Value of: Landeskog to Ottawa

SENSational1

Registered User
Sep 26, 2015
54
0
Gatineau, Quebec
So the Avs take a hit at forward and D just to gain some quantity? Sure Chabot may end up being better that Barrie and maybe even EJ but no NHL GM is taking that gamble unless one of those two are about to have their contracts set to expire or if they demand a trade.

They are rebuilding. They will take a hit no matter what.

I've seen Chabot + 1rst for Landy/Duschene. That's included

Young roster player, like pageau, or dzingle, with good prospect.. maybe brown (would think about it) and maybe another 1rst, (I would offer a lower pick if Brown is included) for Johnson/Barrie. I think value is close-ish....
 

EdAVSfan

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 28, 2009
7,436
4,473
They are rebuilding. They will take a hit no matter what.

I've seen Chabot + 1rst for Landy/Duschene. That's included

Young roster player, like pageau, or dzingle, with good prospect.. maybe brown (would think about it) and maybe another 1rst, (I would offer a lower pick if Brown is included) for Johnson/Barrie. I think value is close-ish....

The avs are rumoured to be looking to move duchene or landeskog for d help and solution.

To follow it up with trading one of the few defenders we have makes little sense.

You can't just role out all d prospects during the season.
 

SENSational1

Registered User
Sep 26, 2015
54
0
Gatineau, Quebec
The avs are rumoured to be looking to move duchene or landeskog for d help and solution.

To follow it up with trading one of the few defenders we have makes little sense.

You can't just role out all d prospects during the season.

I agree with you. It doesn't make sense.

Which is why I don't think a trade happens between sens-avs. Sens aren't willing to let go of Chabot, I don't think.
 

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,161
37,363
They are rebuilding. They will take a hit no matter what.

I've seen Chabot + 1rst for Landy/Duschene. That's included

Young roster player, like pageau, or dzingle, with good prospect.. maybe brown (would think about it) and maybe another 1rst, (I would offer a lower pick if Brown is included) for Johnson/Barrie. I think value is close-ish....

Sure they're rebuilding but that doesn't mean they have to downgrade at forward and D for quantity. There needs to be some type of incentive in a trade regardless of the team's current position. The Avalanche aren't going to trade their best forward and best defenseman for an underwhelming abundance of futures. Chabot is a great prospect but you'd need multiple Chabot's to get the Avs to even come close to considering trading their best forward and best defenseman who both have some term and a friendly AAV in the same deal.
 

SpezDispenser

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
26,788
6,319
This isn't a case of Jason Spezza (yeah, I admit that I had fun reading the Sens board that time).

Aw...the pain of that trade reverberates through me monthly. And I was happy to move on from him, but the return...Damn NTC. We could have had Hornqvist +, but good old Spezza didn't want to play in Nashville.

In hindsight he probably had a better chance in Nashville. I hate NTCes. :(
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,886
9,829
Montreal, Canada
The gap between Larsson and Ceci is greater than Landy and Hall. Not to mention the consensus was that the Oilers got a bad return but they traded from a position of strength to shore up a position of weakness. Right now the avs have as big a hole on forwards as they do defence.

That's your opinion. Mine is that the gap between Hall and Landeskog is about the same as Larsson and Ceci. No problem recognizing that the gap is a bit bigger for the D-men though, but not at the point that this gap is worth 24 y/o speedster Ryan Dzingel plus picks (like the poster said)

I have like I said I'm from Ottawa. As I said he has to prove that he more than just a flash in the pan many players look good initially only to flame out when they get battled tested.

Dzingel looked good last season. This season he has looked great. His speed, skill, tenacity, IQ and even defensive awareness will make him an effective NHL forward. He's pretty similar to Carl Hagelin in fact and I have been saying that for a while.

WOW 2 assists maybe you should hold out For McDavid?

:laugh: ok I'll give you a mulligan for that immature comment :laugh:

... like I said he wouldn't be at risk to being exposed. If he was as good as you claim. Spez said there's a chance he would get exposed and there's a thread about it on your board.

Again, you totally misunderstood the whole discussion but whatever it is too far back now. I can guarantee you that Ceci is NOT going to be exposed at the expansion draft. Heck, I would almost bet one of my houses on it.

I read the Sens board enough and I haven't seen anyone suggest that the Sens should expose Ceci for the draft, even from his haters (because every player (except Alfie/Karlsson/Stone) has haters on the Sens board, that's how it is)

Either way it seems like he won't be a sens player next year. Either by trade or being exposed. The sens feel that the 31 year old Methot is more valuable then a top 4 minute munching defender that has offensive potential and is only 23 years old. It speaks volumes of how the sens perceive Ceci

What.the.heck. are you talking about? Are you trying to make as a fact some HF speculation? That's one of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen on HF and God knows how much crappy stuff I have been reading here :laugh:

Now please find quotes where what you are saying is linked to the REAL WORLD.

If they trade Ceci, it will be to ensure that they wouldn't lose Methot for nothing and to actually get a good young forward back. Hoping they find a way to keep everybody but hard to avoid the expansion draft rules.

Aw...the pain of that trade reverberates through me monthly. And I was happy to move on from him, but the return...Damn NTC. We could have had Hornqvist +, but good old Spezza didn't want to play in Nashville.

In hindsight he probably had a better chance in Nashville. I hate NTCes. :(

Yeah, Spezza should have just went to Nashville. Not sure if they would have still traded for Ryjo but they could have a great team with Ryjo, Spezza, Forsberg, Subban, Josi, etc.. Sens would have gotten Hornqvist and a 1st (maybe Larkin?). Would have been great if Ottawa could have gotten that for 1 year of Spezza. But like you said, damn NTC.

That being said, I wish the fanbase (and medias) learned about this because I'm sure they didn't help Spezza's value with all that scapegoating and "addition by subtraction" crap...
 

Freudian

Clearly deranged
Jul 3, 2003
50,521
17,494
Can people stop with the Hall for Larsson line of thinking for wanting to trade their average defenders for way too much? If that trade somehow set the market, everyone would try to trade middle pairing defenders at this point.

Ceci won't fetch Landeskog. Surely you guys realize how absurd that idea is?
 

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,161
37,363
Ottawa offers Cody Ceci, Colin White and a 2017 2nd for Landeskog.

Sakic said himself on the radio last week that he's looking for "High end D prospects". IF there's discussions with Ottawa it starts with Chabot.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
30,886
9,829
Montreal, Canada
Ben Harpur, Casey Bailey, Marcus Hogberg, Bobby Ryan + 1st 2017 for Landeskog.


BOOOOM!!:yo::D

I think Colorado would want more quality instead of quantity to offset Landeskog and Ryan difference in value (all around play, age, 1.75 cap hit difference)

Hogberg and the 1st are 2 quality pieces but I don't think they'd need a goalie prospect (and seriously he is the best Ottawa goalie prospect, they should keep him)

Bailey doesn't accomplish much and Harpur could be a 3rd pairing D-man but it doesn't give Colorado more incentive to do that deal.

So it's basically :

Bobby Ryan + 1st 2017 + Marcus Hogberg for Landeskog.

I'd say change Hogberg for Ceci and it starts making sense.

Can people stop with the Hall for Larsson line of thinking for wanting to trade their average defenders for way too much? If that trade somehow set the market, everyone would try to trade middle pairing defenders at this point.

Ceci won't fetch Landeskog. Surely you guys realize how absurd that idea is?

I haven't seen anyone propose that (could have missed some posts though)

Personally, my offer was :

Ryan + Ceci + 1st + Englund

for

Landeskog + Beauchemin

So it's Ryan + 1st + Englund on top of Ceci (and Ottawa takes a short term cap dump in Beauchemin to offset partially the difference in cap hit between Landeskog and Ryan)

But thinking about it, I'm probably biased because Landeskog is swedish. Ceci + 1st + Englund is a very big package to give up to upgrade Ryan to Landy

Note : it has to be mentioned that I would not looking at trading Ceci if there was not for the freaking expansion. But I don't want Ottawa to lose Methot so they have to trade Ceci for a young top-6 forward IMO.
 

EdAVSfan

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 28, 2009
7,436
4,473
I think Colorado would want more quality instead of quantity to offset Landeskog and Ryan difference in value (all around play, age, 1.75 cap hit difference)

Hogberg and the 1st are 2 quality pieces but I don't think they'd need a goalie prospect (and seriously he is the best Ottawa goalie prospect, they should keep him)

Bailey doesn't accomplish much and Harpur could be a 3rd pairing D-man but it doesn't give Colorado more incentive to do that deal.

So it's basically :

Bobby Ryan + 1st 2017 + Marcus Hogberg for Landeskog.

I'd say change Hogberg for Ceci and it starts making sense.



I haven't seen anyone propose that (could have missed some posts though)

Personally, my offer was :

Ryan + Ceci + 1st + Englund

for

Landeskog + Beauchemin

So it's Ryan + 1st + Englund on top of Ceci (and Ottawa takes a short term cap dump in Beauchemin to offset partially the difference in cap hit between Landeskog and Ryan)

But thinking about it, I'm probably biased because Landeskog is swedish. Ceci + 1st + Englund is a very big package to give up to upgrade Ryan to Landy

Note : it has to be mentioned that I would not looking at trading Ceci if there was not for the freaking expansion. But I don't want Ottawa to lose Methot so they have to trade Ceci for a young top-6 forward IMO.

For the same reason why Ottawa fans don't see Ceci as one of their 3 best d-men is most likely the same reasons Colorado wouldn't want to base a trade around him.
 

JoemAvs

Registered User
Jul 2, 2011
13,671
4,116
I think Colorado would want more quality instead of quantity to offset Landeskog and Ryan difference in value (all around play, age, 1.75 cap hit difference)

Hogberg and the 1st are 2 quality pieces but I don't think they'd need a goalie prospect (and seriously he is the best Ottawa goalie prospect, they should keep him)

Bailey doesn't accomplish much and Harpur could be a 3rd pairing D-man but it doesn't give Colorado more incentive to do that deal.

So it's basically :

Bobby Ryan + 1st 2017 + Marcus Hogberg for Landeskog.

I'd say change Hogberg for Ceci and it starts making sense.



I haven't seen anyone propose that (could have missed some posts though)

Personally, my offer was :

Ryan + Ceci + 1st + Englund

for

Landeskog + Beauchemin

So it's Ryan + 1st + Englund on top of Ceci (and Ottawa takes a short term cap dump in Beauchemin to offset partially the difference in cap hit between Landeskog and Ryan)

But thinking about it, I'm probably biased because Landeskog is swedish. Ceci + 1st + Englund is a very big package to give up to upgrade Ryan to Landy

Note : it has to be mentioned that I would not looking at trading Ceci if there was not for the freaking expansion. But I don't want Ottawa to lose Methot so they have to trade Ceci for a young top-6 forward IMO.


Thanks for the laugh :D.

Still funny that you are acting like Ryan has any value with his contract and that Ceci or one of your second or third tier prospects somehow will fetch you landeskog.

If the Sens want one of Landeskog and Duchene, the discussion starts and ends with Chabot.

If he is not in the offer, you shouldn't even bother.

Keeping guys like White or Brown (even though I am not a fan and don't want him at all) off the table is just homerism at its best.

Teams don't trade their young, best players on good contracts for second or third tier prospects and expendable roster players (and Ceci is just that right now. Nothing less but certainly nothing more)....
 

SpezDispenser

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
26,788
6,319
I agree with Avs posters unfortunately. Why would they even bother discussing duchene or Landeskog without Chabot and 1st coming back?
 

strictlyrandy

Registered User
Sep 9, 2013
3,955
977
Colorado
I feel like if Avs ever trade one of their big boys to Ottawa, from what I'm reading from Avs fans, Chabot is a must. I don't think Dorion ever makes that trade because of his infatuation with prospects. BUT, if a trade involving Chabot is on the table, as an armchair GM, I would only accept letting go of Chabot is if Johnson or Barrie is also coming back.

So package from the sens involving:
1rst round pick 2018, Chabot, roster player (not named EK65, Stone, Hoffman) and maybe another good prospect (not named White, Brown) and maybe other picks.
From Avs:
DucheSne/Landy
Barrie/Johnson

I'm sure Avs fans think sens add a lot more. But I just don't see Chabot leaving without a good Dman coming back. After him and maybe Euglund/Jaros, we are very thin on D prospects.

Like I said... I think this doesn't happen because Chabot isn't going anywhere. So... /thread?

LOL Chabot and meh for two of our top players?

ROR with 1 yr til UFA returned a substantial package. Duchene (stop with the Duchesne nonsense) will return a heftier package than that if traded.

Duchene for Chabot and a 1st is a realistic starting point value wise. Avs don't have to trade Duchene. If Ottawa wants him badly enough they will pay the price Sakic sets.

This isn't about fair value. If Duchene is moved, he'll be more than guaranteed to be best player in the deal, doesn't mean Avs will trade him for peanuts.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad