Rumor: 2019-2020 Trade Rumours and Free Agent Discussion Part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

Northern Avs Fan

Registered User
May 27, 2019
21,970
29,648
The Gaudreau situation is very interesting. I don’t know why the Flames would want to move him. I’d move Monahan before Gaudreau.

Also, the Flames don’t strike me as an organization that will want to do a picks and prospects deal. Treliving has been trading draft picks to stay competitive for several years.

But, let’s say for fun they do want to trade him for a futures deal.

Do we want him for what it will cost? The deal starts with Byram and a 1st round pick. How much do you have to add to that? Probably a roster player. Maybe Compher.

One of my friends is a Flames fan and he was furious with Gaudreau in the playoffs, and I can’t blame him. But that doesn’t mean he’s not an amazing player. And things are different when you’re playing with Nathan MacKinnon, because he’s the man, and shoulders all the pressure.

If we acquired him, we would have the best offence in the league by a wide margin imo.

I’ve always been a believer, skill wins games. I think I’d do it.

But, if they’re trying to shake things up and trade a star for another star player. And they’re asking about Rantanen and Makar, I’d tell them to f*** off.
 

The Abusement Park

Registered User
Jan 18, 2016
35,067
26,262
I mean I don’t think Gaudreau was necessarily bad in our series as he definitely created a lot of chances, but I do think that he is less effective in the playoffs than he is in the regular season.
 

Pokecheque

I’ve been told it’s spelled “Pokecheck”
Sponsor
Aug 5, 2003
47,781
31,007
The Flatlands
www.armoredheadspace.com
I mean I don’t think Gaudreau was necessarily bad in our series as he definitely created a lot of chances, but I do think that he is less effective in the playoffs than he is in the regular season.

It makes sense since the refs effectively put away their whistles once the regular season ends.

But the real issue isn't Gaudreau--it's Monahan. Dude is rendered ineffective by injury virtually every single year at the worst possible time. Not really his fault, but it's an issue, and one they haven't addressed. Add in the fact that Z effectively snuffed out Tkachuk and you have a team with one player the Avs had to worry about. It was crazy watching them converge with three players at a time on Johnny Hockey, and he really had no one to dish it to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Abusement Park

The Merchant

1787
Sponsor
Aug 2, 2011
20,325
31,377
El Pueblo
I really dont think it would cost that much to get Gaudreau.


He's a great player but if he is traded it's because things are clearly not working out in Calgary and in those type of situation the player is always traded for pennies on the dollar.


That's not to say it wouldnt cost a lot, it would. But I dont think it would be anywhere like Byram + Newhook + 1st type of packages.


Timmins + Newhook + 1st I think would be close.

Gaudreau matched MacKinnon's point total last year, has put up damn near three PPG seasons in his career and is on an extremely friendly deal for the next three years. They would scoff at that offer and rightfully so. If he demanded a trade it may drop the asking price a smidge, but even so they would probably be asking for the Duchene deal as framework and then some.
 

Northern Avs Fan

Registered User
May 27, 2019
21,970
29,648
Gaudreau matched MacKinnon's point total last year, has put up damn near three PPG seasons in his career and is on an extremely friendly deal for the next three years. They would scoff at that offer and rightfully so. If he demanded a trade it may drop the asking price a smidge, but even so they would probably be asking for the Duchene deal as framework and then some.

Yeah, I think any deal there starts with Byram, since the Avs would be unwilling to move, Rantanen and Makar.

I don’t think the Avs would have to trade Byram, Newhook, and a 1st. That’s a lot of talent.

A deal with the Leafs is more likely. I could see both teams looking to make a blockbuster and exchange star players.
 

BKarchitect

Registered User
Oct 12, 2017
8,186
14,637
Kansas City, MO
I saw how effective Johnny was in the playoffs last year. Pass (for the cost of course).

Also people really have it hard for Pageau - and I get that he’s be a great third liner for us but he’s an UFA rental riding an absurdly unsustainable shooting percentage and he’s going to want to turn that into $ this off season. I get that Jost and even JTC have been the forum whipping boys lately but to give up one of them and a top pick (likely a first since we don’t have a second in 2020) for a temporary upgrade on the third line? I don’t think the asset cost is worth it. Pageau is a 14-15 minute checking line player on contending teams not a 23% shooting first liner.

Heck, now that I’ve said that - if we are going to overpay, as I just got done saying “pass” on Johnny Hockey - if we are going to overpay, overpay on a star not on a guy like Pageau. If Pageau’s cost is already a 1st and Jost or JTC, you might as well add another good asset and get somebody A) better and B) signed past this year.
 

The Abusement Park

Registered User
Jan 18, 2016
35,067
26,262
Also people really have it hard for Pageau - and I get that he’s be a great third liner for us but he’s an UFA rental riding an absurdly unsustainable shooting percentage and he’s going to want to turn that into $ this off season. I get that Jost and even JTC have been the forum whipping boys lately but to give up one of them and a top pick (likely a first since we don’t have a second in 2020) for a temporary upgrade on the third line? I don’t think the asset cost is worth it. Pageau is a 14-15 minute checking line player on contending teams not a 23% shooting first liner.

If we traded for JPG I’m sure we’d have an idea of how likely he was to sign with us this offseason.

Plus if we brought him in it would be to be a shutdown 3C and his points would mean basically nothing. He comes in and immediately gives us at worst the 2nd or 3rd best C depth in the league and a proven playoff performer to help us make a deep run. His unsustainable shooting % shouldn’t even factor into us acquiring him.
 

BKarchitect

Registered User
Oct 12, 2017
8,186
14,637
Kansas City, MO
If we traded for JPG I’m sure we’d have an idea of how likely he was to sign with us this offseason.

Plus if we brought him in it would be to be a shutdown 3C and his points would mean basically nothing. He comes in and immediately gives us at worst the 2nd or 3rd best C depth in the league and a proven playoff performer to help us make a deep run. His unsustainable shooting % shouldn’t even factor into us acquiring him.

I like JPG don't get me wrong but now we are in that hypothetical "if we get him of course he comes with a contract extension" thing - which maybe true sometimes and certainly is not other times so it would make me nervous getting into an asset bidding war.

And points may mean nothing to us but they will mean something to the next contract JPG signs, which will be a contract befitting his current role and production if he and his agent have any say about it. Which is a kind way for me to theorize that he's going to be significantly overpaid.

I feel like we can acquire a similar role target for less...it's hard to say who at this point but there should be options if we are looking for a 3rdline shutdown C and points don't matter to us. But again I'd aim higher if we are going to really go for it or make a couple complimentary moves.
 

Foppa2118

Registered User
Oct 3, 2003
52,661
32,031
If we traded for JPG I’m sure we’d have an idea of how likely he was to sign with us this offseason.

Plus if we brought him in it would be to be a shutdown 3C and his points would mean basically nothing. He comes in and immediately gives us at worst the 2nd or 3rd best C depth in the league and a proven playoff performer to help us make a deep run. His unsustainable shooting % shouldn’t even factor into us acquiring him.

Pageau will put up the bulk of his points prior to the deadline though, which is when he's most likely to be moved.

His end of year point totals will put him in a position to command a big raise with term as a UFA. The kind of raise that the Avs are probably unlikely to want to pay for as a #3C. I think you have to factor that into whether it's wise to give up the assets to acquire him.

Hopefully you're right though in that they will only trade for him, if they know they can re-sign him.
 

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
61,440
19,719
w/ Renly's Peach
That's the thing, though - if Johnny wanted to score, then he would have. He had plenty of chances to do so, and what I think happened is the waved-off goal and the terrible penalty shot attempt got to his head. Big time players either score in those instances, or they let it fuel them to score later on. They don't put on a sour face and do nothing for the rest of the game.

I'm really not trying to hate on Gaudreau here, mind you. I like him and think he's an awesome player. I just think the linemates excuse only goes so far when trying to explain his bad postseason stats. The onus is on him to get **** done in the postseason when he knows players will be targeting him to get him off his game, and he can't produce.

There's only so much that you can do to make the puck bounce your way; what you can reliably do is put yourself & your linemates in positions for it to bounce your way. And that's where I think Gaudreau's problems were last spring; as nothing was going his way...we were taking away space from him really aggressively; our transition game scared their blueliners off from supporting him as much as they had all season; his linemates went MIA & could neither take advantage of the extra attention he was getting -- flubbing scoring chances or losing the puck cheaply -- nor could they make any space for him to get a breather; and when he tried to force things on his own that only frustrated him more between the extra emphasis we were putting on taking space away from him & nothing bouncing his way.

I think Gaudreau has a bit of that MacK-bitchiness in him when he gets frustrated; which exacerbates problems when things aren't going your way...thus why we saw him lashing out last spring...and that, I think, is a completely fair critique of him as a player. But that's also very different from what Balthazar was suggesting & isn't some sort of fundamental problem with his game.

I buy into clutchness being a thing; as some players just have it from the get go and are "big time players" right away (see: MacKinnon, Nathan). But others have to learn it to- / get a few swings before they- become "big time players"; which is why we can see a Caps core, that for years were labelled as chokers, now be (generally) considered big time performers. So I'm not one of those "clutchness isn't real" people pushing on this because I just don't buy into the concept.

...but I thought that Gaudreau was the last core-Flame trying to turn the tide in that series -- even though that failed to materialize for him -- which is why I find it hard to single him out for blame. It's also why I see him as a clear example of a star who doesn't have any big moments on his playoff resume...yet...but with a couple of more swings -- and a supporting cast that actually shows up -- I'm confident that that will change. Even if he doesn't get to play second fiddle to MacK ;-)
 

Pierce Hawthorne

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 29, 2012
46,389
44,870
Caverns of Draconis
Gaudreau matched MacKinnon's point total last year, has put up damn near three PPG seasons in his career and is on an extremely friendly deal for the next three years. They would scoff at that offer and rightfully so. If he demanded a trade it may drop the asking price a smidge, but even so they would probably be asking for the Duchene deal as framework and then some.

Using points as the only evaluation tool is not going to create a very strong argument.

For starters Mack is a Center while Gaudreau is a Winger... Big difference between the two right off the bat. Secondly, a lot of Gaudreaus value is generated off the PP, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it does impact his value. And third, given Gaudreaus size and history in the playoffs at this point, his value also takes a hit for those factors.

Plus again.... The only scenario in which Gaudreau is dealt is one where the Flames and/or Gaudreau both decide a change is necessary. In said scenario you automatically lose value because it's not a situation where "either we get an offer we cant refuse or we keep him" type of situation but a situation where one or both sides have decided they want to go in a different direction.



And you use the Duchene trade as what you think would be the framework.... That's actually quite close to what I have already suggested. There wasn't an "A" level asset exchanged in that trade besides Duchene. The original deal saw the Avs get:

- Bowers, a B level prospect who was always pretty limited in offensive upside and was considered a "safe" pick his draft year because of that limited upside.
- Girard, a B/B+ level prospect who had fantastic junior numbers but size concerns limited the kind of perceived value he would have.
- Kamenev, a B- level prospect that was trending downward after failing to leave an impression at Nashvilles training camp despite promising looking AHL numbers.
- A 1st round pick that was projected to be in the very late 20s
- A 2nd round pick that was projected to be in the very late 50s
- A 3rd round pick that was projected to be in the very late 80s


So it was essentially a trio of B level prospect, a 1st, a 2nd, and a 3rd. No asset anywhere close to the value of what Byram carries right now. Not only that, but that deal was almost immediately considered to be a massive haul for the Avs even before the pick turned into what it did. A return that almost nobody expected to see. It was actually one of those rare situations where the team trading the star player got a lot of really good value.

Newhook + Timmins + 1st is actually very close in value to what the Avs got in return for Duchene. Timmins and Girard would be a wash. The two 1st round picks would be a wash. And Newhook as a prospect right now is in that borderline "A" level. I would certainly think Calgary would much prefer to get a borderline blue chip quality prospect rather than a few B level prospects and mid round draft picks to fill out the deal.

The Duchene trade is probably actually a decent metric to use for a potential Gaudreau deal. Gaudreau has that one extra year on his deal, but Duchene is also a Center which balances out that extra year pretty much.

I think a potential Gaudreau trade would go either one of two ways... Either they get an A+ quality prospect like Byram, but without very much attached to him. Similar to how Ottawa swung for the fences taking basically just Brannstrom and a late pick for an extended Stone, but they wanted a guy they firmly believe will be high impact in return. So maybe something like Byram + Jost as a comparable to that deal. The other direction it could go would be where they dont go after a true A+ level piece, but instead opt for a massive haul of assets in the hopes that the sum of all of its parts can amount to better value than Gaudreau... Similar to that Duchene deal or what the Sens opted to go for in the Karlsson deal. Something like Timmins + Kaut + Annunen + Zhuravlyov + 1st type of deal where they aren't getting an A+ guy, but they get 3-4 pieces that have legit NHL upside, and a chance to draft a guy they're very high on themselves in the next draft. And they would hope that 2-3 of those pieces become impact guys in the NHL down the road. Both deals would be risky for both sides as well. For the Flames if they put all there marbles in one basket on Byram and he busts they get basically nothing. On the flip side with the massive haul of pieces where none of them are elite, they dont have as much hope of getting a high impact guy and then even if a couple of them carve out NHL careers they may not equate to the value of what losing Gaudreau does. From an Avs perspective, Gaudreau may not fit the team and continue his playoff struggles while Byram or the package of assets they give up do end up panning out in Calgary and they wind up with a great future akin to what the Avs have going for themselves right now.


But it's not going to be anything like Byram AND a haul of 3-4 additional solid future pieces. Because you blue chip guys like Byram just carry so much value in todays game where cap space is so important and high end NHLers are breaking out younger and younger. A guy like Byram could easily be playing 20+ minutes a night and performing like a legit Top pairing Defender in the league as soon as next season in the right situation.




Anyways.... End long post on why Superstars rarely get the value perceived around the league.
 

Northern Avs Fan

Registered User
May 27, 2019
21,970
29,648
There's only so much that you can do to make the puck bounce your way; what you can reliably do is put yourself & your linemates in positions for it to bounce your way. And that's where I think Gaudreau's problems were last spring; as nothing was going his way...we were taking away space from him really aggressively; our transition game scared their blueliners off from supporting him as much as they had all season; his linemates went MIA & could neither take advantage of the extra attention he was getting -- flubbing scoring chances or losing the puck cheaply -- nor could they make any space for him to get a breather; and when he tried to force things on his own that only frustrated him more between the extra emphasis we were putting on taking space away from him & nothing bouncing his way.

I think Gaudreau has a bit of that MacK-*****iness in him when he gets frustrated; which exacerbates problems when things aren't going your way...thus why we saw him lashing out last spring...and that, I think, is a completely fair critique of him as a player. But that's also very different from what Balthazar was suggesting & isn't some sort of fundamental problem with his game.

I buy into clutchness being a thing; as some players just have it from the get go and are "big time players" right away (see: MacKinnon, Nathan). But others have to learn it to- / get a few swings before they- become "big time players"; which is why we can see a Caps core, that for years were labelled as chokers, now be (generally) considered big time performers. So I'm not one of those "clutchness isn't real" people pushing on this because I just don't buy into the concept.

...but I thought that Gaudreau was the last core-Flame trying to turn the tide in that series -- even though that failed to materialize for him -- which is why I find it hard to single him out for blame. It's also why I see him as a clear example of a star who doesn't have any big moments on his playoff resume...yet...but with a couple of more swings -- and a supporting cast that actually shows up -- I'm confident that that will change. Even if he doesn't get to play second fiddle to MacK ;-)

I think you’re being way to friendly on his playoff performance. If you took this conversation over to the Flames HF board, I’m pretty sure they’d tell you he was pretty bad. My friend who’s a die hard Flames fan definitely would.

You aren’t viewing him as the kind of player Flames fans did. Heading into the playoffs a lot of them thought he was fairly comparable to MacKinnon.

He was floating a lot in that series, and rarely, if ever back-checking.

I already said, I’d take him for a fair price, but he had a really rough playoff. It doesn’t mean he can’t excel in the future, but it wasn’t pretty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AvsGuy

The Abusement Park

Registered User
Jan 18, 2016
35,067
26,262
I think you’re being way to friendly on his playoff performance. If you took this conversation over to the Flames HF board, I’m pretty sure they’d tell you he was pretty bad. My friend who’s a Flames die hard fan definitely would.

You aren’t viewing him as the kind of player Flames fans did. Heading into the playoffs a lot of them thought he was fairly comparable to MacKinnon.

He was floating a lot in that series, and rarely, if ever back-checking.

I already said, I’d take him for a fair price, but he had a really rough playoff. It doesn’t mean he can’t excel in the future, but it wasn’t pretty.

I think the thing that would help him out the most is that he wouldn’t be the main source of offense here. He would be the 3rd focus behind Mack and Mikko which would probably be good for his playoff game game.
 

SirLoinOfCloth

Registered User
Apr 22, 2019
6,320
13,022
Colorado
I think you’re being way to friendly on his playoff performance. If you took this conversation over to the Flames HF board, I’m pretty sure they’d tell you he was pretty bad. My friend who’s a die hard Flames fan definitely would.

Fraternizing with the enemy???

giphy.gif


giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: Northern Avs Fan

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
61,440
19,719
w/ Renly's Peach
I think you’re being way to friendly on his playoff performance. If you took this conversation over to the Flames HF board, I’m pretty sure they’d tell you he was pretty bad. My friend who’s a die hard Flames fan definitely would.

You aren’t viewing him as the kind of player Flames fans did. Heading into the playoffs a lot of them thought he was fairly comparable to MacKinnon.

He was floating a lot in that series, and rarely, if ever back-checking.

I already said, I’d take him for a fair price, but he had a really rough playoff. It doesn’t mean he can’t excel in the future, but it wasn’t pretty.

Oh I know Flames fans are insane and unreasonably harsh on him because of their unrealistic expectations. He's simply not MacK-caliber and his postseason obviously wasn't great, but he was more impressive than any other Flame with skill (aka not counting ol' porn-stache). I think he just makes an easy scapegoat for them because the playoff #s haven't been as good as they have been in the regular season; as a small winger, he doesn't fit the traditional archetype of a franchise player; and he's really whiny. So it's easier for them to just blame him for "not delivering", than to accept that they just weren't as talented as their regular season suggested and that their core is still fundamentally flawed even if Gaudreau suddenly turned into rapey-Kane 2.0

PS - He's not the only top tier scorer who doesn't do too much back-checking, and I enjoy watching MacK n Mikko play too much to start throwing those stones...
 

shadow1

Registered User
Nov 29, 2008
16,723
5,522
Gaudreau is a great player, but if I'm Sakic, I'm not trading an 18-year-old franchise defensive pivot for him.

Colorado is 4th in goals for per game despite playing with a hodgepodge forward line up, which includes Mikko Rantanen missing the last 11 games. If Sakic can pull off getting Hall - who comes at a cheaper price than Gaudreau due to his contract and age - without giving up Byram, then great. But Gaudreau will cost the stars and the moon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AvsGuy

Pokecheque

I’ve been told it’s spelled “Pokecheck”
Sponsor
Aug 5, 2003
47,781
31,007
The Flatlands
www.armoredheadspace.com
BTW, pretty sure Tree-Living would rather saw his own arm off than hand his franchise player over to the team that humiliated the Flames in the first round after they'd won the Western Conference top seed.

I'll say it now--Johnny Hockey, if indeed he gets traded, will be a Philly Flyer. I'd actually like to see that happen. He'd be the hometown boy, and the Flyboys are ridiculously stacked with all kinds of tradeable assets, far, far more than anything the Avs got.
 

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
61,440
19,719
w/ Renly's Peach
I mean I don’t think Gaudreau was necessarily bad in our series as he definitely created a lot of chances, but I do think that he is less effective in the playoffs than he is in the regular season.

That I wouldn't argue with. It's certainly something he needs to improve...but the way flames fans blamed him for their loss was ridiculous when Monahan, Lindholm, Backlund & their vaunted blueline corps. utterly gave up; long before Gaudreau stopped trying (unsuccessfully) to force something to happen. He can & should do better...but his statistical drop is affected by the team-wide failure, even more than it is by his personal performance dipping once playoff-refs show-up. So he would be amongst the least of my worries; were I a Flames fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Abusement Park

Northern Avs Fan

Registered User
May 27, 2019
21,970
29,648
Oh I know Flames fans are insane and unreasonably harsh on him because of their unrealistic expectations. He's simply not MacK-caliber and his postseason obviously wasn't great, but he was more impressive than any other Flame with skill (aka not counting ol' porn-stache). I think he just makes an easy scapegoat for them because the playoff #s haven't been as good as they have been in the regular season; as a small winger, he doesn't fit the traditional archetype of a franchise player; and he's really whiny. So it's easier for them to just blame him for "not delivering", than to accept that they just weren't as talented as their regular season suggested and that their core is still fundamentally flawed even if Gaudreau suddenly turned into rapey-Kane 2.0

PS - He's not the only top tier scorer who doesn't do too much back-checking, and I enjoy watching MacK n Mikko play too much to start throwing those stones...

They don’t back-check all the time but they do sometimes.

But, it’s all about the numbers, baby. If you ain’t producing, you better be back-checking lol
 
Last edited:

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
61,440
19,719
w/ Renly's Peach
They don’t back-check all the time but they do sometimes.

But, it’s all about the number, baby. If you ain’t producing, you better be back-checking lol

Fair enough, I'm more about process than results. So to me, if we accept that drivers of scoring chances often need others to cover up for their lack of back-checking; we accept that whether things work out when they try to make things happen, or not. In general, if a guy isn't chipping in it absolutely becomes even more important that they contribute against the puck...but that changes when we're talking about players who are relied upon to drive scoring chances; rather than just chip in.

***Not saying that Gaudreau was still creating danger consistently; just talking in generalities***
 
Last edited:

Northern Avs Fan

Registered User
May 27, 2019
21,970
29,648
Fair enough, I'm more about process than results. So to me, if we accept that drivers of scoring chances often need others to cover up for their lack of back-checking; we accept that whether things work out when they try to make things happen, or not. In general, if a guy isn't chipping in it absolutely becomes even more important that they contribute against the puck...but that changes when we're talking about players who are relied upon to drive scoring chances; rather than just chip in.

***Not saying that Gaudreau was still creating danger consistently; just talking in generalities***

I’d prefer dudes back-check all the time, I just know that it’s not going to happen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad