Rumor: OFF-SEASON AVS Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents & Roster Moves (related topics)

Status
Not open for further replies.

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
37,365
39,166
Edmonton, Alberta
Often times too much is made of the offensive production of D men. Gudbranson is going to make his mark on defense. He was never seen as a offensive D man any way. His job is to be a big, physical presence and help to negate the opposing team.

EJ was always expected to score, he showed flashes before the draft with the potential to notch some goals and have a big shot.
That was one of the reasons people in St. Louis were soured on him.

Of course Gudbranson is going to make his mark defensively but his lack of anything offensively is the reason why I don't every truly see him being a top pairing defensemen. As I said, at his peak I think he'll be a #3 but for the duration of his career I think he'll be a #4 shutdown, penalty killing defensemen. In order to elevate his game to that top-pairing caliber level as a #2 or even #1, he either needs to develop an offensive game (which he won't at this point), or become the best shutdown defensemen we've seen in years (which he won't).
 

agentblack

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
13,224
756
New York City
Of course Gudbranson is going to make his mark defensively but his lack of anything offensively is the reason why I don't every truly see him being a top pairing defensemen. As I said, at his peak I think he'll be a #3 but for the duration of his career I think he'll be a #4 shutdown, penalty killing defensemen. In order to elevate his game to that top-pairing caliber level as a #2 or even #1, he either needs to develop an offensive game (which he won't at this point), or become the best shutdown defensemen we've seen in years (which he won't).

I bet the Avs really like Gudbranson, not at the cost of EJ or a 1st but at the cost of their higher-ish end prospects, yeah.
 

returnofthemack29

Registered User
Feb 20, 2015
1,305
693
Often times too much is made of the offensive production of D men. Gudbranson is going to make his mark on defense. He was never seen as a offensive D man any way. His job is to be a big, physical presence and help to negate the opposing team.

EJ was always expected to score, he showed flashes before the draft with the potential to notch some goals and have a big shot.
That was one of the reasons people in St. Louis were soured on him.

Gudbranson not even that good defensively, at least yet and he's been playing bottom pairing minutes. His offense is nonexistent, so he's pretty much a big guy who can skate and is still figuring it all out. We already got one of those in Siemens.
 

Foppa2118

Registered User
Oct 3, 2003
52,347
31,519
Chambers with another article finally, on you guessed it............NCAA player Will Butcher. :laugh:

Butcher won't be at rookie camp, and isn't on the Avalanche radar any time soon, so he really has no news relevance at this point. Maybe an article on one of the many new faces this year like Grigorenko, Soderberg, Beauchemin, Comeau, or maybe even checkin in on Winchester or Bordy, or Everberg, or Rendulic to see how their rehab and summer is going? Nope another NCAA focused article.
 

tigervixxxen

Optimism=Delusional
Jul 7, 2013
53,061
6,158
Denver
burgundy-review.com
I love how I guess he talked to Geertsen and put in one quote. I don't understand, for someone who doesn't want to spend a lot of time on this wouldn't you want to milk as much content from 10 minutes of work as possible? It must be a DP thing to interview people and use one quote. If that's what you need for a story topic fine but then wouldn't speaking to the person be worthy of it's own article?
 

agentblack

Registered User
Apr 11, 2011
13,224
756
New York City
Radulov, just cause im curious how he would look with Dutchy but Ladd is a close second. I figure someone will overpay for him (although the way things went this past UFA period you never know) so why not spend a bit more for Rads.
 

ABasin

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Dec 4, 2002
10,671
1,609
Lets say you have a choice of Radulov, Ladd, Eriksson, Backes and Boadker at next years free agent market. Who do you take?

Depends on Radulov's price tag. I wouldn't go for Eriksson though - he doesn't look like the same player post-multiconcussion.
 

UncleRisto

Not Great, Bob!
Jul 7, 2012
30,882
25,858
Finland
Be it that he's played for Arizona but I don't know how much untapped potential a 25 year old has when he's broken 50 points once and 20 goals never. (He would've done it last year had he played more than 45 games but he didn't.) Could very well be a late bloomer but ehh...
 

FoppaForsberg*

Guest
I'd still take a 2 way 50 point winger entering his prime vs the wildcard Radulov who'll cost an arm and a leg.
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
To me this breaks down as such:

Radulov:

pros: the most talented player of the bunch, in prime of his career, has game-breaking talent, can takeover games, terrific playmaker

cons: how will his game translate to NHL, is he willing to sign a short term contract (3 years max) and at what cap hit, has quite a bit of a temper, while he's not a deterrent defensively his defensive game isn't better than average and we need more two-way players in our top 6

Ladd:


pros: great two way player, would round up the top 6 quite nicely, plays bigger then he is, which is something we lack, good goal scorer

cons: he'll get overpaid, will he hold up through the years, if he gets 6 years term those final years could look really ugly, not as skilled as Radulov

Eriksson:

pros: plays a sound defensive game, is a good skater, might come in on a slightly cheaper deal than the rest because of his recent struggles

cons: injury history, his play has fallen off a bit since he got rocked by Scott, is he just missused in Beantown or is that the best you can get out of him

Backes:

pros: can play both wing and centre equally effective, adds size and two way ability to our forwards ranks which is something we lack, gives you ability to match lines and to move him up and down the line-up, wouldn't be asked to play on the topl line like in St Louis

cons: he's getting up there in age and players that play his type of game don't age gracefully, won't put up tonne of points, just like Ladd, has a habit of being MIA when the going gets tough, could get overpaid

Boedker:

cons: skilled, fast, could be a great addition to Duchene's wing, can play both wings, could have untapped offensive potential, could be had for cheaper than the rest of the guys on the list and he is much younger then them fitting right in with the rest of our core

cons: still hasn't put it all together, which of course might be because he is playing for the 'Yotes, you would be paying for potential and not production
 

Ivan13

Not posting anymore
May 3, 2011
26,141
7,095
Zagreb, Croatia
To expand on my previous post, I don't see Radulov, Backes and Ladd getting less than 6mil+, Eriksson will cost less, but like I said has a history of nasty injuries, Boedker on the other hand won't command that much money, which in turn could make it easier to maybe keep Tanguay, or to go after a guy like Frans Nielsen who would be a terrific addition to the team.
 

UncleRisto

Not Great, Bob!
Jul 7, 2012
30,882
25,858
Finland
All of this also assumes that every free agent A) becomes a free agent, B) is eager to sign with the Avalanche for market price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad