Rumor: Avs Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents 18-19 part XX|All Aboard the Do Nothing Train!

[cgf]

omg the lessons they'll learn.

...last year was such a waste...

 

[Meeqs]

Losing in the first round would have a lot of value to this team this season.

Playoff experience is important and often underrated. However I don't feel like it comes close to the actual value of the assets we'd have to give up are.

 

[Foppa2118]

As opposed to Hayes, Stone is probably the level of player that makes sense to try to lock down before they hit UFA, by giving up the Avs 1st.

That's a very close call for me though. I think there's other fallback options they can pursue if they miss out on Stone in UFA, and they can still keep their 1st to possibly draft Knight and improve their goalie prospect pool.

Fortune may favor the bold in this case though.

 

[agentblack]

...last year was such a waste...

We made some money right? Z scored a goal...thats all i remember. NSH just used us a warmup.

 

[Meeqs]

I'm ok with our first going there if he's signed.

He's never signing in Ott to give them that leverage and control of his future. If he'll sign with us now, he'll sign with us in UFA. No reason to give up assets.

Its not surprising to see the Avs targeting him though. With the strong analytics department they have they'll know how dominant he has been this year.

 

[cgf]

Playoff experience is important and often underrated. However I don't feel like it comes close to the actual value of the assets we'd have to give up are.

At this point we'd need a second line and a goalie, so yeah it's too late to salvage the season unless Francouz can take over the job & galvanize the team...then getting a Hayes / Stone or some option with term, could make sense.

But I'm just saying: making the playoffs in back to back seasons for the first time since Sakic retired >>> our pick ending up 10th instead of 16th; even if we lose in round 1 again.

 

[Barklez]

That 2nd is a significant asset. Viewing picks through a very small sample size over multiple years with different scouts is the wrong way to go about it imo.

I'd say historically a pick in that range has about a 33-45% chance of becoming a solid NHL player.

And I'd say you're being overly optimistic. And we're both just guessing so it doesn't really matter.

I'm viewing the pick in the context in which we would have it. Which is at the end of a hugely long dry spell outside of the top 15. That's with this organization's scouting, which is all that matters.

The fact is, it literally has been that long since any of our picks outside of gimme's amounted to anything. So until they prove otherwise, I'm not going to value a pick in that range super highly for our organization.

It isn't a nothing asset, but it isn't enough for me to bite on that trade proposal. And realistically, neither team does that trade in real life so I'm not going to sweat over the details.