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

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.

Ev wrote:

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

I can see your point. This does hurt his value a little. There’s not a lot of people that can take on extra salary unless there’s even salary coming back but columbus has enough space to take on something.

It’s most likely not gonna be a one for one in this situation.
But I can see columbus also sitting on him the whole year without trading him to get their price. They do have him locked for another two years now.

The other way to look at it is to let the year play out. If our puck is a top 3 pick (or even top 5j it’s value will be much higher towards the draft.

You could even see a one for one more or less for our, say 3rd overall, for Dubois. And I would do it. Columbus would have to seriously consider it also. Especially around the draft.

PTFlea wrote:

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.

I think Habs fans might actually part with Suzuki for Dubois. The problem is how much more would they part with to get him.


I don’t think Norris or Batherson are untouchable. Depends on the moving pieces but if you loose Norris to add Dubois. It’s an upgrade most likely.

If Montreal doesn't go after PLD they'd be insane. And in Montreal no one is untouchable. You better believe one of JK, Poehling, Caufield, or Suzuki would be heading back the other way.

Bergevin isn't afraid to go big-game hunting. My guess is JK and Mete are centerpieces with Lehkonen and maybe a pick going back the other way. Montreal gets their Quebecois 1C.

Then go for it, outbid them. Offer Norris + 1st + Brunnstrom and you'll have 3 of the nastiest pieces of business in the top 6 in Tkachuk, Dubois and Stutzle.

Well that's just it. Until Brannstrom is a full-time fixture in the NHL he's just a prospect. Same with Norris, Brown, Stutzle and whoever else.

Would I personally want to trade Norris or Batherson? No... but if the return was Dubois you have to think long and hard about it.

I think our most expendable 'A' prospects are Brannstrom and L. Brown, and everyone not named Sanderson, Norris, Batherson, Daccord and Stutzle are on the table. That includes Balcers, Abramov, Formenton, Sogaard, Hogberg, Greig, Jarventie, and our picks. Dubois is a pillar you build around.

If Columbus insisted on Norris I would 100% consider it.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Well that's just it. Until Brannstrom is a full-time fixture in the NHL he's just a prospect. Same with Norris, Brown, Stutzle and whoever else.

Would I personally want to trade Norris or Batherson? No... but if the return was Dubois you have to think long and hard about it.

I think our most expendable 'A' prospects are Brannstrom and L. Brown, and everyone not named Sanderson, Norris, Batherson, Daccord and Stutzle are on the table. That includes Balcers, Abramov, Formenton, Sogaard, Hogberg, Greig, Jarventie, and our picks. Dubois is a pillar you build around.

What is your fascination with Daccord? He somebody you trade in a heartbeat if you’re upgrading somewhere. He’s just another goalie prospect.

I don't think Daccord is "just another goalie prospect". I think he's more valuable than that, but until he proves something over a prolonger period of time at the pro level, it's hard to know for sure.

In other news, 3 AHL teams opted out of the upcoming AHL season which is something I didn't even know could happen. Apparently their players will be spread around the AHL and then I imagine some will likely head overseas as well.

tim1_2 wrote:I don't think Daccord is "just another goalie prospect". I think he's more valuable than that, but until he proves something over a prolonger period of time at the pro level, it's hard to know for sure.

In other news, 3 AHL teams opted out of the upcoming AHL season which is something I didn't even know could happen. Apparently their players will be spread around the AHL and then I imagine some will likely head overseas as well.

I didn’t mean I don’t think he has value. Just that I’d move him for sure, if needed, since we have a lot of goalie prospects and have a legit starter now. He’s probably second on the goalie prospect list for me

I think he's a highly motivated, future starter. I can't say the same about our other goalie prospects and I have no idea who Murray will do in Ottawa this year. No reason to protect Murray with so many potential starters out there. Every team has at least two capable goalies this season.

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:I think he's a highly motivated, future starter. I can't say the same about our other goalie prospects and I have no idea who Murray will do in Ottawa this year. No reason to protect Murray with so many potential starters out there. Every team has at least two capable goalies this season.

“No reason” to protect the goalie you just traded for and signed for 5 years. Come on man. He will obviously be protected unless he is terrible (like worst goalie stats) in his first year. Any other goalie we have can be trade bait.

Of course they'll protect Murray. Shouldn't even be a question.

I also can’t see any scenario, even if Murray is statistically the worst starter this year, where Murray is not protected. Year one of however long the contract is means nothing with this team the Sens are icing.

If Murray comes in and Dung the bed, why would he be protected? Seattle wouldn't take him.

tim1_2 wrote:If Murray comes in and Dung the bed, why would he be protected?  Seattle wouldn't take him.  

Very true as well.

Six Stars players and 2 staff with positive tests. NHL will revise the schedule and Dallas won't play until at least the 19th.

Not a great start.