I get that... but doesn't beat what LA, MInny, and Boston can offer. And OO don't have 1st round level value today, not even close.
It is a valid question... I just don't see that Avs making that deal.
Rumor: 2022-2023 Trade Rumors and Free Agency: The Search for a 2C
- Thread starter SoundwaveIsCharisma
- Start date
-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
- Apr 25, 2006
- 53,507
- 59,408
There's no f***ing way in Hell that the Avs would trade 2 first and Newhook for a rental. You guys don't know the Avs much if you think that's even remotely possible.
Even a single 1st and Newhook for a rental isn't happening. Only way they do that is if they think they can re-sign the player.
Even a single 1st and Newhook for a rental isn't happening. Only way they do that is if they think they can re-sign the player.
I could see Newhook + 1st happening... the never happening sounds a lot like Barron won't be traded last year
- Apr 25, 2006
- 53,507
- 59,408
You mean Helleson, who was traded with a 2nd for someone that they intended to re-up.I could see Newhook + 1st happening... the never happening sounds a lot like Barron won't be traded last year
Barron was also traded with a 2nd and Sakic said specifically that he'd not have traded him for a rental.
We're far, far from a 1st + Newhook for a rental here.
Gumballhead
Registered User
I'm saying the absolutes of ___ won't be traded can easily be incorrect (even Byram). We've seen that a bunch over the years. 1st + Newhook is on the high side for a standard rental, but not so far out of the reach. Copp last year got traded for more than that.
I'm sure they will intend to re-up anybody they trade for, even if they are UFAs. I wouldn't automatically assume this is a good thing... don't have to look further than Manson.
- Apr 25, 2006
- 53,507
- 59,408
Maybe it's going to change now but that's not in the Avs DNA to overpay for a rental. They are always linked to the big names but always come up short because they want a good deal.
The only exception I can think of was Kuemper but they literally had no choice.
Yeah totally agree with that. They haven't really been in this position in the past with an expensive hole to fill and coming off a Cup win going for a 2nd. Situations tend to change.
I don't want to trade for Horvat. We can't afford to re-sign him. We don't have that many assets, rather go for someone with term or someone we can afford to re-sign.
I want Hayes @6M. Or Kuznetsov @6,8M. Latter isn't happening, but Hayes is a realistic target.
I want Hayes @6M. Or Kuznetsov @6,8M. Latter isn't happening, but Hayes is a realistic target.
- Aug 28, 2009
- 7,944
- 5,205
Put me in the camp that doesn’t believe the Avs will pay a big amount for a pure rental.
They’ll pay cheap prices for pure rental depth.
If they’re putting together a value package, they’ll look at a player that can be kept.
Unless they think Horvat can be re-signed and kept, I highly doubt they’ll pay up.
It just doesn’t appear to be in their philosophy to spend on rentals.
They’ll pay cheap prices for pure rental depth.
If they’re putting together a value package, they’ll look at a player that can be kept.
Unless they think Horvat can be re-signed and kept, I highly doubt they’ll pay up.
It just doesn’t appear to be in their philosophy to spend on rentals.
The counter point to the Avs don't pay for rentals is Kuemper... They paid (heavily) for 1 year of his services and were okay with him walking.
- Aug 28, 2009
- 7,944
- 5,205
Perhaps. But we have no idea the Avs intention at the time. Kuemper was different in that he was acquired for an entire season. Do the Avs still let him walk if he has a good post season?
Did they trade him KNOWING they wouldn’t keep him?
Honestly, Kuemper sunk himself with his incredibly inconsistent play. For all we know the Avs tried to sign him in the year.
The Avs did try to sign him, but knew his price was too high. The overall point is that they were willing to just have a rental and pay up for a guy they needed. That deal really isn't that far off in value from Newhook + 1st. Timmins was coming off a solid playoffs after breaking into the league that year. He did get injured and it kinda fell apart for him in Arizona, but at the time of the trade, he was a well regarded young player with good upside.
Ararana
Registered User
Still shows a willingness to pay a 1st and a top prospect for a player that they have a strong need for and they don't retain.
Avs_19
Registered User
- Jun 28, 2007
- 85,997
- 35,554
I wouldn't even trade Byram for Horvat signed at a discount so no chance on that. You don't trade Niedermeyer 2.0, even with the injuries early in his career. I'd make the bet on him and I hope the Avs will too.
Find another way to get Horvat or just get O'Reilly. Semi-washed O'Reilly can still help this team, especially when surrounded by the wingers the Avs have in the top six. I have faith in MacKinnon-O'Reilly-Rodrigues-Helm down the middle.
Find another way to get Horvat or just get O'Reilly. Semi-washed O'Reilly can still help this team, especially when surrounded by the wingers the Avs have in the top six. I have faith in MacKinnon-O'Reilly-Rodrigues-Helm down the middle.
Ararana
Registered User
Desperation and need are probably the divers here. They were going to throw away a cup competitive season when Grubaeur walked so they panicked on Kuemper.
Good news, I think, is they're about to throw away another cup competitive season without a 2C so I could see them being pretty desperate at the deadline. I personally wouldn't give up Newhook or Girard for a rental. Byram is off the table completely for me (he's either healthy and too good to trade, or he's not and you're selling him for pennies on the dollar).
They might have to bite the bullet and just give Horvat the money he's looking for. I'd much rather give a large contract to Horvat than Kadri.
Last edited:
avsfan09
Registered User
Copp was traded for a conditional 1st. Not sure I’d say that’s more than Newhook and a first.
Personally, I wouldn't give up Girard for a rental... Newhook I would. To me, Newhook still looks like a solid 2nd line wing sort of guy. Can probably get you 20-25g and 25-30a with fair regularity once he's stapled to wing and gets adequate PP time. His peak season may add 5 to those each. That is a good player, but he's not really a core level guy and doesn't fit a spot of huge need. Avs have plenty of guys who can play top 6 wing spots. Landy, Rants, Nuke and Lehky are a solid group. Compher and ERod (for this season) can step in if needed. If you're willing to take on flawed guys, you can pick them up for a 2nd quite frequently. So while you may not get quite as good of player, you can replace Newhook with relative ease.
Now G... I don't think you can really trade him until you understand the Byram situation. If Byram is healthy and you can fit in a Toews re-signing. Then you can probably move G for help up front. Those are two fairly big ifs. If either one isn't the case, G is a really nice backup. He needs to quit regressing, but a real solid piece. Now saying that, if you can get a 3C today who is signed with term, is of similar age, and may have 2C upside... G should absolutely be available.
Conditional 1st + 2nd + Barron is more than or very close to Newhook + 1st. Barron is a pretty decent young player... he's probably better than Newhook today. Newhook has a bit more upside, but the difference isn't huge.
- Jan 18, 2016
- 35,516
- 26,869
I don't think anyone would. But there's a real chance with our asset pool it would have to take Byram to get Horvat. Girard is redundant behind Hughes in VAN. And then a 1st, Newhook, OO, Behrens are fine pieces but not standout pieces.
Yup... exactly this. Avs can't outbid the LA, Minny, and Detroits of the world. Not as desperate as the Bostons to win this year (and they'd likely re-sign him for a crapload since they have space).
You're right, no one wants to trade Byram, but whatever is happening with him is getting really concerning.
The team says LBI, but since when have we not known about an injury that was LBI? We know about Landy, we knew about Nuke, etc. I mean, hamstring, groin, ACL, MCL, broken foot or ankle... Word usually gets out about what the LBI is.
Why don't you think so?
At a career 0.43 PPG carrying a $3.5M cap hit in the final year of his contract I think it would be fine sending him out for an upgrade.
We can replace a 0.43 PPG player.
- Status
