I'm not talking about the assets given up to get him--I get the Avs overpaid (and I don't think it was Burke who negotiated that, it was Treliving) it was when Sakic dealt him away for Rocco Grimaldi AFTER he had become a depreciated asset. Say what you will about Grimaldi but he's an ace AHL player, and that's a great asset to have in the organization.
He'd be in San Antonio right now if not for the fact that the affiliate is being shared.
Neither of you are gonna convince me that he has zero or negative value in a season where journeyman goaltender Michael Leighton, sporting a stellar .869 Save % this season in the AHL, was traded for as an insurance policy, and NHL washout Antti Niemi is being passed around the league like a hot potato in goalie pads despite proving multiple times he's no longer remotely NHL-capable. It's not like he's making some insane amount of money either.
What did Pitt give for Leighton? Nothing. It was Archibald and a 6th for a 4th plus two contracts on each side. Leighton is an insurance policy alright. In the AHL. Niemi? Just like you said; Passed around. For nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Hammond is at most worth a 7th-rounder. Wouldn't surprise me at all if it ends up being conditional, ie nothing, if he's traded. And right now Hammond's caphit is actually an issue for some teams. We'd have to retain 50%. Also, if he's able to trade Hammond, it shuts the door on a possible Bernier-trade. Throwing a hissyfit because Hammond, the guy Ottawa had to include a 3rd for us to take, isn't traded is plain stupid.
Barberio? Maybe a 6th. Because of the options we have on D, he'd be a realistic trade-option, imo.
Comeau and Bernier? These guys are interesting. Both should be traded, imo. Their worth? I'm guessing a 4th each, maybe a 3rd if somebody's really desperate. If either are not traded, the only valid reason is if they're re-signed. Or by some miracle we're legitimately in the playoffrace, of course.
My take on last year's deadline and the UFA's; They obviously saw the issue with the lockerroom and were willing to pay to give away Iginla. Beauchemin and his contract at the time made him untradeable. Simple as that. Guys like Mitchell, Tyutin, Bourque, Wiercioch, Grigorenko, Goloubef and Gelinas had absolutely zero value. If the Avs had been offered a conditional 7th, again meaning nothing, I feel pretty sure they would have taken it just to be rid of a few of them. At the time I was mad because none of them were traded, but with the season they had as individuals and a team, I understand that other teams wouldn't go near them.
Regarding Sakic's trades, non-trades or signings, it's the moves from the Roykic-era that are the worst; Berra- and Stuart-trades were awful, Iginla and Beauch-signings were worse, even though most of HFAvs were more than ok with the latter two. If the rumored Duchene-trade with Ottawa is true, then that's also a bad non-move, despite him getting an absolute haul for him when he made the trade.
In the long run for this franchise it was a very good thing Sakic wisened up and went in a direction which made Roy leave (yes, I know if Roy had been in charge, the rumored Duchene-trade probably would have gone through). He wanted to build a Kings ala Sutter, the direct opposite way the NHL turned out to go these last years, and a thing as bad as having a Melnyk as an owner is having a Head Coach with an upper management position in addition (Roy/Tippett). Those are two completely different roles and should not be mixed.
If you want it to be your mission to be angry at Sakic, him not being able to squeeze out a 6th- or 7th-rounder at the deadline or trading Hammond for an actual asset isn't a problem, imo. It's keeping around guys like Billington, most of the pro- and amateur scouting staffs. The Avs will have a good opportunity starting next year with the Eagles, but I don't trust them to take advantage of it and start churning out some home-grown talent. I'll believe it when I see it.
Of course the above starts with the actual draft and the results speak for themselves. Outside the top ten it's horrendous. Nothing less. I'll give it to Roy, though; The draft is one place he, by getting the right people in, might have had a positive influence. The disastrous 2014 draft was Pracey's last kick at the can, the 2015 draft which right now looks quite promising was riddled with Q or Q-linked players, while the 2016 draft where Roy had been stripped of his say looks like utter crap after Jost. 2017 is impossible to say for a while. I wonder how much Mesonero had to say with those 2015 picks, because it sure looks to me he has been ignored ever since Roy was out of the picture. '16 and '17 gave us zero Q-players, only the token camp invitees. Another negative thing with Hepple is his goalie-strategy. I don't want to use a 1st-rounder on a goalie, but the whole unknown-second-year-eligible-euro-goalie-in-the-late-rounds isn't any better of a strategy.
To sum up this sho..., uhm, long novel;
- Sakic not being able to trade Hammond or aquiring a couple of 6th/7th-rounders last deadline is a complete non-issue.
- Him keeping guys like Billington, Hepple, pro scouting staff etc around is an issue. A big one at that.
- All in all; He's learned from his earlier mistakes and getting Roy out was a big plus for the long-term health of this organization. I hope he'll also wise up about point #2.
