Habs acquire Laine for Harris

This is an interesting trade. In my view, Harris was worth a 2nd rounder on his own. If you trade an established young NHL defenceman who appears to be a #4-5 guy, that's roughly the market for that type of asset. The Athletic says he's a giant bargain right now because his stats suggest a worth of about 3.4M and he's only making 1.4M. So in that regard, Columbus gets a serviceable D man on the cheap. The 2nd rounder is probably fair game for this, and the odds the 2nd rounder becomes as good as Harris or better is likely in the 10% range, so it's not good odds for us, but conversely, we knew we had to move a LHD and this helps to open up roster space. So that's that. I see the Harris for a 2nd rounder as a bit of a wash.

To me, the trade then becomes Laine the player in exchange for taking on Laine's contract. I don't like that part as much, for reasons I've talked about before. According to The Athletic, Laine's expected output (if you put aside the injury and mental health issues) equates to value of about 6.6M. So we're overpaying here by over 2M for two consecutive years. That means that on his own, even if Laine plays to his expected value, we still took on about 4.2M of cap hit for nothing, and by previous NHL trade standards, that probably should have brought back a late 1st rounder or early 2nd rounder on its own. So IMO, not good value on the cap management for us.

Now I think the obvious fan reaction is that we just acquired a scorer with a high upside without giving up anything that important. So I think the superficial way of looking at this trade is to say that it's a clear win for that reason. But I can't emphasize enough how much cap space is worth in today's NHL. And giving up 17.4M in cap space over two years is a big one for me. Are we getting the same value here that we are from paying a Suzuki, a Caufield, or a Slafkovsky? That's certainly a big question. I'd have a hard time believing Laine will be as complete a player, though I do think his potential to score goals in probably a bit higher than the others. But then past that, the next question is, what happens if he does play to his value? He's signed for two years, and we're not likely to be a Cup challenger in those two years. So what happens after that? If he has a career resurgence, are we going to be willing to pay him 9-10M a year on a longterm deal thereafter, or are we letting him walk as a UFA or trading him at that point? If he plays average hockey, then maybe we can re-sign him for cheaper, but then how much does that help us to sign a 20-goal scorer? Now add in the injury history and the mental health issues and there are a decent number of risks here.

Ultimately, I think there is big upside potential here, which is the exciting part. I think this trade probably results in our PP being better and in our team moving up the standings by a few points. But the big picture is that I'm not sure how much that helps us. The goal is not necessarily to be 4-5 points better this year and next and then to make a big payout in two years or lose him when we want to be hitting our contention years. So I like the fit for the player: big guy with offensive skill who could have a resurgence playing for a player's coach in a hockey city. I'm less sold on the plan surrounding where this goes. I would have liked the trade better if Laine were signed to 4-5 years at 6M or if we had sent Anderson back the other way. I get that it's hard not to be excited about adding scoring punch, but I think we should have gotten more back for the amount of cap we took on.

^^ I'll come back to the same question I asked before: where does this trade get us in two years. I could understand a team with cap space adding him for free if they were a competitive team. In fact, I think Laine has reasonably good odds of performing well and being at least a 25-goal scorer here. But what does that do for us? Again, let's say this move just moved us from being an 80-point 23rd best overall team to an 85-point 20th-overall team. Ok. Now what? I'm not in the least disputing the potential Laine has on the ice, and I'm happy to have him as a player. Scott Gomez actually played really well for us when he first got here, but he wasn't worth the 7M+ price tag. So I come back to the fact that cap space matters, and I come back to the fact that the years that matter for the Habs the most are the ones where we're competitive for a Cup. So the players I want to see brought in are ones that we'll be able to keep around and have as part of the core for that Cup run. Is that 2024-25? Nope. Is it 2025-26? Unlikely. So what happens in the summer of 2026? I've said this, but there are two possible outcomes to this deal. Either Laine is average or has health issues and doesn't live up to things, the way we ran into issues with the likes of Semin, Gurianov, etc. And so then you have a dead asset and he probably walks in two years for nothing. We don't lose a ton this way, but we did let Columbus off the hook for 17.4M in cap space and we did lose the opportunity to use that cap space elsewhere. What if a team offered you a 1st rounder to take another guy like Monahan off their hands for 5-6M and one season? That's a better use of cap space.

The other possibility is that Laine has a resurgence. And that's best-case scenario for us in terms of how this trade plays out. That's what we want. But then what happens next? Sean Monahan had a resurgence here, got a trade to a contender, but then opted to sign elsewhere despite the fact we reportedly explored bringing him back. We decided we didn't want to pay him and/or he decided he wanted to explore another opportunity. Radulov had a resurgence here and then walked for money, despite claiming he loved it here. Kovalchuk had a mini-resurgence here and never came back. Players want to take care of the bottom line and provide for themselves and their families while they can. So it's not a guarantee that even if Laine loves it here that he'd stay, muchless take a hometown discount to play here. So if everything "works out" for us, we're still left with the decision as to whether we want to pay out in two years. If Laine scores 40 goals, he's going to command 9-10M or more on the open market, and someone will pay him. Someone's going to give him a NMC or a strong NTC. Are we prepared to do those things and sign Laine from age 28 through age 34, 35, or 36?

We came out of this trade with a strong asset, which is why it's an interesting trade to me. But the fit here in terms of the time-span of the contract not matching up with our window is odd. I'm curious to see where Hughes goes with this in terms of lomngterm plan. Is this a Monahan type move where Plan A is to trade him in a year or two? Is this with the intent of Laine being part of the core and using up a lot of cap on him? Is this just a gamble because we had the cap space to do it this year? I still don't understand the vision here. And that's not to say there is none, it's just not clear to me.

^^ I'll come back to the same question I asked before: where does this trade get us in two years. I could understand a team with cap space adding him for free if they were a competitive team. In fact, I think Laine has reasonably good odds of performing well and being at least a 25-goal scorer here. But what does that do for us? Again, let's say this move just moved us from being an 80-point 23rd best overall team to an 85-point 20th-overall team. Ok. Now what? I'm not in the least disputing the potential Laine has on the ice, and I'm happy to have him as a player. Scott Gomez actually played really well for us when he first got here, but he wasn't worth the 7M+ price tag. So I come back to the fact that cap space matters, and I come back to the fact that the years that matter for the Habs the most are the ones where we're competitive for a Cup. So the players I want to see brought in are ones that we'll be able to keep around and have as part of the core for that Cup run. Is that 2024-25? Nope. Is it 2025-26? Unlikely. So what happens in the summer of 2026? I've said this, but there are two possible outcomes to this deal. Either Laine is average or has health issues and doesn't live up to things, the way we ran into issues with the likes of Semin, Gurianov, etc. And so then you have a dead asset and he probably walks in two years for nothing. We don't lose a ton this way, but we did let Columbus off the hook for 17.4M in cap space and we did lose the opportunity to use that cap space elsewhere. What if a team offered you a 1st rounder to take another guy like Monahan off their hands for 5-6M and one season? That's a better use of cap space.

The other possibility is that Laine has a resurgence. And that's best-case scenario for us in terms of how this trade plays out. That's what we want. But then what happens next? Sean Monahan had a resurgence here, got a trade to a contender, but then opted to sign elsewhere despite the fact we reportedly explored bringing him back. We decided we didn't want to pay him and/or he decided he wanted to explore another opportunity. Radulov had a resurgence here and then walked for money, despite claiming he loved it here. Kovalchuk had a mini-resurgence here and never came back. Players want to take care of the bottom line and provide for themselves and their families while they can. So it's not a guarantee that even if Laine loves it here that he'd stay, muchless take a hometown discount to play here. So if everything "works out" for us, we're still left with the decision as to whether we want to pay out in two years. If Laine scores 40 goals, he's going to command 9-10M or more on the open market, and someone will pay him. Someone's going to give him a NMC or a strong NTC. Are we prepared to do those things and sign Laine from age 28 through age 34, 35, or 36?

We came out of this trade with a strong asset, which is why it's an interesting trade to me. But the fit here in terms of the time-span of the contract not matching up with our window is odd. I'm curious to see where Hughes goes with this in terms of lomngterm plan. Is this a Monahan type move where Plan A is to trade him in a year or two? Is this with the intent of Laine being part of the core and using up a lot of cap on him? Is this just a gamble because we had the cap space to do it this year? I still don't understand the vision here. And that's not to say there is none, it's just not clear to me.