Trade Deadline

[Willie Dog]

TSN has a top 25 list of players who might be available at the deadline... They call it the Tradebait list. I was surprised to see Andrew Shaw's name on the list. I can't see MB moving Shawsie... considering he gave up 2 second rounders for him and gave him a 5 year 20 mill deal and he's got what MB values the most above anything... CHaracter.

TSN Tradebait list

[blny]

TSN really grasping at Shaws if they think Andrew is on the market.

[Cranky]

If there is a mistake in trading Chucky or Captain Streaky will simply put another nail in the coffin for half a generation.

I don't trust BergyBust to figure out which end of the toilet to sit on, never mind trade even more of our depth and future.

[seventeen]

I’ve had to keep re-evaluating my opinion of Bergevin’s competency. I used to have him near the top of the bottom third, but he and Chiarelli and Chayka are now in a real tussle for that last place spot.

[GNick99]

Jan 18, 2018 9:37:50 GMT -5 Willie Dog said:

TSN has a top 25 list of players who might be available at the deadline... They call it the Tradebait list. I was surprised to see Andrew Shaw's name on the list. I can't see MB moving Shawsie... considering he gave up 2 second rounders for him and gave him a 5 year 20 mill deal and he's got what MB values the most above anything... CHaracter.

TSN Tradebait list

Players who have won a Cup generally have a little more value in trade return this time of year.

[OopyDoopy]

I would be just as much a buyer as a seller at this years trade deadline. My picks this year would not be available, however in 2019 I would consider using them to get young established players from teams wanting to unload at this years trade deadline. A lot of things have to change in this organization in regards to development of players however. If this management team is kept in place, I would be more inclined to trade all picks this year, except for the first round pick, to get NHL ready prospects from teams that have a record of developing SKILLED players.

[GNick99]

Jan 28, 2018 17:03:24 GMT -5 OopyDoopy said:

I would be just as much a buyer as a seller at this years trade deadline. My picks this year would not be available, however in 2019 I would consider using them to get young established players from teams wanting to unload at this years trade deadline. A lot of things have to change in this organization in regards to development of players however. If this management team is kept in place, I would be more inclined to trade all picks this year, except for the first round pick, to get NHL ready prospects from teams that have a record of developing SKILLED players.

Doubt I would do that...if Patches goes signals some type of reshuffling.....decent chance next year isn't a banner year.

[OopyDoopy]

Jan 29, 2018 9:09:41 GMT -5 GNick99 said:

Jan 28, 2018 17:03:24 GMT -5 OopyDoopy said:

I would be just as much a buyer as a seller at this years trade deadline. My picks this year would not be available, however in 2019 I would consider using them to get young established players from teams wanting to unload at this years trade deadline. A lot of things have to change in this organization in regards to development of players however. If this management team is kept in place, I would be more inclined to trade all picks this year, except for the first round pick, to get NHL ready prospects from teams that have a record of developing SKILLED players.

Doubt I would do that...if Patches goes signals some type of reshuffling.....decent chance next year isn't a banner year.

My though process is this. While having draft picks in any draft should be gold for the future it is a crap shoot at the best of times and it really doesn't matter who one picks, they also have to be developed properly. There are exceptions of course to this, first rounders historically turn out to be NHL players and so do a vast majority of 2nd round players, but how affective they are in the NHL has a lot, IMO, to do with how they were developed before and mostly after they are drafted.

Look at Edmonton as an example of what can really go wrong. They have floundered for what, 10 or so years, give or take a few. They have had how many top 10 picks in that time and other high 2nd round picks and basically top picks in every rounds. Where are they now, where would they be without the McDavid draft? This organization either cannot draft properly or cannot develop properly or both. Would they have been better off trading some of their first and second round picks for players that were drafted and developed in other organizations, that are 20-22 and ready to step into the NHL, for organization needs, I would say yes.

Instead of continuously drafting 18 year olds that are a crap shoot at best, why not turn one's draft picks into a 20-22 year olds, that one knows are going to be a productive NHL? The record has shown historically, IMO, that Bergevin and CO cannot develop prospects properly. This is why I want picks traded for NHL ready prospects. This is also an argument for increasing the draft age to 19 or more, another year of development and maturity would do wonders in being able to make more accurate picks.

[PTH]

Jan 29, 2018 13:44:25 GMT -5 OopyDoopy said:

Jan 29, 2018 9:09:41 GMT -5 GNick99 said:

Doubt I would do that...if Patches goes signals some type of reshuffling.....decent chance next year isn't a banner year.

My though process is this. While having draft picks in any draft should be gold for the future it is a crap shoot at the best of times and it really doesn't matter who one picks, they also have to be developed properly. There are exceptions of course to this, first rounders historically turn out to be NHL players and so do a vast majority of 2nd round players, but how affective they are in the NHL has a lot, IMO, to do with how they were developed before and mostly after they are drafted.

Look at Edmonton as an example of what can really go wrong. They have floundered for what, 10 or so years, give or take a few. They have had how many top 10 picks in that time and other high 2nd round picks and basically top picks in every rounds. Where are they now, where would they be without the McDavid draft? This organization either cannot draft properly or cannot develop properly or both. Would they have been better off trading some of their first and second round picks for players that were drafted and developed in other organizations, that are 20-22 and ready to step into the NHL, for organization needs, I would say yes.

Instead of continuously drafting 18 year olds that are a crap shoot at best, why not turn one's draft picks into a 20-22 year olds, that one knows are going to be a productive NHL? The record has shown historically, IMO, that Bergevin and CO cannot develop prospects properly. This is why I want picks traded for NHL ready prospects. This is also an argument for increasing the draft age to 19 or more, another year of development and maturity would do wonders in being able to make more accurate picks.

I can understand the urge to get more mature prospects, and the limited downside it brings, but it also means we have limited upside: the high-end guys, the guys who dominate at the WJC the year after their draft, that take that next stride in their development, those guys won't get moved for similar picks. We'd only get the "blah" prospects - guys like Danault, who couldn't quite stick in Chicago though they could see he would make it in some capacity.... but not as a star. They knew he wasn't Joe Sakic or Patrice Bergeron.

So, if we move picks for prospects 1-3 years after the draft, we'll be looking at limiting downside but also limiting upside, perhaps to a greater extent.

I'm ok with a few moves of this kind, for example moving a 2nd rounder for an equivalent to what Danault was 2 years ago, but it shouldn't be our all-around player development strategy.

[seventeen]

This is another example of the risk/reward trade-off. Keeping the pick is high risk and high reward if you get it right. Trading a pick for a 19 year old prospect is less risk but will cost you more as there is now more certainty and so on. Chances are with a 22 year old they will either be merely ok and not cost you much, or they won’t work out as well as you hope. Sign a 24 year old and you get a Joe Morrow.

I think the strategy can work but to get high end prospect talent, (Robrt Thomas for example) it will cost a Pacioretty.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Andrew Zadarnowski voiced his opinions on how Marc Bergevin may not be a successful as he'd like be when trying to off-load some players for picks ... the UFA pool is impressive this year ... see "Top 30 Unrestricted Free Agents"...

Cheers.

[Tankdriver]

JVR and Tavares this summer? I wouldn't mind that if we lose Plekanec and Pacioretty this season for some picks and a young defenceman.

[franko]

Jan 30, 2018 10:52:36 GMT -5 Tankdriver said:

JVR and Tavares this summer? I wouldn't mind that if we lose Plekanec and Pacioretty this season for some picks and a young defenceman.

JT doesn't want to move too far from where he lives now . . . Rags with a salary dump, a clean slate, and a UFA binge that includes him.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Won't matter how successful Marc Bergevin is at obtaining draft picks for UFAs, it means diddly-squat if they can't develop them ... get rid of the putz in charge of player development and replace the AHL coaching staff lock, stock and barrel ...

Cheers.

[blny]

May as well put this here. After 40/Friedman claiming that SJ and Pittsburgh showing interest in Plekanec. Friedman also claiming that Montreal may try to RE-SIGN him. Good grief.

[seventeen]

Resigning him at 4 MM per season sounds like standard operating procedure. Can’t have enough offensive black holes.

[seventeen]

I have this gut feel that there will be little activity this deadline for the Habs. Pleks May be traded but I think he’ll be the only one if any. I think Patches will survive the rest of this season. I think we’ll waste a huge opportunity. My opinion only and it’s just a feeling.

[blny]

Feb 11, 2018 1:18:20 GMT -5 seventeen said:

I have this gut feel that there will be little activity this deadline for the Habs. Pleks May be traded but I think he’ll be the only one if any. I think Patches will survive the rest of this season. I think we’ll waste a huge opportunity. My opinion only and it’s just a feeling.

I can't remember if it was TSN or Sportsnet, but one of the two discussed the possibility of not trading Max by the deadline. In essence, "they have to get the deal right". If the offers aren't there by the end of the month, and you feel getting more teams involved at the draft might increase the likelihood of getting what you want, then I get that.

[PTH]

I worry that with NYR rebuilding, there are a lot of options out there, so Berg will be stuck between a rock and a hard place: move Pacioretty for less than market value, or wait until the draft or next year's deadline to try and get a better deal.

At this point, I'd move him as long as we get one asset with a high likelyhood of being a top 6 center. We need to retool this team ASAP, and I'd rather move guys for below market value than simply treading water for another year.

[Cranky]

Feb 11, 2018 13:42:47 GMT -5 PTH said:

I worry that with NYR rebuilding, there are a lot of options out there, so Berg will be stuck between a rock and a hard place: move Pacioretty for less than market value, or wait until the draft or next year's deadline to try and get a better deal.

At this point, I'd move him as long as we get one asset with a high likelyhood of being a top 6 center. We need to retool this team ASAP, and I'd rather move guys for below market value than simply treading water for another year.

It makes no sense to enter a buyers market.

I would seriously consider picking up a player for our high draft pick. A PROVEN mid twenties center is worth a top 5-6 pick. As long as he is 5-6 years signable.

NYR have a couple and so do the Hens.

Hoffman....if sign to a 4 year extension.

Kadri...plus their second.

Sure, a top 5 pick will most probably make it in the NHL but no one can sure-bet one of them being a 1c or a top 2 defensman.

[PTH]

Feb 12, 2018 3:07:50 GMT -5 Cranky said:

Feb 11, 2018 13:42:47 GMT -5 PTH said:

I worry that with NYR rebuilding, there are a lot of options out there, so Berg will be stuck between a rock and a hard place: move Pacioretty for less than market value, or wait until the draft or next year's deadline to try and get a better deal.

At this point, I'd move him as long as we get one asset with a high likelyhood of being a top 6 center. We need to retool this team ASAP, and I'd rather move guys for below market value than simply treading water for another year.

It makes no sense to enter a buyers market.

I would seriously consider picking up a player for our high draft pick. A PROVEN mid twenties center is worth a top 5-6 pick. As long as he is 5-6 years signable.

NYR have a couple and so do the Hens.

Hoffman....if sign to a 4 year extension.

Kadri...plus their second.

Sure, a top 5 pick will most probably make it in the NHL but no one can sure-bet one of them being a 1c or a top 2 defensman.

The problem isn't only with the likely scenario, but also that you're giving up all possible upside - if we pick the next Jagr, we get a superstar we could never get otherwise.

Problem is, this is exactly Berg-type thinking: go for the lower-risk, lower-upside scenario (Drouin for Serg, Weber for Subban fit this to a T). I don't like it.

I could accept our having a horrible team if Berg had made reasonable gambles and things hadn't worked out, but we got here by going for low-risk moves.

[Cranky]

Feb 13, 2018 1:19:24 GMT -5 PTH said:

Feb 12, 2018 3:07:50 GMT -5 Cranky said:

It makes no sense to enter a buyers market.

I would seriously consider picking up a player for our high draft pick. A PROVEN mid twenties center is worth a top 5-6 pick. As long as he is 5-6 years signable.

NYR have a couple and so do the Hens.

Hoffman....if sign to a 4 year extension.

Kadri...plus their second.

Sure, a top 5 pick will most probably make it in the NHL but no one can sure-bet one of them being a 1c or a top 2 defensman.

The problem isn't only with the likely scenario, but also that you're giving up all possible upside - if we pick the next Jagr, we get a superstar we could never get otherwise.

Problem is, this is exactly Berg-type thinking: go for the lower-risk, lower-upside scenario (Drouin for Serg, Weber for Subban fit this to a T). I don't like it.

I could accept our having a horrible team if Berg had made reasonable gambles and things hadn't worked out, but we got here by going for low-risk moves.

Trading Subban was not small risk. Not trading was the low risk road.

Not signing Radu and Markov was not small risk. The small risk was overpaying them.

All of the above were high risk moves that net us 27th in the league.


The only small risk was trading for Drouin and his 2nds for this or that.

[PTH]

Feb 13, 2018 1:29:19 GMT -5 Cranky said:

Feb 13, 2018 1:19:24 GMT -5 PTH said:

The problem isn't only with the likely scenario, but also that you're giving up all possible upside - if we pick the next Jagr, we get a superstar we could never get otherwise.

Problem is, this is exactly Berg-type thinking: go for the lower-risk, lower-upside scenario (Drouin for Serg, Weber for Subban fit this to a T). I don't like it.

I could accept our having a horrible team if Berg had made reasonable gambles and things hadn't worked out, but we got here by going for low-risk moves.

Trading Subban was not small risk. Not trading was the low risk road.

Disagree. Weber has a lower downside than Subban does - he's a more steady performer, who's future fits into a narrower band of potential outcomes. Weber at his worst is still good, PK could have failed to develop more maturity and stays overly high-risk. I'm not saying it's a smart call to make, just that I think that's how Berg tends to operate.

Not signing Radu and Markov was not small risk. The small risk was overpaying them.

All of the above were high risk moves that net us 27th in the league.

Well, those weren't deliberate moves: he wanted to sign them, but the UFA dynamic didn't work out for us, but I'm looking at moves where Berg did what he wanted to do.

The only small risk was trading for Drouin and his 2nds for this or that.

He transformed a prospect with massive upside, but who could also flame out after 50 games, into a 50-60 point winger, who we could safely assume would keep on being an NHLer, but who we could also assume wasn't going to become a superstar, either. The bigger upside and downside is now in Tampa, the safe bet is here.

If we keep on going for safe bets, we'll keep on being a middling team.

[franko]

Feb 13, 2018 8:42:35 GMT -5 PTH said:

If we keep on going for safe bets, we'll keep on being a middling team.

never thought we'd be looking up to and almost hoping that we'd be middling.

as it is we're "lower middling" . . . not bad enough to have "the pick" but not good enough to "make the playoffs where anything could happen".

[seventeen]

Feb 13, 2018 8:42:35 GMT -5 PTH said:

Disagree. Weber has a lower downside than Subban does - he's a more steady performer, who's future fits into a narrower band of potential outcomes. Weber at his worst is still good, PK could have failed to develop more maturity and stays overly high-risk. I'm not saying it's a smart call to make, just that I think that's how Berg tends to operate.

Safe is death, but that is indeed Bergevin's normal line of thinking.  It's how he played, it's how he manages.  It's a mug's game.  Something I never checked on until now, but Bergevin never played on a cup winner. The 96 Wings and 2001 Penguins were the closest where they were beaten in the 3rd round. Twenty seasons in the NHL with 80 playoff games. (0bviously other people liked his safety first approach, but never a winner).

[blny]

Forgot about this thread. Suppose we can use this to dump all trades between now and end of day Feb 26th? Here's a couple of small deals that went down this afternoon.

DiDomenico had cleared waivers.

Leafs got a 4th rounder from the Blues.

[blny]

Hawks send Kempny (d) to Caps for conditional third. Condition on pick is it will be the highest of the current three thirds Washington has.

[Willie Dog]

Feb 19, 2018 13:09:16 GMT -5 blny said:

Hawks send Kempny (d) to Caps for conditional third. Condition on pick is it will be the highest of the current three thirds Washington has.

I was hoping mbhead would would trade Alzner to the Caps

[Disgruntled70sHab]

[NWTHabsFan]

DET sends Mrazek to the Flyers for conditional picks. I guess that the Flyers’ goalie needs was the best chance to move a Niemi for anything.