I was agreeing with the other post and I'm well aware of Chiarot's stats, so not sure why you're quoting them to me?

I am so perplexed that there are GMs that would pay said price for Chiarot, it makes me question my sanity and makes me rethink if im the one being biased or ignorant. hes not good at all "playoff type" is a load of bs

I think this is pretty realistic and frankly, I would be pretty happy with this TDL if this happened.





I think the discrepancy is in how much MORE those guys cost than Chiarot. ANA isn't just asking for a 1st for Lindholm. They're also asking for a top prospect too, maybe more. Same with Klingberg. I think teams are way more willing to "settle" for a lesser player but also a lesser value going out too. Plus there are quite few teams all interested in a cheap cost effective dman. If one team gets Manson and the other gets Giordano, that 3rd team for example is left with going HUGE with Chychrun/Klingberg/Lindholm or much less with Chiarot for example. Heck maybe that 3rd team doesn't even have the right assets to acquire one of those guys in the first place so their options are more limited. Who knows?

We seem to think that because MTL is asking for a 1st for Chiarot that all the other teams selling players are asking for the exact same return so all these guys are equal "good". If Im Dallas, Im selling Klingberg for minimum of double what MTL is asking for Chiarot. Which may be pricing some teams out, right out of the gate. Imagine the backlash if a GM got less for Klingberg than MTL got for Chiarot...

Also just to add, teams need the player they're acquiring to be as cheap as possible as pretty much all contenders are cap strapped. Chiarot at 50% retained is 1.75M. Thats more manageable than ALL of the other players mentioned without a 3rd team retaining. Arizona only has 1 more retention spot so everyone can't be using them as the easy "we'll just get a 3rd team to retain" scenario either. Even with another team involved, that's yet another asset they'd have to trade off to get that 3rd team to retain a second time. For some teams, they might see the final cost as too much.

Its not that Chiarot is soooo good that soooo many teams want him. Its that of the group of guys that they like (Chiarot including), he'll probably be the cheapest to acquire AND in cap. I'd rather have Chychrun too but if its going to cost Two 1sts and two of your best prospects to get him, maybe Chiarot becomes the easy plan B if all the other good Dman are taken and teams are getting down to the wire on TDL that making a big move would take too long to do.

Im not even sure the 1st HAS to be in the trade. I think Hughes would be fine with just prospects and a late pick or whatever. I think the combined value has to reach a 1st but doesn't have to be a 1st specifically. Either way, we'll see.

Have you ever seen him in the playoffs?

1- I think you're overstating the asking prices for UFAs like Lindholm and Klingberg. I have not seen anyone suggest or report that Lindholm will require a 1st and a top prospect. Nobody on Earth thinks Klingberg will fetch two 1sts. Not only are they not worth all that, but again, it's a buyer's market. That affects everyone's price.

2- There are also a good number of players who are better, younger and cheaper (in both acquisition cost and salary) than Chiarot. It's not just a big mall of high ticket items out there. There's plenty for every budget available.

1- I think you're overstating the asking prices for UFAs like Lindholm and Klingberg. I have not seen anyone suggest or report that Lindholm will require a 1st and a top prospect. Nobody on Earth thinks Klingberg will fetch two 1sts. Not only are they not worth all that, but again, it's a buyer's market. That affects everyone's price.

2- There are also a good number of players who are better, younger and cheaper (in both acquisition cost and salary) than Chiarot. It's not just a big mall of high ticket items out there. There's plenty for every budget available.

Teams don’t give up 2 1sts for rentals. Klingberg and Lindholm will probably get a 1st and a couple of B prospects each . That’s how it’s always been. But rentals don’t get a teams top 5 prospect

It might be their values, but it's not what they are gonna be traded for, so you can do this all you want, you'll be wrong on pretty much all of em

Pretty much everyone outside of Montreal agrees with you . He's a defensive defenseman who can't defend

You were talking about "playoff types", I'm pointing out that Chiarot wasn't great in the playoffs either. That should have been self-evident.

1- I think you're overstating the asking prices for UFAs like Lindholm and Klingberg. I have not seen anyone suggest or report that Lindholm will require a 1st and a top prospect. Nobody on Earth thinks Klingberg will fetch two 1sts. Not only are they not worth all that, but again, it's a buyer's market. That affects everyone's price.

2- There are also a good number of players who are better, younger and cheaper (in both acquisition cost and salary) than Chiarot. It's not just a big mall of high ticket items out there. There's plenty for every budget available.

Mark Stone was a rental and Calgary didn’t want to give up Valimaki or Dube. Winnipeg didn’t want to give up Vesalainen. Nashville didn’t want to give up Tolvanen. Even though Mark Stone was a 1st line player. It just shows how much teams don’t value rentals that much

I think we're all talking about different things. The two 1sts comment is in ref to Chychrun. Not Kingberg or any other rental.

I think Chychrun gets at least 3 1sts equivalent imo

How can you suggest they aren't?

Even though the two 1sts was reference to Chychrun, not Klingberg but even if it were a 1st and a prospect for example, thats still less than what MTl would get for Chiarot.

Its been documented the Habs are asking for a 1st by many different people, one would think a guy like Klingberg is going to cost more than it'll cost for Chiarot, no?

"Better". Yet Chiarot's name keep coming up.

Listen im not here to say he's a superstar or anything but teams say they want him. Reporters are saying teams want him. Maybe they value him differently than the fans do? It wouldn't be the first time.

Have you ever seen him in the playoffs?

I think many contenders would be jumping at the opportunity of adding Petry at 4 mill

That's a pretty lazy analysis...

I think you all need to be reminded that David Savard fetched a 1st and a 3rd last year (plus a 4th to DET to retain). Chiarot >>> Savard.

Yeah, but Savard was also one of the only UFA dmen that moved (and was playing better than Chiarot is now). This year, there's about 15 UFA defensemen on the move plus players with term like Chychrun and even Sanheim and Provorov.

Supply and demand, Chiarot is not the hot stuff on the market.

1- Umm common sense? History? Actual sourced reports that have come out? Pick your favorite.

2- You said "If Im Dallas, Im selling Klingberg for minimum of double what MTL is asking for Chiarot." = a minimum of two 1sts for Klingberg. That's what I was responding to.

3- Heh. What they want to ask for and what they can actually get are often very different things. In no way, shape or form is Chiarot worth a 1st, and so far nobody is willing to pay that. So... worth is not set by a supposed asking price. Worth is set by what someone will pay.

But yes, Klingberg should draw a good bit more than Chiarot. Maybe even double, like you said - only Chiarot probably ain't gonna draw a 1st, unless Hughes gets some dummy stupid drunk.

4- Chiarot's name "keeps coming up" because there's never been more THW-level BS out there. It ain't because he's that good, or that much in demand.

5- What teams have said they want him? Anyone at all? Parroting Twitter nobodies with wiggle room words does not count. ESPECIALLY from Friedman. I mean actual sourced journalism reports. Where are they? Show us.

thats what people dont get "look what savard got" as if savard wasnt better at the time

We all saw him just last year. He was the worst of Montreal's top-4. He did get away with a lot of dirty plays, but he didn't defend very well.

Chiarot was a beast in the playoffs that you clearly never watched.

It's not you, it's NHL GMs. They believe in "playoff types".

1 - You are using "CF" common sense. When has actual GM's ever done the opposite? Come on now........ Im not saying I'd do it but I think you're adding your own flavor to the idea that he's not. There is no such thing as a source stating " STL is ready to pay a 1st for x player". Im not sure what you are expecting to see?

2 - Yeah im saying IF I were Dallas. Not what Dallas is doing. I have no idea what Dallas is doing. But I can see the confusion there.

3 - Once again, your own opinion is showing here. Im not even advocating Chiarot WILL get a first. Just whats being talked about and why some MAY be interested. As for getting GM's drunk...... yeah. I think more than half the GM's in the league are juiced most of the time. How else do you explain some of the trades they make? haha That's making my point, frankly.

4 - Maybe. Maybe not. You certainly don't have any credibility/authority to prove otherwise so its either we trust what you say or what literally all the "insiders" are saying.

5 - once again, if you think teams, in a negotiation, are going to publicly say "i want X player and we're going to pay exactly this for him too", I don't know what to tell you. That NEVER happens. All we can go on is hearsay, rumours and the publications/people that stake their reputation on the things they say. Like ones saying that teams are interested in him. He's going to be traded. Its impossible to say otherwise. It might even be to STL. What's up for debate is the price tag. Not that teams would or wouldn't be interested. Like I said previously, It doesn't even have to be a 1st in return. So who cares if a team has a 1st this year or not.