General Hockey Talk - Injuries, signings, factoids + other news from around the league

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

I disagree. I don't even think that's enough. It's in the ballpark. but Logan Brown...does he hold much value?

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

I disagree. I don't even think that's enough. It's in the ballpark. but Logan Brown...does he hold much value?

Less than before but still a dominant ahl player, young centre with high offensive upside. If that’s not enough for Dubois then you pass IMO. It wouldn’t cripple us or anything though. I’d still like getting Dubois

I wouldn't give up Brannstrom. I keep hearing he's good.

wprager wrote:I wouldn't give up Brannstrom. I keep hearing he's good.

He’s good, he’s progressing but if they keep insisting on him playing LD, he will ask for a trade very soon.

Lagoon wrote:

wprager wrote:I wouldn't give up Brannstrom. I keep hearing he's good.

He’s good, he’s progressing but if they keep insisting on him playing LD, he will ask for a trade very soon.

Jesus Christ

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

I disagree.  I don't even think that's enough.  It's in the ballpark. but Logan Brown...does he hold much value?

Less than before but still a dominant ahl player, young centre with high offensive upside. If that’s not enough for Dubois then you pass IMO. It wouldn’t cripple us or anything though. I’d still like getting Dubois

I'd pay that happily, just don't think Columbus would take it. I think you have to add Formenton into that.

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

I disagree.  I don't even think that's enough.  It's in the ballpark. but Logan Brown...does he hold much value?

Less than before but still a dominant ahl player, young centre with high offensive upside. If that’s not enough for Dubois then you pass IMO. It wouldn’t cripple us or anything though. I’d still like getting Dubois

I'd pay that happily, just don't think Columbus would take it. I think you have to add Formenton into that.

Formenton, brown, brannstrom and 1st? Is there what you’re suggesting? IMO that’s a huge overpay

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Ev wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:L. Brown, brannstrom, unprotected 1st . That's what I would offer

That’s way too much. If you’re trading brannstrom you aren’t trading the 1st and brown along with it. The first would be taken out.

I disagree.  I don't even think that's enough.  It's in the ballpark. but Logan Brown...does he hold much value?

Less than before but still a dominant ahl player, young centre with high offensive upside. If that’s not enough for Dubois then you pass IMO. It wouldn’t cripple us or anything though. I’d still like getting Dubois

I'd pay that happily, just don't think Columbus would take it.  I think you have to add Formenton into that.

Formenton, brown, brannstrom and 1st? Is there what you’re suggesting? IMO that’s a huge overpay

That's why i wanted to see what guy smiley thought Dorion should do considering Columbus would want a huge package to move him. Don't think it works for us, too many assets to give.

What I read was that he still wants to be traded. I guess the 2 year deal is so they wouldn't be trying to trade a pending free agent.

But why would he want to go to (add stay in) Ottawa? Would you really give up that much for less than 2 seasons (assuming a deadline move on the second year)?

wprager wrote:What I read was that he still wants to be traded. I guess the 2 year deal is so they wouldn't be trying to trade a pending free agent.

But why would he want to go to (add stay in) Ottawa? Would you really give up that much for less than 2 seasons (assuming a deadline move on the second year)?

it wouldn't matter where he wants to go. He has no say. Seems he just wants out of Columbus for whatever reason. It would be similar to when we got Turris (not comparing the two players and their values at the time).

I think if he or Barzal are legitimately for sale, you offer a fair bit. I like Brannstrom and think he's about ready to carve out a nice career, but i wouldn't hesitate trading him and a 1st to start talks. Then adding Brown and Formenton to complete the deal would also be within the realm for me. I mean...I'd try to get them to take Brown or even Greig or someone else, but they're not dumb and this will be a game changing trade for them.

However...and this is where you lose deals, Norris is off the table and Sanderson would be too.  Same with Batherson, so you've likely lost before you start.

Edit and why does he want out? 23 year old asking for a trade better have a good reason. Red flags...

For once I agree with many of you. You absolutely trade Brannstrom, a 1st and Brown. At least see if that’s a package that gets it going. I’d add a 2nd rounder also (preferably Tampa’s).

Tbh I think that gets it done. This ain’t Kalrlsson you’re trading. But two prime prime assets, and a prospect that could eventually replace Dubois.

Dubois is a legit number 1C and we ain’t likely to get one with our first next year. Not one that fits with the age of the players in the rebuild at any rate.

This is more than a perfect fit.

You probably get a first back for stepan and Norris moves into the number 2C.

The left is set in a few years without Brannstrom.
Chabot, Sanderson and Wolanin.

Make it happen Dorion!

Montreal would be pissed if we got. Big true number 1 francophone C.

Flo The Action wrote:For once I agree with many of you. You absolutely trade Brannstrom, a 1st and Brown. At least see if that’s a package that gets it going. I’d add a 2nd rounder also (preferably Tampa’s).

Tbh I think that gets it done. This ain’t Kalrlsson you’re trading. But two prime prime assets, and a prospect that could eventually replace Dubois.

Dubois is a legit number 1C and we ain’t likely to get one with our first next year. Not one that fits with the age of the players in the rebuild at any rate.

This is more than a perfect fit.

You probably get a first back for stepan and Norris moves into the number 2C.

The left is set in a few years without Brannstrom.
Chabot, Sanderson and Wolanin.

Make it happen Dorion!

Would love Dubois but I think that’s just too rich for a player who a) wants out, so his value is reduced, and b) has not shown to be more than a 60 point player as of yet . He’ll probably be a 70 point guy. I just think you can get him for a bit less. But he would be a great fit here

PTFlea wrote:However...and this is where you lose deals, Norris is off the table and Sanderson would be too.  Same with Batherson, so you've likely lost before you start.

Edit and why does he want out? 23 year old asking for a trade better have a good reason. Red flags...

Why would Norris or Batherson be off the table?

Ev wrote:

PTFlea wrote:However...and this is where you lose deals, Norris is off the table and Sanderson would be too.  Same with Batherson, so you've likely lost before you start.

Edit and why does he want out?  23 year old asking for a trade better have a good reason.  Red flags...

Why would Norris or Batherson be off the table?

To me, they represent the blue chippers. Id be really reluctant to move them, even for a guy like this. I guess it's what Montreal fans laugh about when their fans won't trade Suzuki or Caufield etc.