Proposal: SELL SELL SELL. Trade Proposal and Trade Deadline talk continued!

Would you trade pick #2/3 for John Tavares?


  • Total voters
    173
Status
Not open for further replies.

Miller Time

Registered User
Sep 16, 2004
22,838
15,040
We ould be a very bad gamble on keep Patches.

Odds of are his value will be highest now vs this summer or next deadline.

Then there's the risk of injury.

MB's desperation is likely a factor in keeping the offers low, but that to will only increase over time.

Doesn't look promising no matter how you look at it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc McKenna

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
What is that +?

Because Vilardi + 1st is not enough as far as I'm concerned.

These would be the primary pieces of the deal. Most of the value is there. I could see the Kings perhaps coughing up a little bit more, but Vilardi and the 1st would remain the two biggest pieces.

Interesting conclusion you've reached here (no sarcasm). When did the candle burn out on Eriksson Ek? Because not too long ago, he was a coveted prospect...

Alot like...Gabe Vilardi.

Which kinda leads to my point about trading Pacioretty for unproven prospects. What's to tell you 1yr from now you don't feel the same about Vilardi?

Vilardi is dominating junior aged prospects, he did so last year too, there's nothing really noteworthy about that. Its to be expected, it's a whole other thing to do it at the pro level though, as evidenced by Eriksson Ek, the NHL is another step.

So, Eriksson Ek has never been as coveted as Vilardi.

The bolded is actually the point. Without that risk, we don't get Vilardi, or anyone like him.

A 1st, a late one, seems like a very small consolation prize if Vilardi turns into a Joel Eriksson Ek type of prospect or worse, a bust.

Right now the Kings sit 3rd in their division, and first is entirely out of reach. That means their pick is relatively buried unless they go balls deep into the playoffs. There's going to be an excellent player available at, say, 20 this year.

Of course there's another way...you don't trade him. The Habs are under no obligation to trade Pacioretty at a discounted price. He hasn't asked for a trade, he's not a pending UFA...

If they don't get a ransom for him, keep him.

It's not a discounted price. It's a different kind of price. One with at least a possibility of a huge payoff. I'm looking at growth stocks. You're looking for bonds.

There's furthermore a cost to doing nothing. Pacioretty's value come this trade deadline will reach its apex. Next year you'll be able to get half, maybe, of the return I'm talking about. You can say ''fine, we'll hold on to him'' but that doesn't fit the strategy and direction of the team, and Pacioretty's value deteriorating from this point on is a certainty. We can hold on to all of our players until it's too late to really grow the future of our team, but I suspect you're tired of seeing that.
 

Doc McKenna

A new era 2021
Jan 5, 2009
11,812
11,733
I don't have a problem with people having different opinions, whether they are based on their love of Subban/hate of Weber or for 100% rational reasons.

EDIT:

You made me think about it... I just wanted to add this.

It's undeniable that some people hate the trade for emotional reasons. Which I don't have a problem with. We're fans. It's normal to be emotional about the team. We're not robots, and it's not a badge of honor to claim to be perfectly rational about everything on the team IMO. Like you can find that the trade is roughly even, but emotional attachment to Subban makes you hate the trade. There's nothing wrong with that.

As for people who have rational reasons, even those people, can have their judgement colored a little bit by their emotions. But even if they're perfectly rational about it, I find a lot of the people who hate the trade hate it because of shot based stats. I personally think most of the shot based stats are to be used with the utmost caution and not for players you have actually watched with your own two eyes, just for players you don't know, but that's just me.

If you happen to not fall in any categories I just named above, then you don't have to wear that hat. I don't claim EVERYONE must fit into that picture. I know it's not the case.



:rolleyes:
I didn't like some of Subbans 'moves' they were risky. But getting a player back that doesn't even move the puck doesn't make him better defensively. In fact because he won't take risks Weber tends to be stuck in his own end more and thus does more defending. I would prefer we kept the play in their end. Hard to score 150+feet from the other net, for either team.
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
These would be the primary pieces of the deal. Most of the value is there. I could see the Kings perhaps coughing up a little bit more, but Vilardi and the 1st would remain the two biggest pieces.



So, Eriksson Ek has never been as coveted as Vilardi.

The bolded is actually the point. Without that risk, we don't get Vilardi, or anyone like him.



Right now the Kings sit 3rd in their division, and first is entirely out of reach. That means their pick is relatively buried unless they go balls deep into the playoffs. There's going to be an excellent player available at, say, 20 this year.



It's not a discounted price. It's a different kind of price. One with at least a possibility of a huge payoff. I'm looking at growth stocks. You're looking for bonds.

There's furthermore a cost to doing nothing. Pacioretty's value come this trade deadline will reach its apex. Next year you'll be able to get half, maybe, of the return I'm talking about. You can say ''fine, we'll hold on to him'' but that doesn't fit the strategy and direction of the team, and Pacioretty's value deteriorating from this point on is a certainty. We can hold on to all of our players until it's too late to really grow the future of our team, but I suspect you're tired of seeing that.
Look I'm not going to keep arguing with you over this...we clearly have different opinions of Pacioretty's value and that's fine. Neither of us is going to back down .

I understand where you're coming from, just don't agree with selling our best asset at what I think is a discounted price. I'm not really into doing solids for other teams.

I mean, we may have drafted a player last year, a dozen picks later, who is every bit as good as Vilardi will be.

I've grown a bit weary of Pacioretty myself, but not to the point of making a trade like this.

Unless of course that "+" you're referring too, makes up what I think is a significant gap between Vilardi's upside and Pacioretty's proven worth.
 

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,617
We're stuck with Alzner. He's terrible and no one will want him for free.
Alzner and Shaw are examples why maybe MB not using capspace last summer is blessing in disguise. Imagine adding another 8M in albatross contacts.
 

Cole Caulifield

Registered User
Apr 22, 2004
27,967
2,465
Theres nothing difficult to understand about what you or he's advancing, I understand it and I think my responses reflect that.

I don't agree with it, you two seem to think the Habs are under some obligation to trade Pacioretty for a discount.

You want to trade Pacioretty for a return that indicates Pacioretty is a UFA rental...but he's not.

Unlike you, I don't think the Habs HAVE to trade Pacioretty.

If all they can get for Pacioretty today is a top prospect +1st...may as well hold on to him and trade him at next year's deadline, they'll get the same exact return.

It is odd though, how we tend to evaluate the value of players. I've been told multiple times here (not by you) that Tomas Plekanec can be worth as high as a 1st round pick.

Yet Pacioretty is worth a top prospect + 1st...

Am I to assume that the difference in value between Plekanec and Pacioretty is 'just' a prospect?

That doesn't seem right to me. Either Plekanec's value is way overstated or Pacioretty's undervalued.

When you say something like that, is where you give me the impression that you don't understand.

For me, the value in Pacioretty is the possibility of hitting a homerun with what we're going to get in return. The way to do this is a Nieuwendyk for Iginla or Girard for Turris type deal. You think the flames didn't value Nieuwendyk ? They traded him for an unkown prospect...

I would love something like Pacioretty for Mantha type deal but even if wings were in the playoffs picture they'd never trade Mantha for Pacioretty. They might have before Mantha had started producing in the AHL/NHL. That's the best case scenario for a Patch deal.
 

Habs Icing

Formerly Onice
Jan 17, 2004
19,520
11,178
Montreal
That is not an option. Pacioretty must be traded, the sooner the higher the chance of getting the better return. You keep Pacioretty, your asset is losing value right before your eyes. Especially if we keep surrounding him with zero PMD and centers. Then next year at the deadline, the return won't even be Vilardi. And we'd just be forced to sign a declining asset to a bad deal or just let Pacioretty leave via UFA, and that's what we must avoid at all costs.

That might not be the case. What if The Idiot has decided he's going to sign Tavares? Aside from high taxes, peeping tom journalists and Siberian weather what else would The Idiot have to entice Tavares? Money, term and the opportunity to play with Patches which could lead to a Cup. He could tell Tavares, "We have Price, Weber, Drouin and Patches, I'll sign a few UFAs and make a few trades and if we add you we're contenders." With Patches gone and replaced by a prospect, the roster looks less likely to convince JT. After all he isn't young enough to wait around for prospects. I am not advocating that idea but I can see The Idiot and his band of merry Morons mulling over that one.
 

NotProkofievian

Registered User
Nov 29, 2011
24,476
24,599
Look I'm not going to keep arguing with you over this...we clearly have different opinions of Pacioretty's value.

I understand where you're coming from, just don't agree with selling our best asset at what I think is a discounted price. I'm not really into doing solids for other teams.

I mean, we may have drafted a player last year, a dozen picks later, who is every bit as good as Vilardi will be.

I've grown a bit weary of Pacioretty myself, but not to the point of making a trade like this.

Probably not though.

You asked what the Kings are risking in this deal. Well, their prospect pool essentially. This is starting to look like one of the last hoorah's for L.A.. They'd make this move in an attempt to guarantee them their 3rd ring. There is no safety net for them if it fails. Pacioretty can bolt in 1.5 years and sign with a team closer to home like NYR. If Doughty bolts, they'll be rebuilding from scratch, with no prospects to give them a head start.
 

MTL-rules

Registered User
Nov 17, 2006
9,700
2,466
I didn't like some of Subbans 'moves' they were risky. But getting a player back that doesn't even move the puck doesn't make him better defensively. In fact because he won't take risks Weber tends to be stuck in his own end more and thus does more defending. I would prefer we kept the play in their end. Hard to score 150+feet from the other net, for either team.

Come on as if PK was never stuck in his zone. Weber makes a very solid first pass, he's not just a good skater/puck handler like PK. 2 very different types of players, but when we are pinned down in the defensive zone, I would much rather have someone like Weber than PK to hold the fort.

We are seeing the same BS we saw with Markov when he was injured... a collective amnesia toward a player's game. I still recall posters thinking Markov was unnecessary and forgetting how great his outlet passes were to get the offense going focusing sorely on his lack of foot speed and strength down low. Now, reading about Weber, it looks like he's Hal f***ing Gill... no wonder other teams posters think he's overrated and overpaid.

Weber is a rock defensively, possibly top 5 defensive defencemen in the league, with a solid first pass and a cannon of a shot (with accuracy). That's a superstar defenceman right there. Be proud to have him instead of whining about the trade... we all know the trade was bad, mostly because of where both teams are now, but how about we enjoy having a player of Weber's stature on our blueline...
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
When you say something like that, is where you give me the impression that you don't understand.

Well is there some kind of trade demand i'm not aware of? Is Pacioretty's contract expiring this year and not next?

Why do they HAVE to trade him?

The ONLY reason there's even talk about him being moved is because the Habs are having a crappy season. If they were in a playoff spot, or even close to one, there's no way he would he even be available.

For me, the value in Pacioretty is the possibility of hitting a homerun with what we're going to get in return. The way to do this is a Nieuwendyk for Iginla or Girard for Turris type deal. You think the flames didn't value Nieuwendyk ? They traded him for an unkown prospect...
You're not talking about hitting a homerun...you're talking about hitting a double and hoping someone else (1st round pick) brings you to homeplate.

Nieuwendyk was ONE deal...how often is one HOF player traded for a prospect that ends up being a HOF'er?

Also, Iginla was far from an unknown prospect at the time of this trade.
 

Doc McKenna

A new era 2021
Jan 5, 2009
11,812
11,733
Come on as if PK was never stuck in his zone. Weber makes a very solid first pass, he's not just a good skater/puck handler like PK. 2 very different types of players, but when we are pinned down in the defensive zone, I would much rather have someone like Weber than PK to hold the fort.

We are seeing the same BS we saw with Markov when he was injured... a collective amnesia toward a player's game. I still recall posters thinking Markov was unnecessary and forgetting how great his outlet passes were to get the offense going focusing sorely on his lack of foot speed and strength down low. Now, reading about Weber, it looks like he's Hal ****ing Gill... no wonder other teams posters think he's overrated and overpaid.

Weber is a rock defensively, possibly top 5 defensive defencemen in the league, with a solid first pass and a cannon of a shot (with accuracy). That's a superstar defenceman right there. Be proud to have him instead of whining about the trade... we all know the trade was bad, mostly because of where both teams are now, but how about we enjoy having a player of Weber's stature on our blueline...
You must be watching a different team as weber usually passes to his partner or chips it to the neutral zone. His legend lives on if you think Weber is top 5 defensively in the league. There are a lot of better players in their own end. Many don't have a booming shot though. His claim to fame is his top 5 shot. That is what Weber is top 5 in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Miller Time
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->