How has Ritchie gone from quite literally zero value to worth a 4th?? As for the main part of this you’re going after a top end rental D man and young forward for a D man whose been a scratch that’s paid too much, a D man whose best part of his game is that his dog is cute plus a D prospect who’s not as good as what the Ducks have plus and undersized winger who has never played in North America pluuuuss a draft pick in the bottom 5-10 picks of the first round. A lot of quantity doesn’t equal any quality.

Calling Manson a top end rental d man is a joke unto itself. Klingberg, the former Norris contender, would be the top end of the rental defensemen. Mark Giodano, the Norris winner just a few seasons ago would be the top end of rental defensemen. Hampus Lindholm could fit into that description too. Manson has nothing that even remotely puts him in that realm. There's two or three levels between Manson and the top end of the rental defensemen. A 1st, 2 decent prospects and a replacement is more than enough for 2 months of Manson.

To point out just how ridiculous you are I want you to look at the return Muzzin got. This trade is very similar to it while Muzzin was both better than Manson and had term remaining. If anything the OP is giving away too much.

Exactly, Plus Muzzin is ALOT better then Manson



If you have a pulse on the ducks, The entire fanbase says Steel is in a make it or break it season as he isnt living up to expectations, so a 24 year old Center being traded for a 25 year old dman who both have similiar contracts and could use a change of scenery makes sense

Anaheim can get a far better offer then this for both Manson and Steel.

Based on what? I've already brought up the comparable to the Muzzin trade in which he was the better defenseman and had term remaining. Why would Manson fetch even more?

Skejl got just a 1st. Is Manson better? Not really. Savard got a 1st and a 3rd. Manson better? Not really. Lots of comparables for a price like this, show your work on why its wrong.

Ewwwww, no interest in Ritchie! Maybe send us a 3rd and take out the 4th going your way

This trade doesn't work for either team. With the possible exception of Villeneuve, none of those players interests us. On the other side, Manson isn't worth more than a first, Steel isn't worth more than a good prospect, and including Holl in the deal is a poor idea because what if Manson doesn't re-sign in Toronto? I know that's where he's from, but why take that chance?

We don’t have the cap space to take Ritchie for next year
Habs fans need to realize that, we will barely be able to sign Romy & Lehky

Lol why would the Habs give up any asset for Ritchie. What a good joke.

I mean if you'd prefer to go with what Lebrun has been saying since the start of the year it's a top prospect and a 1st for Manson cause Anaheim loves the guy, no need to move him either with the west wild card and weak Pacific. You're justifying an offer of two d men with a 3.5 combined cap to a team that has better up and coming pieces that don't need to log jammed next year. As for the prospects, neither of those are top prospects. So far, a first is the only significant piece for Manson in a market where RD require a pretty penny, plenty of teams could outdo that deal in a half a second. Then to ask Anaheim to add is wild. Beyond all this, Manson was an absolutely perfect fit for Vancouver at the start of the season and nothing materialized, he said no to a trade to Canada onve already, given Winnipeg but who's to say every Canadian team isn't on that list? It's the tried and true saying on this website, quantity doesn't equal quality, this offer is a lot of nothing. Make your argument better, not louder.



Why would Anaheim need a 25 year old LD man that is a 7th dman in Toronto? Who is he replacing in Anaheim? Fowler, Lindholm or a league minimum with similar numbers on the bottom pairing? It makes zero sense. Look what Calgary got for Sam Bennett, a draft pick and an asset young enough that he can develop in their system not someone else's, that's a change of scenery deal, not bringing on a bad d man to help Toronto.

I wouldn’t expect all our players to be back next year. Obviously chiarot, but I would expect 2-3 players who are signed behind this season to also be traded by the time next year rolls around. Not sure who but I don’t think we are coming back with same lineup. I wouldn’t worry about cap space next year for the habs!!

I 100% agree not the same roster will be back, but for now I don’t think it’s ideal to take the contract of Ritchie. Other teams will know we will be over the cap and some players who might be move might lose value for that unique reason that we need to move someone

I'm pretty confident about my argument when you weren't able to address them at all. Manson is neither a top end defenseman nor is he worth more than comparables I have been able to lay out. You tried to skate around those facts but they are still the facts. Make your argument better, not louder? Should take your own advice.

Confidence when you’re wrong is an interesting trait. I can’t imagine that’s easy to manage.
You listed a RD man with an astronomical price tag that wants to get paid through the nose next year, hardly a comparable and then you’ve listed a few LD. RD in the current NHL are of way higher value than LD, it’s not close. I’ll form it in a question so it’s really easy for you, outside of Klingberg which rental RD is getting more in a package than Manson? Your argument that you’re so confident in doesn’t hold water whatsoever. Again, if you’d like to go with Lebrun from earlier in the year, 1st and a top prospect because Anaheim loves the player, that’s quality over quantity which you seem to be missing the point of. Outside of a 1st round pick that should land in the bottom 10 there is next to zero quality in the package above. My argument isn’t loud at all, you decided to come out with a wet diaper and start calling people ridiculous, change your pampers and try answer the question above.

Show your work if you are going to base your argument on it. RHD are worth more sure but you are making the claim that a middle of the road RHD should be considered as valuable as a former Norris winner because of the side he plays on which is clearly ridiculous. Show the examples of this rather than an obviously ridiculous opinion with no evidence. Let's see why Manson should be considered as valuable as players like Giordano and Lindholm.

Also since you seem to be leaning on it so heavily, what a team wants doesn't matter in the rental market. They take what they can get because otherwise they get nothing. A team saying they want a lot more than a player is worth is just par for the course in the NHL and is a dumb metric to use as a basis for value when you can use comparables from past deadlines.

Oh god. You’re one of these people. Try again, which RHD will get more than Manson at the deadline outside of Klingberg?
As a Flames fan, Gio is not worth more, if being a former Norris winner carried any value then he would have been protected in the expansion draft, that’s your worst argument yet. That alone shows where your mind is at and how irrelevant everything you’ve said here today is. Either answer the question or we can all move on love.

I notice you still can't provide any evidence for your opinions despite me asking every post. Show us the comparables if you want to be taken seriously. You are talking about whats been said being irrelevant yet you can't show any evidence of your wild claims being true. Talk about irrelevant. I've been able to provide evidence in the form of comparables to show my opinion is true. If yours is correct, why can't you? We know what you think, now show us why.

Dear god you’re a strange little thing.

Same handed was D pairing often fair worse than LD/RD pairings, there are far fewer top end RHD available on the market, it’s such simple concepts, supply and demand, go read Jimmy Rutherfords article on it, or look at the analytics of same handedness D pairings vs. Left and right. This has been common in hockey for a very long time now, really the entire salary cap era.

Now, which RD will get more than Manson outside on Klingberg?

And yet you still can't show it in action. You seem like a grade schooler so i will put this in a way you might understand. You continuously give us the 1st paragraph of your essay to tell us what you think but can't manage the following supporting paragraphs to show us why you think it. Show us the examples. You haven't even argued that Manson isn't the top RHD available, so I wont bother with having had to show that, but I've even provided examples of comparable RHD in past seasons getting a return similar to this in the Savard trade. Show why I'm wrong.

There are very literal examples in the comment above. Go read Jim Rutherfords article about it, look through the analytics, it’s a big wide internet, you can find it. When Yzerman was building team Canada he had this problem, but you probably know more than he does right? You don’t want to know though, you won’t look it up because you refuse to look at the very facts that prove you’re wrong.

Why’d you take my question out of the quote?! Hahaha
I’ll add more for you:

Which RD will get more than Manson outside on Klingberg?
Do you think you’re a better hockey mind than Yzerman, Rutherford and all the other Gm’s that try run out a balanced line up?

I take your question out of the quote because its irrelevant. You can't provide any evidence of your opinion being true so we are going to end up in the same place. Even if Manson is the top RD outside of Klingberg, I'm still going to be able to the same comparables from past seasons which you haven't even tried to disprove because you can't. The question is just a strawman to get away from the original points you haven't been able to argue.

Also you are talking about Yzerman's team Canada? A list of the team was never released, wtf are you even talking about. You've gone off the deep end. It's also interesting you bring up 'all the other GMs that true to run a balanced line up' because it's far from a universal thing in the NHL. You don't have to look far on teams here to find a defenseman listed as LD/RD. Apparently you consider yourself a better hockey mind than the GMs too I guess.

There's an expression, "If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts; if you have the law on your side, pound the law; if you have neither the facts nor the law, pound the table.". If you hit the table any harder, I'm worried its going to break.

See the absolute sophistry in your argument is shocking.
Doug Armstrong was Canadas GM, Yzerman GM’d a team to a gold medal in 2014, essentially built the closest this to a dynasty in the modern day NHL and Rutherford has 3 Stanley cups. I’ll reference those guys as opposed to the guy on CapFriendly who can’t answer a question.
I told you above why your comparable are really bad. How much are you giving up for Hall? Former Hart winner right? Just like Gio, big price tag for aging former award winners.

If you don’t have an answer to these, don’t bother replying, if you can’t answer these it just shows you know you’re wrong and would rather try lie you’re way to a pat on the back.

Which rental RD gets more than Manson outside of Klingberg?
Do you believe you’re a better hockey mind than Yzerman and Rutherford who have been on record saying they’d like to run out balanced D cores?
Do you think you know more than the analytics that back up my point?

If you don’t have an answer, then don’t bother, move along and pat yourself in the back, I won’t reply if you can’t answer those.

*looks at the price Arizona paid for Hall*
Who's side are you arguing again?

Talk about a horrible example. It's no wonder you won't even try to provide any others to back up your opinions.

25 points in 30 games at the time of the deal, that’s not Gio. Easy one. Next.

Which rental RD gets more than Manson outside of Klingberg?
Do you believe you’re a better hockey mind than Yzerman and Rutherford who have been on record saying they’d like to run out balanced D cores?
Do you think you know more than the analytics that back up my point?

So even you think your example is a bad one. Really says something about you that you tried to make it in the first place.