Joe Sakic - Record as Colorado Avalanche GM - Part II (Updates in First Post)

[AllAboutAvs]

No more often than you forget that the cap exists

Huh???? When did I forget that the cap exists?

 

[PAZ]

No more often than you forget that the cap exists

ROR, Schenn & Hayes moved recently for prices we could've matched, and there have been other players that would've fit our needs who either did move or where on the block. We got none of them. That's the problem, not that he shot down one specific trade for an asset that in the long run he ended up getting close to similar value for.

PS - out of Bowers, Kamenev & Hammond; which of them is providing us depth atm?

Would you really want to pay the price for rental Hayes? I think it's important to be savvy when spending a finite resource like picks and prospects.

But anyways, there is no perfect formula, and I think the past few years has shown the importance of having a mix between patience and aggressiveness. Tampa had the best team on paper in the last decade and a better team that we could dream up, yet they just got swept. Sharks went out and got Karlsson, at the time he was the best player to move in a decade. Still up in the air, but there's a chance they get bounced in the 1st round. I think it's important to have patience and make changes to the roster, but it's equally important to have assets to have sustained success because it is so hard to win the cup. There's very few teams that have gone all-in and been a big spender at the deadline and actually won the Stanley Cup, it's pretty much the opposite.

Both Pittsburgh's and Washington's most recent cups came from ensuring they had sustained success and because they didn't completely make their prospect cupboard run bare. Having the best team on paper doesn't mean anything, it's about a team clicking and finding sustained chemistry. The years that Pittsburgh went all in with Hossa/Iginla? Came up short. However, they acquire Bill Guerin? End up winning the cup.

You look at the teams that have won in the last decade, all of them have been in playoff contention for years and eventually won the cup. Sure you look at all the teams that have had sustained playoffs and end up getting the choker label, but Washington had that label for years and it was close to consensus that their window was closed, and then with the help with some of their prospects developing they won the cup. Not because of players like Shatty.

 

[MarkT]

I don't think every team in the playoffs has a shot just because they made it...and I suspect that's our main point of separation. Yes LA won it all as an 8th seed & 'lumbus is a serious threat this year, but those were atypical 8th seeds who had made major upgrades that were still settling in prior to the postseason starting. So despite being 8th seeds, they had/have the pieces to contend. That's why I don't think you can argue that SJ has been a contender throughout Jumbo's tenure there. They were contenders in the 2000s and are contenders again now, but they absolutely fell out of that tier for an extended period as well...and despite all of those postseason berths they don't have a single cup to show for it.

So I don't disagree with the way you view the playoffs, I just don't think a playoff berth counts as a kick of the can unless you have the personnel to win it all. And what that formula is, we can see from examining past winners.

As for unlimited windows, that's just unsustainable. You can extend your window with shrewd maneuvering, but the margin of error is so small that the instant you stop pulling rabits out of your ass it all catches up to you & you're forced into the same kind of retool as ever contender who's window has closed without their core having retired. That's why Chicago ultimately failed, despite having the benefit of cap-circumventing contracts & teams thirsty to absorb their cap-mistakes.

I never said every team in the playoffs has a shot, but they literally do, by definition, have a shot. All it takes some years is a goalie getting hot, and in those cases had they missed the playoffs it wouldn't have mattered how hot their goalie was. But I'm not talking about the fluke years where 8ths seeds win it - I'm talking about teams that make the playoffs every year like the Sharks - yeah some years they make the playoffs and get eliminated in the first round, and some years they go deeper. But you can never predict when you'll run into a team hotter than you or when you'll hit injury trouble. I don't think you can point to the lack of cups for the Sharks and call them a failure. They have been wayyyy more successful than a lot of other teams who have won a single cup in the time since San Jose has been a consistent playoff team.

See, I think the real difference between us is you place much more importance on winning the cup. It seems like you think selling all the team's assets, winning one cup, then sucking for a decade, is a good plan. To me that's not worth it. To me the perfect team is one that has up years and down years but is always good enough to at least make the playoffs. That's the kind of success I think is sustainable in the cap era.

And just because most teams have failed to maintain sustained success, does not mean it's impossible. You're using Chicago as your example. Do you think they didn't make blatantly dumb moves? Was the Panarin trade not obviously idiotic from the moment it was made? Was the Cam Ward signing? How about the Brian Bickell contract back in 2013? Those are just a few examples, but I think a Hawks fan could point to a lot of decisions that didn't just fail the "rabbit out of your ass" test, but failed the "not terrible decision" test. Name any other contender whose "window closed" and I can probably point to a few boneheaded decisions that people at the time, without the benefit of foresight, could tell were dumb moves.

 

[Makar to MacK]

I think that this year with only 2 or 3 really good players available in FA (being Panarin, Skinner, and maybe Hayes) that it takes 2 to tango. Said players have to be willing to sign here and I'm not sure that will be Sakic's fault if they don't as he has built a pretty good culture in the locker room imo. Time will tell what happens but tbh I wouldn't be to mad if Sakic stays the course if he can't get one of those 2 players (I'm not a big Hayes fan and I think he is gonna be paid way more then he is worth tbh) because the alternative is signing bloated contracts for lesser players that could really come back to bite us in the a$$ later on. I really hope that Panarin or Skinner signes with us but so do 30 other teams in the NHL and between the 2 there are only 2 teams that are gonna win those players obviously. Just my 2 cents

 

[AllAboutAvs]

No more often than you forget that the cap exists

ROR, Schenn & Hayes moved recently for prices we could've matched, and there have been other players that would've fit our needs who either did move or where on the block. We got none of them. That's the problem, not that he shot down one specific trade for an asset that in the long run he ended up getting close to similar value for.

PS - out of Bowers, Kamenev & Hammond; which of them is providing us depth atm?

ROR? Really? That ship has sailed and you know it.

Schenn? You would have paid two 1sts and a roster player to get him?

Hayes? Why pay valuable assets (1st, 4th and a B prospect) for a rental, especially a player that we have very good chance of getting a few months later.

What are those other players you mentioned we could have got because those are not very good examples of Sakic sitting on his hands.

And I am still waiting for you to explain to me when I ever forgot that the cap exists.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

Theres actually a lot of good players on the market this summer, at least as of right now anyway.


Karlsson
Panarin
Duchene
Skinner
Gardiner
Dzingel
Hayes
Ferland
Lee
Zuccarello
Nyquist




Theres other good utility players worth looking into as well. Connolly, Donskoi, Chaisson, Nelson, etc.

 

[Foppberg]

I think if we can push Vegas/SJ, or even advance.. Then we're a highly thought of destination for UFAs unless they're dead set on the east coast and oceans/big city life.

 

[cgf]

Huh???? When did I forget that the cap exists?

When I forgot what a catastraf*** 2017 was.

Would you really want to pay the price for rental Hayes? I think it's important to be savvy when spending a finite resource like picks and prospects.

But anyways, there is no perfect formula, and I think the past few years has shown the importance of having a mix between patience and aggressiveness. Tampa had the best team on paper in the last decade and a better team that we could dream up, yet they just got swept. Sharks went out and got Karlsson, at the time he was the best player to move in a decade. Still up in the air, but there's a chance they get bounced in the 1st round. I think it's important to have patience and make changes to the roster, but it's equally important to have assets to have sustained success because it is so hard to win the cup. There's very few teams that have gone all-in and been a big spender at the deadline and actually won the Stanley Cup, it's pretty much the opposite.

Both Pittsburgh's and Washington's most recent cups came from ensuring they had sustained success and because they didn't completely make their prospect cupboard run bare. Having the best team on paper doesn't mean anything, it's about a team clicking and finding sustained chemistry. The years that Pittsburgh went all in with Hossa/Iginla? Came up short. However, they acquire Bill Guerin? End up winning the cup.

You look at the teams that have won in the last decade, all of them have been in playoff contention for years and eventually won the cup. Sure you look at all the teams that have had sustained playoffs and end up getting the choker label, but Washington had that label for years and it was close to consensus that their window was closed, and then with the help with some of their prospects developing they won the cup. Not because of players like Shatty.

I would. We have a surplus of assets right now, but that is not an eternal situation and I don't trust our draft & dev teams not to lose some value on that surplus if we use all of those picks instead of trading them for either future picks or current pieces. And I think Hayes would have been a sensible move this TDL. Plus I don't think making a couple of trades for top 6ers would've gutted our asset pool or anything. So I don't think it's fair to suggest that making moves prior to now would have prevented us from having the capital with which to make moves down the line.

Hayes may have struggled to fit in with us quickly enough to become a factor this postseason, as he has in Winnipeg, but I don't think that's a guarantee. Firstly because the Jets didn't need him for as big of a role as we did, so he didn't get the opportunities with them that he would've with us, and secondly because WPG was always just a stop-over for him, whereas we have a shot at him in FA & so he could've started really settling in here off the ice...which (I suspect) is more important to Hayes than it is to some players.

But Hayes is just one of multiple players that we could've made a move for before this postseason, and if we had addressed the 2nd line last summer - as I wanted - we would have no longer needed Hayes at the TDL. So it needed not be him specifically that we could've acquired to push Soda down to the 3rd line and given ourselves the kind of C depth that could capitalize on the way that the west has opened up for us this postseason.


As for the previous winners, outside of Washington, all of them (by my definitions) had an initial window of contention and then needed to retool; PIT & CHI managing to open a 2nd window afterwards...though having 2 of the top 3 players + Kessel falling into their lap helped PIT pull that off immensely & their cap-circumventing contracts + the cap-loophole created by the Kane-injury helped CHI...while LA couldn't & Boston never even got back to the mountain top.

Washington is an exception IMO, in part because winning a cup makes costs explode with your supporting cast; thus is why their failure to win during their 1st window helped them open a 2nd window...but that's not a trajectory I'd like us to follow.


Also I'm not saying we should've filled our second line at the TDL, but last summer. If I had my way we wouldn't have needed any big additions at the TDL...that said, you're underplaying their utility IMO, Chicago's buys certainly helped them win their 3rd cup, Pittsburgh doesn't have a 2nd window without Kessel (or was he an offseason addition?) & CBJ wouldn't be in round two without their buys this season. I tend to side against making significant rental-buys, but it's by no means a black-and-white subject.

I never said every team in the playoffs has a shot, but they literally do, by definition, have a shot. All it takes some years is a goalie getting hot, and in those cases had they missed the playoffs it wouldn't have mattered how hot their goalie was. But I'm not talking about the fluke years where 8ths seeds win it - I'm talking about teams that make the playoffs every year like the Sharks - yeah some years they make the playoffs and get eliminated in the first round, and some years they go deeper. But you can never predict when you'll run into a team hotter than you or when you'll hit injury trouble. I don't think you can point to the lack of cups for the Sharks and call them a failure. They have been wayyyy more successful than a lot of other teams who have won a single cup in the time since San Jose has been a consistent playoff team.

See, I think the real difference between us is you place much more importance on winning the cup. It seems like you think selling all the team's assets, winning one cup, then sucking for a decade, is a good plan. To me that's not worth it. To me the perfect team is one that has up years and down years but is always good enough to at least make the playoffs. That's the kind of success I think is sustainable in the cap era.

And just because most teams have failed to maintain sustained success, does not mean it's impossible. You're using Chicago as your example. Do you think they didn't make blatantly dumb moves? Was the Panarin trade not obviously idiotic from the moment it was made? Was the Cam Ward signing? How about the Brian Bickell contract back in 2013? Those are just a few examples, but I think a Hawks fan could point to a lot of decisions that didn't just fail the "rabbit out of your ass" test, but failed the "not terrible decision" test. Name any other contender whose "window closed" and I can probably point to a few boneheaded decisions that people at the time, without the benefit of foresight, could tell were dumb moves.

Well, I think that's a bit of an unfair hypothetical you're setting up saying "selling all the team's assets, winning one cup, then sucking for a decade" because that's not what I want at all. What I want is to win a cup (or cups) before the retool that's invariably coming in the mid-2020s...during which we too would probably make the playoffs more years than not, just like the Sharks have...and the team to be able to win again during a 2nd window that we'd still have the assets to open even with the addition or two that I think should've been made last summer.

But you're right. If choosing between a hypothetical decade of cup-less playoff seasons vs a decade with 1 cup but the team missing the playoffs more often than not, I pick the latter. And that probably is a central point of conflict in this discussion.

Chicago made some mistakes, but they also had some significant advantages that won't be available to us as the mistakes they made didn't come close to outweighing the boons that they wrought from the cap-circumventing contracts they got to lock in under the previous CBA. Had Captain Serious & the rapist gotten to sign their current deals under that CBA as well, then even with the errors that were made Chicago could have won another 2 cups.

 

[cgf]

ROR? Really? That ship has sailed and you know it.

Schenn? You would have paid two 1sts and a roster player to get him?

Hayes? Why pay valuable assets (1st, 4th and a B prospect) for a rental, especially a player that we have very good chance of getting a few months later.

What are those other players you mentioned we could have got because those are not very good examples of Sakic sitting on his hands.

And I am still waiting for you to explain to me when I ever forgot that the cap exists.

Why's that? Because his demands back then look reasonable in hindsight & we have to save face by pretending he wouldn't have been a perfect fit for what we're missing?

And Schenn was traded for two protected 1st & a cap dump, not a roster player.

Because FA is after the postseason and this postseason has lined up for us to make a run if we had the personnel to go all of the way to the SCF? Plus, we have an asset surplus that can more than survive being dipped into, and that may spoil if left unused.

Why should I bother? You can come up with names to shoot down without my help based on this post.

You forgot that the cap exists right after I forgot that we weren't good in 2017

 

[PAZ]

When I forgot what a catastraf*** 2017 was.


I would. We have a surplus of assets right now, but that is not an eternal situation and I don't trust our draft & dev teams not to lose some value on that surplus if we use all of those picks instead of trading them for either future picks or current pieces. And I think Hayes would have been a sensible move this TDL. Plus I don't think making a couple of trades for top 6ers would've gutted our asset pool or anything. So I don't think it's fair to suggest that making moves prior to now would have prevented us from having the capital with which to make moves down the line.

Hayes may have struggled to fit in with us quickly enough to become a factor this postseason, as he has in Winnipeg, but I don't think that's a guarantee. Firstly because the Jets didn't need him for as big of a role as we did, so he didn't get the opportunities with them that he would've with us, and secondly because WPG was always just a stop-over for him, whereas we have a shot at him in FA & so he could've started really settling in here off the ice...which (I suspect) is more important to Hayes than it is to some players.

But Hayes is just one of multiple players that we could've made a move for before this postseason, and if we had addressed the 2nd line last summer - as I wanted - we would have no longer needed Hayes at the TDL. So it needed not be him specifically that we could've acquired to push Soda down to the 3rd line and given ourselves the kind of C depth that could capitalize on the way that the west has opened up for us this postseason.


As for the previous winners, outside of Washington, all of them (by my definitions) had an initial window of contention and then needed to retool; PIT & CHI managing to open a 2nd window afterwards...though having 2 of the top 3 players + Kessel falling into their lap helped PIT pull that off immensely & their cap-circumventing contracts + the cap-loophole created by the Kane-injury helped CHI...while LA couldn't & Boston never even got back to the mountain top.

Washington is an exception IMO, in part because winning a cup makes costs explode with your supporting cast; thus is why their failure to win during their 1st window helped them open a 2nd window...but that's not a trajectory I'd like us to follow.


Also I'm not saying we should've filled our second line at the TDL, but last summer. If I had my way we wouldn't have needed any big additions at the TDL...that said, you're underplaying their utility IMO, Chicago's buys certainly helped them win their 3rd cup, Pittsburgh doesn't have a 2nd window without Kessel (or was he an offseason addition?) & CBJ wouldn't be in round two without their buys this season. I tend to side against making significant rental-buys, but it's by no means a black-and-white subject.


Well, I think that's a bit of an unfair hypothetical you're setting up saying "selling all the team's assets, winning one cup, then sucking for a decade" because that's not what I want at all. What I want is to win a cup (or cups) before the retool that's invariably coming in the mid-2020s...during which we too would probably make the playoffs more years than not, just like the Sharks have...and the team to be able to win again during a 2nd window that we'd still have the assets to open even with the addition or two that I think should've been made last summer.

But you're right. If choosing between a hypothetical decade of cup-less playoff seasons vs a decade with 1 cup but the team missing the playoffs more often than not, I pick the latter. And that probably is a central point of conflict in this discussion.

Chicago made some mistakes, but they also had some significant advantages that won't be available to us as the mistakes they made didn't come close to outweighing the boons that they wrought from the cap-circumventing contracts they got to lock in under the previous CBA. Had Captain Serious & the rapist gotten to sign their current deals under that CBA as well, then even with the errors that were made Chicago could have won another 2 cups.

I get what you're saying, we have a limited window with Mack's contract, Makar on an ELC, etc. and it's important to make the most of that time. I just think timing is equally important and you can't rush it without seeing some results. I think the moves Joe made this season have been close to perfect, considering we were still very much a playoff bubble team and were 1 season out from having the worst record in the modern NHL. Acquiring a player like Hayes would have improved the team, but the Rangers most likely would be asking a lot more than a 1st + 4th + B prospect. Hard to say what the price would be, but I imagine it would be closer to Jost + 1st if we wanted him last summer.

Chicago's acquisitions were made after they were already a perennial cup contender and needed to fill in the gaps, acquiring a #2/3C, a #4/5 defenseman, etc. They did have the luxury of having cap circumventing contracts, but they also benefited by being patient and having prospects like Buff, Ladd, Brouwer, Versteeg, etc. develop into big roles. Either way, I agree that I don't think Chicago's model can be used. With Pittsburgh, Kessel was a huge acquisition but equally important was the addition of the youngsters like Murray, Guentzel, Rust, Sheary, Dumo.

With all that being said, I think Joe has made the right moves up to this point by sticking with his patient MO, but with the addition of Makar and seeing that last season wasn't a fluke, this offseason he needs to make something happen, but not at the expense of hampering the team in the future by making a desperate signing like Neal. I know you aren't a fan of Joe's patience approach, but I honestly think it's paid huge dividends and players like Bowers, Kam, will be important depth in the future. Overpay by an extra year on Hayes is fine, but signing him to a long contract over $8 mil contract is not.

Joe has set himself up to have a huge offseason though. With one of the best free agent classes in years, multiple cup pretenders being bounced in the 1st round in embarrassing fashion, and teams feeling the cap crunch, there's going to be a lot of options.

 

[cgf]

I get what you're saying, we have a limited window with Mack's contract, Makar on an ELC, etc. and it's important to make the most of that time. I just think timing is equally important and you can't rush it without seeing some results. I think the moves Joe made this season have been close to perfect, considering we were still very much a playoff bubble team and were 1 season out from having the worst record in the modern NHL. Acquiring a player like Hayes would have improved the team, but the Rangers most likely would be asking a lot more than a 1st + 4th + B prospect. Hard to say what the price would be, but I imagine it would be closer to Jost + 1st if we wanted him last summer.

Chicago's acquisitions were made after they were already a perennial cup contender and needed to fill in the gaps, acquiring a #2/3C, a #4/5 defenseman, etc. They did have the luxury of having cap circumventing contracts, but they also benefited by being patient and having prospects like Buff, Ladd, Brouwer, Versteeg, etc. develop into big roles. Either way, I agree that I don't think Chicago's model can be used. With Pittsburgh, Kessel was a huge acquisition but equally important was the addition of the youngsters like Murray, Guentzel, Rust, Sheary, Dumo.

With all that being said, I think Joe has made the right moves up to this point by sticking with his patient MO, but with the addition of Makar and seeing that last season wasn't a fluke, this offseason he needs to make something happen, but not at the expense of hampering the team in the future by making a desperate signing like Neal. I know you aren't a fan of Joe's patience approach, but I honestly think it's paid huge dividends and players like Bowers, Kam, will be important depth in the future. Overpay by an extra year on Hayes is fine, but signing him to a long contract over $8 mil contract is not.

Joe has set himself up to have a huge offseason though. With one of the best free agent classes in years, multiple cup pretenders being bounced in the 1st round in embarrassing fashion, and teams feeling the cap crunch, there's going to be a lot of options.

No major disagreements, but I didn't want Hayes last summer, I only wanted Hayes at the TDL after we didn't add someone better previously.

RE: chicago; Soupy & Hossa were signed before they became contenders & were monumental in that becoming a cup winning core. They are an example of projecting growth and making moves on those projections rather than on what has already been proven.

I don't have any major gripes with Joe, although I do think we'd be in an even better spot if he had been a little more proactive...be that pulling the trigger on the dutchy trade a year earlier, jumping on ROR/Schenn/Zucker/etc. when they hit the market. But everything is still ahead of him this summer and he could still hit it out of the park; which is why I won't judge him until we see what happens in the coming months.

 

[flyfysher]

If choosing between a hypothetical decade of cup-less playoff seasons vs a decade with 1 cup but the team missing the playoffs more often than not, I pick the latter. And that probably is a central point of conflict in this discussion.

Do you really think that with the personnel which the Avs have assembled that they aren't built for a SC window spanning multiple seasons and should proceed from that premise instead of a trade deal in an effort to grab the SC now because it may be our one shot? I understand your thinking and realize we are discussing hypotheticals but I just don't see the Avs really being in that position.

 

[AllAboutAvs]

Why's that? Because his demands back then look reasonable in hindsight & we have to save face by pretending he wouldn't have been a perfect fit for what we're missing?

And Schenn was traded for two protected 1st & a cap dump, not a roster player.

Because FA is after the postseason and this postseason has lined up for us to make a run if we had the personnel to go all of the way to the SCF? Plus, we have an asset surplus that can more than survive being dipped into, and that may spoil if left unused.

Why should I bother? You can come up with names to shoot down without my help based on this post.

You forgot that the cap exists right after I forgot that we weren't good in 2017

Doesn't matter what the reason is about ROR...the ship has still sailed.

I'll give you Lethera as a cap dump but it is still twp 1st rounds for Schenn and on top of that it was right after we came out of our 48pt season. We were in no position to go shopping for Schenn at that price.

You wanted to add someone like Hayes last summer. Ok I understand and I agree to a certain point. I say Sakic did try to add somebody. There were rumours we were in on some guys. He found the price too high and I agree with that as we were just one season removed from that dreaded 48pt season. So he reverted to plan B whuch is to evaluate what he had on his hands...the kids. Now we are in a much better situation to be more aggressive in FA and trades.

I apologize if I "shoot down" your players you mentioned but I thought this was a message board where we can argue somebody else's position. You are the one that said there were other players we could have got. I'll be the first one to agree with you if I find they were valid targets in my eyes. If in my eyes they were not I'll argue that point. I'm sorry if you don't like it.

Maybe we should stop this discussion as I can see you are getting upset by using at the end of your post.

You'll have to explain your last comment as I do not understand it one bit. Sorry for my being dense.

 

[LTC Pain]

Theres actually a lot of good players on the market this summer, at least as of right now anyway.


Karlsson
Panarin
Duchene
Skinner
Gardiner
Dzingel
Hayes
Ferland
Lee
Zuccarello
Nyquist




Theres other good utility players worth looking into as well. Connolly, Donskoi, Chaisson, Nelson, etc.

Only two FAs I want Super Joe to go after this summer - Panarin and Ferland. Hard pass on Hayes.

 

[Foppa2118]

Only two FAs I want Super Joe to go after this summer - Panarin and Ferland. Hard pass on Hayes.

The tricky part will be if Panarin just wants to go to Florida. I'd be less upset than most if they just signed a Ferland type, and they drafted a top forward at #4 that might not be ready next year, but it won't be the kind of upgrade many are hoping for.

I have the same concerns about Hayes as others, but I still think the Avs go all in on him.

 

[Makar to MacK]

The tricky part will be if Panarin just wants to go to Florida. I'd be less upset than most if they just signed a Ferland type, and they drafted a top forward at #4 that might not be ready next year, but it won't be the kind of upgrade many are hoping for.

I have the same concerns about Hayes as others, but I still think the Avs go all in on him.

The whole point is that none of the prospects available at 4 will be ready that soon unfortunately or at least that seems to be the common consensus. I'm not sure about Byram but all the forwards except Hughes and Kakko don't look to be NFL ready or are committed elsewhere. Pods might be ready but he has said that he is staying in Russia until his current contract runs out at least.

 

[Foppa2118]

The whole point is that none of the prospects available at 4 will be ready that soon unfortunately or at least that seems to be the common consensus. I'm not sure about Byram but all the forwards except Hughes and Kakko don't look to be NFL ready or are committed elsewhere. Pods might be ready but he has said that he is staying in Russia until his current contract runs out at least.

That may be the case with the guys after the big two, but really that's just a guess when people say that. Even NHL teams don't know for sure. You have to see prospects in training camp and pre-season against legit NHLers to assess their readiness, and a lot can change over the summer at age 18. Every year someone surprises by sticking in the NHL and looking good.

I wouldn't count on guys like Dach and Cozens making the jump right away, but I wouldn't count it out either. That puts Sakic in a bind though. I think he was hoping they'd get Hughes or Kakko so he could count on them being NHL ready.

 

[ThunderBird]

I like Joe's patience. I would rather him be patient than sign a bad contract. If the guy isn't the right fit or the number's aren't right then don't force it. Making a bad signing can wreck our window whether it is open or it is opening.

My biggest gripe with Sakic is his draft record in the second and third rounds. That has to get better for us to have a long sustainable window. Now that we are opening the window we won't get top 10 picks anymore.

 

[cgf]

Do you really think that with the personnel which the Avs have assembled that they aren't built for a SC window spanning multiple seasons and should proceed from that premise instead of a trade deal in an effort to grab the SC now because it may be our one shot? I understand your thinking and realize we are discussing hypotheticals but I just don't see the Avs really being in that position.

Again I don't think that's the choice that we actually faced. Moving for ROR last summer, Hayes at the TDL, or any other player that fit the bill, wouldn't have gutted us & prevented us from contending for multiple seasons. It would've just increased our window of contention by opening it sooner & giving us more swings before the eventual cap-cull.

 

[RockLobster]

If Joe is "patient" again--and I'd hesitate to call it that, I think it's more that the FO has some antiquated views on salary--then as some others have pointed out, their window for contention will shut hard.

They have MacKinnon on a steal of a contract. That's what matters most because players like Rantanen, Landeskog, and Barrie will need raises as soon as this upcoming season (Mikko). Makar is on his ELC for another 2 years and it currently seems like the team has designs to lock him up long-term as soon as possible.

Their "patient" approach has now paid off to them having a boatload of cap space to re-sign Rantanen (and Barrie, like they should), and make some moves in UFA to actually address the issue(s) the team has. Not utilizing that would be, in my opinion, grounds for Joe to be dismissed from his position and have someone brought in who will actually have the f***ing balls to make a move to keep this team going.

It's nice that we are in the 2nd round, but we saw the problem all year with the secondary scoring, and while it hasn't so-much been an issue lately, it still is an issue as the season largely pointed to.

 

[Iceberg]

Trading a 1st round pick for a rental at the deadline this year was the dumbest thing Sakic could have done.

 

[cgf]

Trading a 1st round pick for a rental at the deadline this year was the dumbest thing Sakic could have done.

Nah, that's trading Barrie

 

[Iceberg]

Nah, that's trading Barrie

Nah, that was never an option at the deadline.

 

[cgf]

Nah, that was never an option at the deadline.

Nor is it for the offseason

Either way, the dumbest thing Joe could've done at the TDL was waste any sort of (even pseudo-)asset on a washed up "playoff vet" like Derick Brassard...

 

[Iceberg]

Nor is it for the offseason

Maybe not... still not sure what it has to do with Sakic's work at the TDL.