HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Colorado Avalanche
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

In-season Proposals, Rumors, Free Agents & Roster Moves (related topics) XLI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-06-2013, 08:17 PM
  #76
SoundwaveIsCharisma
Moderator
 
SoundwaveIsCharisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Screw You Blaster
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,124
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SoundwaveIsCharisma
Quote:
Originally Posted by Averick View Post
This is a euphemism for the flip side of being judicious. I don't have a problem with a more judicious approach. As far as deals go, I'd have to know the details. I'm not OK with them throwing every prospect in the pipeline at a team for one player, like some here seem to be.
I meant that more in terms of Offer Sheets. There are some truly top-end defensemen available on the offer sheet market this year IMO, would be nice to at least try to acquire some via offer sheet.

SoundwaveIsCharisma is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 08:31 PM
  #77
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundwaveIsCharisma View Post
I meant that more in terms of Offer Sheets. There are some truly top-end defensemen available on the offer sheet market this year IMO, would be nice to at least try to acquire some via offer sheet.
Fair enough. What would that involve, a 2nd round pick?

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 08:38 PM
  #78
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Avs have traded away two first rounders a year in advance.

First one Avs were about to give up the Matt Duchene pick for Adam Foote were it not for the last game of the season.

Second one was 11st overall sandwiched between years where Avs picked 2nd and 1st overall.

Time to stop tempting the hockey gods by trading away first rounders before we have any idea where it might end up.
I agree with this. And I don't agree with this characterization by some that the 14 draft is garbage. This characterization is really just a rationalization for trading a pick.

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:09 PM
  #79
Rhaego
Registered User
 
Rhaego's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 6,646
vCash: 500
I don't see a downside in offer sheeting A-Pie. Give him 8 million/year.

If they match, they have to get rid of some of their key players. If they don't, we get a stud dman.

(edit: same with McDonough in NY, though if they get rid of their players it doesn't effect us)

Rhaego is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:13 PM
  #80
hughdreamz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 1,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elway View Post
I don't see a downside in offer sheeting A-Pie. Give him 8 million/year.

If they match, they have to get rid of some of their key players. If they don't, we get a stud dman.

(edit: same with McDonough in NY, though if they get rid of their players it doesn't effect us)
Downside: the struggle to resign out core. Then down the road, keeping Mac will require us losing some key pieces.

hughdreamz is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:13 PM
  #81
Boulder Avalanche
Pull the Goalie
 
Boulder Avalanche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Boulder, Colorado
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elway View Post
I don't see a downside in offer sheeting A-Pie. Give him 8 million/year.

If they match, they have to get rid of some of their key players. If they don't, we get a stud dman.

(edit: same with McDonough in NY, though if they get rid of their players it doesn't effect us)

Do we trade EJ back to them it would only be fair? It would be kind of funny if EJ was traded to not be under the shadow of Pie and he ends up under it.

Boulder Avalanche is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:14 PM
  #82
zoomzoom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Larry Brooks ‏@NYP_Brooksie

McDonagh, Rangers "getting closer to a deal" agent Ben Hankinson says in email.

zoomzoom is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:18 PM
  #83
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,298
vCash: 500
Am I the only one that holds reservation about using an offer-sheet? I feel as though that's a last desperate move where we throw all caution to the wind and hope for the best. Although there is a first time for everything, I don't think there's been a single offersheet that hasn't been matched. Plus there's the repercussions throughout your own roster.

Gigantor The Goalie is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:36 PM
  #84
Rhaego
Registered User
 
Rhaego's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 6,646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughdreamz View Post
Downside: the struggle to resign out core. Then down the road, keeping Mac will require us losing some key pieces.
There won't be a struggle, we have a lot of maneuverability. And the cap will be rising

Rhaego is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 09:58 PM
  #85
cody275
HFBoards Sponsor
 
cody275's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gigantor The Goalie View Post
Am I the only one that holds reservation about using an offer-sheet? I feel as though that's a last desperate move where we throw all caution to the wind and hope for the best. Although there is a first time for everything, I don't think there's been a single offersheet that hasn't been matched. Plus there's the repercussions throughout your own roster.
Penner (Ducks) to Oilers wasn't matched. I think that's the only one.

It's safe to say that the Hjalmarsson offer-sheet played a role in the Sharks getting Niemi too.

cody275 is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:00 PM
  #86
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zandar View Post
Wow thank god you are not the Avs GM. So for possibly one year of Dion you are offering: a first, Wilson, McGinn and a goalie prospect? So we trade 4 assets (3 of which are/could be great complimentary players) for an upcoming UFA? I'm just shocked how many people toss away assets like they are nothing then you see a first line talent (who isn't UFA) traded for a scoring line winger, a first (likely late) and a solid prospect. So McGinn, the 2014 first and the goalie prospect better be bringing back what looks to be a signed Dion. Only a cup contender would throw those kind of assets to the wind.
Yup, cause Wilson is the second coming of Rob Blake, McGinn totally has more than 84 career points and has proven he will be an NHL All-Star, the 3 goalie prospects can all play net for the Avs at once(not to mention the best goalie prospect the Avs have is totally not Pickard and not on the shortlist) , and 1st round picks always make the NHL and rock! Avs can never replace all that talent in the system. It never works out to trade for a D man and they usually cost nothing in trades.


Good D men cost assets if you are not giving up proven NHL talent in a trade. Dion is not Rob Blake or Chris Pronger, but he is more valuable than Douglas Murray, took two 2nd round picks to get last deadline.

Just look at what the Avs gave up to get D men through the years.

Blake - Deadmarsh, Miller, Aulin, and Steckel. Deader was a good NHL winger and the other three were OK NHL players, but can't say any of them were players the Avs REALLY needed over the years after the trade or any of them would have turned the Avs into contenders. (worth noting the Avs also got Reinprecht as a throw in)

Bourque - Rolston, Grenier, Pahlsson, Martin Samuelsson, again, Rolston and Pahlsson were decent NHLers, but not anyone there that I would cry over.

Kasparaitis - Berry, Nieminen, no losses there.

Ozolinsh - Nolan, Owen Nolan was a good NHLer, Ozo was a good NHL defensemen.

DeVries - Branko Radivojevic, who?

Brett Clark - Frederic Cassivi - Where would the Avs be without him!

DJ Smith - Matt Davis - "yawn"

Derek Morris - Drury, Yelle (Avs also got Shantz and McAmmond) Ok, Avs lost this one, you got me.

McAllister - Hostikka - All-Star, no?

Marchment - Ryan Donnally and Brad Richardson

Skrastins - Peter Regin

Ballard - Reinprect

Boughner- Chris Bahen, Casey Borer, Risto Korhonen!

Vannanen- Ballard, Morris (also got Gratton and Stastny from the Yotes)

Leopold - Tanguay (Avs picked up 2 second round picks as well)

Salei - Skrastins and Adam Comrie (how creepy is it that these guys were traded for each other given how they died? )

Foote - Luca Sbisa and David Savard

Quincey and Pressing - Ryan Smyth (Avs also got Luke Walker)

O'Bryne - Bournival

Johnson - Stewart and Shattenkirk (Avs also got McClemment and Siemens) This trade goes to show you should be giving up PROSPECTS and PICKS, rather than NHL ready talent for D men....

And there you have it, every notable Avs trade for a D man since 1995 (Will admit I could be missing one or two, but point stands) . Look at all that NHL All-Star and Cup winning talent the Avs gave up. There are some really good NHL players in there, Drury, Deadmarsh, Miller, Nolan, Tanguay, and the quality range in the D men the Avs acquired in that time ranges widely, but outside of Drury, I can't say that a single player on that list would have changed the course of the Avs long term future in a positive way if he had not been traded..and in the long haul, trading Drury got the Avs Stastny. Stewart and Shattenkirk remain outstanding in the long run as we still have to see what the players involved on both sides do over the next 5-10 years.

My point is that giving up a package of unknown prospect potential and some mid-tier players for a known quanity D man at the very least is very unlikely to cost the Avs anything in the long run, and Phanuef is already a very good #2 D man, and can/could be a #1 D man. I would trade Wilson, McGinn, a goalie prospect, and a 1st for Dion 10 days out of the week...and that's not where I start when talking to the Leafs, that's where I would draw the line in getting him. (again, maybe you can get them to take Hishon over McGinn). And again, if Dion proves to be worth keeping and can be re-signed, giving up an extra second is nothing. The fact that he is not signed long term also means the Avs lose nothing in long term cap risk if he does not fit with the club. In a worse case situation, if he really does not work out, someone will give close to, if not more, for him at the deadline to play for a contender.


Last edited by Drury_Sakic: 07-06-2013 at 10:06 PM.
Drury_Sakic is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:02 PM
  #87
JWK
Report Spam @JWK Plz
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: 303
Country: South Korea
Posts: 13,030
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughdreamz View Post
Downside: the struggle to resign out core. Then down the road, keeping Mac will require us losing some key pieces.
But if we do get Pie(big if) he'll be one of our key core player. I don't really see the downside if we do get Pie, once again big if.

JWK is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:17 PM
  #88
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
Yup, cause Wilson is the second coming of Rob Blake, McGinn totally has more than 84 career points and has proven he will be an NHL All-Star, the 3 goalie prospects can all play net for the Avs at once(not to mention the best goalie prospect the Avs have is totally not Pickard and not on the shortlist) , and 1st round picks always make the NHL and rock! Avs can never replace all that talent in the system. It never works out to trade for a D man and they usually cost nothing in trades.


Good D men cost assets if you are not giving up proven NHL talent in a trade. Dion is not Rob Blake or Chris Pronger, but he is more valuable than Douglas Murray, took two 2nd round picks to get last deadline.

Just look at what the Avs gave up to get D men through the years.

Blake - Deadmarsh, Miller, Aulin, and Steckel. Deader was a good NHL winger and the other three were OK NHL players, but can't say any of them were players the Avs REALLY needed over the years after the trade or any of them would have turned the Avs into contenders. (worth noting the Avs also got Reinprecht as a throw in)

Bourque - Rolston, Grenier, Pahlsson, Martin Samuelsson, again, Rolston and Pahlsson were decent NHLers, but not anyone there that I would cry over.

Kasparaitis - Berry, Nieminen, no losses there.

Ozolinsh - Nolan, Owen Nolan was a good NHLer, Ozo was a good NHL defensemen.

DeVries - Branko Radivojevic, who?

Brett Clark - Frederic Cassivi - Where would the Avs be without him!

DJ Smith - Matt Davis - "yawn"

Derek Morris - Drury, Yelle (Avs also got Shantz and McAmmond) Ok, Avs lost this one, you got me.

McAllister - Hostikka - All-Star, no?

Marchment - Ryan Donnally and Brad Richardson

Skrastins - Peter Regin

Ballard - Reinprect

Boughner- Chris Bahen, Casey Borer, Risto Korhonen!

Vannanen- Ballard, Morris (also got Gratton and Stastny from the Yotes)

Leopold - Tanguay (Avs picked up 2 second round picks as well)

Salei - Skrastins and Adam Comrie (how creepy is it that these guys were traded for each other given how they died? )

Foote - Luca Sbisa and David Savard

Quincey and Pressing - Ryan Smyth (Avs also got Luke Walker)

O'Bryne - Bournival

Johnson - Stewart and Shattenkirk (Avs also got McClemment and Siemens) This trade goes to show you should be giving up PROSPECTS and PICKS, rather than NHL ready talent for D men....

And there you have it, every notable Avs trade for a D man since 1995 (Will admit I could be missing one or two, but point stands) . Look at all that NHL All-Star and Cup winning talent the Avs gave up. There are some really good NHL players in there, Drury, Deadmarsh, Miller, Nolan, Tanguay, and the quality range in the D men the Avs acquired in that time ranges widely, but outside of Drury, I can't say that a single player on that list would have changed the course of the Avs long term future in a positive way if he had not been traded..and in the long haul, trading Drury got the Avs Stastny. Stewart and Shattenkirk remain outstanding in the long run as we still have to see what the players involved on both sides do over the next 5-10 years.

My point is that giving up a package of unknown prospect potential and some mid-tier players for a known quanity D man at the very least is very unlikely to cost the Avs anything in the long run, and Phanuef is already a very good #2 D man, and can/could be a #1 D man. I would trade Wilson, McGinn, a goalie prospect, and a 1st for Dion 10 days out of the week...and that's not where I start when talking to the Leafs, that's where I would draw the line in getting him. (again, maybe you can get them to take Hishon over McGinn). And again, if Dion proves to be worth keeping and can be re-signed, giving up an extra second is nothing. The fact that he is not signed long term also means the Avs lose nothing in long term cap risk if he does not fit with the club. In a worse case situation, if he really does not work out, someone will give close to, if not more, for him at the deadline to play for a contender.
One problem with this analysis is that the Lindros trade afforded us an abundance of assets,which included Forsberg. You could argue Forsberg was e better player, nevermind all the rest. So to reference that era as a basis for comparison is erroneous. The truth is, the Avs have been lucky in recent drafts. Duchene turned into what one would hope. Same with Landeskog. Even the defenseman have exceeded where they were drafted to this point.

This era is totally different. The Avs are building assets through scouting, not by trading Lindros.

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:19 PM
  #89
AslanRH
Guenin Get Out
 
AslanRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Wyoming, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,139
vCash: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by hughdreamz View Post
Downside: the struggle to resign out core. Then down the road, keeping Mac will require us losing some key pieces.
Not sure I understand how either of these would happen? Maybe I'm missing your point, but how does an offer sheet affect us resigning our players or moving them for Mac to stay?

__________________
"People often claim to hunger for Truth, but seldom like the taste when it is served up."
AslanRH is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:33 PM
  #90
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Averick View Post
One problem with this analysis is that the Lindros trade afforded us an abundance of assets,which included Forsberg. You could argue Forsberg was e better player, nevermind all the rest. So to reference that era as a basis for comparison is erroneous. The truth is, the Avs have been lucky in recent drafts. Duchene turned into what one would hope. Same with Landeskog. Even the defenseman have exceeded where they were drafted to this point.

This era is totally different. The Avs are building assets through scouting, not by trading Lindros.
And this negates the fact that the Avs gave up virtually zero NHL talent in trades for defensemen how?

Trades of prospects for known NHL talent results in mostly crap going to the other side. Some other trades of the 2000's for example. (with enough time for prospects to fail or pan out)

Hossa for Colby Armstrong, Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito, and Daultan Leveille.

Chris Pronger for Eric Brewer, Jeff Woywitka and Doug Lynch

Joe Thornton for Marco Sturm, Brad Stuart and Wayne Primeau

Doug Weight for Jesse Boulerice, Mike Zigomanis, Magnus Kahnberg, Reto Berra, Cade Fairchild.

Roberto Luongo for Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen, and Alex Auld

Pavol Demitra - Patrick O'Sullivan and Trevor Lewis

Bill Guerin for Ville Nieminen, Jay Barriball, and Ian Cole

Ryan Smyth - Robert Nilsson, Ryan O'Marr and Alex Plante

Some of the biggest trades of the post-1st lockout era till 2010, enough time to evaluate the prospects traded. Again, might have missed one or two, but look at the crap prospects traded. In situations where mostly futures are traded for a known player, the futures are almost always pure crap. (and yes, some of the players traded for also were crap)

And how does trading Wilson, McGinn, and the Avs 1st really jam up the Avs overall drafting plan? You are still top 3 protecting the 1st, Lando and Duchene were hard to miss guys, as most top 3 picks are...thus you protect that...and the Avs only lose the 2nd if they decide to and are able to re-sign Phanuef...and the odds the Avs once again find a steal in the 2nd round, well, is not great...and if they really find a guy in the 2nd round they love, trading up for a 2nd rounder is not impossible.


Last edited by Drury_Sakic: 07-06-2013 at 10:45 PM.
Drury_Sakic is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:41 PM
  #91
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AslanRH View Post
Not sure I understand how either of these would happen? Maybe I'm missing your point, but how does an offer sheet affect us resigning our players or moving them for Mac to stay?
The biggest concern about making offer-sheets is that it exposes your own talent to offer-sheets or needing to be traded.

1) If the opposing GM is a jerkface, they might offer sheet one of your guys just to make you pay him more than he is worth, or to actually get the player.

2) The required dollars to get a player in said offersheet deal probably means you overpay for the player fiscally and perhaps mess up your own fiscal/cap structure and makes it harder to keep your own players, both in reducing your own cap space and moving the expectations bar with your own players when they come calling for a contract - hard to tell your own player he is worth X when you gave a player from another team Y.

3) I do think there is a bit of an unwritten rule amongst some GMs that offersheets are still not a legitimate strategy to use. The more they are used, the more acceptable they will become..and more GMs will start using them. Other GMs may be more willing to offersheet an Avs player if the Avs themselves use one.

Drury_Sakic is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:47 PM
  #92
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
And this negates the fact that the Avs gave up virtually zero NHL talent in trades for defensemen how?

Trades of prospects for known NHL talent results in mostly crap going to the other side. Some other trades of the 2000's for example. (with enough time for prospects to fail or pan out)

Hossa for Colby Armstrong, Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito, and Daultan Leveille.

Chris Pronger for Eric Brewer, Jeff Woywitka and Doug Lynch

Joe Thornton for Marco Sturm, Brad Stuart and Wayne Primeau

Doug Weight for Jesse Boulerice, Mike Zigomanis, Magnus Kahnberg, Reto Berra, Cade Fairchild.

Roberto Luongo for Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen, and Alex Auld

Pavol Demitra - Patrick O'Sullivan and Trevor Lewis

Bill Guerin for Ville Nieminen, Jay Barriball, and Ian Cole

Ryan Smyth - Robert Nilsson, Ryan O'Marr and Alex Plante

Some of the biggest trades of the post-1st lockout era till 2010, enough time to evaluate the prospects traded. Again, might have missed one or two, but look at the crap prospects traded. In situations where mostly futures are traded for a known player, the futures are almost always pure crap. (and yes, some of the players traded for also were crap)

For as verbose as this reply was, the first sentence and last paragraph are contradictory. It's true; read it several times if necessary.

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:51 PM
  #93
TwoPadStack
Gross Misconduct
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,785
vCash: 50
I would let a kangaroo box my nuts if we got Pietrangelo, and I would need to fly to the other side of the world to accomplish that.

TwoPadStack is online now  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:52 PM
  #94
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Averick View Post
For as verbose as this reply was, the first sentence and last paragraph are contradictory. It's true; read it several times if necessary.
Uh, what?

Not all proven NHL players work out when acquired..some do....but virtually zero NHL prospects traded for said players work out. How is that contradictory...

The fact of the matter is that a wide majority of the time, the team that gets the better, more known player, in a trade involving prospects and unproven NHL talent for that player, gets the better end of the deal...with most of the assets going the other way being virtually worthless. You cannot deny that fact.

Drury_Sakic is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 10:56 PM
  #95
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
Uh, what?

Not all proven NHL players work out when acquired...but virtually zero NHL prospects traded for said players work out. How is that contradictory...

The fact of the matter is that a wide majority of the time, the team that gets the better, more known player, in a trade involving prospects and unproven NHL talent for that player, gets the better end of the deal...with most of the assets going the other way being virtually worthless. You cannot deny that fact.
You say the Avs give up almost nothing as prospects but then you go on to trash the idea of giving up prospects because its often "pure crap". Your words, no?

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 11:04 PM
  #96
AslanRH
Guenin Get Out
 
AslanRH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Wyoming, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,139
vCash: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
The biggest concern about making offer-sheets is that it exposes your own talent to offer-sheets or needing to be traded.

1) If the opposing GM is a jerkface, they might offer sheet one of your guys just to make you pay him more than he is worth, or to actually get the player.

2) The required dollars to get a player in said offersheet deal probably means you overpay for the player fiscally and perhaps mess up your own fiscal/cap structure and makes it harder to keep your own players, both in reducing your own cap space and moving the expectations bar with your own players when they come calling for a contract - hard to tell your own player he is worth X when you gave a player from another team Y.

3) I do think there is a bit of an unwritten rule amongst some GMs that offersheets are still not a legitimate strategy to use. The more they are used, the more acceptable they will become..and more GMs will start using them. Other GMs may be more willing to offersheet an Avs player if the Avs themselves use one.
Ah, I understand how you are thinking. My two cents:

1) Has a "revenge" sheet happened in the NHL? Are the Avs expected to sheet Brodie just because of the ROR sheet? Nashville going after Schenn next year just because of Weber? Have yet to see any evidence of this phenomenon.

2) I'm not asking for the Avs to offer 8M to just any top pairing defenseman, but in a cap tight league, you will either pay out the nose to get a top pairing dman:
-via FA
- via assets in a trade
- or a mixture of both (which is how I view an offer sheet).
Ex: I would easily trade a 1st+2nd+3rd for McDonagh, and I wouldn't mind if he was paid 6M+/yr. Granted I think Rangers match, but nothing was lost in the attempt except some hurt feelings of a GM.

As for our own players, I think we've seen them compare themselves to others already, but not just locally (ROR). Players can follow what similar guys are making as easy as we can. They also should understand some of the business end in that bringing in an asset generally costs more than maintaining it.

3) As an organization it is up to you to protect your assets. Letting your RFAs get to the point they can receive an offer sheet is a risk that can be avoided by signing your assets before other teams can approach them.

The offer sheet rule is there, and business is business. Hockey is business. I think we are starting to see that in order to procure assets, GMs will need to start using every means available to them. If there is value to be had, most any team will take it if you let them.

AslanRH is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 11:06 PM
  #97
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,298
vCash: 500
I think Drury_Sakic brings up a good point with the past trades. However which defensemen are out there that we can use our prospects to acquire and which defensemen are worth using our prospects on? Not to mention all those trades, or at least most of them were used when we were contenders. We're not contenders at this point and we'd have to aim for a 30+ defenseman. One of which would be useless once we're ready to contend properly.

Gigantor The Goalie is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 11:06 PM
  #98
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Averick View Post
You say the Avs give up almost nothing as prospects but then you go on to trash the idea of giving up prospects because its often "pure crap". Your words, no?
No.

I am willing to admit that the known players CAN be crap, or just simply not fit with the club they get traded to. But the odds of the named player working out versus the prospects traded becoming worth anything to make the team that traded them regret trading them are much better. Phanuef is going to put up at LEAST 40 points, if not 50-60, and play 25+ minutes a night. The odds of that not happening are slim. McGinn and Wilson could very well not match that production combined...and neither can contribute the same level of quality minutes on the blueline that Dion can...and there is the potential that Phanuef can bring Johnson to the next level either by giving him a top tier partner OR by playing on another pair that pulls pressure off Johnson.

Adding an All-Star player to the roster does not always work out...but I would much rather take a chance that adding a proven NHL D man (Phanuef) to the roster will work out for the Avs than hoping that Wilson, McGinn, and what will probably be a mid-1st round pick can turn the fate of the Avs over the next season and beyond.

Plus, even if adding Phanuef only improves the Avs enough to go from last place in the west to the 7th/8th seed, which I think is very likely, it vastly improves the development and mindset of the rest of the young talent on the roster.

If you were Duchene, Stastny, O'Reilly, Lando, Johnson, and the rest of the Avs roster...would you be willing to give more going into the season knowing that management added a major piece to the roster? Plus finishing in the playoff race vs. last place is a huge mental boost for a developing roster.


Last edited by Drury_Sakic: 07-06-2013 at 11:15 PM.
Drury_Sakic is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 11:15 PM
  #99
Averick*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
No.

I am willing to admit that the known players CAN be crap, or just simply not fit with the club they get traded to. But the odds of the named player working out versus the prospects traded becoming worth anything to make the team that traded them regret trading them are much better.

Adding an All-Star player to the roster does not always work out...but I would much rather take a chance that adding a proven NHL D man (Phanuef) to the roster will work out for the Avs than hoping that Wilson, McGinn, and what will probably be a mid-1st round pick can turn the fate of the Avs over the next season and beyond.

Plus, even if adding Phanuef only improves the Avs enough to go from last place in the west to the 7th/8th seed, which I think is very likely, it vastly improves the development and mindset of the rest of the young talent on the roster.

If you were Duchene, Stastny, O'Reilly, Lando, Johnson, and the rest of the Avs roster...would you be willing to give more going into the season knowing that management added a major piece to the roster? Plus finishing in the playoff race vs. last place is a huge mental boost for a developing roster.
The cost of being wrong is less severe with your younger guys no? Understand too, that not all of your younger prospects need to materialize. And if you're the Avs, it's even better. They must not be a great defense. They simply need to be good enough.

So, in relation to your analysis, there's something to be said for the buckshot approach , provided that you have multiple defensive prospects.

Averick* is offline  
Old
07-06-2013, 11:19 PM
  #100
cgf
Aves Fan
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 17,024
vCash: 500
My issue isn't giving up the 1st, Wilson, Pickard/Martin/Aitto and Sgar/McG or Barrie Elliott, it's giving all of that up for Phaneuf, who's not just an upcoming UFA, but is also not that good a fit next to EJ as EJ would have to continue playing as cleaner upper instead of finally getting a partner he can trust to clean up for him. If we were getting back Vlasic instead I'd be all for it because Vlasic is under control for quite a while and could finally give EJ a partner he can trust, but for Phaneuf? No ****ing way.

cgf is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.