Overpay for Montour. Danault is one of the best 2 way centers in the league whereas Montour is a pure offensive defenseman with very bad underlying numbers. If you were to do this trade it should be Montour +.

🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔. Well it seems you see the logic behind the move, so what do you suggest??

MTL need Danault a whole lot more than a RHD, plus Montour is a huge question mark at this point so I'm not sure how this makes sense for the Habs.

The others are closer.

I understand why Buffalo would need Danault, but there’s no need to trade for less than his actual value.

Looking at it where picking up a younger RD allows to move Petry and max out on that deal. More long term thinking than short term in that.

Mtl loses all these trades by a wide margin

So are you suggesting adding a pick or prospect?? Or pulling the conditional pick??

And I say 2-3 years from now we are having a different opinion on that. Only one that is debatable (and I knew it) is the Danault deal. He is young enough to be part of it......

You're literally missing at least a 1st round pick in each trade

Montour is a pretty big downgrade from Petry. If bottoming out was the idea you could just roll with Juulsen, Fleury or Brooks and get prospects or picks from Danault instead of a guy who isn't as good and only a few months younger.

I think you're undervaluing the players coming back and/or overvaluing the players dealt.

Ideally I wanted Bear, but I think the tag on that would be more than Danault.

But I can see your point to an extent. Not really trying to bottom out, rather handing the mantle to the kids (except Gallagher.... kinda need that presence). Montreal's young forward core for my money is fantastic, and giving them ice time to further develop is what I am really up to. Montreal is 2-3 years away from being a contender if things progress as they should.

At that time, is a 29 year old Montour a downgrade on a 35 year old Petry? How I am seeing it; not so much as a compartmentalized deal, but a series of deals to set a direction. Now having said that, the general feedback is more could be had in moving Danault, so I am taking that in.

Not gonna get into Danault.

Petry= 1st with a B prospect, 50%retained means that prospect becomes a better prospect or another pick

Tatar = 1st and 3rd with a B prospect, 50% retained means, once again, a better prospect.

I stand by my statement, add a 1st to each of those trades

If Robertson and Pelletier were B prospect then you're right. But niether are B prospects.

And Danault..... there are strong arguments for and against moving him. Young enough to get a great return, young enough to part of the team long term.

If you read the thread, I was really thinking Danault for Bear, but I think Holland would want more, why I shyed away.

I am not sure where you are getting the evidence that Montour is a uni-dimensional defensemen, but he had the best +/- among all Buffalo Skaters and he had a better PDO than ANY Habs defenseman.
If he had as much PP time as Petry he would out score him as well.
Let me add, for the 20 games he was on the team last year, he was the Sabres BEST defenseman, with more pts and a better +/- than Dahlin or any of the other on the team.
I am a Sabre fan as you may know, and I fight this same battle with my fellow Sabre fans.
Botterill stole Montour for a first and a fringe NHL prospect.
I could not believe the Ducks traded him for so little.
Murray must of thought Guhle was something special because it was a huge underpayment.

Montour would definitely be MTL #2 RHD and BTW he has played the left side as the Sabres have 4 solid RHD.

Robertson is the only one I like out of the two, he has a chance to be a top 6 guy MAYBE but would still need a 1st with him for MTL to consider it.

Pelletier is a B prospect. As an over age player in the Q this year he only put up 82 points, should have been closer or over 100. And Bennett has shown that he is a bottom 6 player, so once again, MTL would need a 1dt to consider it, and even then it's still a maybe since they can just draft a better over age player that out performed Pelltier this year with a late round pick that they have a ton of.

When you suggest Robertson has "a chance" of being a top 6 I am not sure what to make of your valuations. The guy put up .75ppg with a weak Iowa team in his FIRST year of pro hockey.

Pelletier's 82 points was in just 57 games..... that prorates to a 100 point season. We won't mention that a lot of scouts disagree with you.

Bennett maybe a bottom 6 guy, but obviously you haven't watched the Flames in the playoffs..... the guy was best beat Flame on the ice two years running. You need guys like that to win. But what do I know?

He is yet to directly answer my question, so maybe he realized something🤷‍♂️.... but as you maybe noticing, most don't see the logic behind a 6 year younger Montour change out for Petry.

The lack of long term thinking herr is mindnumbing.

Ok.... follow up.

As a Sabres fan, do you see the value in a Danault for Montour deal? Surely I am not off by much here, especially with the conditional pick.....

Great he has a good +/- and PDO, he also had over 50% offensive zone starts which certainly help a great deal with those stats. It also speaks to a defenseman who is incredibly sheltered even a 26. Plus it's not like his xGF or xGA really indicate that he's driving play much or due for better point totals.

As for being the best defenseman on the Sabres for 20 games last year I'll have to take your word for it. But small sample sizes don't definitely prove anything. This season Drouin was the Habs' best player for the first 20 games. He was playing like the player we all knew he could be, then he got injured and wasn't able to regain that form later. Players have spurts all the time, doesn't mean that they'll be able to keep it up for a full season.

It's a lot less about Montour vs. Petry as opposed to Montour vs. Danault.

Why trade a guy we know fits perfectly and consistently tilts the ice in his team's favor for a guy who's main attraction is potential and being a few months younger.

From my prespective it's Montour who is 6 years younger than Petry.

Beleive me, I totally get the pros and cons on the Danault deal. Ultimately, Montreal is moving from a position of strength to ensure the blueline grows into equal billing. 2-3 years from now we are still talking about Montour and Danault, but are we talking about Petry? 2-3 years from now a right side of Weber, Montour and Brooks could more more than good. That is exactly where my thinking is.

Fair enough, I'm just very hesitant to move Danault until one of the promising players actually takes his place. Buffalo thought Mittelstadt was ready and O'Reilly was therefore expendable, which in hindsight was a hasty judgement. I just don't want Danault to be moved before we are absolutely certain he can be replaced.

2 or 3 years down the road if Danault actually becomes expendable then I doubt his value would have tanked too much and he can be moved then.

Also this is how some Sabres fans see Montour.
https://www.diebytheblade.com/2020/3/19/21184500/buffalo-sabres-player-report-card-brandon-montour

Oh, I completely understand the hesitation in moving Danault. However, as the article you linked pointed out, his transition game is fantastic. Habs blueline lacks that skill set.... big time.

The lack of offense I think is more a function of a sub par offense than it is Montour himself, and it's hard to find a rythym when you are being moved around the lineup like a cheap joint.

Having read that, I am wondering if Montour could be had for a 2nd rounder and a pounds of Buffalo Wings🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️. Reading between the lines, he has game, just no where to play a steady 18-20 minutes.

Oh.... RoR's departutire from Buffalo is because he wanted out. Something about a loosing culture.