Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Would you?
#41
(2017-01-12, 11:46 AM)Habfan Wrote: I was just looking at the Pred's and Fisher is going to be an UFA.  If the Preds become sellers IMO that would be a great option to try and deal Pleks.  I just wonder if the Preds would be interested.  They would get a younger guy that fills in for the 2nd line nicely and has potential to be a great 2nd line player.  They shouldn't care about the added salary cap hit and would probably like it, although I think they would be paying more in actual salary.  I think Fisher would be a like-for-like replacement to Pleks and he would come off the books at the end of the year freeing up money for Chucky and Radulov, and another top 4 Dman.  And if he works out he'd be a good option to resign cheap for another year.

I get what you are suggesting

I think there are cheaper options for Nash, or if they are going to pay $6M, then get a younger better C then Pleks

I do not see the need to dump Pleks next season UNLESS his cap is an issue. But I would assume MB figured out it wouldn't be before he signed him. altho Rad was nowhere in anyone's imagination when Pleks resigned.

I just don't see the rush need to dump him. But hey if they offer him in off season, and someone takes him ....I wouldn't be upset or anything.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#42
Fisher is interesting, although playmaking isn't his forte either. He's a lot better and more consistent on the forecheck than Pleknec and can play both PK and PP, although his defensive skills are more reliable than his offensive skills

That said, why would NASH do a one-for-one swap? Plekanec isn't filling in for the 2nd line role nicely anymore in Montreal. Why would he in NASH? How does not filling in nicely in the 2nd line role translate into potential to become a great 2nd line player?

Would NASH even protect Plekanec?

I don't see why NASH makes the swap but, I'd go for it, for sure. IMO, Fisher's persistant forechecking style and solid defensive acumen will be quite useful in the playoffs for this year. Beyond that, who knows...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#43
Just read an article about who Nash may protect for that LV draft

They are one team who may go with the 8-1 format as they have 4 dmen to protect. In that case Nash would not worry about resigning Fischer now as they would have no room to protect him. So let the LV draft go, and then resign him is what they will do. LV can offer him 5x his worth, he is not leaving Nashville. There is one guy who doesn't need the $ and who's tie to the city goes beyond the team he plays for.

lol his wife's song just came on the radio

anyways, I like the smart thinking....but I really don't think Fischer is ever playing anywhere but Nash
Reply
Thanks given by:
#44
A few tweets out there about Montreal looking at Plex-Serg plus for Duchene. Not sure what I think about that.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#45
I think Colorado is the direction in which the Habs should be looking.

Matt Duchene is 25
And exactly what the Habs need.

The Habs have Five 2nd Round picks over the next two drafts.

Galchenyuk
Duchene
Danault/McCarron
Mitchell/McCarron

That sure looks like a step in the right direction...
Reply
Thanks given by:
#46
(2017-01-14, 08:13 AM)tm123 Wrote: A few tweets out there about Montreal looking at Plex-Serg plus for Duchene.  Not sure what I think about that.

I'm  thinking Ryan McDonagh .
Reply
Thanks given by:
#47
Maybe.....
But the return is substantially different.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#48
(2017-01-14, 11:23 AM)habling Wrote: Maybe.....
But the return is substantially different.

Of this, I agree.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#49
One team will land him for a pretty deal. But u r correct it would be Serg plus for sure.

I mean on can try Beau, 1st, 2nd, prospect not named Serg

If they dont land Serg for sure a 1st would have to be in it.

I guess the question is...
Are the habs better with Duchense or Serg for the next 5-7 yrs?

I keep feeling that with Dan an McC and possibly Hudon that our #2-3 C are here already. What we lack is another scoring winger. Sherbak may be 2 yrs away still.

So imagine next year.....
Chuck's line
Lehk/Dan/ Jvr
$haw/ pleks/ Gally
Mitch/McC/ Carr

Not saying I want JVR, but just showing u the impact of having Dan play with a reaponsiblly smart 20g guy in Lehk PLUS. a guy who can EASILY score 25-30g. I think we have enough C in house we need more scoring wingers withbsize ans then Shaw/gally on 3rd line. Wow thats depth.

I just wouldnt trade Serg for anyone right now

Beau, Juulseen, 1st rounder, a bunch of 2nd rounders yes. But nor Serg
Reply
Thanks given by:
#50
Danault may well be worth playing 2C but, he might be lower end 2C. A higher end 2C and Danault as a 3C that can move up in the lineup when injuries strike brings a lot more valuable depth up the middle to a team than banking on Danault as the 2C.

The higher end 2C (ex: a young but proven 30G C like Duchene or galchenyuk, whichever becomes the 2C) brings you better results at that position and you know that Danault has the style to be a two-way, shutdown C as your 3C.

McCaron can play 4th line C or RW somewhere else in the lineup, with PP minutes as a net presence in the O-zone. He can also cover for Danault if injury strikes.

Any team can use a bonafide higher end 2C that makes your C line a 1Ca and 1Cb, 3Ca and 3Cb rather than a C line that is 1C,2C,3C,4C.

However, you're right, we could also use a top end LW or RW for the top 6. IMO, the position doesn't matter because Lehkonen could easily play RW and maximize his quality NHL level shot. His hockey sense will still have him be responsible defensively on the off wing, IMO.

I also don't consider this will get done simultaneously at the trade deadline. Could well be a two year thing, if it ever gets done that way.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#51
Plekanec + Juulsen + Johnston + 1st to Colorado
Duchene to Montreal
Reply
Thanks given by:
#52
Are you trying to sabotage the deal by adding Johnston? Wink
Reply
Thanks given by:
#53
(2017-01-14, 05:40 PM)habling Wrote: Plekanec + Juulsen + Johnston + 1st to Colorado
Duchene to Montreal
Lol that's funny.

Sent from my T03 using Tapatalk
Reply
Thanks given by:
#54
Seriously, unless there was an undisclosed reason for Colorado needing to unload Duchene regardless of the return, I doubt they are remotely interested by this offer.

It's just convenient for us to unload 6M salary fro Plekanec, really. No incentive for COL to take his contract on. Our 1st round pick is a late first round pick at best and perhaps more likely between 26 and 30 with the addition of Duchene to our lineup. It would be more like a really good 2nd round pick...

Julssen, while a projected 2nd pairing RD, if all goes well, is several years away from being NHL ready, IMO, unless you're willing to risk burning a young talent by bringing him up much too quickly. COL needs quality help on D right away.

I believe you'd have to feed them some cool-aid about Beaulieu's worth and include him in the deal. Even then, they'd likely balk at the offer and it would take a blue chip prospect that is young but, physically and mentally mature like Sergachev for COL to start discussing the trade. An inconsistent Beaulieu with a lingering question mark about his hockey IQ may be far from what would be necessary to land Duchesne.

I believe that a package not involving Sergachev to land Landeskog would be easier to make and, then, a Beaulieu could become an attractive part of the package.

I'd be willing to forego the upgrade at C for this season if we landed a young LW like landeskog who is more physical than Duchene and, not unlike Radulov, has a blue collar work ethic despite displaying plenty of skill. bBetter programmed for the playoffs, not only does he solve a big problem for us at LW, a position we lack depth at, he is also a forward that likes to shoot the puck.

At barely 24, Landeskog is already a 20+ Goal-scoring LW that likely still has upside to reach 30 and average closer to 25 a season and get over 50 points consistently.

There's no doubt that COL is looking to shake the roster tree on hopes of reinvigorating it's lineup and rebooting the current team dynamic.

How would a healthy lineup suddenly look for Montreal with Landeskog and without Beaulieu (the cost, along with a pick and/or another prospect not named Sergachev)

Landeskog - Galchenyuk - Gallagher
Pacioretty - Danault - Radulov
Lehkonen - Plekanec - Shaw
Byron - McCarron - Mitchell

Flynn

Emelin - Weber
Markov - Petry
Depth Veteran D - Pateryn

Barberio

I believe that keeping Pacioretty and Radulov alongside Danault can provide a viable scoring line (as we are currently seeing despite the fact opponents can zero in on this line, given the current injuries)

I see no reason why Landeskog - Galchenyuk - Gallagher could not work as a line.

Lehkonen - Plekanec - Shaw make an interesting two-way, shutdown third line.

Byron - McCaron - Mitchell appears to be a line that can both be counted on to prevent opponents scoring and contribute the odd goal in the process.

Overall, that lineup up front looks balanced and deep for the playoffs. It may lack a little depth, right now, at C and perhaps that can be addressed in the offseason, somehow, without handicapping the NHL roster (a certain playmaking Russian C as an UFA?).

Landeskog is signed to a 5.57M cap hit for another 4 seasons after this and provides contract stability at a rather fair Cap cost for a young, gritty, skilled, proven 20+ Goal-scoring, 50+ Point-getting LW.

Obviously, a trade for Landeskog means he is being protected at the expansion draft:

Galchenyuk
Pacioretty
Landeskog
Radulov (re-signed)
Gallagher
Shaw
Danault (I'd chose over Byron because he is a C and provides more upside)



Weber
Petry
Emelin


Price


We wouldn't need to protect Beaulieu because we'd have traded him to COL in a package for Landeskog. Emelin would be the logical choice at D after Weber and Petry.

Lineup next year?:

Landeskog - Galchenyuk - Radulov
Pacioretty - Serchipov (sp) - Gallagher
Lehkonen - Danault - Shaw
Hudon - McCarron - Mitchell

Emelin - Weber
Sergachev - Petry
Markov - Pateryn

Barberio

Assuming we'd lost Byron, an inexpensive role player with speed, at the expansion draft and succeeded in trading Plekanec for a draft pick after the expansion draft and before the general NHL draft. Markov would've been re-signed to a 1-yr contract, maybe a 2-yr contract at a reasonable Cap hit.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#55
(2017-01-14, 09:05 AM)snowhab Wrote:
(2017-01-14, 08:13 AM)tm123 Wrote: A few tweets out there about Montreal looking at Plex-Serg plus for Duchene.  Not sure what I think about that.

I'm  thinking Ryan McDonagh .

I know, thinking the same thing every time I hear about trading a D prospect.
Reply
Thanks given by:
#56
I believe Duchene is only signed for two years. I wouldn't even go there unless it's a guarantee that we resign him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply
Thanks given by:
#57
I like the idea of toning down the trade acquisition and cost....
Maybe not the Duchene type 2 line center....
But a Landeskog 2nd line winger, using Danault as the 2nd line center.

Pacioretty - Galchenyuk - Radulov
Landeskog - Danault - Gallagher
Lehkonen - McCarron/Plekanec - Shaw
Carr - Mitchell - Andrighetto/Flynn
Reply
Thanks given by:


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)