How the Montreal Canadiens quietly helped the Kings land Artemi Panarin
Photo credit: Wendell Cruz-Imagn Images
The arrival of Artemi Panarin with the Los Angeles Kings is the biggest news of the day in the NHL.
What’s interesting for fans here is seeing the Montreal Canadiens’ footprint in this situation.
Without Kent Hughes’ intervention last December, this trade would probably never have happened.
As Karine Hains of The Hockey News noted, the Kings owe a great deal to the Montreal organization for Panarin’s move from the Rangers.
"With a big thanks to the Habs for taking Danault’s cap hit."
- Emily Kaplan
- Emily Kaplan
By acquiring Phillip Danault a few months ago, the Habs freed up cap space for the Kings, and it’s that financial room that now allows Los Angeles to take on a salary of Panarin’s caliber.
Insider Elliotte Friedman confirmed the price paid: Liam Greentree and a conditional draft pick.
But the real currency in this deal is the space under the salary cap.
The hidden impact of Kent Hughes’ and the Montreal Canadiens’ management
This is proof that in today’s NHL, flexibility is worth gold.
The Montreal Canadiens’ general manager used his cap space as a strategic asset back in December.
We’re now seeing the domino effect of that decision.
The Kings moved Danault’s contract so they could swing this major move in February.
It’s asset management that has indirectly just changed the landscape of the Western Conference.
Hughes didn’t do it for the Kings’ sake, but rather to maximize his own assets.
Still, Luc Robitaille probably has to send a little thank-you message to his Montreal counterpart tonight.
Now that is interesting!
Also read on Montreal Hockey Fanatics :
New York Rangers trade Artemi Panarin to Los Angeles Kings
New York Rangers trade Artemi Panarin to Los Angeles Kings
| POLL | ||
FEVRIER 4|1598 ANSWERS How the Montreal Canadiens quietly helped the Kings land Artemi Panarin Would you have traded a young player like Michael Hage to add Artemi Panarin to the Montreal Canadiens’ lineup? | ||
| Yes | 142 | 8.9 % |
| No | 1456 | 91.1 % |
| List of polls | ||