HFBoards

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

Summer Baggage Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-30-2017, 10:16 AM
  #1
S E P H
@SEPH_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 9,788
vCash: 50
Summer Baggage Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avs71 View Post
Did anyone mention Friedman speculating the Preds might try and sign a top-4 defenceman, so they could use one of their own in a trade?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/n...around-league/
This rumour has been posted a couple of times throughout the last week or so. Granted this seems more like speculation from Friedman, but we know a couple of things based on all the rumours we've heard. One of them is that the Preds and Poille really do like Duchene. The other one is that Sakic supposively wanted Ekholm as the major part of the deal, which Poille declined at the time as he wants to keep four top 4 defenders for this club. So now maybe Poille wants to head back to Duchene if he's able to land a top 4 defender on the free agent market.

The biggest issue I see now is cap space, considering that the newest rumour is that Johansen wants 8.5 million per year. But I suggest that Avs can get more in a deal, maybe one around Ekholm+Fiala/Kamenev+Fabbro or 1st 2018 if Avs retain some of his contract.

What are your guys' thoughts on this situation?

S E P H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:18 AM
  #2
RockLobster
Moderator
Damnit, Jian Yang!
 
RockLobster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas
Country: Germany
Posts: 23,082
vCash: 844
Poile really doesn't seem like he's going to touch his Top-4, so it's pretty much a near certainty those are out.

A Nashville deal would basically be pure futures, and in my mind the best package would be something like Fabbro + Kamenev + Roster player (would like Sissons or Aberg...but neither are likely) + 2018 1st.

__________________

There's only one thing I hate more than lying: skim milk, which is water that is lying about being milk.
RockLobster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:18 AM
  #3
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
I think it'll be Duchene for Ekholm 1 for 1. No additions.

__________________
"Cody McLeod didn't get that nose working in an office"
- Gord Miller
Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:19 AM
  #4
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
David Poile should not touch his top-4.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:19 AM
  #5
CobraAcesS
Registered User
 
CobraAcesS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Michigan
Country: United States
Posts: 13,232
vCash: 500
Sounds like a plan. If they need to retain on Duchene to get the return they need. Then they should do it.

CobraAcesS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:20 AM
  #6
SoundwaveIsCharisma
Moderator
 
SoundwaveIsCharisma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Screw You Blaster
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,469
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SoundwaveIsCharisma
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
This rumour has been posted a couple of times throughout the last week or so. Granted this seems more like speculation from Friedman, but we know a couple of things based on all the rumours we've heard. One of them is that the Preds and Poille really do like Duchene. The other one is that Sakic supposively wanted Ekholm as the major part of the deal, which Poille declined at the time as he wants to keep four top 4 defenders for this club. So now maybe Poille wants to head back to Duchene if he's able to land a top 4 defender on the free agent market.

The biggest issue I see now is cap space, considering that the newest rumour is that Johansen wants 8.5 million per year. But I suggest that Avs can get more in a deal, maybe one around Ekholm+Fiala/Kamenev+Fabbro or 1st 2018 if Avs retain some of his contract.

What are your guys' thoughts on this situation?
Does Nashville have any bad contracts that they'd want to get rid of? Ekholm+Fabbro+cap dump would be a dream come true for me. I really, really like Ekholm, think he's absolutely awesome. I think having an Ekholm-EJ top pairing takes a lot of pressure off the kids and lets them learn and develop on the job. Fabbro still has loads of potential, plus he and Jost have that history together.

I don't see it happening though. Just don't see Nashville shipping out their Top-4.

SoundwaveIsCharisma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:20 AM
  #7
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 15,100
vCash: 50
Don't think Poile will touch his top four, as he shouldn't, and if he did, I don't think he'd add anything of significant value to Ekholm. He's a really high end top four defensman and despite being 27 should have years of great hockey left in him in my opinion.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:24 AM
  #8
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
I think it'll be Duchene for Ekholm 1 for 1. No additions.
I really hope not. I mean I like Ekholm but that deal would really suck.

We would be wasting Ekholms prime on an at best mediocre team (with little hope to improve because we still would lack way too many assets ) and probably significantly worsen our odds for Dahlin by doing this deal.


That would really sting.

It might be fair value but if Ekholm comes our way we need to land a 1st+ prospect as well. Duchene probably is not worth that but otherwise the deal does not make much sense for us IMO.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:32 AM
  #9
AvalancheFan19
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,922
vCash: 500
I mean if Nashville does indeed sign a defencemen I'd say they're going to aggressively go after Duchene. However, I personally would not want the deal centered around Ekholm. The value is fair but he's a little too old and Poille obviously would not add much more to the deal.

AvalancheFan19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:40 AM
  #10
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Obviously I've watched a lot of central division hockey like everyone here and I've always been a fan of Ekholm and found him a bit underrated but his play grew on me even more in the playoffs this year. I would trade Duchene for him straight up and be very happy with that trade. He'd instantly be our best defenseman.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:42 AM
  #11
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 9,738
vCash: 500
Ekholm is a legit top pairing defender. If they package him with a first and a good prospect I think someone much more enticing becomes available than Duchene.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:45 AM
  #12
Grackle Party
uninformed neophyte
 
Grackle Party's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,219
vCash: 500
I just dont understand what this team would be doing by adding Ekholm. Thats not a rebuild, they would need to make some other moves to the forwards to be a playoff contender

Grackle Party is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:48 AM
  #13
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grackle Party View Post
I just dont understand what this team would be doing by adding Ekholm. Thats not a rebuild, they would need to make some other moves to the forwards to be a playoff contender
Ekholm just turned 27, is under contract for 5 more seasons on an absolute steal of a contract and doesn't play a game that would make him wear down earlier than most. Ekholm makes the team better now AND for the future.

He'd be a more important piece of a rebuild than Erik Johnson or Gabe Landeskog and you don't see fans asking them to be moved.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:52 AM
  #14
Avs44
Registered User
 
Avs44's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 15,100
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
Ekholm just turned 27, is under contract for 5 more seasons on an absolute steal of a contract and doesn't play a game that would make him wear down earlier than most. Ekholm makes the team better now AND for the future.

He'd be a more important piece of a rebuild than Erik Johnson or Gabe Landeskog and you don't see fans asking them to be moved.
I completely agree. I'd welcome the guy.

Avs44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:54 AM
  #15
Patagonia
Registered User
 
Patagonia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Country: Canada
Posts: 753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundwaveIsCharisma View Post
Does Nashville have any bad contracts that they'd want to get rid of? Ekholm+Fabbro+cap dump would be a dream come true for me. I really, really like Ekholm, think he's absolutely awesome. I think having an Ekholm-EJ top pairing takes a lot of pressure off the kids and lets them learn and develop on the job. Fabbro still has loads of potential, plus he and Jost have that history together.

I don't see it happening though. Just don't see Nashville shipping out their Top-4.
I wondered if Sakic really wants Ekholm? He is 16 months OLDER than Duchene and might be using the approach to squeeze more players in a trade.

Duchene is a perfect fit for the Preds and protection if Johansen decides to holdout (not like he's done before). Rumoured asking for Draisaitl money approx. $8M-$8.5M per and they have the same Agency and Agent as ROR.

Patagonia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 10:56 AM
  #16
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
I really hope not. I mean I like Ekholm but that deal would really suck.

We would be wasting Ekholms prime on an at best mediocre team (with little hope to improve because we still would lack way too many assets ) and probably significantly worsen our odds for Dahlin by doing this deal.


That would really sting.

It might be fair value but if Ekholm comes our way we need to land a 1st+ prospect as well. Duchene probably is not worth that but otherwise the deal does not make much sense for us IMO.
This team isn't going to be an "at best mediocre team" for the next 5 years. At least we hope not.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:05 AM
  #17
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
This team isn't going to be an "at best mediocre team" for the next 5 years. At least we hope not.
Trading Duchene for Ekholm would IMO be the exact kind of move that would hurt this franchise the most.

Don't get me wrong. It is not bad value. But a terrible strategic decision. The same way Varly was in hindsight not bad value but also a move that ultimately IMO lead to the last rebuild being a failure and us being stuck in mediocrity for way too long without real hope for improvement.

It is the exact kind of move that a team aiming for the treadmill of mediocrity would make at this point.

And given that we are talking the Avs, it very well might happen.

If we get Ekholm, we need to get atleast another 1st + another prospect out of this.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:12 AM
  #18
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
Trading Duchene for Ekholm would IMO be the exact kind of move that would hurt this franchise the most.

Don't get me wrong. It is not bad value. But a terrible strategic decision. The same way Varly was in hindsight not bad value but also a move that ultimately IMO lead to the last rebuild being a failure and us being stuck in mediocrity for way too long without real hope for improvement.

It is the exact kind of move that a team aiming for the treadmill of mediocrity would make at this point.

And given that we are talking the Avs, it very well might happen.

If we get Ekholm, we need to get atleast another 1st + another prospect out of this.
How is it terrible strategically? Ekholm instantly becomes our #1, and on the left side, too, which allows Zadorov to play 2nd pairing minutes and not be fed to the wolves every night against the opposing team's 1st line.

If Zadorov develops the way we think he can, then in 2-3 years time he can step into the role Ekholm was holding down while Ekholm moves down to the 2nd pairing.

I want picks/prospects too but let's not act like this sort of trade wouldn't help this team tremendously. It'd fill the biggest need this team has had for over a decade and would allow the kids to develop properly in the right situations.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:16 AM
  #19
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
How is it terrible strategically? Ekholm instantly becomes our #1, and on the left side, too, which allows Zadorov to play 2nd pairing minutes and not be fed to the wolves every night against the opposing team's 1st line.

If Zadorov develops the way we think he can, then in 2-3 years time he can step into the role Ekholm was holding down while Ekholm moves down to the 2nd pairing.

I want picks/prospects too but let's not act like this sort of trade wouldn't help this team tremendously. It'd fill the biggest need this team has had for over a decade and would allow the kids to develop properly in the right situations.

Because you are getting older with one move while trying to get younger and build for the future with all of the other moves. One of the main reasons Duchene is on the block is because his age and that he does not fit our "rebuild" basically. Does not make much sense to trade him straight up for a guy that is even older IMO.

It is also a win-now move when all of your other moves so far have been aimed at building for the future so far this offseason and basically going for a rebuild.

Mixed messages once again. When Jost and Rantanen and Makar should finally be ready to really to shine for this team, our top pairing will be 30+ already and only have a limited amount of time left before we will have to look for their replacement and odds are that we won't have the assets to do it then and again be stuck in no-mans land...


It is basically IMO one of the biggest problems for the Avs. They don't really have a plan or strategy or philosophy or whatever you want to call it that they are sticking with..


That has been a personal problem I have had with this team for quite some time now.


Last edited by JoemAvs: 06-30-2017 at 11:21 AM.
JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:21 AM
  #20
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
Because you are getting older with one move while trying to get younger and build for the future with all of the other moves.

It is also a win-now move when all of your other moves so far have been aimed at building for the future so far this offseason and basically going for a rebuild.

Mixed messages once again. When Jost and Rantanen and Makar should finally be ready to really to shine for this team, our top pairing will be 30+ already and only have a limited amount of time left before we will have to look for their replacement and odds are that we won't have the assets to do it then and again be stuck in no-mans land...


It is basically IMO one of the biggest problems for the Avs. They don't really have a plan or strategy or philosophy or whatever you want to call it that they are sticking with..


That has been a personal problem I have had with this team for quite some time now.
You don't build a team of all prospects and 18-23 year olds. Unless you want to be the Edmonton Oilers circa 2007-2016.

Ekholm solves a huge need on this team. He's not going to magically fall off a cliff in a couple of years, and when his play does tail off we'll have the likes of Zadorov/Bigras/Meloche/Makar/etc having a few years (some more, some less) of pro experience ready to step in.

I don't see the downside that you do.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:22 AM
  #21
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
Because you are getting older with one move while trying to get younger and build for the future with all of the other moves.

It is also a win-now move when all of your other moves so far have been aimed at building for the future so far this offseason and basically going for a rebuild.

Mixed messages once again. When Jost and Rantanen and Makar should finally be ready to really to shine for this team, our top pairing will be 30+ already and only have a limited amount of time left before we will have to look for their replacement and odds are that we won't have the assets to do it then and again be stuck in no-mans land...


It is basically IMO one of the biggest problems for the Avs. They don't really have a plan or strategy or philosophy or whatever you want to call it that they are sticking with..


That has been a personal problem I have had with this team for quite some time now.
My god he literally just turned 27 and has 5 very solid years left on his contract. He would be the best defenseman the Avalanche have had since Rob Blake. Trading for a 27 year old #1D with plenty of term and great hockey left is not a "win now" move. It helps now, sure. But it helps the future also.

If this is your mentality do you want to trade EJ, Barrie and Landeskog too?

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:24 AM
  #22
raistlin76
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Cracow
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,444
vCash: 500
I agree. Ekholm is very good move if we have a shot this or next season. But we don't. We need D younger than Dutchy or at least additional 1st.

raistlin76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:29 AM
  #23
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
My god he literally just turned 27 and has 5 very solid years left on his contract. He would be the best defenseman the Avalanche have had since Rob Blake. Trading for a 27 year old #1D with plenty of term and great hockey left is not a "win now" move. It helps now, sure. But it helps the future also.

If this is your mentality do you want to trade EJ, Barrie and Landeskog too?
Barrie yes even though I might be his biggest fan on this board.

Landeskog not so much. IMO he is young enough to keep around and he is the kind of guy you want leading a rebuilding team IMO and who can take on the heavy minutes to help shelter the kids.

I also want to keep EJ because he is a very good guy to help you shelter your young guys and take the heat off of them. He also probably does not have as much value in a trade right now as he does to the Avs.


But yeah. If people are happy with getting back to that bubble team level we have been for quite some time, Ekholm for Duchene straight up is probably a good way to achieve that rather quickly.


We will see how it turns out.
Also pump the freaking brakes on the Ekholm train.
The best D since Rob Blake?

Holy cow. What a playoff run can do for onces value I guess.

Fundamentally disagree with that.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:31 AM
  #24
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
Barrie yes even though I might be his biggest fan on this board.

Landeskog not so much. IMO he is young enough to keep around and he is the kind of guy you want leading a rebuilding team IMO and who can take on the heavy minutes to help shelter the kids.

I also want to keep EJ because he is a very good guy to help you shelter your young guys and take the heat off of them. He also probably does not have as much value in a trade right now as he does to the Avs.


But yeah. If people are happy with getting back to that bubble team level we have been for quite some time, Ekholm for Duchene straight up is probably a good way to achieve that rather quickly.


We will see how it turns out.
So I need to ask. Who do you suggest we trade Duchene for? Don't give any of these unrealistic fairy tail trade proposals that I see around here. Give a reasonable example of what somebody would give up for Matt Duchene who just scored 40 points and is 2 years away from UFA that's a better option than Matthias Ekholm.

Edit: also just saw your edit. Who have the Avs had since Blake that's a better defenseman than Ekholm?

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:37 AM
  #25
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
So I need to ask. Who do you suggest we trade Duchene for? Don't give any of these unrealistic fairy tail trade proposals that I see around here. Give a reasonable example of what somebody would give up for Matt Duchene who just scored 40 points and is 2 years away from UFA that's a better option than Matthias Ekholm.

Edit: also just saw your edit. Who have the Avs had since Blake that's a better defenseman than Ekholm? Please don't say Liles.
IMO EJ in his "prime" a few years agowas better. IMO people are seriously overrating Ekholm if they call him a legit #1 D. Top pairing guy? Sure.
Legit #1 D on another team? IMO no.

Hanifin straight up I would do. Murray + 1st + Bjorkstrand I would probably do.
Barzal/Beauvillier + 2 1sts + 2nd I would do. Fabbro + Fiala + Girard/Kamenev/1st, I would probably do.

Also if Ekholm really is as good as you think he is, Poile would be nuts to trade him for Duchene at this point in time.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:12 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.