Rumor: In-season Proposals, Rumors, Free Agents & Roster Moves (related topics) XLII

[Avs_19]

This Phoenix fan certainly supports the Klesla for Sgarbossa chatter.

This Avs fan supports it as well. How do we make it happen?

 

[member 116861]

Another Avs fan that supports it.

 

[Tommy Shelby]

I'd rather hold on to our best offensive prospect than trade him for a slight upgrade over Hejda that has a hard time staying healthy.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

I cant believe you guys would throw away a kid with so much talent for a defensive dman who will be no more than a rental to a non playoff team.
We have way to many guys on the back end as it is. Add Rusty and it may get a little better, but not much.

I'd much rather give Elliott his chance to make the next step and hold on to Sgarbo. He's our first call up once an injury happens and might even make the team out of camp.

 

[henchman21]

I think a Klesla for Sgarbossa trade right now would be foolish. Klesla isn't going to make a big enough difference on this team that he alone takes them from a 10-11 place team to a 7-8 team. So... we might as well hold on to the 2nd best forward prospect on this team as he will have more impact on the team over the course of his career.

If Klesla has 3 years remaining on his contract this might be a different conversation.

 

[tucker3434]

I think a Klesla for Sgarbossa trade right now would be foolish. Klesla isn't going to make a big enough difference on this team that he alone takes them from a 10-11 place team to a 7-8 team. So... we might as well hold on to the 2nd best forward prospect on this team as he will have more impact on the team over the course of his career.

If Klesla has 3 years remaining on his contract this might be a different conversation.

What he said. We're a little thin with quality forward prospects. I don't think we can afford to trade our best away for 1 year of Klesla.

 

[Avs71]

I just don't understand what it would hurt to sign Hainsey.

Only thing I could think of would be that they feel he is just another replica of the problem the Avs already have. He hasn't looked like a defenceman who could contribute over 20 points in three years now. Even though he would be better defensively than a bunch of the Avs defencemen, perhaps they're only looking at adding a two-way defenceman, or a real good offensive defenceman.

Adding another 1-way contract could hamper a move further down the line if there is a trade Roy is looking at. Like others have mentioned, the Avs probably don't want to pay a guy like Hunwick 1.5 million to play in the AHL.

Roy also seems sold on Wilson being EJ's partner for now, which if healthy, would provide more offense and physical play than Hainsey. Then you have Hejda who is a great partner for Barrie. They probably have a hope that Elliott makes the team too. That would leave Hainsey/Sarich/Hunwick/Benoit as options for that last spot. I'm not saying that is the only spot Hainsey fits in on the team, just a possible line of reasoning for not signing a guy like him.

I believe these were Roy's projected defence pairings?

Ryan Wilson - Erik Johnson
Jan Hejda - Tyson Barrie
Stefan Elliott - Cory Sarich

 

[bromando]

Klesla is a UFA after this year, people. Avs, regardless of the talent of the player, just don't need to be trading for rentals. Agree with Henchman...if we get a longer deal out of it then I consider the trade. But for a rental? No way.

Also don't like the idea of trading our top prospects. We've got one of the thinnest prospect pools in the league IMO and we have for a few years now. We're just finally building it up to reasonable standards...let's not give it away for rentals.

 

[RockLobster]

And add on top of that, I think, if used right, Sarich could potentially have the same impact on Elliott that Hejda had on Barrie...but only if they use him in the right role.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Klesla is a UFA after this year, people. Avs, regardless of the talent of the player, just don't need to be trading for rentals. Agree with Henchman...if we get a longer deal out of it then I consider the trade. But for a rental? No way.

Also don't like the idea of trading our top prospects. We've got one of the thinnest prospect pools in the league IMO and we have for a few years now. We're just finally building it up to reasonable standards...let's not give it away for rentals.

My only concern has and will be his contract, if we're given the opportunity to ask him before the trade or given a conditional 2nd/3rd back if he doesn't sign, I'm fine with it. Klesla is what our defense needs most right now and making the playoffs would give experience to our players that they need. We don't need to do any damage, just make it.

Klesla could give us a few good years minimum and replace Hejda even. Sgarbossa offers us nothing we don't already have on the team and we're not even sure how he'd do at wing for us.

 

[AslanRH]

I'm all for giving up a conditional pick for Klesla, Meszaros, or the like, but not yet ready to lose Sgarbossa.

Having not yet seen how Tanguay fits on the team, ROR/Stastny play on wing and if they or either can be resigned, and with McGinn and Downie coming up for contracts, trading our 1 offensive fwd prospect (Hishon is one more lengthy injury from being a bust IMO) now for a moderate upgrade seems rash and unwise.

 

[hockeyviking]

I'd rather hold on to our best offensive prospect than trade him for a slight upgrade over Hejda that has a hard time staying healthy.

mackinnon says hi

 

[henchman21]

My only concern has and will be his contract, if we're given the opportunity to ask him before the trade or given a conditional 2nd/3rd back if he doesn't sign, I'm fine with it. Klesla is what our defense needs most right now and making the playoffs would give experience to our players that they need. We don't need to do any damage, just make it.

Klesla could give us a few good years minimum and replace Hejda even. Sgarbossa offers us nothing we don't already have on the team and we're not even sure how he'd do at wing for us.

Sgarbossa offers the best potential replacement for Downie (if he leaves as a UFA or trade at the deadline) or Tanguay (if his play drops). Nobody else in the system is really close to him. Hishon is the closest, but he just can't stay healthy for the life of him. After Hishon though, it gets really, really slim for top 6 potential players and those players all have big question marks as to how they will transition. Sgarbossa just ended his rookie AHL season at a .77 PPG, has played wing extensively before, and while a bit undersized at 5'11" 175, that isn't an unusual size for a NHL player especially if he adds ~10lbs.

I don't think that Klesla is the difference between this team making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.

 

[bromando]

My only concern has and will be his contract, if we're given the opportunity to ask him before the trade or given a conditional 2nd/3rd back if he doesn't sign, I'm fine with it. Klesla is what our defense needs most right now and making the playoffs would give experience to our players that they need. We don't need to do any damage, just make it.

Klesla could give us a few good years minimum and replace Hejda even. Sgarbossa offers us nothing we don't already have on the team and we're not even sure how he'd do at wing for us.

I think just as big a concern is his injury history. It's like acquiring an older, more injury prone, less offensive Ryan Wilson. Klesla is far from what the team needs IMO. In fact, regardless of the length of his contract, I'd say no considering the injuries and age.

Sgarbossa doesn't fit our top 9 at the moment. But if one or two or three pieces get traded this year or lost in the offseason (Stastny, ROR, Downie for starters), Sgarbossa could definitely fill a need. I'm not saying he's extraordinary, but he is a pretty good scorer and has top 6 upside. I'd rather not make the playoffs than trade away good futures at this point unless it's for a significant upgrade.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

My only concern has and will be his contract, if we're given the opportunity to ask him before the trade or given a conditional 2nd/3rd back if he doesn't sign, I'm fine with it. Klesla is what our defense needs most right now and making the playoffs would give experience to our players that they need. We don't need to do any damage, just make it.

Klesla could give us a few good years minimum and replace Hejda even. Sgarbossa offers us nothing we don't already have on the team and we're not even sure how he'd do at wing for us.

Sorry to bash Lonewolfe because I usually agree with everything you say, but Klesla is definitely not what our defense needs most. We need a left handed top pairing guy for EJ which Rusty is not. With that partner we would have Hejda as our shutdown 2nd pairing leftie with Barrie, and Wilson would be a great 3rd pairing guy to partner with Elliott.

We already have enough guys to make two quality 2/3 pairings, we're just lacking that top pairing guy so we have to use wilson to fill in. If Klesla came over he would still be that 2nd pairing guy that fills in on the first. There is no need to have him at this point in time, especially when we have Siemens who could be at Klesla's level in a year.

 

[Foppa2118]

I can't understand the obsession with keeping Sgarbossa. People are acting as if this team is in need of young talented forwards, and that Sgarbossa is a can't miss talent. Neither of which are true.

Trade him for something you have a strong need for, and can potentially re-sign for longer.

What exactly do people think Sgarbossa is gonna turn into that they would regret trading him so much? A full one year player isn't a rental either.

 

[member 116861]

I think Klesla would be a good partner for EJ or a great partner for Elliott. With Klesla we would have 4 top-4 d-men, we would still only have 1 top pairing defenseman but at least we would have 4 top-4 d-men. Maybe I'm not as high on Sgarbossa as some of you are but I see him as a 2nd liner at best. I'm willing to trade a 2nd liner for a 2nd pairing defenseman.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

I think Klesla would be a good partner for EJ or a great partner for Elliott. With Klesla we would have 4 top-4 d-men, we would still only have 1 top pairing defenseman but at least we would have 4 top-4 d-men. Maybe I'm not as high on Sgarbossa as some of you are but I see him as a 2nd liner at best. I'm willing to trade a 2nd liner for a 2nd pairing defenseman.

I'm not, when we already have 3 second pairing D, 3 young potential second pairing D and no number 1. Not to mention no other top 6 potential prospects outside of Mackinnon.

 

[bromando]

I can't understand the obsession with keeping Sgarbossa. People are acting as if this team is in need of young talented forwards, and that Sgarbossa is a can't miss talent. Neither of which are true.

Trade him for something you have a strong need for, and can potentially re-sign for longer.

What exactly do people think Sgarbossa is gonna turn into that they would regret trading him so much? A full one year player isn't a rental either.

A full one year player is basically a rental. Regardless of terminology, on a team that may or may not make the playoffs with Klesla, it's silly to trade assets for uncertainty when you're just beginning to come out of a rebuild. I can't understand everyone's need to make the playoffs. Sure I'd love it and I want it really badly, but we were the second worst team in the league last year. Although I think we're better than when we nearly made the playoffs two years ago, I think we still have a lot of room to grow before making rash trades or shipping off prospects.

It's not about Sgarbossa being a can't miss talent either. For me, it's about organizational depth. Trading away your top prospects for one year players is the kind of management that destroys depth and creates unsustainable teams. We don't have quality depth, so to trade what little top 6 potential we have for a one year player will just set us back in the future. I wouldn't be upset with trading Sgarbossa in a package for a great upgrade at D, but Kesla isn't that.

 

[Foppa2118]

Sgarbossa offers the best potential replacement for Downie (if he leaves as a UFA or trade at the deadline) or Tanguay (if his play drops). Nobody else in the system is really close to him. Hishon is the closest, but he just can't stay healthy for the life of him. After Hishon though, it gets really, really slim for top 6 potential players and those players all have big question marks as to how they will transition. Sgarbossa just ended his rookie AHL season at a .77 PPG, has played wing extensively before, and while a bit undersized at 5'11" 175, that isn't an unusual size for a NHL player especially if he adds ~10lbs.

I don't think that Klesla is the difference between this team making the playoffs and not making the playoffs.

Sgarbossa isn't going to replace the role Downie plays. If they lose him, they'll look to replace him with someone else besides Sgarbossa.

They don't have to worry about replacing Tanguay for three years. Sgar will be 24 by that time, they surely won't keep him hanging around in the minors until then.

The Avs have more forward depth than most teams in the league. They also have their biggest spots at forward filled, except for maybe an elite winger. Any spot that you would hope Sgarbossa can fill in the next couple years can be addressed with the usual lesser UFA signing.

If Sgarbossa were establish himself in the NHL and on the Avs, at best it would be in a complimentary winger role similar to the one Reinprect played. And that's IF he pans out as a top six or bust prospect. With the Avs holding the rights to Duchene, MacKinnon, Landeskog, PAP, Tanguay, McGinn, and O'Reilly all for at least a few years, they just don't have a really need for that type of player.

Losing Sgarbossa for nothing, let alone for at least one year of a desperately needed defesneman, is not that big of a deal at all.

 

[henchman21]

I can't understand the obsession with keeping Sgarbossa. People are acting as if this team is in need of young talented forwards, and that Sgarbossa is a can't miss talent. Neither of which are true.

Trade him for something you have a strong need for, and can potentially re-sign for longer.

What exactly do people think Sgarbossa is gonna turn into that they would regret trading him so much? A full one year player isn't a rental either.

I think Sgarbossa will be a 15-20g 50-55p player on the second line with a good bit of sandpaper to his game. Basically a higher scoring Downie with less crazy. Not the type of player you give up easily.

If this team is going to philosophically stay with the 3 scoring line system, the Avs are going to need a constant influx of young top 6 talent to stay under the cap. Paying 3rd liners $4m a year isn't going to be possible if the cap stays at a reasonable level.

Sgarbossa isn't going to replace the role Downie plays. If they lose him, they'll look to replace him with someone else besides Sgarbossa.

They don't have to worry about replacing Tanguay for three years. Sgar will be 24 by that time, they surely won't keep him hanging around in the minors until then.

The Avs have more forward depth than most teams in the league. They also have their biggest spots at forward filled, except for maybe an elite winger. Any spot that you would hope Sgarbossa can fill in the next couple years can be addressed with the usual lesser UFA signing.

If Sgarbossa were establish himself in the NHL and on the Avs, at best it would be in a complimentary winger role similar to the one Reinprect played. And that's IF he pans out as a top six or bust prospect. With the Avs holding the rights to Duchene, MacKinnon, Landeskog, PAP, Tanguay, McGinn, and O'Reilly all for at least a few years, they just don't have a really need for that type of player.

Losing Sgarbossa for nothing, let alone for at least one year of a desperately needed defesneman, is not that big of a deal at all.

You seriously have not seen Sgarbossa play enough. His future role is that of Downie, and he is not a top 6 or bust player. He will be useful on a 3rd line, even if they Avs don't stick to this system. As for Tanguay, he could regress at any point. If he slips next year to a 30 point player, the Avs will be looking to replace him on the 2nd line very quickly. This doesn't even take into account the possibility of losing one of Stastny or ROR by next season.

As it sits right now, the odds of losing two of the current top 9 forwards are pretty strong. There needs to be replacement players available in the prospect pool.

 

[Foppa2118]

A full one year player is basically a rental. Regardless of terminology, on a team that may or may not make the playoffs with Klesla, it's silly to trade assets for uncertainty when you're just beginning to come out of a rebuild. I can't understand everyone's need to make the playoffs. Sure I'd love it and I want it really badly, but we were the second worst team in the league last year. Although I think we're better than when we nearly made the playoffs two years ago, I think we still have a lot of room to grow before making rash trades or shipping off prospects.

It's not about Sgarbossa being a can't miss talent either. For me, it's about organizational depth. Trading away your top prospects for one year players is the kind of management that destroys depth and creates unsustainable teams. We don't have quality depth, so to trade what little top 6 potential we have for a one year player will just set us back in the future. I wouldn't be upset with trading Sgarbossa in a package for a great upgrade at D, but Kesla isn't that.

It's not silly at all to trade for a player that can help you, and give up a player you don't need, and isn't going to be elite anyway.

What's silly is to think you can get better without making these kind of trades.

Trading Sgarbossa doesn't even come close to destroy the Avs depth at forward. It barely even makes a dent. Whatever you think Sgarbossa will become, you can find that in any UFA market, and it won't cost you that much.

 

[tucker3434]

I can't understand the obsession with keeping Sgarbossa. People are acting as if this team is in need of young talented forwards, and that Sgarbossa is a can't miss talent. Neither of which are true.

Trade him for something you have a strong need for, and can potentially re-sign for longer.

What exactly do people think Sgarbossa is gonna turn into that they would regret trading him so much? A full one year player isn't a rental either.

I'd argue that every team is in need of young talented forward prospects, and he's essentially our only one. Injuries and trades will have us needing him sooner rather than later.

You're right that he isn't can't miss, but he's the best we've got. A rebuilding team can't afford to trade away their already thin prospect pool for rentals.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Sgarbossa isn't going to replace the role Downie plays. If they lose him, they'll look to replace him with someone else besides Sgarbossa.

They don't have to worry about replacing Tanguay for three years. Sgar will be 24 by that time, they surely won't keep him hanging around in the minors until then.

The Avs have more forward depth than most teams in the league. They also have their biggest spots at forward filled, except for maybe an elite winger. Any spot that you would hope Sgarbossa can fill in the next couple years can be addressed with the usual lesser UFA signing.

If Sgarbossa were establish himself in the NHL and on the Avs, at best it would be in a complimentary winger role similar to the one Reinprect played. And that's IF he pans out as a top six or bust prospect. With the Avs holding the rights to Duchene, MacKinnon, Landeskog, PAP, Tanguay, McGinn, and O'Reilly all for at least a few years, they just don't have a really need for that type of player.

Losing Sgarbossa for nothing, let alone for at least one year of a desperately needed defesneman, is not that big of a deal at all.

Why? I think that's exactly who they will replace him with. A young cheap talented player who's already in our system waiting for his chance. Wouldn't that be better than signing somebody else for an overpayment to play on the 3rd line?

 

[Freudian]

Hainsey is as good as Klesla, can be had for peanuts and fills a bigger need (PP). No reason to trade for Klesla at this point.