McKenzie: Moved: McKenzie: Oilers in on Barrie? (Moves by Colorado-- Merged)

[GirardSpinorama]

Again, you have to slam the GM of an unrelated team to deflect from the debate you're losing. If you had a point you'd have quoted the relevant section of my post and countered with something fact-based, or at least rooted in the present discussion.

Here is your argument that I wanted to counter. I wrote my point about the Kessel trade quickly because I wanted to immediately point out how hypocritical your view points are.

And that there is the crux of the problem. You want what is best for your team, which is understandable. However, what's not is viewing the entire market through that myopic lens. Newport doesn't give a flip what you think is fair. They don't care. They'll go to any means to get what THEY want. Don't like it? Move Barrie now. Don't piddle around like Sakic did with ROR and return a pile of futures that don't help the Avs get any closer to contention in the next two years.

But hey, if you want to pay your young players whatever their agents want, by all means. But your own GM does NOT agree with that view point. Just to add, it was rumored that Sakic tried to trade ROR for Giordano and the Flames did not take the deal (for good reason, Gio is a number 1 dman). Everything you are saying about Joe is untrue, if anything you're criticizing him for what Chia would do.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

It's about what fits the market. I will have zero qualms if Draisaitl demands the same extension the other kids got- 6 years+, $6 million. I'd even accept a slight bump due to cap inflation.

What I would NOT accept- what would piss me off- is if Chiarelli decided his star young power center was the hill to die on when it came to bridge contracts, and decided to make an example of him. Then you fall right into the pattern of build-'em-up-ship-'em-out that Sakic is in. You become a farm club for the other 29 NHL clubs.



I highly doubt the Sabres care what Eichel asks for if he manages to out-produce Eichel on his ELC. That's a great problem to have. In any case, he's one of those blank check kids, a borderline generational player. He'll get paid and Murray will be happy about it.



And that there is the crux of the problem. You want what is best for your team, which is understandable. However, what's not is viewing the entire market through that myopic lens. Newport doesn't give a flip what you think is fair. They don't care. They'll go to any means to get what THEY want. Don't like it? Move Barrie now. Don't piddle around like Sakic did with ROR and return a pile of futures that don't help the Avs get any closer to contention in the next two years.

Is a single player really a pattern of building them up and shipping them out? The only player that fits that bill in Colorado is ROR. And, if Barrie ends up being #2 in that "pattern", and returns as much as ROR, then the Avs will probably be a better team in the long term. So, it's a win for the Avs.

If Buffalo wants to pay Eichel more than ROR, that's up to them. But, there is this thing called a salary cap. If they have $16m tied up in 2 forwards, they'll definitely have to make some tough choices down the road.

And, the Avs essentially replaced ROR with Soderberg. A little less production, not elite D, but same kind of player. Do you honestly think upgrading from Soda to ROR makes the Avs a contender? Would ROR somehow magically prevent Tanguay and Iginla from getting older? Does he prevent Nick Holden from being in the Avs top 4? Does he stop Guenin, Gormley, Redmond and Bodnarchuk from each playing 20+ games on the Avs blueline?

 

[GirardSpinorama]

But that's exactly what he did. Where's Compher fit? Is Grigorenko going to replace his production? You succinctly explained what he got back for ROR- a whole bunch of pieces that don't serve a contender's goal of, well, contending.

Avs used the 7.5 on ROR to pay for 5 mill for Soderberg (replaced much of the production). They got quality prospects they desperately needed. They may be magic beans to you if your team has no scouts, but teams sometimes need to project and trade for potential. That was a quality trade for the Avs.

The moment you have to step into that territory, you know you've lost. This is about the Avalanche and Sakic. Deflecting is a sure sign your stance isn't the right one.

Its actually relevant and not a deflection. Everyone and their grandma knows that Taylor Hall's value on a contender is higher than Taylor Hall's value being on a bottom feeder for six years. Chia didn't have the leverage since his needs were so obvious. He had to lose value on the trade to get a player that would take the team out of the bottom.

 

[Drij]

Right you are. Sheary was an FA signing. Rust was a third rounder a million years ago. Cullen was a bargain bin UFA pick-up. Ian Cole was had for a borderline NHLer and a 7th round pick. However- and this is the key- they didn't trade Evgeni Malkin to land any of those pieces; in fact, when it came time to supplement their stars, they went out and PAID futures to get a Phil Kessel.

The Avs took a step back for the 2+ seasons that followed the ROR trade, no question. They'll do the same if they mess around with Barrie.

its been 1 year...and we almost made the playoffs...

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Nah. Chia letting go of young players has no barring on whether sakic is letting go of Tyson Barrie. I can't help you if you can't figure that out.

Why do I need your help? I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of saying that Sakic is a bad GM for not kowtowing to Newport, when the fan making that very argument considers Chirelli a good GM when he does the exact same thing.

 

[Bender]

It's about what fits the market. I will have zero qualms if Draisaitl demands the same extension the other kids got- 6 years+, $6 million. I'd even accept a slight bump due to cap inflation.

What I would NOT accept- what would piss me off- is if Chiarelli decided his star young power center was the hill to die on when it came to bridge contracts, and decided to make an example of him. Then you fall right into the pattern of build-'em-up-ship-'em-out that Sakic is in. You become a farm club for the other 29 NHL clubs.

But that's clearly NOT what I asked you. I said what if Leon wants $9M per (NINE - NOT SIX)...then what?

Because everyone on the Avs that's a comparable player to ROR was getting $6M per or thereabouts...Duchene $6M, Varlamov $6M, Landeskog $5.5M. O'Reilly wanted $8M per year on the Avs and we shipped him out...rightfully so in my view.

If Draisaitl wanted $9M compared to everyone else who was at $6M or $7M, my guess is you'd feel alright about getting good value back for him and wouldn't be in this largely hypocritical "pay him at all costs" stance ESPECIALLY if you had to sign him FIRST and then had to re-up McDavid the year after.

 

[tony d]

I see Barrie filed for arbitration. Could this set something up for him to be moved by the Avalanche?

 

[Cousin Eddie]

I see Barrie filed for arbitration. Could this set something up for him to be moved by the Avalanche?

Arbitration wont affect it. If he's going to be moved it's for other reasons. The fact that Tyson is the one who filed actually helps the Avs. They can select a two year term which ends up with Tyson on a two year contract likely in the 5 million dollar per year range. Plus he's still an RFA at the end.

 

[strictlyrandy]

I see Barrie filed for arbitration. Could this set something up for him to be moved by the Avalanche?

Unlikely. We see players file all the time, they hardly reach actual arbitration. Joe knows what Barrie is worth in a trade. He doesn't have to trade him. My guess is they are trying to work something with Barrie first before they work something with MacKinnon.

 

[PatrikOverAuston]

But hey, if you want to pay your young players whatever their agents want, by all means. But your own GM does NOT agree with that view point.

Why do I need your help? I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of saying that Sakic is a bad GM for not kowtowing to Newport, when the fan making that very argument considers Chirelli a good GM when he does the exact same thing.

What does it matter what my GM did in an entirely different situation on a different team? I've never even said whether or not I agree with what he did, or if he even is a good GM in general. However, your constant need to deflect and pull my club into it continues to demonstrate you don't have the factual ammunition necessary to discount my points.

Just to add, it was rumored that Sakic tried to trade ROR for Giordano and the Flames did not take the deal (for good reason, Gio is a number 1 dman). Everything you are saying about Joe is untrue, if anything you're criticizing him for what Chia would do.

Rumored nothing- Sakic traded O'Reilly for futures a year after signing him to a contract engineered to take him to FA. That's his fault. It's on him.

Is a single player really a pattern of building them up and shipping them out? The only player that fits that bill in Colorado is ROR.

He's now going through the same motions with Barrie. It's pretty clear that Sakic hasn't learned from the last time.

And, if Barrie ends up being #2 in that "pattern", and returns as much as ROR, then the Avs will probably be a better team in the long term. So, it's a win for the Avs.

Great, but Colorado's window is today, not long-term. You don't pay a goaltender what Varlamov is making if you're re-tooling/re-imagining/re-building. You don't keep around as many core players as Sakic has if you want to change the mix.

Sakic made his team worse in the ROR trade. There's no debating that. He's about to do the same with Barrie if the pattern holds true.

If Buffalo wants to pay Eichel more than ROR, that's up to them. But, there is this thing called a salary cap. If they have $16m tied up in 2 forwards, they'll definitely have to make some tough choices down the road.

For sure, but all successful teams have to deal with that. Edmonton will need to handle a pricey McDavid extension even if they extend their playoffless streak to 13 years, to use another example. This league requires you to pay your guys to keep them. I'm not sure why Sakic seems to struggle with that; he was, after all, the harbinger of all of this kind of stuff after he signed New York's offer sheet back in 1997.

And, the Avs essentially replaced ROR with Soderberg. A little less production, not elite D, but same kind of player.

Soderberg had never come close to O'Reilly's numbers in Boston. They aren't even deployed the same, which you note is as a result of his less-than-ideal defensive ability. If Sakic thought a player who was five years older and both less productive and well-rounded was a good replacement for O'Reilly, well, he got what he paid for, and the team performed about as well as one might have expected.

Do you honestly think upgrading from Soda to ROR makes the Avs a contender?

In what way does essentially trading one player for another who plays the same position but is worse in every facet a good idea for ANY team? The cap savings weren't even all that substantial, as you pointed out. It's the difference between the Avs with or without a Cody McLeod.

Would ROR somehow magically prevent Tanguay and Iginla from getting older? Does he prevent Nick Holden from being in the Avs top 4? Does he stop Guenin, Gormley, Redmond and Bodnarchuk from each playing 20+ games on the Avs blueline?

Man, it's a shame Sakic couldn't trade O'Reilly the year before for actual NHLers to help fill any one of those positions.

Also, I'd like to point out all of those things are directly within Burnaby Joe's sphere of influence. If the Avs are weak on D or up front, he's the one to blame- not O'Reilly.

Avs used the 7.5 on ROR to pay for 5 mill for Soderberg (replaced much of the production). They got quality prospects they desperately needed.

Wait, so the logic here is a bit off. The Avs "needed" quality prospects, ostensibly because they couldn't draft them. That would usually mean a deficiency in team scouting. Yet...

They may be magic beans to you if your team has no scouts, but teams sometimes need to project and trade for potential. That was a quality trade for the Avs.

You trust those same scouts who couldn't draft prospects to identify ones worth obtaining on other teams. That doesn't strike you as a little, I don't know, bizarre?

Its actually relevant and not a deflection. Everyone and their grandma knows that Taylor Hall's value on a contender is higher than Taylor Hall's value being on a bottom feeder for six years. Chia didn't have the leverage since his needs were so obvious. He had to lose value on the trade to get a player that would take the team out of the bottom.

And yet none of it has to do with Joe Sakic trading O'Reilly at a time of his choosing that also happened to correspond with his value being the lowest, or at least lower than it had been a year before.

You can keep going back to that well, but it's not absolving Sakic of anything.

its been 1 year...and we almost made the playoffs...

Almost doesn't count for much. It's Joe Sakic's job to make the Avalanche into a contender, and he's only taken them further back with moves like the O'Reilly trade.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

What does it matter what my GM did in an entirely different situation on a different team? I've never even said whether or not I agree with what he did, or if he even is a good GM in general. However, your constant need to deflect and pull my club into it continues to demonstrate you don't have the factual ammunition necessary to discount my points.



Rumored nothing- Sakic traded O'Reilly for futures a year after signing him to a contract engineered to take him to FA. That's his fault. It's on him.



He's now going through the same motions with Barrie. It's pretty clear that Sakic hasn't learned from the last time.



Great, but Colorado's window is today, not long-term. You don't pay a goaltender what Varlamov is making if you're re-tooling/re-imagining/re-building. You don't keep around as many core players as Sakic has if you want to change the mix.

Sakic made his team worse in the ROR trade. There's no debating that. He's about to do the same with Barrie if the pattern holds true.



For sure, but all successful teams have to deal with that. Edmonton will need to handle a pricey McDavid extension even if they extend their playoffless streak to 13 years, to use another example. This league requires you to pay your guys to keep them. I'm not sure why Sakic seems to struggle with that; he was, after all, the harbinger of all of this kind of stuff after he signed New York's offer sheet back in 1997.



Soderberg had never come close to O'Reilly's numbers in Boston. They aren't even deployed the same, which you note is as a result of his less-than-ideal defensive ability. If Sakic thought a player who was five years older and both less productive and well-rounded was a good replacement for O'Reilly, well, he got what he paid for, and the team performed about as well as one might have expected.



In what way does essentially trading one player for another who plays the same position but is worse in every facet a good idea for ANY team? The cap savings weren't even all that substantial, as you pointed out. It's the difference between the Avs with or without a Cody McLeod.



Man, it's a shame Sakic couldn't trade O'Reilly the year before for actual NHLers to help fill any one of those positions.

Also, I'd like to point out all of those things are directly within Burnaby Joe's sphere of influence. If the Avs are weak on D or up front, he's the one to blame- not O'Reilly.



Wait, so the logic here is a bit off. The Avs "needed" quality prospects, ostensibly because they couldn't draft them. That would usually mean a deficiency in team scouting. Yet...



You trust those same scouts who couldn't draft prospects to identify ones worth obtaining on other teams. That doesn't strike you as a little, I don't know, bizarre?



And yet none of it has to do with Joe Sakic trading O'Reilly at a time of his choosing that also happened to correspond with his value being the lowest, or at least lower than it had been a year before.

You can keep going back to that well, but it's not absolving Sakic of anything.



Almost doesn't count for much. It's Joe Sakic's job to make the Avalanche into a contender, and he's only taken them further back with moves like the O'Reilly trade.

You keep trying to blame Sakic for the ROR situation, but as I pointed out, he inherited a bad situation, created by Pierre LaCroix. He traded ROR to make the team better in the long run, and most Avs fans are happy with the return. And, ROR wasn't traded for Sodaberg, so not sure where you're going with that. The Avs shipped out ROR, McGinn and a 6th, and got back Sodaberg, Zadorov, Grigorenko, Compher and the 31st OA pick (which they traded for picks that became Greer/Meloche and Morrison). I think there is a serious debate as to whether moving ROR made the Avs better, but we won't know for sure for a couple of years.

Also, I'd love to hear the logic about why the Avs window is right now, and not in 2-3 years. We aren't the Sharks, with guys like Thornton and Marleau. Or the Canucks with the Sedins. Every single core player on the team is in their 20s. We're poised to have a good, young, balanced team, that should be competitive for years. Why is it a huge deal if those competitive years start in 2017, instead of 2014?

 

[Drij]

Almost doesn't count for much. It's Joe Sakic's job to make the Avalanche into a contender, and he's only taken them further back with moves like the O'Reilly trade.

So going from last in the west to 9th doesn't count for anything. You don't go from last place to contender overnight.

Edmonton has been trying to do that for 10 years now.

 

[Hennessy]

I love how Oilers fans suddenly became experts on Colorado's FO since Barrie might be rumored to maybe go to their team.

 

[cgf]

You realize that we got an awesome return for ROR right? One that we had to listen to other teams' fans tell us (for over a year) that we'd never get. Barrie's awesome and should just remain an Av; but if we have to trade him & get a similar package, the team will be better for it in the long run as well.

 

[AvsGuy]

OT, but the piece that's making the ROR trade really interesting right now is JT Compher.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

What does it matter what my GM did in an entirely different situation on a different team? I've never even said whether or not I agree with what he did, or if he even is a good GM in general. However, your constant need to deflect and pull my club into it continues to demonstrate you don't have the factual ammunition necessary to discount my points.

Just trying to point out your hypocrisy, which is totally valid in any debate as it emphasizes your lack of consistency. Unless you state right here that you don't think Chia is a good GM, in which case I'll withdraw this point.

Rumored nothing- Sakic traded O'Reilly for futures a year after signing him to a contract engineered to take him to FA. That's his fault. It's on him.

Man, it's a shame Sakic couldn't trade O'Reilly the year before for actual NHLers to help fill any one of those positions.

And yet none of it has to do with Joe Sakic trading O'Reilly at a time of his choosing that also happened to correspond with his value being the lowest, or at least lower than it had been a year before.

O'Reilly was pretty much in the driver seat after the Calgary offersheet that Sakic inherited. He had a QO of 6 mill, he wasn't going to take less than 7.5. Any team trading for him would get the same situation, so his value was not that much lower. The Avs made the playoffs that year and they were not going to trade O'Reilly away because it was going to weaken their team regardless. It was a perfectly sensible move at that point.

Wait, so the logic here is a bit off. The Avs "needed" quality prospects, ostensibly because they couldn't draft them. That would usually mean a deficiency in team scouting. Yet...

You trust those same scouts who couldn't draft prospects to identify ones worth obtaining on other teams. That doesn't strike you as a little, I don't know, bizarre?

The same team that drafted O'Reilly and Barrie in the 2nd and 3rd round. I'm not worried about the Avs scouts. Not the best in the league, but fairly competent. Our pipeline was depleted since we graduated a lot of prospects and missed out on others.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

The same team that drafted O'Reilly and Barrie in the 2nd and 3rd round. I'm not worried about the Avs scouts. Not the best in the league, but fairly competent. Our pipeline was depleted since we graduated a lot of prospects and missed out on others.

For the record, it is worth noting that the top end of the scouting branch of the club was fired as Roy/Sakic took over.

Beyond Duchene, O'Reilly, and Barrie, the previous scouting staff had not hit on any player really, even just for depth players. (can include Lando into that I guess too maybe)

The current scouting staff appears to be at least looking good on a few picks turning into solid depth players, plus Rantanen is shaping up to be a top 2 line winger.

It is also worth noting the Avs cleaned house at the player development level this summer, as it appeared as though the previous staff was not developing players well and the AHL club was seemingly horribly miss-managed from the player development standpoint.

Sakic/Roy inherited a bad scouting group and cleaned house. It took them a bit longer, but they also found that the development group was lacking, so they cleaned house there too.

Part of why Roy and Sakic are going to need more time, perhaps 3-4 years more even, to see what they can really do is that the old regime sat on its hands for far too long and the franchise stagnated and fell into disrepair as a result. It is almost like they took over an expansion franchise. Winning the division in year one really skewed the view on what the state of the franchise was.

I am willing to give them a few more seasons to see what they can do, just so long as they continue to make changes to the culture and behind the scenes operations of the team as well as show they are learning from their own mistakes.

 

[ManofSteel55]

What does it matter what my GM did in an entirely different situation on a different team? I've never even said whether or not I agree with what he did, or if he even is a good GM in general. However, your constant need to deflect and pull my club into it continues to demonstrate you don't have the factual ammunition necessary to discount my points.

Not sure what else you expect. If you are going to run at a team's GM, then expect them to give it back.

Rumored nothing- Sakic traded O'Reilly for futures a year after signing him to a contract engineered to take him to FA. That's his fault. It's on him.

Sakic traded O'Reilly for a good package of futures because they were already very strong at forward. You can only pay so many guys #1 centre money.

He's now going through the same motions with Barrie. It's pretty clear that Sakic hasn't learned from the last time.

It's a completely different situation, the only parallel is that its a good player looking to be paid. O'Reilly was expendable, Barrie probably isn't as much and thus his value is higher until they know for sure what is going to happen with his arbitration.

Great, but Colorado's window is today, not long-term. You don't pay a goaltender what Varlamov is making if you're re-tooling/re-imagining/re-building. You don't keep around as many core players as Sakic has if you want to change the mix.

Colorado's window is not today. They have a very young team. A team paying a starting goalie a good salary doesn't mean that their "window is open". It means they are trying to build a balanced team for when the window is open.

Sakic made his team worse in the ROR trade. There's no debating that. He's about to do the same with Barrie if the pattern holds true.

Sakic made his on ice team worse in the immediate future, but loaded up the system and gained money to get Soderberg, who isn't as good as O'Reilly, but is playing a role and making a salary more in line with what the Aves needed as opposed to another top liner in O'Reilly.

For sure, but all successful teams have to deal with that. Edmonton will need to handle a pricey McDavid extension even if they extend their playoffless streak to 13 years, to use another example. This league requires you to pay your guys to keep them. I'm not sure why Sakic seems to struggle with that; he was, after all, the harbinger of all of this kind of stuff after he signed New York's offer sheet back in 1997.

Every team negotiates. Some players want to be paid more than an organization wants to pay them. We know that was the case with ROR, and rightfully so in his situation as he has proven to be worth the kind of money that Colorado can't pay him. There is nothing wrong with Sakic wanting Barrie to show him more (be it in a more complete game or whatever they want) before giving him a big money, long term contract. Barrie is a good player but not without some flaws, a GM is smart to not want to cripple the team long-term for a player they aren't sure is the long-term fit.

Soderberg had never come close to O'Reilly's numbers in Boston. They aren't even deployed the same, which you note is as a result of his less-than-ideal defensive ability. If Sakic thought a player who was five years older and both less productive and well-rounded was a good replacement for O'Reilly, well, he got what he paid for, and the team performed about as well as one might have expected.

Soderberg doesn't need to reach O'Reilly numbers. He needs to be an adequate 2nd line center. He is that. O'Reilly was that, but was capable of more and wanted to be paid to do more. Colorado's performance last year also isn't a result of Soderberg. Like Edmonton, they are looking to balance their team. You can't blame Soderberg any more than you can blame any one Oiler for us being so bad again last year.

In what way does essentially trading one player for another who plays the same position but is worse in every facet a good idea for ANY team? The cap savings weren't even all that substantial, as you pointed out. It's the difference between the Avs with or without a Cody McLeod.

When you are trading a guy who wants to be a #1 centre and wants #1 centre money, but isn't your teams #1 centre and has made it known that he wants top dollar regardless of the role he will take on the team, it makes sense. It wasn't O'Reilly for Soderberg. It was O'Reilly for Soderberg and a pile of very good prospects. A net win for Sakic, much like Hall for Larsson and Lucic is going to be a net positive for Chiarelli. I'm sure if Sakic could have gotten a #1 defenseman for O'Reilly, he would have.

Man, it's a shame Sakic couldn't trade O'Reilly the year before for actual NHLers to help fill any one of those positions.

Hindsight, 20/20. The year before O'Reilly's value might not have been the same. The positions Sakic wanted to fill also might not have been possible with trade. We've seen that in Edmonton for years.

Also, I'd like to point out all of those things are directly within Burnaby Joe's sphere of influence. If the Avs are weak on D or up front, he's the one to blame- not O'Reilly.

It's Sakic's job to fix that problem. Probably is a big part of why they don't want to trade Barrie for beans.

Wait, so the logic here is a bit off. The Avs "needed" quality prospects, ostensibly because they couldn't draft them. That would usually mean a deficiency in team scouting. Yet...

Colorado has had the same problem with Edmonton in terms of scouting. Lots of top end draft picks means lots of young guys who make the NHL right away and not much for the prospect pool. A successful team has a strong prospect pool that they can lean on when necessary. How is Sakic strengthening his prospect pool a bad thing?

You trust those same scouts who couldn't draft prospects to identify ones worth obtaining on other teams. That doesn't strike you as a little, I don't know, bizarre?

Using that logic, no team with a bad drafting record should be trading for prospects. Quite frankly, that makes no sense, especially when dealing with prospects who are nearly universally considered to be very good.

And yet none of it has to do with Joe Sakic trading O'Reilly at a time of his choosing that also happened to correspond with his value being the lowest, or at least lower than it had been a year before.

Do you truly know if O'Reilly's value was lower when he was traded? For all we know the offers might have been basically the same, and in that case, why not get the extra year out of him. I'm sure if a trade to fill a hole long term was there for O'Reilly, he would have taken it. The fact is that everyone knew that ROR was looking to get paid, so other GM's might needed to see more from him before making an offer.

You can keep going back to that well, but it's not absolving Sakic of anything.

Almost doesn't count for much. It's Joe Sakic's job to make the Avalanche into a contender, and he's only taken them further back with moves like the O'Reilly trade.

Thoughts

 

[zar]

Thoughts

Very reasonable comments... good job.

Let's be honest here... every GM has their good and bad "moments". We, the general public, rarely are made aware of all of the factors - as we do not know what goes on behind closed doors.

ROR Trade
If you find a quote where Sakic comes out and says "ROR is a ceiling as a 2nd line centerman and that all we are paying him!"... then you can say he made an error. His actions, to me, were more along the lines of... we see MacKinnon as our future 1C, maybe Duchene as our 2C and can not afford to pay ROR with his demands to play a 2C or 3C role. You try your best to negotiate with the players agent but sometimes the agent/player stand their ground and what prevails is what we witnessed. I think Sakic shipped ROR out for the best package he can get while he still has value.

Hall Trade
From a Chia POV, he understands (he actually said it), he was going to take heat for the Hall trade... one to one value, Hall > Larsson. He did what he thought was best for the team. Larsson is seen as some one with untapped potential... how much? Who knows? As it stands today, IMO, he looks like he could have a ceiling of strong #2 or low #1 (for clarification purposes, I call a top 30 overall valued dman in the NHL a #1) but today is a low end #2 or high #3 (45th-70th overall valued Dman in the NHL). Larsson has a very good contract for a high #3/low #2. I am confident that Chiarelli tried to trade everyone not named McDavid, Klefbom, Sekera (NMC), Draisaitl, Nurse, or Talbot before he traded Taylor Hall. I am also confident that he then identified which specific Dmen he wanted that he felt he could realisitcally get then picked up the phone to see who which GM was even going to answer the phone. He makes a deal for Larsson, albeit at a very high cost, but one that makes the Oilers a better overall team... especially considering he had likely already a strong indication that Lucic was willing to sign in Edmonton. Other GMs said 'we woudl have offered a better package'... that's using their own value. Remember, even GMs have rose coloured glasses for their own players when it comes to trades - they're no different than some of us - you have to take that stance to extract value. Come contract time they use different glasses. Back to the trade and GMs saying they would have offered a better 'package'... to me that meant offered a lesser player with picks... this is not what the Oilers needed.

Barrie
Barrie... we'll see what happens... many people are taking some very strong stances when they truly have no idea, ZERO, ZIPPO, ZILCH, what Sakic is offering or what Barrie is demanding. You have to make deal that make sense for today and for the next 5-8 before putting pen to paper. If Barrie is asking for $7.5-8m then I do not blame Sakic for not signing him and I do not want that deal anywhere near the Oilers. If Barrie is asking for $5-6m then I think Sakic is not being smart and I hope he trades Barrie to the Oilers after the arbitration hearing. What is most likely is, before the hearing, Barrie and the Avs agree to a 4-5 year contract with a $6-6.25 AAV NMC and he stays an Av. I would love to see him an Oiler for $6-6.25m per (min 5 year term) trading Barrie + Comeau for RNH + Davidson or Reinhart (Avs choice)

Conclusion
My point is, it's not always looking purely at the value of the player to gauge a trade, it's looking at ALL of the circumstances in the situation to gauge a trade. I think Joe and Pete have both done OK and the outcomes of the trades are 'yet to be determined' because of the future values.

 

[Liferleafer]

Arbitration wont affect it. If he's going to be moved it's for other reasons. The fact that Tyson is the one who filed actually helps the Avs. They can select a two year term which ends up with Tyson on a two year contract likely in the 5 million dollar per year range. Plus he's still an RFA at the end.

I agree, this will help the Avs. They will get Barrie for a reasonable 2 year deal, can re-evaluate after that.

 

[PatrikOverAuston]

You keep trying to blame Sakic for the ROR situation, but as I pointed out, he inherited a bad situation, created by Pierre LaCroix.

Sakic had choices. Why do you keep ignoring that? His only option was not to let ROR a year closer to UFA. Not even close. That's bad management.

He traded ROR to make the team better in the long run, and most Avs fans are happy with the return.

The Avs needed to be good in the short run, but if you are "happy" as a group with the problems such constant retooling creates (see below) that's nothing anyone can dissuade you from.

And, ROR wasn't traded for Sodaberg, so not sure where you're going with that.

The post I quoted noted Soderberg was brought in to replace O'Reilly's production. I understand it wasn't a straight-across trade, but Sakic tried to save a couple bucks via that route, and it didn't work. That's where I was going with that.

I think there is a serious debate as to whether moving ROR made the Avs better, but we won't know for sure for a couple of years.

Right, but the point is you'd know if it made them better or even the same today because said assets would be contributing to the current roster. Only Grigorenko really is, and he's Ryan O'Reilly.

Also, I'd love to hear the logic about why the Avs window is right now, and not in 2-3 years. We aren't the Sharks, with guys like Thornton and Marleau. Or the Canucks with the Sedins. Every single core player on the team is in their 20s. We're poised to have a good, young, balanced team, that should be competitive for years. Why is it a huge deal if those competitive years start in 2017, instead of 2014?

Here's why: Matt Duchene will be a year away from UFA when the team is just beginning to be competitive by your own timeline. Varlamov will be a year away. Tyson Barrie will also be a year and a contract away from the open market, presuming he goes to arbitration and comes out of it with a two-year deal. Why are those players staying in Colorado if they have the choice to leave for a more competitive team- especially one who wouldn't haggle over pennies and nickles? Right there are three of your core pieces.

Oh, and by then, Erik Johnson will be 30. Beauchemin's career will almost be over. Behind them is, what, Zadorov? You'll then need to spend in FA to fill almost an entire top 6, because your only other option is to hope Bigras and a random like Corbett or Geertsen is NHL-ready by that point.

If the Avs don't make a strong case for the playoffs by the end of 2018, that's about it for this window. They will need to enter a complete rebuild, and turn the team over to the Core 2.0 of MacKinnon, Grigorenko, Rantanen and Jost.

So going from last in the west to 9th doesn't count for anything. You don't go from last place to contender overnight.

Roy and Sakic have been in senior leadership roles with the Avs since 2013. That's not overnight.

Edmonton has been trying to do that for 10 years now.

Right, and guess what our mistake was? I'll give you a hint: it was entrusting the future of the team to two former players who hadn't proved their mettle in the NHL as executives/coaches beforehand.

I love how Oilers fans suddenly became experts on Colorado's FO since Barrie might be rumored to maybe go to their team.

Does one have to be an expert to know Ryan O'Reilly was traded for lottery tickets?

You realize that we got an awesome return for ROR right? One that we had to listen to other teams' fans tell us (for over a year) that we'd never get.

That you'd never get more than scratch-offs some years out from impacting the roster in a real way? Well, those people were more pessimistic about Sakic's management than I am, I'll tell you what.

Barrie's awesome and should just remain an Av; but if we have to trade him & get a similar package, the team will be better for it in the long run as well.

You can keep talking about the long run, but if you want your CURRENT players to hang around beyond 2019, you better be good in that period- or willing to compete with market salaries. Sakic hasn't shown an interest or aptitude for either.

Just trying to point out your hypocrisy, which is totally valid in any debate as it emphasizes your lack of consistency. Unless you state right here that you don't think Chia is a good GM, in which case I'll withdraw this point.

It's not a point anyone's listening to, believe me. Again, you can't take criticism of Sakic without having to change the subject. It's glaringly obvious.

O'Reilly was pretty much in the driver seat after the Calgary offersheet that Sakic inherited. He had a QO of 6 mill, he wasn't going to take less than 7.5. Any team trading for him would get the same situation, so his value was not that much lower.

Wait, so poor Sakic was rendered so helpless by an offer sheet that he signed O'Reilly to a two-year extension timed to take him right to free agency the YEAR AFTER?

He had choices- he could have paid the man, knowing it's more fruitful to trade players signed for term than those staring the open market in the face. He created that situation, and reaped the consequences of it.

The Avs made the playoffs that year and they were not going to trade O'Reilly away because it was going to weaken their team regardless. It was a perfectly sensible move at that point.

But I thought it was about more than what made sense that day, that season, that it was about the "future" and "long-term"?

The same team that drafted O'Reilly and Barrie in the 2nd and 3rd round. I'm not worried about the Avs scouts. Not the best in the league, but fairly competent. Our pipeline was depleted since we graduated a lot of prospects and missed out on others.

You're the one who believed the team needed to re-stock their pipeline and to do that, they needed to trade a today player for possibilities. You're now saying that you trust the same people who put you in the position to have that empty pipeline in the first place. That's all I'm saying- it's a strange course of logic to follow.

 

[Lacaar]

I'm guessing Barrie wins Arbitration between 5 and 6 mill.
Colorada requests 2 year ruling.

Barrie plays in Colorado for 2 more years at least.

The only way I think he moves is if there really is some internal budget in Colorado or he requests to be moved for whatever reason.

 

[Soundwave]

I think a three way deal could make a lot of sense.

Colorado wants more cost control on their D

Anaheim wants a LW and to clear cap to sign Lindholm and stay under budget.

Edmonton wants an offensive RD


To COL:
Cam Fowler, Nail Yakupov, Mark Fayne

To EDM:
Tyson Barrie, Clayton Stoner, Jarome Iginla

To ANA
Benoit Pouliot, Griffin Reinhart (gains $3+ million in salary space)

 

[Avs44]

I think a three way deal could make a lot of sense.

Colorado wants more cost control on their D

Anaheim wants a LW and to clear cap to sign Lindholm

Edmonton wants an offensive RD


To COL:
Cam Fowler, Nail Yakupov, Mark Fayne

To EDM:
Tyson Barrie, Clayton Stoner, Jarome Iginla

To ANA
Benoit Pouliot, Griffin Reinhart (gains $3+ million in salary space)

Iginla isn't waiving, and there is zero need for Fayne here. Tyutin, Weircioch, Bigras, Gelinas, and Siemens will be fighting for those last two spots. However, I think Anaheim fans are going to hate that deal, and I really cannot blame them. If they want a roster player back, you'd think the could get a better LW than Pouliot, and if they want futures, you'd have to think they could get a high end prospect+, and I don't think Reinhart is remotely that prospect.

Fowler and Yakupov for Barrie however...it's tough to say. The Avs guaranteed get three more years of Barrie, and they only get Fowler for a guaranteed two, so the contract thing actually does not work out in their favour.

 

[Soundwave]

Iginla isn't waiving, and there is zero need for Fayne here. Tyutin, Weircioch, Bigras, Gelinas, and Siemens will be fighting for those last two spots. However, I think Anaheim fans are going to hate that deal, and I really cannot blame them. If they want a roster player back, you'd think the could get a better LW than Pouliot, and if they want futures, you'd have to think they could get a high end prospect+, and I don't think Reinhart is remotely that prospect.

Iginla could waive. He and his wife are from the Edmonton area after all and I think that's where they plan on settling down after retiring. Plus he knows Chiarelli and Lucic from Boston and playing with McDavid and all the bruhaha.

Anaheim is tricky because they want a LW but they don't want to take on any salary, kinda hard to make that work. Oilers doing them a large favor here by taking Stoner off their hands. It's rumored they were interested in Pouliot before though, he wouldn't be a bad fit. He's similar to Perron but brings more speed/size.