Rumor: AVS Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents & Related Topics 2016-17 Part XVI

[RockLobster]

Wait have they even made an offer(s)? I can't remember the last time I heard or read 'the Avs are in on college FA X' and I definetely don't remember the last time I heard 'it's down to the Avs and teams x,y,z for FA ___'

It was down to the Avs and Rangers for Kevin Hayes. The Avs wouldn't guarantee a roster spot and the Rangers would, so that was the difference.

The Avs were also trying on Alex Lyon (goaltender for Philadelphia), but again, didn't make the offers that were ultimately necessary, like Philadelphia did.

 

[dahrougem2]

You know, this narrative is totally baseless. They have been in on multiple collegiate FA's and most of those players choose to go to the team of their choice. Most of those kids would want to be a part of a team with a generational talent like McDavid, on an iconic team like the Rangers, or part of a team that is already in the playoff hunt. It's not just about them being promised something, and even if it was, I am glad we have a GM that views them as rookies that need to earn a roster spot in the NHL.

You enjoy Sakic's mentality?

That mentality is why we strike out on those FA's. It's a stupid way to do business. So what you promise the kid a spot on the NHL roster. There are 13/14 forward slots available. Is promising ONE spot to a kid really going to derail your entire forward corps? Of course it isn't.

Kevin Hayes is just one player, but even that one player would go a hell of a long way to improving the depth on this team. His 44 points on this season would be tied with MacKinnon for the team lead. If it comes down to promising a spot to a kid or not, you promise them a spot. If they flame out, who cares? At least you would have gotten a free asset. It's not like you're promising this player a roster spot for 3+ years. If it's beyond evident the player can't cut it in the NHL, they'll be either sent to the AHL, traded, or not re-signed when their contract is up. And if they prove they can then you have added to your team's depth.

Thinking like Sakic is a stupid way to do business.

 

[xbestboybandever]

You enjoy Sakic's mentality?

That mentality is why we strike out on those FA's. It's a stupid way to do business. So what you promise the kid a spot on the NHL roster. There are 13/14 forward slots available. Is promising ONE spot to a kid really going to derail your entire forward corps? Of course it isn't.

Kevin Hayes is just one player, but even that one player would go a hell of a long way to improving the depth on this team. His 44 points on this season would be tied with MacKinnon for the team lead. If it comes down to promising a spot to a kid or not, you promise them a spot. If they flame out, who cares? At least you would have gotten a free asset. It's not like you're promising this player a roster spot for 3+ years. If it's beyond evident the player can't cut it in the NHL, they'll be either sent to the AHL, traded, or not re-signed when their contract is up. And if they prove they can then you have added to your team's depth.

Thinking like Sakic is a stupid way to do business.

And what happens if that kid comes in and isn't on of the top 13/14 forwards? Comparing a player like Hayes this year to anyone on our team is comparing apples and oranges. You can't gauge how a player is going to perform and I would rather have a GM tell a kid he's got to earn a roster spot rather then promise him one and deal with the fallout of him not making the NHL roster. I'm not saying having a player like Hayes wouldn't be helpful. I just think all of this "just make a better offer" is a simplistic way of looking at a complicated situation. The player is a FREE AGENT. He is free to sign with any team he pleases. I also feel like having an opportunity to suit up for a team like the Rangers has a much bigger draw than being promised a spot on the Colorado Avalanche. Look no further than the Kevin Shattenkirk rumors that are circulating. Let's say he wants to play in New York and only New York like is being reported, Joe Sakic says "I'll give you $10M a year for 7 years." Shattenkirk takes the lower deal, the offer Sakic put out never comes out, and everyone will be claiming Sakic didn't try hard enough, when fact of the matter is, some players already have a destination picked.

This is just the mentality of the board as a whole. No matter what Sakic does, it's not good enough.

 

[Sea Eagles]

And what happens if that kid comes in and isn't on of the top 13/14 forwards? Comparing a player like Hayes this year to anyone on our team is comparing apples and oranges. You can't gauge how a player is going to perform and I would rather have a GM tell a kid he's got to earn a roster spot rather then promise him one and deal with the fallout of him not making the NHL roster. I'm not saying having a player like Hayes wouldn't be helpful. I just think all of this "just make a better offer" is a simplistic way of looking at a complicated situation. The player is a FREE AGENT. He is free to sign with any team he pleases. I also feel like having an opportunity to suit up for a team like the Rangers has a much bigger draw than being promised a spot on the Colorado Avalanche. Look no further than the Kevin Shattenkirk rumors that are circulating. Let's say he wants to play in New York and only New York like is being reported, Joe Sakic says "I'll give you $10M a year for 7 years." Shattenkirk takes the lower deal, the offer Sakic put out never comes out, and everyone will be claiming Sakic didn't try hard enough, when fact of the matter is, some players already have a destination picked.

This is just the mentality of the board as a whole. No matter what Sakic does, it's not good enough.

And in this instance, it hasn't been mate. Sakic has completely dismantled this team, to the point The Colorado Avalanche are the laughing stock of the entire League.

Whether it's taking bad advice. Whether it's accepting mediocrity from scouts. Whether it's drafting, claiming, acquiring average (or other teams off cuts) ..... the product we have right now (which is relatively full strength, and full spent), is completely non entertaining, lacks passion, lacks pride, lacks effort & any sense of what that Avs jersey stands for.

This is his, Roy's (who he hired), and Billington's (who he kept around), and Bednar (and coaching staff) who he hired's machine. They built this crap. Now, they should be held to account for it, and the problem is, they aren't. They are so blind to it all, they even pat themselves on the back for it, with the, "we know what we have in this locker room", and "we know the talent we have" and the "I like the team we have" and all of that.

 

[McMetal]

I remain skeptical of making promises to NCAA free agents. Unless they are Vesey level guys who are sure things to be at least third liners, I don't see why you would ever promise a roster spot to a kid who hasn't played a game in the NHL. What if we had promised that to Compher? He wasn't ready at training camp. Did everybody want to just keep him in the NHL instead of developing in the minors just because we promised him he wouldn't go there? That's bad both short and long term.

And if the answer to that is "Send him down anyway" then I must be confused as to the definition of the word "promise". If we make a promise, and don't keep it, won't that poison the well for future free agents that we make these extravagant promises to?

And another question for the "Say anything to get the player" crowd. Do you really trust our scouts to identify players who are sure things and are worth making these promises to? We don't exactly have a stellar track record on this front either.

 

[avs1dacup]

I remain skeptical of making promises to NCAA free agents. Unless they are Vesey level guys who are sure things to be at least third liners, I don't see why you would ever promise a roster spot to a kid who hasn't played a game in the NHL. What if we had promised that to Compher? He wasn't ready at training camp. Did everybody want to just keep him in the NHL instead of developing in the minors just because we promised him he wouldn't go there? That's bad both short and long term.

And if the answer to that is "Send him down anyway" then I must be confused as to the definition of the word "promise". If we make a promise, and don't keep it, won't that poison the well for future free agents that we make these extravagant promises to?

And another question for the "Say anything to get the player" crowd. Do you really trust our scouts to identify players who are sure things and are worth making these promises to? We don't exactly have a stellar track record on this front either.

This is exactly where I stand and why I have such a hard time being upset they didn't make those same promises. They did everything else right. As a team, if you make a promise to a player and don't keep it, kiss signing any FAs away. At all. Not just the NCAA. Similar promises are made to the pros as well. Not keeping them would ensure players just laugh when more promises are made since they likely wouldn't be kept.

 

[tigervixxxen]

They aren't all make the roster promises, some are burn an ELC year deals. If the player isn't very good that's not really the worst thing either. When ELC deals are pretty much all going to be the same it comes down to who can offer the best in other areas. I wouldn't compare it to NHL player UFAs, different ballgame. Kids are looking for an opportunity more than anything.

 

[dahrougem2]

And what happens if that kid comes in and isn't on of the top 13/14 forwards? Comparing a player like Hayes this year to anyone on our team is comparing apples and oranges. You can't gauge how a player is going to perform and I would rather have a GM tell a kid he's got to earn a roster spot rather then promise him one and deal with the fallout of him not making the NHL roster. I'm not saying having a player like Hayes wouldn't be helpful. I just think all of this "just make a better offer" is a simplistic way of looking at a complicated situation. The player is a FREE AGENT. He is free to sign with any team he pleases. I also feel like having an opportunity to suit up for a team like the Rangers has a much bigger draw than being promised a spot on the Colorado Avalanche. Look no further than the Kevin Shattenkirk rumors that are circulating. Let's say he wants to play in New York and only New York like is being reported, Joe Sakic says "I'll give you $10M a year for 7 years." Shattenkirk takes the lower deal, the offer Sakic put out never comes out, and everyone will be claiming Sakic didn't try hard enough, when fact of the matter is, some players already have a destination picked.

This is just the mentality of the board as a whole. No matter what Sakic does, it's not good enough.

When there is evidence presented to you that Sakic simply didn't do enough to sign a free agent, I don't know what else to tell you.

You can call out the board all you'd like, but it seems like you defend Sakic at every turn. Which is fine if you'd like to do so. I used to defend Sakic a ton, but I'm done defending the guy when it's clear as day he is way, way too passive of a GM.

Whether it's promising a roster spot, or promising the player a game at the end of a season in order to burn a year off of an ELC, or whatever the case may be: scouts do their due diligence. If the player sucks, there isn't going to be a bidding war for his services. Sure, the player could come in and suck after these promises. But wouldn't you rather gain a free asset and find out for yourself whether the player is good or not instead of watching him do it elsewhere?

Sure, it ultimately comes down to what the player wants to do but in these instances, Sakic has made the decision very easy for the player by not matching other teams.

 

[xbestboybandever]

When there is evidence presented to you that Sakic simply didn't do enough to sign a free agent, I don't know what else to tell you.

You can call out the board all you'd like, but it seems like you defend Sakic at every turn. Which is fine if you'd like to do so. I used to defend Sakic a ton, but I'm done defending the guy when it's clear as day he is way, way too passive of a GM.

Whether it's promising a roster spot, or promising the player a game at the end of a season in order to burn a year off of an ELC, or whatever the case may be: scouts do their due diligence. If the player sucks, there isn't going to be a bidding war for his services. Sure, the player could come in and suck after these promises. But wouldn't you rather gain a free asset and find out for yourself whether the player is good or not instead of watching him do it elsewhere?

Sure, it ultimately comes down to what the player wants to do but in these instances, Sakic has made the decision very easy for the player by not matching other teams.

It's not defending Sakic at every turn, but I find it comical that all of this boards speculation is treated like the word of God. Not a single one of us are agents, close to the organization or players, and have no idea as to what Sakic has and has not offered to players. Yet, you can say he is not doing enough. He is not aggressive enough to make deals. However, when he makes aggressive deals (ie, Boedker Trade), he is mortgaging the future of the organization. I get the "free asset" mentality of the college FA, but again, most of you seem to forget that players in that position can dictate where they choose to play. Just like veteran players, they choose the destination that they want to play in, and if I get the same contract from every team, I would also think that going to a HUGE market like New York, Boston, Montreal, Toronto, or having an opportunity to play with Wayne Gretzky lite in Edmomton would prevail over playing hockey in Denver. I know that if I had been recruited that way, I would have gone to NY in a heartbeat. So, my defense of Sakic comes down to this, give me concrete proof that he is not willing to go the extra mile to get FA's, though the term on deals to players like Iginla and Beauchamin, seem to prove the contrary. Also, stop acting like Sakic writes the checks to these players (regarding acquiring dead capspace for picks). All of this is pure speculation and a lot of you won't be happy no matter what gets done. I am unhappy with how this team has faired this year, and I do believe there is a lot of blood on Sakic's hands, but given the situations that he inherited when he took over (Signing all of our young talent to reasonable contracts in an attempt to keep them all), I think he has faired decently.

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

You enjoy Sakic's mentality?

That mentality is why we strike out on those FA's. It's a stupid way to do business. So what you promise the kid a spot on the NHL roster. There are 13/14 forward slots available. Is promising ONE spot to a kid really going to derail your entire forward corps? Of course it isn't.

Kevin Hayes is just one player, but even that one player would go a hell of a long way to improving the depth on this team. His 44 points on this season would be tied with MacKinnon for the team lead. If it comes down to promising a spot to a kid or not, you promise them a spot. If they flame out, who cares? At least you would have gotten a free asset. It's not like you're promising this player a roster spot for 3+ years. If it's beyond evident the player can't cut it in the NHL, they'll be either sent to the AHL, traded, or not re-signed when their contract is up. And if they prove they can then you have added to your team's depth.

Thinking like Sakic is a stupid way to do business.

What happens if it's a guy who isn't good enough. Then players who have been paying their dues like Bigras can get disgruntled.

It's these type of situations that will cause good players to want out.

 

[dahrougem2]

What happens if it's a guy who isn't good enough. Then players who have been paying their dues like Bigras can get disgruntled.

It's these type of situations that will cause good players to want out.

It's not like you're married to the player. You promise them a roster spot, and if they can't cut it, you have a discussion with the player and their agent about sending them down to the AHL in order to gain experience and improve their confidence. And if the player is resistant to that even though he is struggling at the NHL level, you cut your ties via trade/waivers.

Given the Avs' depth over the course of the last decade, signing these UFA's isn't going to get in any players' way. It would hopefully mean less of a reliance on useless vets.

 

[Perratrooper]

Do you guys think Arizona would have any interest in Duchene or is he to old for their rebuild as well as slowing there's down?

I was thinking of a trade of:

Chychrun
Duclair
Crouse
first round 2017

for

Duchene
Grigorenko


we would significantly improve our odds of getting #1 overall as well as another top 4 pick. I'll assume that we get picks 1 and 2.

Rantanen-MacKinnon-Hischier
Landeskog-Patrick-Duclair
Greer-Compher-Crouse
Nieto-Sodaberg-Comeau
Barrie-EJ
Zadorov-Mirionov
Chychurn-Beauch
Pickard
Smith

(assuming we lose Varly and Barberio to the expansion draft)

 

[dahrougem2]

Do you guys think Arizona would have any interest in Duchene or is he to old for their rebuild as well as slowing there's down?

I was thinking of a trade of:

Chychrun
Duclair
Crouse
first round 2017

for

Duchene
Grigorenko

There isn't a chance in hell the Coyotes would consider this.

 

[Perratrooper]

There isn't a chance in hell the Coyotes would consider this.

Why not? Crouse and Duclair are not great, Chyrchun looks like he could be okay, but is very raw and Arizona has no top 6 centre man and Duchene fills that void while still keeping their top end prospects in line. But okay we throw in a 2nd rounder this year or next to sweeten the pot.
2nd rounder>Crouse
Grigs<Duclair
Duchene>Chyrchun, first

that's just one guys opinion

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Why not? Crouse and Duclair are not great, Chyrchun looks like he could be okay, but is very raw and Arizona has no top 6 centre man and Duchene fills that void while still keeping their top end prospects in line. But okay we throw in a 2nd rounder this year or next to sweeten the pot.
2nd rounder>Crouse
Grigs<Duclair
Duchene>Chyrchun, first

that's just one guys opinion

No chance in hell Arizona trades their top 4 pick for 2 years of Duchene straight up. They certainly aren't going to add the best defenseman of last years draft on top of that to get him.

Also a 2nd rounder isn't more valuable than Crouse.

 

[TheForsbergShow]

You kinda just proved a point though. He went the extra mile on signing the wrong players like Iggy, Beauch and Stuart. All guys that were already on their last legs to a team that was young and fast. Everyone knew that the 3rd year on the Iggy contract was going to suck. Beauch has worn down quicker than we had thought after one good season and Stuart just sucked.

The boedker trade just wasn't really smart to begin with, it was an aggressive move at the wrong time. We were a borderline team at best and already had horrible depth in the organization, and to give up what we did for 20 games just wasnt good risk/reward. It would have looked a lot better if we resigned Boedker to a decent deal but he had better offers (to play on a better team).

Now I am curious to see how this team will fair with most of the deadweight hopefully gone by next year and a few young guys that Sakic has added, but even then we shouldn't be relying on too much from them. He also still has to replace a few spots most likely with other FA guys, so lets see how that goes. As it stands his FA adventures haven't really faired too well. I didn't mind the Roy version of Soderberg but if this is what we will get from him for the rest of the contract that will look pretty ugly.

I think the biggest thing is he seems to struggle on finding the balance on when to be aggressive and when to hold back. We will see if he gets close to his asking price for Duchene. Maybe he wants teams to see Duchene play at the Worlds on Team canada to remind them that he still is good away from this tire fire haha. Kinda like we saw from Mack at the World Cup when he plays on a good team.

 

[TheForsbergShow]

Why not? Crouse and Duclair are not great, Chyrchun looks like he could be okay, but is very raw and Arizona has no top 6 centre man and Duchene fills that void while still keeping their top end prospects in line. But okay we throw in a 2nd rounder this year or next to sweeten the pot.
2nd rounder>Crouse
Grigs<Duclair
Duchene>Chyrchun, first

that's just one guys opinion

Like you said its a potential top 4 pick and on top of that one of their better Dmen prospects and some solid young pieces.

Would you trade our pick (maybe Patrick or Hischier) and players like that for a someone with 2 years left on his contract?

What makes our 2nd rounder over Crouse? He was drafted just two years ago lol.

 

[Foppa]

A college FA guy like Aston-Reece would walk into this team. I'd be offering all the playing time we have considering how our roster looks, especially when it comes to the bottom 6 of the forward unit.

 

[AvsCOL]

A college FA guy like Aston-Reece would walk into this team. I'd be offering all the playing time we have considering how our roster looks, especially when it comes to the bottom 6 of the forward unit.

I have absolutely zero faith in Sakic right now. I'd be shocked if the Avs are even kicking the tires on him, they're way too complacent.

 

[NOTENOUGHJTCGOALS]

It's not like you're married to the player. You promise them a roster spot, and if they can't cut it, you have a discussion with the player and their agent about sending them down to the AHL in order to gain experience and improve their confidence. And if the player is resistant to that even though he is struggling at the NHL level, you cut your ties via trade/waivers.

Given the Avs' depth over the course of the last decade, signing these UFA's isn't going to get in any players' way. It would hopefully mean less of a reliance on useless vets.

If you waive or cut the guy it may impact your ability to sign future college players.

Although if you're not signing them in the first place it makes sense to at least try it once. The front office avoiding making any tough decisions is the reason they are in a terrible spot.

 

[chet1926]

I have absolutely zero faith in Sakic right now. I'd be shocked if the Avs are even kicking the tires on him, they're way too complacent.

Why because Sakic didn't trade Duchene for pennies on the dollar? Or was it because he couldn't find any takers for the absolute trash veteran players we have?

Sorry Sakic couldn't find any takers for guys like Mitchell 2G in 59 games, Tyutin who is -25, Colborne still has year on contract and has produced all of 3pts since opening night, Beauchemin year on contract and has sucked donkey ass all season, Wiercioch/Goloubef who pretty much are AHLers.

There are things to be frustrated at in regard to management, but being mad/losing all faith in Sakic because he couldn't turn our pile of crap players into gold at the deadline is just short of absurd.

I guarantee you that our management is looking at all possibilities to make the team better, they know that another terrible season next season will mean they all lose jobs. I highly doubt people would purposely sabotage themselves into losing jobs. Meaning they're going to be very busy this offseason turning the team into something better because they don't want to lose their jobs.

No matter what Sakic does, I guarantee you that people around here will find something to complain about. Sakic has done some good things for this team. He took a prospect pool that had absolutely nothing in it and now has lots of promising players including Jost, Greer, Compher, Bigras, Mironov, Meloche, Beaudin, Morrison, Nantel, Butcher just to name a few. He hasn't made any any awful trades (I guess you could debate the ROR trade, but Sakic's hands were tied on that one, ROR wasn't signing here unless we severely overpaid him and Sakic got a nice package in return). He has also done some stupid stuff that looks bad like losing Stastny, signing Iginla to a long term deal, trading for Berra, re-signing Stuart before he even played a game for us, signing Beauchemin to a long term deal, you can debate Soderberg but the guy put up 50pts last season, didn't see him falling off the cliff this year.

 

[chet1926]

A college FA guy like Aston-Reece would walk into this team. I'd be offering all the playing time we have considering how our roster looks, especially when it comes to the bottom 6 of the forward unit.

College UFAs have all the power. If they only want to play in a certain area they can specify that. A guy like Reese who is from New York, probably either wants to play on the east coast or a large market team. Of which the Avs can't offer either.

I'm sure we've sent out feelers, and hell we might have even been aggressive, it's impossible to know. But if a guy only wants certain things that we can't offer, then we don't have much of a chance. We could offer a top 6 spot in the lineup immediately, but that might not be enough to get it done if the player has other thoughts on his mind.