View Single Post
Old
01-21-2013, 12:38 PM
  #85
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 12,184
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamonddog01 View Post
1) Doubt the team moves Edler for the reasons the other poster has addressed.

2) I don't think a signed Edler is fair value for the rights to an unsigned RFA in Russia. If Edler was still an upcoming UFA - this is a fair trade. As of now though it's lopsided in Colorado's favour.

As for defenceman - the obvious LHD that the Canucks can move is Ballard. Is there anything the team can add to Ballard (who admittedly would only be a 2nd pairing LHD)?

Our better prospects are Jensen, Connauton, Corrado, Lack and Gaunce. A forwards that the AVs might like are Hansen (very poor man's Landeskog).
I completely undestand if the Canucks don't want to move Edler. Just don't expect ROR.



No, unsigned Edler would not be fair. Teams don't trade top young players for upcoming UFAs. The Avs control ROR until he is 27. Unsigned RFAs hold far more value than unsigned UFAs.



No. The Avs would give up a mid pick/prospect for Ballard. Anything based around Ballard for ROR is laughable, regardless of the prospects you throw in on top. I'm not a huge fan of any of the Canucks prospects. You don't even get close to ROR if all you're offering is an overpaid mediocre
defensman+spects.


As already said, the Avs will demand full value in a trade for ROR. The team that trades for him will obviously know and be willing to pay what O'Reilly wants. We won't trade him for something as laughable as Ballard+futures, especially to a division rival.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote