Forums/NHL Trades

What would you offer for 3OA

Apr 17 at 7:34
#1
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 558
Likes: 108
Fans of other teams, what would you offer for 3OA?

I dont think the hawks will or should necessarily trade the pick, but curious what we could get for it.
Apr 17 at 7:42
#2
Burgers and Hockey
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 6,959
Likes: 2,840
You could maybe use it to get rid of Seabrook? Assuming he's willing to waive his NMC of course.
TanSor liked this.
Apr 17 at 7:45
#3
Formerly arousedcat
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 3,981
Likes: 2,073
I'd be interested as a Wild fan... Maybe something like Zucker + 12 OA + Belpedio + Aberg? Might not be enough... Hard from our perspective since we traded pretty much all of our tradeable assets. What are the Hawks trying to do? Win now or retool?

Edit: If the 1st offer isn't intriguing enough, what about Zucker + Brodin + 12 OA + Belpedio for 3 OA + Jokiharju? Seems like Hawks could use help on their left side with Keith on the decline
BurgerBoss liked this.
Apr 17 at 8:00
#4
OldNYIfan
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 5,668
Likes: 2,240
Seems to me that Fowler or Lindholm plus the #9 overall might be enough, or maybe not. Maybe include one of your young RhD and one of our numerous young forwards.
TanSor liked this.
Apr 17 at 8:17
#5
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 5,161
Likes: 956
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Seems to me that Fowler or Lindholm plus the #9 overall might be enough, or maybe not. Maybe include one of your young RhD and one of our numerous young forwards.


Lindholm and the 9th overall would do it, with maybe Chad Krys coming back.
OldNYIfan liked this.
Apr 17 at 8:21
#6
OldNYIfan
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 5,668
Likes: 2,240
Quoting: ChiHawk
Lindholm and the 9th overall would do it, with maybe Chad Krys coming back.


I would take that.
ChiHawk liked this.
Apr 18 at 12:32
#7
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 558
Likes: 108
Quoting: OldNYIfan
Seems to me that Fowler or Lindholm plus the #9 overall might be enough, or maybe not. Maybe include one of your young RhD and one of our numerous young forwards.


I dont even think the pick should be traded but I would do lindholm and 9 for 3 in a heartbeat
OldNYIfan liked this.
Apr 18 at 12:34
#8
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 558
Likes: 108
Quoting: BurgerBoss
You could maybe use it to get rid of Seabrook? Assuming he's willing to waive his NMC of course.


Dont think wed trade the highest pick weve had in a decade+ just to unload seabrook. We already made that mistake with bickell.
BurgerBoss liked this.
Apr 18 at 12:36
#9
Thread Starter
Joined: Jun 2018
Posts: 558
Likes: 108
Quoting: TanSor
I'd be interested as a Wild fan... Maybe something like Zucker + 12 OA + Belpedio + Aberg? Might not be enough... Hard from our perspective since we traded pretty much all of our tradeable assets. What are the Hawks trying to do? Win now or retool?

Edit: If the 1st offer isn't intriguing enough, what about Zucker + Brodin + 12 OA + Belpedio for 3 OA + Jokiharju? Seems like Hawks could use help on their left side with Keith on the decline


Interesting. I think brodin+12+belpedio for 3 would be more appealing for chicago. Dont think hawks part with joki unless someone really wows bowman
TanSor liked this.
Apr 18 at 11:52
#10
rangersandislesfan
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 26,222
Likes: 2,606
Quoting: BurgerBoss
You could maybe use it to get rid of Seabrook? Assuming he's willing to waive his NMC of course.


Obviously getting rid of Seabrook's contract would be good, but that's a waste of the 3rd overall pick. I know you'd be getting something else back, but still not a good think to do with a 3rd overall pick. Especially because Seabrook's contract is so bad that you're going to probably have to do 3OA+Seabrook for something like 10OA to 12OA + a prospect or something. I wouldn't try too hard to get rid of Seabrook's contract because the price will be too high. You can't just move Seabrook+2nd+extra prospect for a prospect of the same value as the one you're giving up. That's basically giving up a 2nd to get rid of Seabrook. Sure, that would be a good deal for Chicago, but a 2nd isn't enough to get another team to want to take his contract. Teams are going to ask for the 3rd overall pick. I don't see any way the Blackhawks trade that pick at all.

I think the reason teams never trade top 5 picks is a good one. It's because you have a chance to get a really good young player, so why not use it? I wouldn't go around offering it for a 25-29 year old defenseman. That just doesn't make sense to do when you can get a way younger player in the draft. And if you offer the pick for someone really young who's already in the NHL, if that player is good enough the other team probably won't take the deal.

The top 5 picks in the draft are all basically untouchable like most years. Those picks almost never get traded and I don't see why this year would be any different. But when I think about it, Detroit, Buffalo, Edmonton, Anaheim and Vancouver don't seem at all likely to trade their picks either. So, I think the top 10 are untouchable. Then I look at Philly and they're building a younger team who should probably just stay at 11 and make a pick. Then Minnesota kind of seems to be in a rebuild or retool. Even if they do decide to build for next year, that pick shouldn't be moved IMO. Florida's pick is the highest I could see being moved. I don't think they will trade it, but they could. If they decide they want to be in win-now mode, they might move it to acquire that last piece they need to be a playoff team next year. I could possibly see them doing that to build a better team for next year. I'm not sure though. All of these are guesses and I could turn out to be completely wrong.
BurgerBoss liked this.
Apr 18 at 12:20
#11
Burgers and Hockey
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 6,959
Likes: 2,840
Quoting: rangersandislesfan
Obviously getting rid of Seabrook's contract would be good, but that's a waste of the 3rd overall pick. I know you'd be getting something else back, but still not a good think to do with a 3rd overall pick. Especially because Seabrook's contract is so bad that you're going to probably have to do 3OA+Seabrook for something like 10OA to 12OA + a prospect or something. I wouldn't try too hard to get rid of Seabrook's contract because the price will be too high. You can't just move Seabrook+2nd+extra prospect for a prospect of the same value as the one you're giving up. That's basically giving up a 2nd to get rid of Seabrook. Sure, that would be a good deal for Chicago, but a 2nd isn't enough to get another team to want to take his contract. Teams are going to ask for the 3rd overall pick. I don't see any way the Blackhawks trade that pick at all.

I think the reason teams never trade top 5 picks is a good one. It's because you have a chance to get a really good young player, so why not use it? I wouldn't go around offering it for a 25-29 year old defenseman. That just doesn't make sense to do when you can get a way younger player in the draft. And if you offer the pick for someone really young who's already in the NHL, if that player is good enough the other team probably won't take the deal.

The top 5 picks in the draft are all basically untouchable like most years. Those picks almost never get traded and I don't see why this year would be any different. But when I think about it, Detroit, Buffalo, Edmonton, Anaheim and Vancouver don't seem at all likely to trade their picks either. So, I think the top 10 are untouchable. Then I look at Philly and they're building a younger team who should probably just stay at 11 and make a pick. Then Minnesota kind of seems to be in a rebuild or retool. Even if they do decide to build for next year, that pick shouldn't be moved IMO. Florida's pick is the highest I could see being moved. I don't think they will trade it, but they could. If they decide they want to be in win-now mode, they might move it to acquire that last piece they need to be a playoff team next year. I could possibly see them doing that to build a better team for next year. I'm not sure though. All of these are guesses and I could turn out to be completely wrong.


I agree. CHI should just keep the pick. I just had this idea that maybe it could be used in order to remove a bad contract in this certain case. For example if it were EDM who had this pick, they surely might have considered moving it in order to get rid of Lucic.
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Remove Option
Insert NHL Teams
Submit Poll