Jj Peterka à 46 point with 26 goal and with ELC contract for another year. Ostlund is a very good young C and à top 12 pick 2024 will be good. And with the cap is free for 8M you can have Drouin,Trenin Walker and Duhaime for some year and a second center for long time.
Mikko Rantanen - MOOSE - 96
- Thread starter Imppair
- Start date
So you are replacing a 100 point winger for a 46 point winger. What could go wrong?
Ostlund is an unknown as is the draft pick.
We are significantly worse in this scenerio. It’s not even close.
You can't prove that he has 130 goals period let alone over the last 3 years. The guy's a 2nd assist PP merchant.
Contrat, Cap Hit, Salaire, Statistiques - Noah Östlund - CapFriendly - Masses salariales LNH
Contrat, salaire, cap hit, salaire annuel moyen, gains en carrière, statistiques avancées, historique des mouvements et transactions, statut d'agent libre - Noah Östlund
fr.capfriendly.com
JJPeterka will be a 80 point winger with Mack as a center.
worse than our current 100M alignment perhaps. If all the current players without a contract sign a new contract the salary mass would be more than 100M.
- Jul 25, 2006
- 31,836
- 22,448
The cap will continue to go up. There should be a way to keep most of this players
Wait what? I can’t prove that he has 130 goals over the past 3 years when he literally has 130 goals the past 3 years?
What kind of mindfuxkery is this?
GeoRox89
Registered User
Contrat, Cap Hit, Salaire, Statistiques - Noah Östlund - CapFriendly - Masses salariales LNH
Contrat, salaire, cap hit, salaire annuel moyen, gains en carrière, statistiques avancées, historique des mouvements et transactions, statut d'agent libre - Noah Östlund
JJPeterka will be a 80 point winger with Mack as a center.
worse than our current 100M alignment perhaps. If all the current players without a contract sign a new contract the salary mass would be more than 100M.
80 points hey? That’s quite the claim
niwotsblessing
Registered User
I don't play on Cap Friendly so I do not have a granular view of our cap going forward, nor do I trust the prognostications regarding the cap. What I read on our Avs forum indicates that a bottleneck is coming sooner than the cap is rising, and it may have $13- mil plug in it.
My idea is not who should exchange it for but whether we should exchange it. a 12-13 M winger will prevent us from having 4 trios and 3 pairs of balanced defenders. we cannot have a 1st trio that plays 25 minutes per game during 82 games AND the series. it is surely possible to find a winger with an ELC salary or 3 to 5M in the long term (example: Drouin). Particularly with the little hope of quality in our young player (after Ritchie almost nothing)
Ottawa, New Jersey and Buffalo are 3 teams that must stop adding even very talented young people to look for quality veterans. They have space to sign Rantanen long term. a young top 6 (Peterka, Quinn, Mercer or Batherson) + young prospect and 1st pick.
- New Jersey: Mercer + Hotz + 1st 2024
-Buffalo: JJ Peterka+ (1 among Ostlund, Savoie, Kulich or Rosen)+ 1 st 2024
- Ottawa: Batherson + Jarventie and 1st 2024
Ottawa, New Jersey and Buffalo are 3 teams that must stop adding even very talented young people to look for quality veterans. They have space to sign Rantanen long term. a young top 6 (Peterka, Quinn, Mercer or Batherson) + young prospect and 1st pick.
- New Jersey: Mercer + Hotz + 1st 2024
-Buffalo: JJ Peterka+ (1 among Ostlund, Savoie, Kulich or Rosen)+ 1 st 2024
- Ottawa: Batherson + Jarventie and 1st 2024
Last edited:
- Jul 25, 2006
- 31,836
- 22,448
Cut cost else where, not by trading a top 10 player in the league. Switch Girard with cheaper 2nd pair D. Switch Colton with a cheaper 3C etc…Mikko isn’t going anywhere. I’m confident that the Avs management doesn’t think they have to trade Mikko to have depth
Avsfan1921
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2019
- 1,837
- 2,036
I’m not sure where I stand but I can see legit merits to both sides of the Rantanen argument. One thing I will say, is that the Avs have been good at finding middling depth at fair to good prices. We have not, however, been good at acquiring outside top end talent. That is to say we would likely have better results keeping Mikko and finding depth than we would replacing Mikko should we find out that we need more star power after the trade. It’s likely less risky to keep him and figure it out than let him go and figure it out, and this is before we even take the known team/line chemistry he provides into account.
You sound as if finding 100 point / 50 goal per season players is an easy thing.
Avsfan1921
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2019
- 1,837
- 2,036
That’s the literal exact opposite of what I’m saying.
Complete 180 from the text I wrote.
Absolute misinterpretation of my comment.
And that is why you find yourself in so many arguments, because you take people words and twist/misrepresent them.
It's just that some people here make it sound like 100-point wingers are dime in a dozen, just good assets to be traded.
Whereas 100-point centres are true unicorns, and must be kept at all costs.
Avsfan1921
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2019
- 1,837
- 2,036
Yes I agree they are very hard to find. Fortunately we are blessed to have many high end players but they cost a lot and there’s only so much cap to go around. That’s why there is legitimate discussion to be had. And again, I lean to keeping Rantanen but it’s not a forgone conclusion that this will net better results than a well rounded team with less superstars but still a fair share of them.
Dismissing the conversation as ludicrous while intentionally misrepresenting what others say is not a good way to be taken seriously or have quality conversation imo.
Freaky Styley
Registered User
I don't think anyone is saying that, and that's where a lot of the frustration is occurring.
We are saying that Rantanen is one-dimensional and really offers only production to our team. While that is a very important aspect to success and winning, we could replace Rantanen with a 70-80 point winger at a much cheaper price, while keeping the other elements of the team successful. Furthermore, unlike teams like Tampa Bay or Boston, in the context of our team, Colorado's offense does not run through our one-dimensional topline winger but instead he augments it. So while it might make sense for other teams to commit a huge chunk of their cap to a guy like Rants, it doesn't make as much sense for us. The only reason this idea is even being floated is because a Rantanen trade offers the largest cap savings from a single move, and prevents losing 2-3 other important each of the next couple of seasons.
We can continue to find Parise's/Tatar's/Coglianos/Kivirantas at league min, but we got really lucky with Drouin this year, that's not something we can continue to bank on going forward
Vaslof
Registered User
- Feb 1, 2017
- 5,160
- 3,999
70-80 point player would be top 30 in the league. You are not just going to find one for cheap. Or find one at all.
Freaky Styley
Registered User
I've stated previously in this thread (with statistical backing) that I believe Drouin could be that guy a full year next to MacKinnon. A guy like Seth Jarvis is another example. You are able to find those guys, or guys that are capable of those numbers for a fraction of the price. Zach Hyman, Carter Verhaghe... they exist - and that's without factoring the ~10 point bump players get from joining the Avs.
Just find a ~60-65 point guy and put him next to MacKinnon and he will get 70-80 points.
And in saying this I do believe it's easier to find one of those guys in a Rants trade than to find solid/reliable 3rd liners/2nd pair D to play for close to league min
To put it in simple terms, I think a large cohort of people believe we are a better team in the long run with the money to re-sign Drouin & Walker(or players like them) + a Rantanen trade return than we are with Rantanen + lower quality replacements for Drouin + Walker, and I think it's a valid argument/discussion. A smaller cohort just refuses to accept that line of thinking.
Last edited:
Foppa2118
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2003
- 52,431
- 31,724
Mikko can be a frustrating player at times, but I think a lot of that is just in the optics, when he falls down, or turns the puck over after waiting for a passing lane or something.
Even when he hasn’t played well this year, he has still done a lot of little things that help the team, and help his linemates have success.
Nate’s been the biggest factor in his own success this year, but in a nano second he would also tell you how many smart little plays Mikko has made to jump start his rushes, or put him in a good position to score in the O zone.
You can’t leach your way to 6th in points toward the end of the season. Or 40 goals and 100 points.
Drouin has played with Nate a lot this year, and has played very well himself, but he has half as many points as Mikko (52 less) for a reason.
Even when he hasn’t played well this year, he has still done a lot of little things that help the team, and help his linemates have success.
Nate’s been the biggest factor in his own success this year, but in a nano second he would also tell you how many smart little plays Mikko has made to jump start his rushes, or put him in a good position to score in the O zone.
You can’t leach your way to 6th in points toward the end of the season. Or 40 goals and 100 points.
Drouin has played with Nate a lot this year, and has played very well himself, but he has half as many points as Mikko (52 less) for a reason.
- Jan 18, 2016
- 34,313
- 25,564
Freaky Styley
Registered User
Drouin has played about 50% of his time now 5 on 5 with MacK, and wasn't a fixture on PP1 until recently. He's played about half of the time with Nate than Rantanen has.
I believe he's been on the top line the last 5 games.. he has 7 points (including 2 pointless nights)
Drouin has played 71 games this year... his first 36 (until Dec 31), he had 16 points. He's got 32 in his last 35, playing away from MacKinnon a lot of that time. The numbers match the eye test, he's been one of our best and most consistent forwards the last few months.
Things really started to click for him mid-December once he got adjusted and earned the trust of the coaching staff. It's amazing what a little confidence does for a talented player.
Last edited:
You’re assuming guys like Drouin or Seth Jarvis could put up 70 points next to Mackinnon while we KNOW that Rantanen can put up 50/100 with him.
You’re willing to gamble on trading away an elite scorer and a guy who has crazy chemistry with the best player in the world for a maybe? That’s not a gamble I would be willing to take.
Guys like Jonathan Drouin and Seth Jarvis can had had every single year. They can be had because they are league average players who don’t move the needle at all.
Whereas guys like Rantanen are NEVER available for trade or in free agency.
We traded O’Reilly becauae we didn’t want to pay him and we instantly became worse.
And that large cohort of people who believe we would be better off without Rantanen are flat out wrong.
We trade:
Mikko Rantanen (extended for 8x12.5)
For:
50-60 point player signed for +/- 5 mil
A good prospect
Top 15 draft pick
Jonathan Drouin (signed for 3x4)
Sean Walker (signed for 4x4)
With Rantanen:
Lehkonen- Mackinnon- Rantanen
Landeskog- Mittlestadt- Nichuskin
Wood- Colton- Kovalenko
4th line - who cares. They play 5 minutes a night
Toews - Makar
Girard - Manson
Bottom pair- who cares
Georgiev
Annunen
Without Rantanen:
Drouin- Mackinnon- Nichushkin
Landeskog- Mittlestadt- 50 point player from trade
Lehkonen- Colton- Kovalenko
Wood- Who cares
Toews - Makar
Girard - Manson
? - Walker
Georgiev
Annunen
I’m still keeping Rantanen without a doubt.
Freaky Styley
Registered User
I guess this is where we differ, I do care because it's exactly these matchups that get exposed in the playoffs, not to mention they are the guys needed to play larger roles when injuries happen. This is also disregarding the changes that would be needed to change up the lineup. We can't physically ice a lineup with all of Lehkonen/Colton/Manson/Girard next year like in your first example - this has been shown to you ad naseum. Plus if the 4th line is playing 5 minutes a night it means our top guys are playing even more minutes, and it was clear last year that this wore them out and wasn't effective. In fact, your entire strategy was more or less played out last year and we had proof what lack of depth leads to, especially when injuries hit.
If you don't trust me, trust Bednar. He literally said at a presser following the deadline "You're not winning solely because of depth, but you're definitely not winning without it"
I also don't think my Jarvis/Drouin numbers are assumptions. They are projections based on very real stastical data, added to the eye test that these guys are plain and simple talented top-6 NHL-level players, with a lot more ability than they have shown yet in the league (each for different reasons). Plus Jarvis can PK.
So yes, I'd definitely take your 2nd example especially if that forward return included Jarvis as the guy. That doesn't make me wrong, it just means we disagree.
Last edited:
