brian42 Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 to MTL: Tanev -main piece for Montreal Sutter - Fills in for Plekanec plus cheaper and younger. Canucks lose the long term commitment. Baertschi -fills in some of the scoring in montreal from Radulov and Galchenyuk 3'rd round Pick To Van: Galchenyuk -main piece for Vancouver much needed scoring Plekanec - Cap dump for montreal(6 million). Only 1 year left for Vancouver can flip at deadline and retain some salary. Allows Montreal to make other adds. 2018 1'st - Montreal is in win now mode so trading a 1'st to a rebuilding team makes sense. Main pieces are Tanev and Galchenyuk, Vancouver gets a 1'st because of adding Baertschi, and eating Plekanec's contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, brian42 said: to MTL: Tanev -main piece for Montreal Sutter - Fills in for Plekanec plus cheaper and younger. Canucks lose the long term commitment. Baertschi -fills in some of the scoring in montreal from Radulov and Galchenyuk 3'rd round Pick To Van: Galchenyuk -main piece for Vancouver much needed scoring Plekanec - Cap dump for montreal(6 million). Only 1 year left for Vancouver can flip at deadline and retain some salary. Allows Montreal to make other adds. 2018 1'st - Montreal is in win now mode so trading a 1'st to a rebuilding team makes sense. Main pieces are Tanev and Galchenyuk, Vancouver gets a 1'st because of adding Baertschi, and eating Plekanec's contract. Why do we want Chucky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, brian42 said: to MTL: Tanev -main piece for Montreal Sutter - Fills in for Plekanec plus cheaper and younger. Canucks lose the long term commitment. Baertschi -fills in some of the scoring in montreal from Radulov and Galchenyuk 3'rd round Pick To Van: Galchenyuk -main piece for Vancouver much needed scoring Plekanec - Cap dump for montreal(6 million). Only 1 year left for Vancouver can flip at deadline and retain some salary. Allows Montreal to make other adds. 2018 1'st - Montreal is in win now mode so trading a 1'st to a rebuilding team makes sense. Main pieces are Tanev and Galchenyuk, Vancouver gets a 1'st because of adding Baertschi, and eating Plekanec's contract. Remove Baertschi and Plekanec from the deal, turn Montreal pick coming back to 2nd round and this has some potential win for both teams. I think if you do that you can also get rid of that third pick going East - possibly. Not a bad proposal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: Why do we want Chucky? Intereresitng young player with untapped ceiling but in a system that doesn't seem to get him. He would fit an uptempo Travis Green system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian42 Posted July 3, 2017 Author Share Posted July 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, Alflives said: Why do we want Chucky? our major weakness is scoring and he has potential for 70 points in the future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 4 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Intereresitng young player with untapped ceiling but in a system that doesn't seem to get him. He would fit an uptempo Travis Green system. 2 minutes ago, brian42 said: our major weakness is scoring and he has potential for 70 points in the future Could Chucky be our PK Subban, and becomes even better once out of Montreal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian42 Posted July 3, 2017 Author Share Posted July 3, 2017 3 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Remove Baertschi and Plekanec from the deal, turn Montreal pick coming back to 2nd round and this has some potential win for both teams. I think if you do that you can also get rid of that third pick going East - possibly. Not a bad proposal! Tanev & Sutter for Galchenyuk and 2'nd. That is certainly more plausible as it is a simpler deal. I like the idea of Plekanec as he potentially has negative value at the moment with less than 30 points and 6 million contract but I believe if we retain 2 million at the deadline we could turn him into possibly a 2'nd depending on how he plays. Then Montreal has more cap flexibility. I like both deals though. Montreal needs a centre and right side D-man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian42 Posted July 3, 2017 Author Share Posted July 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Alflives said: Could Chucky be our PK Subban, and becomes even better once out of Montreal? Hope so. With our newly acuried depth it would be nice if we could come up with a package for some higher end talent. Our depth isn't the issue any more it's top end talent imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhukini Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: Could Chucky be our PK Subban, and becomes even better once out of Montreal? He's going to be somebody's PK Subban, I very much doubt it'll be ours. It sounds like the Horvat contract is the last big plan for the Summer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Just now, brian42 said: Hope so. With our newly acuried depth it would be nice if we could come up with a package for some higher end talent. Our depth isn't the issue any more it's top end talent imo. We do have Petersson coming. Would Chucky have a spot once Petersson arrives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Montreal doesn't need Tanev though - it's the left side their issue. On the right side they already have Weber and Petry. Bergevin is being severely criticised re Radulov - he trades Galchenyuk for a player they don't need and it's going to be pandemonium. He needs to find a LD1 and a C1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 27 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Remove Baertschi and Plekanec from the deal, turn Montreal pick coming back to 2nd round and this has some potential win for both teams. I think if you do that you can also get rid of that third pick going East - possibly. Not a bad proposal! right did you not see the habs recent signings (10 million plus for price and 5 mill something for alzner) and you think a deal that results in them taking on more annual contract (at least 2 mill in this proposal) is attractive to them ? it is a bad proposal if only for that reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted July 3, 2017 Share Posted July 3, 2017 Can't see the Habbies taking that plunge. Deal like this could backfire badly on them. Pretty nice targets though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 This does absolutely nothing to address Montreal's needs, Which are a puck moving LHD and a 1/2 center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 1 minute ago, qwijibo said: This does absolutely nothing to address Montreal's needs, Which are a puck moving LHD and a 1/2 center Add Megna - Habs problems solved:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 1 hour ago, coastal.view said: right did you not see the habs recent signings (10 million plus for price and 5 mill something for alzner) and you think a deal that results in them taking on more annual contract (at least 2 mill in this proposal) is attractive to them ? it is a bad proposal if only for that reason Retention coming back is possible. Just the more bodies, the less likely the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 9 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Retention coming back is possible. Just the more bodies, the less likely the deal. the basic components proposed for the trade are not a good fit for the habs and the dollars do not work for them either so perhaps a completely fresh trade proposal makes more sense then the flawed one proposed ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 1 minute ago, coastal.view said: the basic components proposed for the trade are not a good fit for the habs and the dollars do not work for them either so perhaps a completely fresh trade proposal makes more sense then the flawed one proposed ? Wasn't aware you were working for Hab but I guess if you say so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 31 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said: Wasn't aware you were working for Hab but I guess if you say so! You don't have to be working for Montreal to understand what that team needs or what it's cap situation is. If someone made a proposal that offered Vancouver a right shooting shut down D, addressed none of Vancouver's actual needs, and cost Horvat, and a 1sr , would you think it was a good deal for Vancouver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Zepp Posted July 4, 2017 Share Posted July 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, qwijibo said: You don't have to be working for Montreal to understand what that team needs or what it's cap situation is. If someone made a proposal that offered Vancouver a right shooting shut down D, addressed none of Vancouver's actual needs, and cost Horvat, and a 1sr , would you think it was a good deal for Vancouver? Not sure, I don't work for Vancouver. If the D was Subban (revise time) and the Canucks were in the shape Canadians are otherwise, maybe I think about it. Otherwise, probably not. However, Montreal seems to make bizarre trades all the time. Seem bent on perpetual mediocrity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.