Elias Pettersson Posted November 24 Posted November 24 (edited) To Chicago: Nils Höglander Vincent Desharnais To Vancouver: Connor Murphy Desharanis has been a bust for Vancouver. There isn't any room for him in the lineup. We need Soucy/Myers to be the 3rd pairing. Connor Murphy is having a fabulous year. He's got 8 points in 21 games and is a plus 4 on the worst team in the NHL where most of the players are minus. He also plays over 20 minutes a night, so he can play on our 2nd pairing. He also has one more year left on his contract, so he can be with us next year too. I can see him as a Myers replacement on the 3rd pairing as well if he re-signs with us after next season. Hughes Hronek Brännström Murphy Soucy Myers Forbort Juulsen I still would want another top 4 Dman as I'm not sold with Brännström in the top 4, but I think Murphy would definitely help us in the playoffs... Edited November 24 by Elias Pettersson 1 1 Quote
Coconuts Posted November 24 Posted November 24 I get why you like him, but shouldn't a guy whose averaged at least 19 minutes a game since 2018-2019 be worth more than a mid 20's forward whose struggling after a career season and a guy we don't even want in the lineup? I get that Murphy's played in Chicago, but he's still played the minutes. Surely another team could offer Chicago a better deal? 2 goals and 5 points in 19 games for Hoglander isn't great if we're trying to sell him as having upside after a season where he scored 24 goals with a 20% shooting percentage. Thus far that's looking like more out of an outlier than Hoglander having leveled up so to speak. I just question the value Chicago's getting back. 1 1 Quote
Elias Pettersson Posted November 24 Author Posted November 24 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Coconuts said: I get why you like him, but shouldn't a guy whose averaged at least 19 minutes a game since 2018-2019 be worth more than a mid 20's forward whose struggling after a career season and a guy we don't even want in the lineup? I get that Murphy's played in Chicago, but he's still played the minutes. Surely another team could offer Chicago a better deal? 2 goals and 5 points in 19 games for Hoglander isn't great if we're trying to sell him as having upside after a season where he scored 24 goals with a 20% shooting percentage. Thus far that's looking like more out of an outlier than Hoglander having leveled up so to speak. I just question the value Chicago's getting back. True. We should have traded him in the summer after his 24 goal season. Bedard is not happy in Chicago. He needs reinforcements up front. I'm pretty sure Murphy will be traded. But yeah, Chicago probably gets more. I mean if it meant closing the deal I'd probably throw in our 2025 2nd rounder too... Edited November 24 by Elias Pettersson 1 Quote
Rounoush Posted November 24 Posted November 24 Hoglander is having a rough start but I like the talent set he has. You gotta think Tocchett likes that he comes to camp as one of the fittest guys every year. It shows that he is committed to getting better. I'd still hang on to him. Quote
Coconuts Posted November 24 Posted November 24 3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said: True. We should have traded him in the summer after his 24 goal season. Bedard is not happy in Chicago. He needs reinforcements up front. I'm pretty sure Murphy will be traded. But yeah, Chicago probably gets more. I mean if it meant closing the deal I'd probably throw in our 2025 2nd rounder too... Not trying to rain on your proposal, but I just don't see Hoglander having a ton of value as a trade chip right now, we probably should have moved him When I look at his production thus far and the incoming 3M extension I see him more as a guy who could potentially be fair value, but not necessarily great value going forward, I have my doubts as to whether he'll take the next step His shooting percentage last season was always going to be tough to replicate, it was a ways above his career average, and he's gonna be 24 soon so he's approaching "he is what he is" territory imo 1 1 Quote
fuzzy Posted November 24 Posted November 24 I think it's worth pursuing. Maybe have to add a little or expand the deal to make it work. Murphy could be a nice add 1 Quote
Elias Pettersson Posted November 24 Author Posted November 24 3 minutes ago, fuzzy said: I think it's worth pursuing. Maybe have to add a little or expand the deal to make it work. Murphy could be a nice add Murphy is exactly what we need IMO. If we have to add we should. We need some more Dmen who can play 20 minutes per night. We can't go into the playoffs with Desharnais, Forbort or Juulsen in the lineup... 1 1 Quote
Alflives Posted November 24 Posted November 24 He is a plus D, playing 20+ minutes, on a terrible team. New partner for Brannstrom? 2 Quote
Toccfather Posted November 24 Posted November 24 (edited) I really like C.Murphy. I think he's underrated. He hits, blocks shots, can eat minutes and has a bit of skill. Would have him for this year and next as well, allowing Willander a year of development in the A. Hughes-Hronek Soucy/Forbort-Murphy Soucy/Forbort-Myers Ex. Brännstrom, Juulsen Edited November 24 by Toccfather 1 Quote
CanuckMan Posted November 25 Posted November 25 Hoglander might not have value in the sense that he has been struggling. But a team that has a hard time signing players to long term deals might be interested in his 3x3 deal. They know they get someone for 3 years at least, and the potential is there. Maybe on a crappy team like Chicago if he plays higher up in the line up and gets PP time he might actually excel. 1 Quote
Snoop Hogg Posted Wednesday at 10:12 PM Posted Wednesday at 10:12 PM Given his great numbers on a poor team, it doesn’t make sense for Chicago to move Murphy, at least for what’s proposed here. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.