qwijibo Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 3 minutes ago, Herberts Vasiljevs said: I could see Bergevin maybe wanting to bring in Pearson to play with Toffoli. I'm not sure if the price for Gallagher (especially in today's economy) will even be that high. Would Pearson for Gallagher do the trick maybe? Or is that way off base? Boeser would be the kind of return they’d look for. If he was a LW he’d probably fit the bill. But he’s a RW which doesn’t solve any issues. I don’t really see another player on Vancouver (that they’d move) that fits. You don’t trade a beloved 30 goal agitator for a 20 goal guy who’s the same age and doesn’t bring the net front presence that Gallagher does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 11 minutes ago, oldnews said: A hockey deal is probably all that would be possible / or that would make sense. Otherwise - why bother moving him? Putting him on the seller's market right now is probably as inopportune as it gets - unless they are looking to one for one swap him to a team where he's a better fit - ie for a 20 goal scoring LW.... They don't really have a bottleneck at RW in any event imo - Anderson on the 3rd line is an excellent option - guys like Toffoli, Tatar, Byron, Lekhonen can move side to side.... It's unfortunate if a rift develops over the Anderson deal and Toffoli signing...but if they have to repeat a Domi/Anderson type swap that may be the only type of thing that makes sense under the circumstances... From a Canucks point of view though, Gallagher makes much less sense than Danault imo. The current consensus is it would be Gallagher , Anderson, Toffoli , Armia. As the RW. Montreal doesn’t really have a true top line. It’s more like 3 second lines and a checking line. (If you go by minute distribution). A hockey deal is what makes most sense for a couple reasons. First Montresl has had a bunch of picks in the last 3 drafts and are flush again next year. They have quality prospects on all positions. They lack true top end talent. Suzuki/Kotkaniemi/Caufield may grow into those roles. Time will tell. it’s time for the team to take a step forward. Not sell off a top line leader of the team for lesser assets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sestito Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 5 hours ago, Provost said: Ya, you have to know the price for extending him.. but that also increases his trade value of that is already established. Signing him at a $5.5-$6.0 x 5-6 years is probably a reasonable price point. It means you probably walk away from Pearson next year and shuffle the top 6 a little... but it certainly improves your team for a little bump in salary compared with him. Make it buyout friendly in the last couple years to mitigate risk. That is not a good deal. He's the type of guy whose game will fall off a cliff all of a sudden. He's an even strength power house who is the exact type of guy you win with and is twice the player Toffoli is. This would be a needle moving acquisition like Miller and Schmidt were. Factoring in his playstyle and age when he becomes a UFA, anything more than three years on an extension would be instant albatross. I'm all for a cheap deal if there is one to be had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 Just glancing at all teams', cap-list on CapFriendly, there are almost zero teams with the space for some of these left-over stars, who've yet to ca$h in. Appears a pretty lousy time to go UFA(now, or next off-season). The only teams with decent space left are all out east. Or(right now) maybe Nashville? Should this get acrimonious, I'd suggest BG for a Sissons pkg(due to his fine contract, & being out west) might be conceivable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whalespray Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 2 hours ago, 5Fivehole0 said: I don't think Vancouver has the room to trade a Dman. Also there's 0 way Montreal takes that. Virtanen Sutter prospect pick is a bit more realistic That was my original post before edit. I changed it to benn because I thought benn was a fan fav when he was there and they litterally have the worst d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Provost Posted October 13, 2020 Author Share Posted October 13, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, qwijibo said: Boeser would be the kind of return they’d look for. If he was a LW he’d probably fit the bill. But he’s a RW which doesn’t solve any issues. I don’t really see another player on Vancouver (that they’d move) that fits. You don’t trade a beloved 30 goal agitator for a 20 goal guy who’s the same age and doesn’t bring the net front presence that Gallagher does It is about cap space and him only having one year of club control left. If they don’t think they can sign him, do they just let it ride to the end of the year and watch him walk for nothing? Do they stand pat and wait to see where they are at the trade deadline? Do they move him now for a more cost controlled player? Do they want to get rid of a possible season long distraction? Any of those are possible. It is not purely an on ice transaction as there are a ton more variables to it. Boeser for a year of an older pending UFA Is not a reasonable swap in any universe. Edited October 14, 2020 by Provost 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 4 minutes ago, Whalespray said: That was my original post before edit. I changed it to benn because I thought benn was a fan fav when he was there and they litterally have the worst d Have you looked at their D lately? It’s far from the worst. In fact it’s one of their strengths. They’re huge, mobile and mean. They punished the a penguins and Flyers in the playoffs. And thst was before they added Edmundson and Romanov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 1 minute ago, Provost said: It is about cap space and him only having one year of club control left. If the don’t think they can sign him, do they just let it ride to the end of the year and watch him walk for nothing? Do they stand pat and wait to see where they are at the trade deadline? Do they move him now for a more cost controlled player? Do they want to get rid of a possible season long distraction? Any of those are possible. It is not purely an on ice transaction as there are a ton more variables to it. All of that is true. What I’m saying is if they decide to move him there will be a number of suitors. He’s on an incredibly team friendly deal for the rest of the year. If they can’t sign him and decide to move him they’re not going to have to take a loss. They’ll get great value in return 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whalespray Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 minute ago, qwijibo said: Have you looked at their D lately? It’s far from the worst. In fact it’s one of their strengths. They’re huge, mobile and mean. They punished the a penguins and Flyers in the playoffs. And thst was before they added Edmundson and Romanov So back to my original proposal then. Sutter at 50 Virtanen and a pick/Juolevi. IMO Wrathbone Offence and possibly even Breezer defence are passing Juolevi on the depth chart left D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 9 minutes ago, qwijibo said: All of that is true. What I’m saying is if they decide to move him there will be a number of suitors. He’s on an incredibly team friendly deal for the rest of the year. If they can’t sign him and decide to move him they’re not going to have to take a loss. They’ll get great value in return You CAN'T predict trade-outcomes at this juncture. As things stand, the inmates are running the asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, Whalespray said: So back to my original proposal then. Sutter at 50 Virtanen and a pick/Juolevi. IMO Wrathbone Offence and possibly even Breezer defence are passing Juolevi on the depth chart left D. They don't need a Sutter.... they have excellent center depth. We're not getting Gallagher, I think we should stop daydreaming about this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cuporbust Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 (edited) 53 minutes ago, qwijibo said: Boeser would be the kind of return they’d look for. If he was a LW he’d probably fit the bill. But he’s a RW which doesn’t solve any issues. I don’t really see another player on Vancouver (that they’d move) that fits. You don’t trade a beloved 30 goal agitator for a 20 goal guy who’s the same age and doesn’t bring the net front presence that Gallagher does No, they wouldnt. He needs an extension. He would cost similar to what Toffoli costed us last year. He would not get them a young player like Boeser. Especially on an expiring contract. Edited October 14, 2020 by cuporbust 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 minute ago, Whalespray said: So back to my original proposal then. Sutter at 50 Virtanen and a pick/Juolevi. IMO Wrathbone Offence and possibly even Breezer defence are passing Juolevi on the depth chart left D. As I said when you originally made the proposal. It’s an easy pass. First of all Sutter is useless to them. Virtanen holds limited appeal and Juolevi is interesting but in the same boat as Montreal prospect Juulsen. Injuries have derailed his development. on top of all that Montreal doesn’t have the cap space to do it. They’re a little over the cap Gallagher makes $3.75 sutter at 60% is 2.19 Virtanen likely comes in at $2.5-$3m , plus Juolevi on top Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, cuporbust said: No, they wouldnt. He needs an extension. He would cost similar to what Toffoli costed us last year. He would not get them a young player like Boeser. Especially on an expiring contract. Gallagher is a much better player than Toffoli. And if they move him prior to the season he’s worth more than a player who’s just there for the final run at the playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, qwijibo said: The current consensus is it would be Gallagher , Anderson, Toffoli , Armia. As the RW. Montreal doesn’t really have a true top line. It’s more like 3 second lines and a checking line. (If you go by minute distribution). A hockey deal is what makes most sense for a couple reasons. First Montresl has had a bunch of picks in the last 3 drafts and are flush again next year. They have quality prospects on all positions. They lack true top end talent. Suzuki/Kotkaniemi/Caufield may grow into those roles. Time will tell. it’s time for the team to take a step forward. Not sell off a top line leader of the team for lesser assets Gallagher to Tampa for Palat. Tampa probably has to tip the balance - they're shedding 1.55 million of cap and a year of term - and more importantly, they lack leverage... Palat may not be a 'goalscorer' but he's more playmaker than Gallagher - and they both get after the play. Palat 328 pts in 496 games Gallagher 334 pts in 547 games The Habs add a LW to shift the balance and don't have to re-up Gallagher at maximum term.... In a sense it might be a good outcome for Gallagher as well - who goes to a contender, probably produces quite nicely there and then expires a UFA...? Would seem like a 'close' enough margin hockey trade that might make sense for both teams. Tampa of course has to continue to make moves, but they do regardless. The Habs don't - but they could do worse and there is a question of timing - you only have so many possible trade partners in the end, so this might be one to look at.. Tampa also still owes the Habs for Sergachev..... Edited October 14, 2020 by oldnews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elias Pettersson Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 hour ago, oldnews said: Pass on Gallagher. Love the player - but the circumstances make no sense for us. I would not re-sign him next offseason - not near the kind of terms being thrown around - and terrible timing regardless. For one year of Gallagher - with the asset prices being proposed here - hard no. Now Danault on the other hand - I would kick tires at minimum. Bigger guy, heavier game, a center, and good faceoff guy - I'd target him over a RW, no question. If the Habs are considering moving Gallagher - and are looking for a 20 goal scoring LW - in a separate deal I'd consider a Pearson/Danault as principals deal - or alternatively - imo they are relatively small and soft top to bottom at LW - I'd also offer a Roussel + future type deal for Danault - depending on what the Habs intend to acquire in those separate deals (ie if they target a LW for Gallagher, they could still probably stand to improve, get harder to play against in their bottom 6. It looks like a multi-stage set of deals they 'should' make, so the first won't have to accomplish the goal in the end. I think the Habs 'should' move Drouin, as well - but I doubt they do - they'll probably hope to uptick him as a playmaker to Anderson/Toffoli... In any event, Danault would be my target, not Gallagher (as much as I love the guy). I could see Pearson moving to Montreal to play with his dearest friend Toffoli. The bromance can continue for at least another year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 minute ago, oldnews said: Gallagher to Tampa for Palat. Tampa probably has to tip the balance - they're shedding 1.55 million of cap and a year of term - and more importantly, they lack leverage... Palat may not be a 'goalscorer' but he's more playmaker than Gallagher - and they both get after the play. Palat 328 pts in 496 games Gallagher 334 pts in 547 games The Habs add a LW to shift the balance and don't have to re-up Gallagher at maximum term.... In a sense it might be a good outcome for Gallagher as well - who goes to a contender, probably produces quite nicely there and then expires a UFA...? Would seem like a 'close' enough margin hockey trade that might make sense for both teams. Tampa of course has to continue to make moves, but they do regardless. Yup. This is the sort of deal they’d be looking at. It puts Montreal close to $2m over the cap though. But that’s the sort of thing that can be sorted out if the fit is right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 1 minute ago, qwijibo said: Yup. This is the sort of deal they’d be looking at. It puts Montreal close to $2m over the cap though. But that’s the sort of thing that can be sorted out if the fit is right I would use Drouin for a hockey "trade down"... Send him to Pittsburgh for Kapanen. Habs win. Who cares about Pittsburgh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junkyard Dog Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 Apparently the Canucks are in the market looking for a winger. Frank Seravalli believes if Brendan Gallagher is put on the market by the Habs that the Canucks would be at the forefront there. Canucks continuing to pursue shedding some cap which isn't new. Says Hoffman might look at a 1 year deal at around 5.5-6.5M. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 Just now, Junkyard Dog said: Says Hoffman might look at a 1 year deal at around 5.5-6.5M. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts