Koivu at 4C lol.

MIN declines anyway.

Koivu is... a prideful guy. Can't see him agreeing to be moved from the team that drafted him (he LOVES it here, wrote a player tribune thingy a couple years ago about how MN is his home away from home) where he can play in the middle 6 to a team where he'd be relegated to the 4th line.

Indeed. And it's not like he's waiving his NMC either.

Let's just say I wouldn't want to be anywhere near the same room as him (not that I would be) when he's being asked to waive his NMC AND that he'd be going to a team where he'd have to be a 4C... I could honestly see the guy flipping chairs. He can get really heated, angry Mikko is scary.

Luckily that will most likely never happen.

Koivu will be a forever Wild. Number 9 will be retired.

My mistake in referring to it as a 4th line. The Habs don't really have that ... or at least don't want to have that. They try to roll four lines with very little difference between the ice times of each in 5-on-5. I suspect Koivu would also be key to the PK and PP units, so I wasn't trying to demean him at all. And other than Laine, there is no more exciting a young Finn in the league than Kotkeniemi. The Finns also take great pride in their national legacy and bringing in the "next wave" is something that Koivu -- like his brother before him -- might want to do.

I know Koivu loves Minnesota and it would be great for him to retire there. Of course, they should and will retire his #9. By accepting the trade and opening up some cap space for the Wild, Koivu would be being the ultimate "mensch" for the Wild.

I have adjusted my description to better reflect this.

koivu wouldnt be at 4c i would put domi has a winger and have koivu has the 2nd line : danault , koivu , kk and wease i would give 1 or 2 years in ahl for poehling

Agreed. I think that would be a great way to start the season and then see how the kids develop over the first 40 games. (I took a crack at it)

Ok, yes it would be cool to have Koivu come to MTL. But giving up Byron (and retaining, seriously!? Byron was on pace for his 3rd straight 20 goal season, hes a deadly penalty killer and he basically produces as much offense as Koivu at this point anyways!) A 2nd and Lindgren is just stupid for one year of a 36 year old C. Especially when the team already is deep at C with Domi, Danault, KK, Poehling, and weal.

Why are you giving up $4M x 5 years for chariot, you want alzner 2.0? Kulak is just as good if not better than chariot and you're only giving him $1.25M × 2 years. Why are you taking Ladd's terrible contract? You just wasted a TON of cap space and now you cant resign your young guys in 2 years. Terrible moves here.

The Habs have tons of "Byrons" and no one like Koivu. On poise and leadership alone, the move would be worth it. Lindgren is a plug, but he's cheap and a Minnesota boy -- two things that should appeal to the Wild. I'd rather have Christopher Gibson (who's actually a Finn, too).

The Islanders' "fourth line" dominated opponents and Ladd is that perfect combination of big, fast and punishing. He can also score at times, though that might have faded. Still, he'd be a great catch at $3M, so you're really just "wasting" $2M. WIth the cap going up by $2M every year, the Habs will never have a space problem.

I'm fine not taking Chariot, but he's the best LHD on the market, so he'll command a good wage. I went high because I didn't want the scoffers to say "Ben Chariot will never go to Montreal for $3M.... yada yada. I like Kulak too, but I'd feel a lot better if he were the #3 on the left and not the #2.

The habs do not have a bunch of Byron's. No one on the team can skate like him and he was named an assistant captain for a reason.

I would rather overpay $2.5M for some like panarin or skinner than an aging bottom 6'r like Ladd.

Yes kulak would be an ideal 3rd pairing guy, but that doesn't mean you get another 3rd pair guy just to force him there. If chariot is the best LD UFA (your opinion) than you don't overpay for him. You are probably better off avoiding free agency all together and going for a LD in trades or the draft. Overpaying for UFA LD's when there arent any good ones is how you get alzner.

Also are you actually putting shaw at 4th line C when he was on pace for 60bpts this year in a top 6 wing role?

I like Byron, but if Weal (or Tampa) shows us anything it's that there are more good underappreciated forwards around the league than there are C or decent LHDs. And it's not as if I am sending him packing. The Habs would be getting a really good veteran centreman to help smooth the transition for Kotkeniemi and Poehling (and the other Finns: Gibson, Armia, Lehkonen, Armia, Ikonen and Ylonen).

(Separate rant: If the Habs' Quebec scouts were doing their jobs, the Habs wouldn't have to be looking at Tampa longingly for Yanni Gourde, Alex Barre-Boulet, Mathieu Joseph, Cedric Paquette.... It's amazing to me that players like Patrice Bergeron (Habs picked Cory Urquhart five picks earlier), Brad Marchand (Habs had picked David Fischer, Mathieu Carle and Ryan White) and David Krejci (Habs picked Kyle Chipchura) all seemed to go unnoticed in the Habs backyard)

From what I can tell, Chiarot is a step up on Kulak and has a bit more grit. He's Jordie Benn with better wheels and almost 4 years younger.

As for Shaw, there were two reasons for it lining him up back at C. The first is that the Habs make a point of rolling 4 lines in 5-on-5, so each line has to have some dynamism. Shaw, Weal and Armia would torture other teams, though playing Lehkonen there might be even more infuriating for other teams. The other reason is that, let's face it, Shaw gets hurt ... a lot. Having him as a C makes it easier on the team to replace with someone from Laval (Poehling, Suzuki, Evans) than trying to repurpose a winger like Weal to fill the job.

As for Ladd, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think there's still gas left in that tank.

Weal is a center and very strong on faceoffs, shaw has played there before but he's definitely better on the wing.

Kulak had a very good season, I would rather have him over chiarot (especially if you think Kulak is worth $1.25M and chiarot is worth $4M, it's not even close). Kulak is already better than chiarot in every way except for physicality, but kulak was on pace for 150 hits so it's not like hes lacking in that department anyways. Also, considering kulak just broke into the NHL this year it's not unreasonable to expect him to continue to improve. The habs could also just resign Benn for probably $2-3M × 2-3 years and he is also better than chiarot.

OK, I'm sold on taking a wait-and-see on Kulak. I'm less sure about retaining Benn, but he might be the best option out there unless the Habs get lucky in a trade.