(Speculation) MTL potentially shopping Gallagher and Edmunson

[Master Mind]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Agreed, I've been banging the "draft and develop" drum for a good while now. 

 

The draft is the best way to get top players but development requires patience. If we didn't have a history of being awful at drafting and developing our own D we as a fanbase probably wouldn't gripe about them so much.

 

But the only way to change that narrative is to actually do it. I was really hoping we'd find a way to draft a D high this past draft, I hope management is willing to take them in the 1st round going forward. BPA is important, but if you've got players ranked similarly and it's close sometimes going with position won't hurt. 

 

We don't have much in the system for now, our young stars won't be young forever and our veterans will age. Gotta build that next wave or risk running into a talent gap like the one the Gillis era produced. 

Even if we don't draft D with our 1sts, keeping our 2nds/3rds/4ths and using them to draft D can pay off. It hurts that we've traded away so many picks.

 

That is a good point though, if we had a better track record with our drafting/development, maybe the fanbase would be more on board with this approach. I just hope the new management doesn't rush things, and that they make development in the AHL a high priority.

Edited September 17, 2022 by Master Mind

[cripplereh]

1 hour ago, SilentSam said:

Well they gave up their best D prospect in Romanov.

Horvat is not a 1 C.   But could bolster that position.. like he does with us.

I really don’t know what Montreal’s “needs” are,  except perhaps to thicken up the C position, and add someone younger than Edmunson to that D core, who is more skillful with the puck.

 

… they are 10m over the cap as it stands according to CFreindly.

 

and  guys like Drouin an Price on the injury roster pressing to return must have Hab Management a bit woozy.

 

personally I would think Gallagher is the least of their worries.

 

although ,  if .. we were able to move Myers,  Edmunson would look good here.

If just acquiring Edmunson wasn’t to hard a give up for us,.  Myers for futures might not be too bad.

 

We need Myers and to get Edmundson would add a d we need.

[Coconuts]

15 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

Even if we don't draft D with our 1sts, keeping our 2nds/3rds/4ths and using them to draft D can pay off. It hurts that we've traded away so many picks.

 

That is a good point though, if we had a better track record with our drafting/development, maybe the fanbase would be more on board with this approach. I just hope the new management doesn't rush things, and that they make development in the AHL a high priority.

Yup, gotta have bullets in the chamber to take shots on players. You see players from every draft turn into serviceable D, and some even become top 4 or top 2 guys. But if you aren't drafting D you aren't giving yourself a chance to develop players that could hopefully make a difference as part of your D core. 

 

Drafting and development has gotta be a focus going forward, turning around our development system and improving our prospect pool is so important. 

 

I mean, Demko was a 2nd rounder. Hoglander's the first hit we've had in that round since, and what he becomes remains to be seen. Some folks dump on the importance of picks and drafting and would prefer to trade them away to help the immediate roster, I view that as a shortsighted approach. 

Edited September 17, 2022 by Coconuts

[Chris12345]

1 hour ago, Master Mind said:

Even if we don't draft D with our 1sts, keeping our 2nds/3rds/4ths and using them to draft D can pay off. It hurts that we've traded away so many picks.

 

That is a good point though, if we had a better track record with our drafting/development, maybe the fanbase would be more on board with this approach. I just hope the new management doesn't rush things, and that they make development in the AHL a high priority.

There's so much quality in round 2 and 3 for d.

[Master Mind]

3 hours ago, Coconuts said:

Yup, gotta have bullets in the chamber to take shots on players. You see players from every draft turn into serviceable D, and some even become top 4 or top 2 guys. But if you aren't drafting D you aren't giving yourself a chance to develop players that could hopefully make a difference as part of your D core. 

 

Drafting and development has gotta be a focus going forward, turning around our development system and improving our prospect pool is so important. 

 

I mean, Demko was a 2nd rounder. Hoglander's the first hit we've had in that round since, and what he becomes remains to be seen. Some folks dump on the importance of picks and drafting and would prefer to trade them away to help the immediate roster, I view that as a shortsighted approach. 

 

2 hours ago, Chris12345 said:

There's so much quality in round 2 and 3 for d.

Yep, volume of draft picks is often ignored here. The more chances you have, the more likely you'll find a hit. Just look at what teams like Carolina do with their mid picks, drafting Slavin and Pesce.

 

Trading picks because each individual pick has a small percentage of making it is a shortsighted approach. In the bigger picture, keeping all those picks (and improving our development system) would be a huge advantage.

[Chris12345]

28 minutes ago, Master Mind said:

 

Yep, volume of draft picks is often ignored here. The more chances you have, the more likely you'll find a hit. Just look at what teams like Carolina do with their mid picks, drafting Slavin and Pesce.

 

Trading picks because each individual pick has a small percentage of making it is a shortsighted approach. In the bigger picture, keeping all those picks (and improving our development system) would be a huge advantage.

I also like unloading players when it matters to keep the cycle going or make a push.

 

Example - LA trading Linden Vey for a second. Perfect move FOR LA.

[Master Mind]

38 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I also like unloading players when it matters to keep the cycle going or make a push.

 

Example - LA trading Linden Vey for a second. Perfect move FOR LA.

Agreed. Unfortunately we were on the wrong end of those type of deals far too often during Benning's tenure.

 

Glad new management traded Motte for a pick. That's a good sign for how they'll approach these situations.

[Coconuts]

1 hour ago, Master Mind said:

 

Yep, volume of draft picks is often ignored here. The more chances you have, the more likely you'll find a hit. Just look at what teams like Carolina do with their mid picks, drafting Slavin and Pesce.

 

Trading picks because each individual pick has a small percentage of making it is a shortsighted approach. In the bigger picture, keeping all those picks (and improving our development system) would be a huge advantage.

Absolutely, the more picks you've got the better your odds of getting a player out of a draft. Well, a player past the first round. They aren't guaranteed but the odds are much higher. 

 

And yeah, Carolina's done really well. LA too actually. Drafting high helps, but drafting period also helps. 

 

53 minutes ago, Chris12345 said:

I also like unloading players when it matters to keep the cycle going or make a push.

 

Example - LA trading Linden Vey for a second. Perfect move FOR LA.

Def, not holding on too long is important. Some folks are still sour about our trading Motte, but the reality is we've got to be willing to cut bait and get something for players sometimes. 

[Vinny in Vancouver]

With Blake Wheeler and Scheifele both rumoured to be on the outs in Winnipeg, maybe there's a deal to be made there for the Habs.

[qwijibo]

13 minutes ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

With Blake Wheeler and Scheifele both rumoured to be on the outs in Winnipeg, maybe there's a deal to be made there for the Habs.

Why would a rebuilding team like Montreal want a 36 year old Wheeler?  Montreal made their moves to solidify the C position by aquiring Dach and Monahan. I’m not sure where they could possibly move Gallagher to but they won’t be looking to get older or more expensive in the process 

[teepain]

MIKE gillis got us good, where is that guy nowadays, if he was so good he would still have a job in the league

[Vinny in Vancouver]

6 hours ago, qwijibo said:

Why would a rebuilding team like Montreal want a 36 year old Wheeler?  Montreal made their moves to solidify the C position by aquiring Dach and Monahan. I’m not sure where they could possibly move Gallagher to but they won’t be looking to get older or more expensive in the process 

I did mention Scheifele, no?

[qwijibo]

1 hour ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

I did mention Scheifele, no?

Yeah. That’s why I said Montreal already made their move for a C.   So unless the Jets would be interested in a Gallagher for Scheifele swap (and they wouldn’t). I don’t see what kind of move they could possibly make 

[Vinny in Vancouver]

26 minutes ago, qwijibo said:

Yeah. That’s why I said Montreal already made their move for a C.   So unless the Jets would be interested in a Gallagher for Scheifele swap (and they wouldn’t). I don’t see what kind of move they could possibly make 

I guess we disagree on the Monahan and Dach moves. I personally don't think adding an overpriced, oft-injured center given away by his former team in Monahan (actually the Flames paid a conditional 1st for somebody to take him from their hands) as "solidifying" as you put it. And I've been following Dach's career by checking in on the Blackhawks forums and writers every once in a while: when he was drafted, he was being hyped as a Toews replacement; fair or not, even at his young age, for a lot of the Blackhawks fans, those standards have dropped to hoping he'll be a serviceable 2C. They're really not sure what's missing and some of them seem to be glad it's not their problem any more. If the Habs are somehow in a playoff position by the trade deadline, I believe they'll make some moves to improve their roster. 

[qwijibo]

1 hour ago, Vinny in Vancouver said:

I guess we disagree on the Monahan and Dach moves. I personally don't think adding an overpriced, oft-injured center given away by his former team in Monahan (actually the Flames paid a conditional 1st for somebody to take him from their hands) as "solidifying" as you put it. And I've been following Dach's career by checking in on the Blackhawks forums and writers every once in a while: when he was drafted, he was being hyped as a Toews replacement; fair or not, even at his young age, for a lot of the Blackhawks fans, those standards have dropped to hoping he'll be a serviceable 2C. They're really not sure what's missing and some of them seem to be glad it's not their problem any more. If the Habs are somehow in a playoff position by the trade deadline, I believe they'll make some moves to improve their roster. 

Monahan is likely a short term thing.  Regardless Montréal gave up Romanov to get Dach. They clearly believe he has the potential to be the solution at the 2C slot.  Suzuki is the 1C.  They have a multitude of options at 3C.  Montreal has a glut of forwards on NHL contracts as it is.  I just don’t see a workable trade here.  Scheifele makes $6.125 for the next 2 seasons and Montreal has no cap space.  So they’d need to send back substantial cap and quality assets to get Scheifele. 
 

Also. Scheifele is 29 and 2 years away from free agency. He doesn’t fit in the timeline for a rebuild.