Rumor: Avs Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents 18-19 part XIV| Trade Everyone!

[cgf]

It's lost in the HF lore now.

The posts were all deleted, but yes, that did happen. Doesn't matter if you believe it or not though.

I still have PMs from the winter of 2016-2017...

 

[henchman21]

There is no sense in crying over spilt or saved milk. IMO Roy would have had a different looking team if he had his way, but it is a complete unknown if it would have been a disaster or a success. At this point it was years and years ago... let it go.

 

[Murzu]

There is no sense in crying over spilt or saved milk. IMO Roy would have had a different looking team if he had his way, but it is a complete unknown if it would have been a disaster or a success. At this point it was years and years ago... let it go.

I'll never let go of the past! We should had traded Stastny at the trade deadline for 2nd round pick!! #AssetManagement

 

[5280]

I think there was an article from dater that talked about it around this time last year. Tried a quick google search but couldn’t find it. Probably not 100% accurate but it was about how bednar had an one on one conversation with MacKinnon after a bad game and just told him to try and stay even keeled, stop getting so mad all the time for the sake of his teammates or something like that. Maybe someone that’s subscribed to bsn could give a more detailed post.

IIRC I read/heard Sakic played a big role in helping him out, too.

 

[cgf]

There is no sense in crying over spilt or saved milk. IMO Roy would have had a different looking team if he had his way, but it is a complete unknown if it would have been a disaster or a success. At this point it was years and years ago... let it go.

But...sasha...

Did you see/read his interview with Panarin? How can I let that loveable bastard go!

 

[Sea Eagles]

Hope Super Joe is looking at a team like St Louis. They have an abundance of talent. They have for years. Their problem is turnover. They keep changing things too drastically, too quickly. The best thing about our team at present is consistency. We seem to make small adjustments and tweaks. Therefore, I'm hoping Sakic does his best to keep this group together, allow it to grow and continue to build chemistry, synergy & culture.

I'd be happy with one solo add per season, but not at the expense of one of our core guys (like Barrie). Move picks only, or attain through free agency.

When a guy like Andrighetto is on the bench, or another like Barberio / Grubauer, you know your club is faring pretty well.

 

[Avs44]

Hope Super Joe is looking at a team like St Louis. They have an abundance of talent. They have for years. Their problem is turnover. They keep changing things too drastically, too quickly. The best thing about our team at present is consistency. We seem to make small adjustments and tweaks. Therefore, I'm hoping Sakic does his best to keep this group together, allow it to grow and continue to build chemistry, synergy & culture.

That's not what happened in St. Louis. Their recent moves are not the reason they are struggling -- they are a response to their struggles due to the decline of key players, whose primes they let slip away in exchange for nothing.

They are the prime example of why teams should be aggressive when they have the opportunity. Their management sat around and did nothing while key players like Backes, Steen and Bouwmeester went through and exited their primes; never made a move to add a #1 centre; never made a move to add the #1 goalie they so desperately needed, other than acquiring a star goalie at the deadline but who was already past his prime and who never really settled in.

The Blues were once a pretty loaded team. They had a chance to win a Stanley Cup when Backes, Steen, and Bouwmeester were in their primes; Pietrangelo was a young #1; Taresenko and Schwartz were young and emerging; Shattenkirk was a great #3; and Oshie, Perron, and Berglund were providing solid depth. Practically all they did was try to draft, develop, and be patient. But they never leveraged some of the assets they had to try to address key issues. And they won absolutely nothing because, despite having several fantastic players, they did nothing.

Now here they are a few years later...Steen has declined, Backes is gone (and done), Bouwmeester is done. Oshie and Shattenkirk have been traded. Stastny was brought in too late to plug a gap he wasn't suited to (#1 centre) and was traded. The young emerging core they had - Schwartz, Taresenko, and Pietrangelo - are still there and in the midst of their current primes...but they lost all that depth they had around them, and spent this past off-season trying to recapture it by bringing in ROR, Bozak, and even Perron once again, just like they brought in Schenn the prior year. The Blues are what happens when you have a good team but are too passive to take it to the next level: time passes really really quickly, and even if you still have good players on your team (e.g. Taresenko, Pietrangelo) it starts to feel a little too late and a retool beckons.

The LA Kings were a prime example of doing the opposite of the Blues, and their aggressiveness turned into two Stanley Cups.

 

[flyfysher]

That's not what happened in St. Louis. Their recent moves are not the reason they are struggling -- they are a response to their struggles due to the decline of key players, whose primes they let slip away in exchange for nothing.

They are the prime example of why teams should be aggressive when they have the opportunity. Their management sat around and did nothing while key players like Backes, Steen and Bouwmeester went through and exited their primes; never made a move to add a #1 centre; never made a move to add the #1 goalie they so desperately needed, other than acquiring a star goalie at the deadline but who was already past his prime and who never really settled in.

The Blues were once a pretty loaded team. They had a chance to win a Stanley Cup when Backes, Steen, and Bouwmeester were in their primes; Pietrangelo was a young #1; Taresenko and Schwartz were young and emerging; Shattenkirk was a great #3; and Oshie, Perron, and Berglund were providing solid depth. Practically all they did was try to draft, develop, and be patient. But they never leveraged some of the assets they had to try to address key issues. And they won absolutely nothing because, despite having several fantastic players, they did nothing.

Now here they are a few years later...Steen has declined, Backes is gone (and done), Bouwmeester is done. Oshie and Shattenkirk have been traded. Stastny was brought in too late to plug a gap he wasn't suited to (#1 centre) and was traded. The young emerging core they had - Schwartz, Taresenko, and Pietrangelo - are still there and in the midst of their current primes...but they lost all that depth they had around them, and spent this past off-season trying to recapture it by bringing in ROR, Bozak, and even Perron once again, just like they brought in Schenn the prior year. The Blues are what happens when you have a good team but are too passive to take it to the next level: time passes really really quickly, and even if you still have good players on your team (e.g. Taresenko, Pietrangelo) it starts to feel a little too late and a retool beckons.

The LA Kings were a prime example of doing the opposite of the Blues, and their aggressiveness turned into two Stanley Cups.

I don't see the Avs as being near the position that the Blues were in as you described. How far off do you think the Avs are from that position?

 

[Avs44]

I don't see the Avs as being near the position that the Blues were in as you described. How far off do you think the Avs are from that position?

I didn't say they were. It's just something, as henchy pointed out the other day I believe, to keep in mind. The time at the top can be pretty brief given the parity in the league and you sort of have to capture the opportunity for success when it presents itself and turn it into something meaningful.

I'm guessing the Blues back in the early 2010s looked at their quality veterans, looked at their rising young stars in Pietrangelo, Schwartz, and Tarasenko, and thought they were set for a pretty long time. Now they've gone through a couple coaches, they still haven't won anything in the playoffs, and Tarasenko, Schwartz, and Pietrangelo are suddenly in their prime seasons right now.

 

[Hasbro]

Nah we would’ve had Chabot. Roy has a duchene trade lined up that would’ve been Duchene for Zibanejad and Chabot.

That would have been a good trade.

Instead Sakic got a great one.

 

[Balthazar]

That would have been a good trade.

Instead Sakic got a great one.

It's too early to tell which one is better than the other. I'm a big Girard fan and we still have their 1st pick but Chabot + a young legit 2C is quite a return.

 

[Avsboy]

Chabot will cool down. The trades are about even, depending on how high that pick is.

 

[cgf]

It's too early to tell which one is better than the other. I'm a big Girard fan and we still have their 1st pick but Chabot + a young legit 2C is quite a return.

Zibby's a legit 1C, just not a high-end one. He's one of the guys that I'd be happy to trade for at the draft.

 

[CobraAcesS]

Zibby's a legit 1C, just not a high-end one. He's one of the guys that I'd be happy to trade for at the draft.

They should do it in season lol. That team needs a high pick, not to be making the playoffs. Every time I see a team making the playoffs overachieving like that I think of the couple of years we did it and missed out on much needed talent drafting defense.

 

[Balthazar]

Chabot will cool down.

Of course. He won't score 100 points (just like Rants won't score 136).

The question is: is he this year's Will Butcher or he's currently proving his former label of "best dman not in the NHL".

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Zibby's a legit 1C, just not a high-end one. He's one of the guys that I'd be happy to trade for at the draft.

Zibanejad centering Kerf and Jost would really change our 2nd line dynamics. JTC with Soda for a strong defensive third line. If only.

 

[cgf]

They should do it in season lol. That team needs a high pick, not to be making the playoffs. Every time I see a team making the playoffs overachieving like that I think of the couple of years we did it and missed out on much needed talent drafting defense.

Yeah, since a lot of them are Knicks fans I really feel for those guys. Thankfully not-tanking hard enough isn't as deadly in hockey if you have capable scouts.

 

[cgf]

Zibanejad centering Kerf and Jost would really change our 2nd line dynamics. JTC with Soda for a strong defensive third line. If only.

Jost - Zibanejad - Kerfoot*
Calvert - Soda - Jimmothy*
Andrighetto - Kam - Kaut*
( Greer / LBN / Gork )


I can dig it

 

[CobraAcesS]

Yeah, since a lot of them are Knicks fans I really feel for those guys. Thankfully not-tanking hard enough isn't as deadly in hockey if you have capable scouts.

I keep telling my wife not to expect to find players like Lindstrom and Datsyuk in late rounds lol, they need to actually draft high if they want this rebuild to not last forever. Yeah I think some teams might still pull really good players from deep in the draft, but not stars IMO.

Yeah I think drafting is important, but at 17/18 they're all lottery tickets.

 

[Sea Eagles]

That's not what happened in St. Louis. Their recent moves are not the reason they are struggling -- they are a response to their struggles due to the decline of key players, whose primes they let slip away in exchange for nothing.

They are the prime example of why teams should be aggressive when they have the opportunity. Their management sat around and did nothing while key players like Backes, Steen and Bouwmeester went through and exited their primes; never made a move to add a #1 centre; never made a move to add the #1 goalie they so desperately needed, other than acquiring a star goalie at the deadline but who was already past his prime and who never really settled in.

The Blues were once a pretty loaded team. They had a chance to win a Stanley Cup when Backes, Steen, and Bouwmeester were in their primes; Pietrangelo was a young #1; Taresenko and Schwartz were young and emerging; Shattenkirk was a great #3; and Oshie, Perron, and Berglund were providing solid depth. Practically all they did was try to draft, develop, and be patient. But they never leveraged some of the assets they had to try to address key issues. And they won absolutely nothing because, despite having several fantastic players, they did nothing.

Now here they are a few years later...Steen has declined, Backes is gone (and done), Bouwmeester is done. Oshie and Shattenkirk have been traded. Stastny was brought in too late to plug a gap he wasn't suited to (#1 centre) and was traded. The young emerging core they had - Schwartz, Taresenko, and Pietrangelo - are still there and in the midst of their current primes...but they lost all that depth they had around them, and spent this past off-season trying to recapture it by bringing in ROR, Bozak, and even Perron once again, just like they brought in Schenn the prior year. The Blues are what happens when you have a good team but are too passive to take it to the next level: time passes really really quickly, and even if you still have good players on your team (e.g. Taresenko, Pietrangelo) it starts to feel a little too late and a retool beckons.

The LA Kings were a prime example of doing the opposite of the Blues, and their aggressiveness turned into two Stanley Cups.

Hmmm, I get what you are saying, but where does a club draw that proverbial line in the sand between bringing in extra talent, and developing what they have?

Here's what I mean by the risks of change:
One of my favorite players on this time. Alexander Kerfoot. I got told all off season how his best was on show, and that he should be traded for something better. Aren't we all glad this didn't happen? Kid has 17 points in 22 games - on track for 64 points. Hey, I was also in the boat that I was happy with our entire team, but needed that second line fixed, so I've some what changed by tune there as well.

Do you trade a "young" D-man like Barrie (who adds SO much to our team - right now), for potential in Timmins / Makar, so you can move a potential 64 points 2nd line center for someone like Nylander, commanding 8M per, who'd score similar points? Heck, I stated Kerfoot put up similar numbers to Skinner last season, which is why he should have been given much more respect by our hockey audience, but I was laughed at. VERY under rated player. Kid has both skill, and wheels (but is also great defensively).

Okay, how about this. I'd be happy upgrading "supplementary" players rather than core players, to improve the team. The issue I have with that, is what is core, and what is supplementary? Unlike most, I think guys like Kerfoot, Kamenev, Compher, Zadorov are core, as well as the typical players everyone else would normally say. The reason I say that, is these players play particular roles, and do it bloody well. They are easily replaced I hear people say. But do these new players have the chemistry with the team like our existing ones do.

I go back to the fact that our team was once motoring along at one point. We got over excited, traded Downie, and brought in Comeau. Both great (in my opinion) players in their own rights and roles, but it began our slide in my view. If Sakic just held the group together back then, I think we take that next step.

Again, I get what your saying, and agree on many levels. But it's a fine line Avs44. Tinker, great (i.e. Cole in, Lindholm back to minors, Barbs 7th guy), but don't go crazy. I do still think The Blues have had too much change, but we can agree to disagree on that.

 

[cgf]

I keep telling my wife not to expect to find players like Lindstrom and Datsyuk in late rounds lol, they need to actually draft high if they want this rebuild to not last forever. Yeah I think some teams might still pull really good players from deep in the draft, but not stars IMO.

Yeah I think drafting is important, but at 17/18 they're all lottery tickets.

Yeah, but stars aren't as important in the NHL as they are in the NBA. McDavid isn't dragging a group of bums to the finals for a decade, ya know? Yes we love the bottle kids, but there's 3 of them, and we have a good blueline core behind them. In the NBA Porzingis had the knicks in the 9th seed on his own when he got hurt last year, and that with a bad coach.

You need top picks to find stars, but you don't find Mikko Rantanen's 10th overall in the NBA draft. There you're happy with a quality role-player. While in the NHL being able to nail top 40 picks can populate your prospect pool pretty damn quickly...even if you're unlikely to get star talent without those top 5 picks.

 

[CobraAcesS]

Yeah, but stars aren't as important in the NHL as they are in the NBA. McDavid isn't dragging a group of bums to the finals for a decade, ya know? Yes we love the bottle kids, but there's 3 of them, and we have a good blueline core behind them. In the NBA Porzingis had the knicks in the 9th seed on his own when he got hurt last year, and that with a bad coach.

You need top picks to find stars, but you don't find Mikko Rantanen's 10th overall in the NBA draft. There you're happy with a quality role-player. While in the NHL being able to nail top 40 picks can populate your prospect pool pretty damn quickly...even if you're unlikely to get star talent without those top 5 picks.

I think you still need stars in the playoffs. Maybe not elite of the elite, but you need your core players to be rock solid in their positions, and if you're missing one then you need rock solid quality depth at that position.

 

[PAZ]

Do you trade a "young" D-man like Barrie (who adds SO much to our team - right now), for potential in Timmins / Makar, so you can move a potential 64 points 2nd line center for someone like Nylander, commanding 8M per, who'd score similar points? Heck, I stated Kerfoot put up similar numbers to Skinner last season, which is why he should have been given much more respect by our hockey audience, but I was laughed at. VERY under rated player. Kid has both skill, and wheels (but is also great defensively).

Okay, how about this. I'd be happy upgrading "supplementary" players rather than core players, to improve the team. The issue I have with that, is what is core, and what is supplementary? Unlike most, I think guys like Kerfoot, Kamenev, Compher, Zadorov are core, as well as the typical players everyone else would normally say. The reason I say that, is these players play particular roles, and do it bloody well. They are easily replaced I hear people say. But do these new players have the chemistry with the team like our existing ones do.

I mean... Skinner has 25 points and as many goals as Kerfoot has points. He benefits from playing from Eichel, but you can't compare Skinner to Kerfoot. It's like Flames fans comparing Monahan to Mackinnon.

 

[cgf]

I think you still need stars in the playoffs. Maybe not elite of the elite, but you need your core players to be rock solid in their positions, and if you're missing one then you need rock solid quality depth at that position.

True but you can get rock solid later in the top 40. And if you hoard picks / prospects for a minute you’ll have the ammo to go out & grab a ROR, Zibby, or EJ.

So yeah the Rags need a couple elite talents, but the lotto gods are fickle. If they spend another two years with bottom 10 records they could have the high end talent & the depth of good-to-really good talent. Nevermind if they get a Girard out of one of their SRPs.

Let’s say that around the TDL we trade our 1st, Timmins and a conditional first that becomes a second if we miss the playoffs next year for Zibby. But end up picking 5th or 6th with their own pick. Add a FRP for Kreider & maybe one for Hayes, throw a brinks truck at Panarin in the summer, collect another top 10 pick next year, and there could be something brewing there if they don’t waste their picks.

 

[CobraAcesS]

True but you can get rock solid later in the top 40. And if you hoard picks / prospects for a minute you’ll have the ammo to go out & grab a ROR, Zibby, or EJ.

So yeah the Rags need a couple elite talents, but the lotto gods are fickle. If they spend another two years with bottom 10 records they could have the high end talent & the depth of good-to-really good talent. Nevermind if they get a Girard out of one of their SRPs.

Well they got lucky with McD, Stepan, and Hank.. But it didn't win them a cup, and they were never able to trade for or sign that impact star who still had mileage left. Richards and Nash being the obvious reference there. I'm just not sure they're going to avoid the same fate unless they draft the right players top five for a couple of years.