Value of: 16th + to move into the top 10

Digitalbooya

By order of the Peaky Blinders
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2010
26,621
7,387
Wisconsin
I'd consider that as an Avs fan, but as stated a lot of people aren't a fan of the uncertainty Barrie's contract provides. Maybe send a small cap dump back too? Gagne or Manning?
That doesn’t offset that Barrie is not signed. Way too much risk for Edmonton.
 

Djp

Registered User
Jul 28, 2012
24,031
5,708
Alexandria, VA
it will cost you a TON

huge difference between 5-10 and 16. there is a hig difference between 5 and 10,

the stuff ut would cost you you wouldnt want to give up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meeqs

Goulet17

Registered User
May 22, 2003
7,944
3,788
The Avs are probably better served trying to move to the 12th or 13th selection based on a particular prospect that they like who may be dropping. To move up to 12th or 13th, it likely would cost the Avs the 16th plus their second round selection. Of course, they would need a willing dance partner.
 

Meeqs

Registered User
Aug 23, 2012
9,295
1,677
USA
I highly doubt it, there is a big gap between the 2 spots but 16 will still have great options open where the Avs are happy to take there.

If anything I think the conversation about moving down 1-3 spots at 4 is more interesting should Chi not take Byram
 

Patagonia

Keep Whining
Jan 6, 2017
7,624
3,246
16th + Barrie

8th + Larsson + Puljujavri

Only way I'd move that pick is upgrading RD

AVs would likely make this deal, might be backwards for the Oilers.

I believe maybe a few spots higher 11-15 could be interested, but the talent in this range is so close don't believe any team would offer any player of significance to swap picks.
 

57special

Posting the right way since 2012.
Sep 5, 2012
48,423
20,166
MN
Add another pick or player?

1st-16
Kerfoot
2nd- 47h (maybe?)

Don't see that significant player in the 10-16 range unless a player falls ie. Podkolzin, Turcotte or Krebs.
Disagree. The talent drop off is somewhere around #13, depending on what D are taken before. If the Avs are open to taking a D, then no need to move up.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
26,591
9,999
Would anyone in the 5-10 range be willing to trade down to 16 and if so, what would need to be added to 16?
Why would Colorado be looking to add more 18 year olds when they should be looking to improve their roster right now to take advantage of MacKinnons cap hit?

More likely that they should be in the market to move a combination of 16OA, Bowers, Kaut, Jost, Barrie for something that improves their team in the here and now.

Like a second line to complement MacKinnon. Like a Carter or Schenn type move that LA and STL made.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad