Rumor: 2023-2024 Trade Rumors and Free Agency: Offseason Edition

[Balthazar]

I would so give Bertuzzi that contract even though centre is a bigger need than wing.

So:

JTC: 5 X 5.3M
ERod: 3 X 3.7M
ROR: 3 X 5.5M
Drouin: 1 X 2M

 

[Foppa2118]

Manson's cap hit prevented the Avs from bringing in a 2C for about half a season.

All the strawman criticisms about Manson costing the Avs a 2C ignore this, and pretend like they couldn't have traded for one in a normal season.

Pretty clear the plan was to trade for one at the deadline before all the injuries ate up the remaining cap space, decimated their roster, and changed their calculus on if it was worth it to give up the assets this year. Even the players alluded to a deal that was left on the table.

Moving forward Manson won't prevent them from adding a 2C this off season and then the next will likely have a big cap increase that should set the Avs up well cap wise moving forward.

So if the alternative was to hope a defenseman of Manson's caliber is available at every deadline, and then outbid other teams by trading the equivalent of a late 1st or good prospect every year that the Avs don't have, then I think they definitely made the better decision. It's not even that close IMO.

 

[BobRossColton]

Created another one. Sorry not sorry.

 

[Foppa2118]

Also I don't think people realize these narratives that get repeated daily contradict themselves.

They should have signed a 32 year old Kadri to a $7M x 7 year deal, future be damned, because they'll be rebuilding anyway, but signing a 31 year old Manson to a $4.5 x 4 year deal is going to be an anchor that will cripple them with the cap?

They should go all in at the deadline every year, future be damned, but they shouldn't re-sign Manson for four years? A guy they know helped them win a Cup? They should give up assets for the same type of guy every year rather than just once?

 

[John Mandalorian]

Manson's cap hit prevented the Avs from bringing in a 2C for about half a season.

All the strawman criticisms about Manson costing the Avs a 2C ignore this, and pretend like they couldn't have traded for one in a normal season.

Pretty clear the plan was to trade for one at the deadline before all the injuries ate up the remaining cap space, decimated their roster, and changed their calculus on if it was worth it to give up the assets this year. Even the players alluded to a deal that was left on the table.

Moving forward Manson won't prevent them from adding a 2C this off season and then the next will likely have a big cap increase that should set the Avs up well cap wise moving forward.

So if the alternative was to hope a defenseman of Manson's caliber is available at every deadline, and then outbid other teams by trading the equivalent of a late 1st or good prospect every year that the Avs don't have, then I think they definitely made the better decision. It's not even that close IMO.

Water under the bridge as long as they're willing to use Landeskog' s LTIR space.

They need to re-constitute the roster in terms of salary allocation.

The clarity of Landeskogs injury this summer that didn't exist last summer is a gift. And no more excuses regarding uncertainty about his injury.

 

[Foppa2118]

Water under the bridge as long as they're willing to use Landeskog' s LTIR space.

They need to re-constitute the roster in terms of salary allocation.

The clarity of Landeskogs injury this summer that didn't exist last summer is a gift. And no more excuses regarding uncertainty about his injury.

They were setup to be able to trade for a 2C and then re-sign them or sign a new one this off season anyway.

But yeah, Landy's LTIR money will definitely help in that regard.

It's basically like the big cap increase is happening next year, instead of the year after, just not for everyone.

If Landy can come back and play, especially in the playoffs, they're set up extremely well cap wise after the big cap increase.

They'll have been able to sign Mikko, Landy, Nate, Cale, Nuke, Lehky, and a 2C. Plus depending on how much the cap goes up in the next few years, they'll have money to keep some of the other guys who's deals are expiring too.

They're set up pretty well cap wise moving forward. Nate's deal could be a steal again pretty soon, and Cale's already is. Pretty soon Manson's deal will be the equivalent of a $3-3.5M deal right now.

 

[Ararana]

They were setup to be able to trade for a 2C and then re-sign them or sign a new one this off season anyway.

But yeah, Landy's LTIR money will definitely help in that regard.

Not so fast, that's JT2C's money.

 

[MacKaRant]

It's great to know that we can use Landy's cap space this season for the increased cap flexibility, but I am a bit worried about the lack of assets we have to fill in the holes in the roster.

Toews and Byram are by far the best available assets, but moving either of those leaves a big hole to fill.

The 2023 first rounder is the next best asset that we would even consider moving in all likelihood, and because we won the division it's 27th overall instead of 21st or something similar, so value there is a bit lower.

Newhook's value can't be that high at the moment, and we don't have an A level prospect in the AHL or college.

UFA crop isn't that great, so while we'll sign a few guys from there, I don't think we're filling big holes from that list.

So, how we turn 2023 and 2024 first rounders plus Girard into a 2C plus a top 6 winger to replace Landy? Or, if we trade Toews or Byram, how do we fill the top 4 hole that's opened up?

Am I missing any assets? Doesn't this seem a bit thin for the kinds of moves we need to make?

 

[The Abusement Park]

Also I don't think people realize these narratives that get repeated daily contradict themselves.

They should have signed a 32 year old Kadri to a $7M x 7 year deal, future be damned, because they'll be rebuilding anyway, but signing a 31 year old Manson to a $4.5 x 4 year deal is going to be an anchor that will cripple them with the cap?

They should go all in at the deadline every year, future be damned, but they shouldn't re-sign Manson for four years? A guy they know helped them win a Cup? They should give up assets for the same type of guy every year rather than just once?

I mean there's a major difference in that Manson is a luxury piece on this team and re signing Kadri fills the biggest hole on the roster. Mansons 4.5mil eats away at precious cap space needed to fill holes on the rest of the roster.

 

[Pokecheque]

Yes, $4.5 million for a guy who is, at best, a #4 defenseman but is likely more like a 5/6 at this point is way too much money, especially for a team that doesn't really have much in the way of cheap ELC talent to patch holes with.

 

[Foppa2118]

I mean there's a major difference in that Manson is a luxury piece on this team and re signing Kadri fills the biggest hole on the roster. Mansons 4.5mil eats away at precious cap space needed to fill holes on the rest of the roster.

They were both big contributors to the Avs winning the Cup.

Kadri may have been a bigger contributor, but the $1.5M and three year difference in term offsets some of that.

Bottom line is Manson didn't impact their ability to bring in a good 2C. It just impacted their ability to re-sign Kadri in the off season, and if we're justifying re-signing a 32 year old Kadri who reverted back to a 60 point center this year, because they'll be rebuilding anyway, then we should apply that same logic to Manson if we're being consistent.

 

[Balthazar]

Yes, $4.5 million for a guy who is, at best, a #4 defenseman but is likely more like a 5/6 at this point is way too much money, especially for a team that doesn't really have much in the way of cheap ELC talent to patch holes with.

They signed Manson to help Girard and try to get the most out of him. That was the plan anyway.

Also top 4 RHD are ultra rare and the demand is high so they are expensive.

 

[The Abusement Park]

They were both big contributors to the Avs winning the Cup.

Kadri may have been a bigger contributor, but the $1.5M and three year difference in term offsets some of that.

Bottom line is Manson didn't impact their ability to bring in a good 2C. It just impacted their ability to re-sign Kadri in the off season, and if we're justifying re-signing a 32 year old Kadri who reverted back to a 60 point center this year, because they'll be rebuilding anyway, then we should apply that same logic to Manson if we're being consistent.

I mean it's totally different contexts though? If going into last season our defense theoretically lost Toews and EJ to FA and they re signed Manson there would be some reasoning to signing Manson. But that wasn't the case at all. The defense was more than ok going into last season, there's no reason to add a cap that's going to age poorly to the roster when it's not a major hole.

The Avs had a major hole at C and could've fit in Kadri for cap hit only. Or they would've had far more cap flexibility to make a move in the off season. Instead they didn't re sign Naz, didn't have any room to add anyone in the offseason and had pigeonholed themselves for the TDL.

 

[Foppa2118]

Yes, $4.5 million for a guy who is, at best, a #4 defenseman but is likely more like a 5/6 at this point is way too much money, especially for a team that doesn't really have much in the way of cheap ELC talent to patch holes with.

You're basing this evaluation off of Manson trying to play through a high ankle sprain all year. Last year and in the off season, everybody thought of Manson as a #4. Nobody called him a 5/6.

And the Avs not having a lot of cheap ELC talent is why they have to re-sign a guy like Manson in the first place. How else are they gonna fill that role adequately?

I just don't understand why all of Manson's negative evaluations are based on how he played with a debilitating injury. That's not an accurate way to evaluate him at all.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

Created another one. Sorry not sorry.

I think Fast is getting closer to 3M. *LOL* At least that's what I've been using to sign him with. I would absolutely love to get him and say Erik Haula for our 3rd line this summer. Problem is, with how well their teams did, there's a real good chance they would rather stay if given the option.

 

[Pokecheque]

You're basing this evaluation off of Manson trying to play through a high ankle sprain all year. Last year and in the off season, everybody thought of Manson as a #4. Nobody called him a 5/6.

And the Avs not having a lot of cheap ELC talent is why they have to re-sign a guy like Manson in the first place. How else are they gonna fill that role adequately?

I just don't understand why all of Manson's negative evaluations are based on how he played with a debilitating injury. That's not an accurate way to evaluate him at all.

He was a #4 when he showed up, and he's most obviously in a decline.

And he already had an injury history prior to this. The chances he'll have any long stretches at or near 100% is highly unlikely at this point, much like EJ was the last few years. In fact he'll be worse, because his prime IMO was not as good as EJ's was.

 

[Balthazar]

You're basing this evaluation off of Manson trying to play through a high ankle sprain all year.

I thought he fractured something trying to block a shot?

 

[AnimalMother73]

It's great to know that we can use Landy's cap space this season for the increased cap flexibility, but I am a bit worried about the lack of assets we have to fill in the holes in the roster.

Toews and Byram are by far the best available assets, but moving either of those leaves a big hole to fill.

The 2023 first rounder is the next best asset that we would even consider moving in all likelihood, and because we won the division it's 27th overall instead of 21st or something similar, so value there is a bit lower.

Newhook's value can't be that high at the moment, and we don't have an A level prospect in the AHL or college.

UFA crop isn't that great, so while we'll sign a few guys from there, I don't think we're filling big holes from that list.

So, how we turn 2023 and 2024 first rounders plus Girard into a 2C plus a top 6 winger to replace Landy? Or, if we trade Toews or Byram, how do we fill the top 4 hole that's opened up?

Am I missing any assets? Doesn't this seem a bit thin for the kinds of moves we need to make?

Agreed, to fill holes in the short term the team may need to idenitfy a few options where there is a reasonable chance for a rebound (J. Toews, as a hypothetical example) or someone desperate for one of our specific players (Toews or Girard) that has a strong compliment of young forwards that we could obtain via trade.

 

[Foppa2118]

I mean it's totally different contexts though? If going into last season our defense theoretically lost Toews and EJ to FA and they re signed Manson there would be some reasoning to signing Manson. But that wasn't the case at all. The defense was more than ok going into last season, there's no reason to add a cap that's going to age poorly to the roster when it's not a major hole.

The Avs had a major hole at C and could've fit in Kadri for cap hit only. Or they would've had far more cap flexibility to make a move in the off season. Instead they didn't re sign Naz, didn't have any room to add anyone in the offseason and had pigeonholed themselves for the TDL.

The Avs won the Cup in part due to a very deep D core. Toews and a 36 year old EJ don't eliminate the need for Manson. Toews plays on the top pair, EJ on the third pair, Manson was supposed to play on the second pair with Girard or Byram.

With an aging EJ, a young Bo Byram with 91 regular season games, and a fairly one dimensional, undersized Sam Girard that had just got knocked out of the playoffs on a hit behind the net, the need for a D man like Manson was obvious.

The only reason they were "pigeonholed" at the deadline, is because the injury callups ate up their cap space, and changed their calculus on whether it was worth it to give up prime assets for a team that probably wasn't repeating in the state it was in.

If they didn't have such a season from hell, they very likely would have traded for a 2C. And they most likely will in the off season.

So if we're going to be upset, be upset at their bad luck, because Manson didn't impact their ability to bring in a 2C outside of last offseason, which shouldn't matter that much.

 

[Mighty Makar]

A high ankle sprain is no joke. I have one now and it’s been almost 4 months and my ankle is still f***ed. I’d rather have a broken ankle.

 

[Foppa2118]

He was a #4 when he showed up, and he's most obviously in a decline.

And he already had an injury history prior to this. The chances he'll have any long stretches at or near 100% is highly unlikely at this point, much like EJ was the last few years. In fact he'll be worse, because his prime IMO was not as good as EJ's was.

The "decline" is based on him playing while injured. And just like EJ, people conflate his injury history, with what level of player he is when healthy.

He's also four years younger than EJ. He'll be 34 in the final year of his deal.

 

[The Abusement Park]

The Avs won the Cup in part due to a very deep D core. Toews and a 36 year old EJ don't eliminate the need for Manson. Toews plays on the top pair, EJ on the third pair, Manson was supposed to play on the second pair with Girard or Byram.

With an aging EJ, a young Bo Byram with 91 regular season games, and a fairly one dimensional, undersized Sam Girard that had just got knocked out of the playoffs on a hit behind the net, the need for a D man like Manson was obvious.

The only reason they were "pigeonholed" at the deadline, is because the injury callups ate up their cap space, and changed their calculus on whether it was worth it to give up prime assets for a team that probably wasn't repeating in the state it was in.

If they didn't have such a season from hell, they very likely would have traded for a 2C. And they most likely will in the off season.

So if we're going to be upset, be upset at their bad luck, because Manson didn't impact their ability to bring in a 2C outside of last offseason, which shouldn't matter that much.

They also won the cup due to an insanely deep forward core and a very good 1-2 punch down the middle.

Re signing Manson for sure had an impact on adding a 2C? That's 4.5mil of(very little) cap space that you have that you immediately cannot allocate towards the C position. They then added Erod this year at a decent price thanks to his agent being awful, but between those two that's 6.5mil that is gone that is more than enough money to add a C. They could've easily added a Manson like player without hamstringing themselves to another contract that will age like milk. They could've added a guy at the deadline for cheaper than a 2C would've cost at the TDL that's for sure. Manson(or a similar player) has value but re signing Manson(or a similar) player shouldn't have anywhere near the same importance as adding a 2C of some sort.

The "decline" is based on him playing while injured. And just like EJ, people conflate his injury history, with what level of player he is when healthy.

He's also four years younger than EJ. He'll be 34 in the final year of his deal.

I mean the decline is based on that he was a borderline top pairing guy a few years ago and is now nowhere near that level. Especially now that the injuries are piling up on this guy.

 

[Pokecheque]

The "decline" is based on him playing while injured. And just like EJ, people conflate his injury history, with what level of player he is when healthy. He's also four years younger than EJ.

The injuries are part and parcel with the decline, they are not an exception. Bodies age and break down a lot more often, especially with big, physical defensemen. It's not a coincidence we saw some of EJ's best stuff (though you disagreed with this) in the Bubble when he had a good long break between the start of the Pandemic and the tournament to rest and heal up. Same will go with Manson, if he proves me wrong next year, great...but I'm anticipating we'll see a guy who misses even more time than EJ did.

 

[John Mandalorian]

The injuries are part and parcel with the decline, they are not an exception. Bodies age and break down a lot more often, especially with big, physical defensemen. It's not a coincidence we saw some of EJ's best stuff (though you disagreed with this) in the Bubble when he had a good long break between the start of the Pandemic and the tournament to rest and heal up. Same will go with Manson, if he proves me wrong next year, great...but I'm anticipating we'll see a guy who misses even more time than EJ did.

23, 67, 27. One of them is a contract year. Take a guess which.

 

[Foppa2118]

The injuries are part and parcel with the decline, they are not an exception. Bodies age and break down a lot more often, especially with big, physical defensemen. It's not a coincidence we saw some of EJ's best stuff (though you disagreed with this) in the Bubble when he had a good long break between the start of the Pandemic and the tournament to rest and heal up. Same will go with Manson, if he proves me wrong next year, great...but I'm anticipating we'll see a guy who misses even more time than EJ did.

Calling him a #4 or a 4/5 or that he's declining, is an evaluation of what level of player he is in general. That should be based on how he plays when relatively healthy. Not injured.

How he plays while injured, or while sitting in the stands, is a different evaluation. That's an evaluation of how injury prone he is.

FTR I don't think that was some of EJ's best stuff in the bubble, but I do think the rest helped him obviously. Same as the point I'm making with Manson though, that level of play he displayed, he had shown often before when healthy. Especially in the playoffs.