the cave for picks you didn’t really need can alter players trajectory. You really don’t want to lose more than you really should.

Anyway, at this point, Montreal has all the pieces they need to take a big step next year. More picks won’t do any good. Now it’s all about progression and starting being competitive, playing meaningful games and winning more

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Yeah I mean the value is there for sure although you never know where the 2025 pick will land. Look at Philly this year they were supposed to fight with Chicago and San Jose for the highest chance at Celibrini and they almost made the playoff.

Meanwhile, you’re setting your club back a couple of years by moving your 2nd best D. Suzuki’s 24 (going 25), Caufield, Dach & Newhook 23. They all entering their prime soon and have good contracts. Wasting another 2 years in the cave for picks you didn’t really need can alter players trajectory. You really don’t want to lose more than you really should.

Anyway, at this point, Montreal has all the pieces they need to take a big step next year. More picks won’t do any good. Now it’s all about progression and starting being competitive, playing meaningful games and winning more

You are right, you do never know but in Philly's situation they added a 1C with the return of Couturier and Torts is a hell of a coach.

I think directionally the trade is bad for both teams. But the OP tried to sneak in Florida's pick in there even though the odds are they already own it or they are just assuming Calgary wants Montreal to own their 2025 1st

 

[pth2]

I mean if the original trade was legal it obviously favors Montreal because it would guarantee them Calgary's likely but not for sure 2025 1st along with their 2024 1st

This. I think the original proposal wasn't made in good faith, frankly. Or was based on a misinterpretation of the Monahan deal.
I don't know which is worse.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

This. I think the original proposal wasn't made in good faith, frankly. Or was based on a misinterpretation of the Monahan deal.
I don't know which is worse.

Either way I think it should be set clear that trading Florida's pick to Montreal is AFAIK illegal due to the conditions. And due to Calgary's current position they have no intention at all of moving that pick at all. If Calgary does finish outside the bottom 10 next year then oh well but with the direction Calgary took at the deadline, as well as the direction of all the teams around them I expect them to be passed.

 

[pth2]

Either way I think it should be set clear that trading Florida's pick to Montreal is AFAIK illegal due to the conditions. And due to Calgary's current position they have no intention at all of moving that pick at all. If Calgary does finish outside the bottom 10 next year then oh well but with the direction Calgary took at the deadline, as well as the direction of all the teams around them I expect them to be passed.

Agreed on it being illegal.