Thread: Speculation: Paul Stastny
View Single Post
07-10-2012, 12:16 PM
Miller Time
Registered User
Miller Time's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,687
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Boondock View Post
I think what a lot of people (Leaf fans) are missing in these Stastny threads is the context in which Stastny would be moved. Basically there are 2 types of trades in the NHL, "hockey" trades and "situational" trades. A hockey trade would be 2 teams swapping players to fill holes on their current roster with small add-ons to equal out value. A situational trade is when a player isn't getting along with management or cap reasons that sort of thing. With Stastny the Avs would be looking for a hockey deal to fill a hole - most notablely a top pairing D or a top line winger. Sure picks or prospects can be added from either side but the main pieces would be Stastny and a D or W of equal (or close to value). So any deals that are a collection of lower tier players that together would "equal" Stastny is of no interest to the Avs. The Avs will only move Stastny in order to improve their team, but they won't move him just for the sake of making a trade. So Leafs fans are getting bent because Colorado fans don't like packages of players such as Bozak, MacA, a prospect and pick. Well a package like this doesn't make the Avs better then just keeping Stastny. I get not wanting to make a Phaneuf type trade (multiple lesser pieces) and wanting to make a Quincey/Downey type deal.

To summarize if your proposal does not include a top 3 LHD (on a contender) or a top line winger then the Avs won't be interested. If your proposal consists of 7 smaller pieces then the Avs won't be interested. If MacA is the best player going back to the Avs then they won't be interested. If a player who has never played in the NHL is the best piece going back for Stastny then the Avs won't be interested. If you expect the Avs to take a cap dump back then Colorado won't be interested.
How about both LHD & top-6 winger?

Kaberle+Bourque.... Perfect fit, no?

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote