ya that's grim for any potential deadline adds. soo and london could deplete their cupboards pretty badly as well if they decide to go all in on "big fish". definitely a strange year to try and predict expectations/intentions.
Who are the "big fish" for trade deadline this year?
- Thread starter HF92
- Start date
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 10,776
- 6,938
This is the most difficult year to wrap my head around in recent memory. The teams that made the push last year have the success hangover but not enough assets to carry it over an additional year because it was such a sellers market last year that the assets got depleted like crazy in the same markets that are seeing success this year.
Ottawa has managed to get some assets back with the HB defection and subsequent trade as well as the Jack Beck deal. Theoretically, they can push some assets in but I’m not sure that makes a lot of sense for them either. They also have an extra 3rd and 5th (2024) from Flint in the Cranley deal not represented in the database. They are just as likely to sell off Stonehouse as they are adding pieces.
I see Sudbury and Saginaw as the most likely teams to blow their brains out at the deadline.
Then there is a second tier of teams that will make a bit of a push and make some strategically sound deals to fill noticeable gaps but won’t go crazy. Teams like SSM, Guelph, Kingston and Mississauga come to mind in that group. Then there will likely be a handful of teams that may tinker a bit on the fringes of the market. Teams like Ottawa, Brantford, London, Owen Sound and Flint come to mind. The rest could be more aggressive sellers.
That is how I see the market but I am NOT confident I have that right…at all. In fact, I am more confident I am completely wrong than I am completely right.
The only thing I have as a certainty is the Petes will sell Beck and Saginaw is going to push hard. After that? Pfft. Who knows?
Guelph has a healthy cupboard.
'24, two 3rds and a 4th.
'25, two 2nds, 3rd, 4th.
'26 two 2nds, 3rd, 4th.
Regular picks after that.
I could see them going all-in if they are in 4th by the deadline. They need to make sure that coaching/systems are sorted though. IF and that is a big if, they get word that Poitras will be returned, the big moves will come.
'24, two 3rds and a 4th.
'25, two 2nds, 3rd, 4th.
'26 two 2nds, 3rd, 4th.
Regular picks after that.
I could see them going all-in if they are in 4th by the deadline. They need to make sure that coaching/systems are sorted though. IF and that is a big if, they get word that Poitras will be returned, the big moves will come.
Your not usually too far off on your assessment, if Poitras gets sent back for WJC and 2nd half Guelph will be a player, and may be a player anyways.
I never write off London, they have 9 NHL affilliated players and the most experienced goalie in the league which is a recipe for playoff success. The 3rd OA spot is one that could be upgraded on the cheap and may be enough to get them over the hump.
Kitchener will be in the mix also, they are just too good, and unlike the Petes have a healthy supply of 05/06's to recover with next year. They also have the 2-1sts from this year which could become deal closers in the current market.
Kitchener's two firsts from this past draft are game changers at this point. The fact that their 2nd round pick Lam is performing so well makes both of those firsts possible chips if they want to add at the deadline. I can't see them selling from first...
It appears Kitch did very well in the 2023 draft which gives them a lot of options. It really comes down to whether they protect their position at the top or allow other teams to accumulate the assets to beat them in a playoff series.
That's what I thought...well, we better draft as well next year as we did this year. Roobroeck, Czata, Frolov and Galiyanov have all contributed and played well at times. #SELLTHETEAM
HF92
Registered User
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 10,776
- 6,938
| 2024 | KGN 2nd***(Fantilli) | PBO 3rd***(Hislop) | SAG 4th***(Fantilli) | KGN 5th |
| 2025 | 2nd***(Fantilli) | 3rd***(Zito) | KGN 4th | 5th WSR 5th KIT 5th***(Zito) |
| 2026 | --- | 3rd | 4th | 5th BAR 5th***(Hislop) |
| 2027 | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th |
North Bay is fine for picks but they don‘t have many available to be a buyer. I added the picks that they will retain or get back because of three separate deals where conditional picks were included. I believe all the conditions remaining are tied to payers playing this season. So, the picks with asterisks and names are picks they will officially get back when the season ends. (Dirty can confirm. He’s pretty good at keeping proper track)
So, they don’t have a lot of picks to go fishing with. But, they don’t need to make seller moves if they feel they have a solid enough team to roll out status quo. I imagine they will monitor the market and if it makes sense for them to move a player out becuase the market entices them, they will likely do so. But, I don’t see them targeting specific players on their roster and offering them for the best possible trade return no matter what it is. They will likely want a specific return and if they get it, they will pull the trigger. If they don’t, they will keep the player.
always like to read your opinions on different teams, you seem to hae a lot of knowledge on ohl.
keep up the good work Interesting
HF92
Registered User
Do you think that North Bay would want a goaltending prospect in return for Dom, if they went that route? Not familiar in their needs. Would a Landon Miller be someone that’s enticing?
We NEED Dom in the Soo
NB has ‘05 & ‘06 goalies, but no RD drafted within four rounds or import draft the last two years…Virgilio might be of interest
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 10,776
- 6,938
I would defer to Dirty on the Goaltending prospects. I’m not exactly sure if they have a stud somewhere in the system they are high on or not. Keep in mind that if they trade DiVin, they are likely rebuilding and won’t care a heck of a lot about where thy finish in the standings. They may punt the effort of filling their net to the offseason. They do have two competent goalies, even if they aren’t considered in the top half of the league.
HF92
Registered User
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
That would get you the goalie you need but then you have to fill Virgilio’s spot on the blue line. As much as some would argue he’s expendable in a deal, moving him means you’ve just shifted where the pressure goes. Unless you believe someone else down the depth chart on the team is throughly better than Virgilio.
HF92
Registered User
I don’t believe he’s in our top 4 and I believe an addition is coming to our blueline. I believe you can move up Brodie McConnell Barker and Spencer Evans. I’m not a fan of Virgilio personally and my argument that he is expandable is based off of extensive live viewings of his game. I believe we need an older defensive dman,it will push someone out.
Virgilio has been on the 3rd D pairing with Brodie McConnell Barker currently as it is.
6 points and -5 in 21 games this season
Last edited:
I think the need for a proven starter outweighs his role on the bottom pair at the moment. It will hurt down the road though. BMB jr and Evans have both looked good in their limited minutes.
HF92
Registered User
It MAY hurt down the road.. it’s likely to turn out to be a win win situation for both teams. I think Evan’s and/or BMB2 can be as good
HockeyPops
Registered User
- Aug 20, 2018
- 7,522
- 6,522
Soo has some decent D coming through the system. BMB2 (06) and Evans (06) are both looking pretty good, albeit with limited minutes. Solomon (07) played a bit as an affiliate and also looked good. I really liked Gillen (07) in camp and am hoping he makes the roster next year. So Virgilio (06) might be the least painful of the 17 year old Greyhound names that have been tossed around as trade bait. I think trading goaltender Miller (06) or center Brown (06) would be more painful for the organization in the long run.
HF92
Registered User
Agreed, of the 3 I think we see Miller 100% stay. I still think we may see Brown be moved , but totally agree with you here
