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, 11:42 AM
  #26
Balthazar
Someone
 
Balthazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,152
vCash: 500
Ekholm would spend the rest of his prime on a rebuilding team and be near useless (or gone) when we our window opens. Is that what people want for Duchene? Pieces that will harm our draft position and be useless when it actually counts? Talk about a counter-productive plan and a recipe for long-term mediocrity.

It's the friggin' marshmallow experiment all over again.

Balthazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:42 AM
  #27
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
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.
I think Ekholm is undoubtedly better than EJ has been at any point in his career. That's just my opinion thought and i'll gladly respect the opinion of somebody else as I always do.

Also is there anybody else you'd suggest being better? OR do you just think EJ was SO MUCH better than Ekholm that my Blake comment was outlandish? With a reaction like this...."Also pump the freaking brakes on the Ekholm train. The best D since Rob Blake?" I would have guessed you had a major list of reasons why you thought I went overboard with that quote.

Also I think your proposals are out to lunch aside from maybe the CLB one which I don't see being nearly as valuable as Ekholm.

__________________
"Cody McLeod didn't get that nose working in an office"
- Gord Miller
Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:44 AM
  #28
Bubba Thudd
Spinach Balls!
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,149
vCash: 6200
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoemAvs View Post
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.
That one.

__________________
"We're not cynics, we just don't believe a word you say
We're not critics, we just hate it all anyway"
Bubba Thudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:44 AM
  #29
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: w/ Renley's Peach
Country: Germany
Posts: 29,457
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?
Yeah, but I wanna tank for Dahlin and having Ekholm next to EJ with Varly back could screw that up.

cgf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:45 AM
  #30
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
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.
Not calling him a #1D but he would be OUR #1D. Realistically, he's a great #2 but to me personally he's better than EJ. Thinks the game much better.

I'd much prefer Ekholm to all of those deals other than Hanifin, simply because Hanifin has the potential to be even better than Ekholm.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:45 AM
  #31
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthazar View Post
Ekholm would spend the rest of his prime on a rebuilding team and be near useless (or gone) when we our window opens. Is that what people want for Duchene? Pieces that will harm our draft position and be useless when it actually counts? Talk about a counter-productive plan and a recipe for long-term mediocrity.

It's the friggin' marshmallow experiment all over again.
Look, I'm all for building for the future. But if a great 5 year contract on a reasonably aged #1D isn't long enough to play a positive role in this rebuild, I don't want to be a part of this rebuild. I'm not expecting a Stanley Cup or anything, but if our plan is to be 5 years a way from coming out of this rut that's just inexcusable.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:45 AM
  #32
Balthazar
Someone
 
Balthazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
I think Ekholm is undoubtedly better than EJ has been at any point in his career. That's just my opinion thought and i'll gladly respect the opinion of somebody else as I always do.

Also is there anybody else you'd suggest being better?
I'll take a draft picks only return before Ekholm and it's not even close.

Balthazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:46 AM
  #33
Bubba Thudd
Spinach Balls!
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,149
vCash: 6200
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgf View Post
Yeah, but I wanna tank for Dahlin
And even if we lose the lottery again, there's still gonna be great D prospects available at the top of the draft.

Bubba Thudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:48 AM
  #34
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balthazar View Post
I'll take a draft picks only return before Ekholm and it's not even close.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:50 AM
  #35
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 Ekholm is undoubtedly better than EJ has been at any point in his career. That's just my opinion thought and i'll gladly respect the opinion of somebody else as I always do.

Also is there anybody else you'd suggest being better? OR do you just think EJ was SO MUCH better than Ekholm that my Blake comment was outlandish? With a reaction like this...."Also pump the freaking brakes on the Ekholm train. The best D since Rob Blake?" I would have guessed you had a major list of reasons why you thought I went overboard with that quote.
Well the best D since Rob Blake makes him sound way better than he is IMO.

And IMO EJ was an easy one for me but yeah of course like always most of it depends on personal opinion. Won't argue with that.

After thinking about it I have to agree that the list is not very long.

But thinking back, I don't think we even had another legit #2 D on this team aside from EJ since Blake retired. Atleast not for longer than a year.


Barrie putting up 50+in a season is impressive but that probably does not make him a better D and the other one is maybe Beauch with his great half season. Aside from that I don't recall many noteworthy seasons for any of our blueliners which is really,really sad.

So yeah it was maybe a bit too harsh but mostly because our D has been an abomination for the last decade or so.

I'd like to fix it for the long haul via the draft.
Which Duchene for Ekholm would be very counterproductive to reaching that goal so I wouldn't be happy about it.

Again the value is not bad at all(even though I think it would be NSH selling high and the Avs selling low) but I would personally not like it for the outlined reasons.

But I can see Sakic doing that and making you happy. IMO it would not be a good decision for the longterm future of the Avs but I thought that of most of our recent decisions in the last few years and so far it hasn't really stopped them either so I wouldn't be surprised if it happens again.

We will see. In the end we can't influence what happens anyways.

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:51 AM
  #36
Bubba Thudd
Spinach Balls!
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,149
vCash: 6200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
Look, I'm all for building for the future. But if a great 5 year contract on a reasonably aged #1D isn't long enough to play a positive role in this rebuild, I don't want to be a part of this rebuild. I'm not expecting a Stanley Cup or anything, but if our plan is to be 5 years a way from coming out of this rut that's just inexcusable.
But if we can trade Duchene for "Barzal/Beauvillier + 2 1sts + 2nd", we could end up with 2 Ekholms, plus.

Bubba Thudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:51 AM
  #37
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: w/ Renley's Peach
Country: Germany
Posts: 29,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Thudd View Post
And even if we lose the lottery again, there's still gonna be great D prospects available at the top of the draft.
Exactly. We probably won't luck into Dahlin, but it looks like this is the kinda draft where even if we miss out in the lottery, we could fill that #1 dman hole on the left that we've had for ages. One of those top kids, Makar, Zadorov, Meloche, Timmins, Bigras and the third pairing prospects is starting to look like a strong defensive pipeline regardless of what Duchene is traded for.

So move Duchene for futures; have Jost & Greer start in the AHL with Bigras; etc. In a years time we can start adding prime aged vets to fill the remaining holes; one all of the young corner stone pieces are in the organization for an awesome D and a good forward core.

cgf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:52 AM
  #38
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,575
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.
The biggest need this team has is a high end 2way #1. Ekholm is not that. But he would probably give us a good enough Dcore to miss out on a much needed top10 pick where we can pick up said 2way #1.

The best thing for this team is to suck 1 more year. Otherwise, we are probably on another path to mediocrity.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:52 AM
  #39
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
I just don't get how people realistically want to see this team improve if they don't want a player like Ekholm.

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:53 AM
  #40
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
Well the best D since Rob Blake makes him sound way better than he is IMO.

And IMO EJ was an easy one for me but yeah of course like always most of it depends on personal opinion. Won't argue with that.

After thinking about it I have to agree that the list is not very long.

But thinking back, I don't think we even had another legit #2 D on this team aside from EJ since Blake retired. Atleast not for longer than a year.

Barrie putting up 50+in a season is impressive but that probably does not make him a better D and the other one is maybe Beauch with his great half season.

So yeah it was maybe a bit too harsh but mostly because our D has been an abomination for the last decade or so.

I'd like to fix it for the long haul via the draft.
Which Duchene for Ekholm would be very counterproductive to reaching that goal so I wouldn't be happy about it.

Again the value is not bad at all(even though I think it would be NSH selling high and the Avs selling low) but I would personally not like it for the outlined reasons.

But I can see Sakic doing that and making you happy. IMO it would not be a good decision for the longterm future of the Avs but I thought that most of our recent decisions and so far it hasn't really stopped them either so I wouldn't be surprised if it happens again.

We will see. In the end we can't influence what happens anyways.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:54 AM
  #41
dahrougem2
Registered User
 
dahrougem2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StayAtHomeAv View Post
The biggest need this team has is a high end 2way #1. Ekholm is not that. But he would probably give us a good enough Dcore to miss out on a much needed top10 pick where we can pick up said 2way #1.

The best thing for this team is to suck 1 more year. Otherwise, we are probably on another path to mediocrity.
This team needs a #1D, plain and simple. Ekholm is not in the mold of Karlsson/Doughty/Hedman/etc but he sure as hell is closer to them than EJ is.

He solves the biggest need this team has and will solve it for the next half-decade. What more do people want?

dahrougem2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:55 AM
  #42
Bubba Thudd
Spinach Balls!
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,149
vCash: 6200
If we traded Duchene for Ekholm, could we turn around and trade Ekholm for more than we'd ever get for Duchene???

Bubba Thudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:55 AM
  #43
Balthazar
Someone
 
Balthazar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
I just don't get how people realistically want to see this team improve if they don't want a player like Ekholm.
Because some people would rather suck for the next 2 years and have a shot at the Stanley Cup in 5 years than being a bubble team for the next 5 years.

Balthazar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:56 AM
  #44
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: w/ Renley's Peach
Country: Germany
Posts: 29,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
I just don't get how people realistically want to see this team improve if they don't want a player like Ekholm.
I'd be happy to bring in guys like Ekholm...in a year. I don't want this team to improve too much this coming season; and a healthier EJ & Varly + Bednar not coming in at the last minute will already improve the team, as will using more of our young forward prospects.

cgf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:57 AM
  #45
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
 
cgf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: w/ Renley's Peach
Country: Germany
Posts: 29,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
This team needs a #1D, plain and simple. Ekholm is not in the mold of Karlsson/Doughty/Hedman/etc but he sure as hell is closer to them than EJ is.

He solves the biggest need this team has and will solve it for the next half-decade. What more do people want?
Does he actually solve it, or does he just come closer to solving it than EJ / Barrie / current-Zads?

cgf is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:57 AM
  #46
JoemAvs
Registered User
 
JoemAvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Germany
Posts: 8,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
I just don't get how people realistically want to see this team improve if they don't want a player like Ekholm.
I don't want to seriously improve them for next season. Sure I don't want to see a ****show like last year again but IMO the best thing to happen for us is to finish in the bottom 3 for one more year.

Ekholm won't help with that. In contrast he would probably make that rather difficult and probably could prevent it from happening.

I don't want to be a good team next season. I want to be a great team 3-5 years from now with a bright future ahead of us.

Ekholm for Duchene IMO is the wrong way to make that happen.

The Avs would still have one of the weaker bluelines in the league atleast compared to other playoff teams if Ekholm is our best D. I'd rather try to fix that for good than settle for another 1 B solution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post

JoemAvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 11:59 AM
  #47
CharlesPuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 62
vCash: 500
I swear some people here would rather suck forever and live off the "potential success" a draft pick may bring.

CharlesPuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 12:00 PM
  #48
Cousin Eddie
IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
 
Cousin Eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,338
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
I just don't get how people realistically want to see this team improve if they don't want a player like Ekholm.
Maybe we're overvaluing him, but I'm incredibly high on him. His possession stats have screamed #1D for a few years now. His offensive production is definitely something I'd like to see improve a little but he's still averaging 30pts per 82 games over the last 2 years which is solid, though not great. That's while being one of the 5-10 best in the entire NHL at suppressing shots in that same time frame which I think evens out actual production.

Plus the eye test passes with flying colors. a 6'4 defenseman shouldn't physically be possible to be as smooth out there as he is. I love his game and even with his playoff hype I still think he's one of the NHL's hidden gems.

Cousin Eddie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 12:01 PM
  #49
StayAtHomeAv
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dahrougem2 View Post
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.
You don't build a team of all youngsters, but when your core is that of guys who are U23 then it really doesn't make sense to add a 27 year old to the core, especially when you still need to find another youngster with a more potential.

This is the type of trade a team makes to complete a roster, not one at the start of a rebuild.

StayAtHomeAv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-30-2017, 12:01 PM
  #50
Bubba Thudd
Spinach Balls!
 
Bubba Thudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20,149
vCash: 6200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cousin Eddie View Post
Maybe we're overvaluing him, but I'm incredibly high on him. His possession stats have screamed #1D for a few years now. His offensive production is definitely something I'd like to see improve a little but he's still averaging 30pts per 82 games over the last 2 years which is great. That's while being one of the 5-10 best in the entire NHL at suppressing shots in that same time frame.

Plus the eye test passes with flying colors. a 6'4 defenseman shouldn't physically be possible to be as smooth out there as he is. I love his game and even with his playoff hype I still think he's one of the NHL's hidden gems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba Thudd View Post
If we traded Duchene for Ekholm, could we turn around and trade Ekholm for more than we'd ever get for Duchene???


Bubba Thudd 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 01:14 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.