Rumor: 2023-24 Trade Rumors and Free Agency: Season Thread

[AllAboutAvs]

Go way longer than that. 22 year average, the Avs are 2nd highest average in the entire league only behind Vegas. In the last 22 years, the Avs have been below the midpoint just 8 times. They have been top 5, 7 times.

I blame the Colorado river. That's UFA players want to go to the coasts.

 

[Foppa2118]

I don't think the Avs can re-sign EP, but seeing that he won't sign in Vancouver unless they have a good season, here's a random thought.

What if he stays with Vancouver until the deadline, then the Avs trade for his prorated contract so he fits under the cap this year, then they trade him in the off season to a team he's willing to sign with and try to recoup the assets they gave up?

They might actually get close to renting an elite player for free. You don't see high end RFA's like that become available at the deadline. It's usually during the offseason they're a RFA, because the team was holding out hope they could re-sign them. In this case Vancouver would know they can't.

EP would basically be in the same position he's in with Vancouver next off season too, but he'd get an extra Cup run first. Win/win for everyone.

 

[Gruyeriev]

I don’t think it was a discount at all….

The better solution was nobody and divert that money to 2C. If you needed defense spend the 2nd needed to get a guy at the deadline… then don’t re-sign that guy.

No EJ and no Manson? Even if we had kept Helleson we still wouldn’t be as good this year. A younger replacement would be great but Manson type players are also hard to come by. They either can play but aren’t very physical or they are really physical but can’t play.

 

[Foppa2118]

Landy is getting 7, right? So another 5 on top makes it 12. I doubt Petterson is going to get that much. Sure, he had 100 point season, but only single one so far....if he was to leave next year, cause he is not happy with direction Vancouver is heading (as in not winning shit anytime soon), surely only other non-contenders would be able/willing to offer that much. But that would not exactly solve his issue of playing on weak team not competing for Cup, so might as well remain in Vancouver.

102 points + another big contract year should get him at least $11M with the rising cap IMO. Maybe more depending on the team.

He's about to turn 25 so he's in his prime. Teams that are on the cusp of contending but looking for more star talent would definitely pursue him. Vancouver's a long way away from contending.

A team like Seattle for instance has a good amount of cap space next summer to work with. They'll have $10M coming off the books with just Eberle and Wennberg. Plus their backup goalie Driedger who's making $3.5M.

And if Van doesn't want to trade him to Seattle, teams like Detroit and Buffalo could be in the mix. Or others if they can ship a big contract the other way. Carolina's got a ton of cap flexibility next summer too and always seem to be aggressive in building their roster.

 

[The Abusement Park]

No EJ and no Manson? Even if we had kept Helleson we still wouldn’t be as good this year. A younger replacement would be great but Manson type players are also hard to come by. They either can play but aren’t very physical or they are really physical but can’t play.

I’d rather just pay a 2nd every TDL for a rental Manson than be stuck with a contract for a 30+ year old Manson type.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

Fo S&Gs if EP and Toews are looking for similar deals, how about a double sign and trade?

Regardless...I hope we are done with protection clauses. Those things should never have been given out unless a serious discount was returned. Our entire top six (minus the two new guys) have them. Between Landy, Rants, Nuke, and Lehky that's a lot of salary cap that is not necessarily capable of being used in moves that could solve our 2C.

Oh...speaking of which...July 1st was the first time Rants was supposed to deliver a list of 9 teams that are a no go. Besides Arizona, anyone care to take a gander at the other 8? In this day and age of social media, I'm almost surprised that snapshots of these don't get floated from time to time.

I’d rather just pay a 2nd every TDL for a rental Manson than be stuck with a contract for a 30+ year old Manson type.

I'd rather just pay 2 2nds every 4 years for a Devon Toews at 4M.

 

[Foppa2118]

I’d rather just pay a 2nd every TDL for a rental Manson than be stuck with a contract for a 30+ year old Manson type.

Helleson was a lot closer to a 1st in value when he was traded though. Manson and Lehkonen, who was traded for Barron, seemed similar in value IMO too.

Also, teams like Anaheim and Montreal often prefer more proven prospects to the unknown of draft picks.

So to make a Manson type trade every year, might require a Helleson/Barron level prospect every year, which the Avs don't have. Hence why CMac talked about the importance of retaining those deadline additions after giving up what they did.

 

[Pierce Hawthorne]

I’d rather just pay a 2nd every TDL for a rental Manson than be stuck with a contract for a 30+ year old Manson type.

Yep. It was such an easy decision to make but our management completely f***ed it. And now we're stuck with another dirt contract.

 

[Gumballhead]

God I can’t wait for the season to start.

 

[BoneCherry]

Oh...speaking of which...July 1st was the first time Rants was supposed to deliver a list of 9 teams that are a no go. Besides Arizona, anyone care to take a gander at the other 8? In this day and age of social media, I'm almost surprised that snapshots of these don't get floated from time to time.

I would guess Canadian markets for tax reasons alone. Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa. If Arizona is one, then it's up to whatever other stadium he hates the most, and that could be anybody. Anaheim? Nashville? Minnesota? Vegas?

 

[redacted]

No EJ and no Manson? Even if we had kept Helleson we still wouldn’t be as good this year. A younger replacement would be great but Manson type players are also hard to come by. They either can play but aren’t very physical or they are really physical but can’t play.

They are available every deadline and the Avs have 4 other plenty capable top 4 guys. They can get by without him just fine, arguably be better given the level he played last year. Just sign a replacement level guy to get through, improve at the deadline of it is an issue.

 

[Foppa2118]

No other team trades for a Josh Manson type every deadline, because that's not a realistic expectation. Team needs change every year and they have to spend their limited assets on other things.

How are the Avs supposed to address the other areas of need people are upset with, if they have to give up a 1st or a 1st level prospect (they don't have) every year for a Josh Manson type?

Also it doesn't make sense to argue the Avs should go all in at the deadline every year, because the future doesn't matter, and then be upset that they re-signed Manson, because of a concern about his contract in the future.

 

[PAZ]

I get the logic behind the Manson deal, Manson had some pretty big games during the playoffs, brought an element that the Avs' severely lacked at the time, and most importantly showed he could play in the system.

I don't think it's easy as most people are saying about finding a cup run Manson every deadline. It might've not played out how the Avs' brass envisioned, but I still get it. If you expected the cap to stay flat for another year or two (which it has) after the Avs won the cup, as rentals were cheaper and more widely available, I can get the rental for a 2nd argument, but if not we'd be paying normal rental prices of a 1st every deadline.

I still maintain that it's hard to find defensive defenders that fit the Avs' system. Any defensive-oriented D has looked better once they moved on - Graves, Cole, most likely EJ. Not many can skate and defend well, and the ones that do are usually clear top 4 defensemen.

 

[S E P H]

I have been so tuned out of hockey news lately, are the Pettersson quotes of him wanting out of Vancouver if they don't have a winning season true? I really don't trust the media because of how they twist and turn things to make something deemed "newsworthy," so I am clueless on this front.

How many times have you seen him play?

Is this about Hutson? If so, he's definitely the best defenceman I've seen play since Makar's rookie season easily. Will he be better than Clarke or Power? Maybe or perhaps not, but in terms of straight-up dynamic ability with the puck, no one touches him since Makar and maybe that Russian Hurricanes draft pick. You are super undervaluing him if you think he's going to turn out as a Girard defenceman.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

I'm actually a bit surprised that we haven't seen or heard of a bunch of players requesting trades out of Arizona yet. I mean, most of them don't have a ton of leverage but as of now, they also don't have a single NHL defenseman signed past this season, other than Shea Weber.

 

[Richard Doll]

I'm actually a bit surprised that we haven't seen or heard of a bunch of players requesting trades out of Arizona yet. I mean, most of them don't have a ton of leverage but as of now, they also don't have a single NHL defenseman signed past this season, other than Shea Weber.

If it is anyone with any talent, they might be able to force their way to a contender at the deadline.

 

[chet1926]

FYIW Montreal fired their whole medical staff this summer because of the ridiculous number of injuries that the team got in the last 2 seasons.

Here it's been the case for like 5 or 6 years. Basically our entire contender window. Have we changed anything at all?

Not too my knowledge, very frustrating to have so many injuries every single year. It's hard to say things might have been different had we just been a bit healthier, but IMO we probably would have won another cup with better health. Bubble year comes to mind as one of those years where it was super winnable, but injuries destroyed us vs Dallas.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Helleson was a lot closer to a 1st in value when he was traded though. Manson and Lehkonen, who was traded for Barron, seemed similar in value IMO too.

Also, teams like Anaheim and Montreal often prefer more proven prospects to the unknown of draft picks.

So to make a Manson type trade every year, might require a Helleson/Barron level prospect every year, which the Avs don't have. Hence why CMac talked about the importance of retaining those deadline additions after giving up what they did.

I just mean tying yourself down to a Manson/Gudbranson/Chiarot/Savard type contract isn’t the way to go. Either pay the price to add one of these guys when they’re younger so you can get them when they’re effective or just keep them as a rental if they’re older ala Florida with Chiarot. These types of dmen are just horrible to deal with as they age.

And the good thing is these types are always available at the TDL. So I don’t see why it has to be Manson or bust for the org when they could add Dillon or someone like that again later down the line if needed.

 

[redacted]

I get the logic behind the Manson deal, Manson had some pretty big games during the playoffs, brought an element that the Avs' severely lacked at the time, and most importantly showed he could play in the system.

I don't think it's easy as most people are saying about finding a cup run Manson every deadline. It might've not played out how the Avs' brass envisioned, but I still get it. If you expected the cap to stay flat for another year or two (which it has) after the Avs won the cup, as rentals were cheaper and more widely available, I can get the rental for a 2nd argument, but if not we'd be paying normal rental prices of a 1st every deadline.

I still maintain that it's hard to find defensive defenders that fit the Avs' system. Any defensive-oriented D has looked better once they moved on - Graves, Cole, most likely EJ. Not many can skate and defend well, and the ones that do are usually clear top 4 defensemen.

I understand why they signed him, it was a run it back situation and they liked how he fit. Avs prefer some security in roles they deem vital.

It think there is some revisionist history here. Graves and Cole were not moved on from due to play... they were moved on because of expansion draft considerations and a cap casualty. Overall their play was pretty good here and equal to that of a #4D. That is all that is really needed in the role.

Still their acquisitions show that these defenders are simply not hard to acquire. Defensive #4D are some of the easiest to acquire actually. Just take New Jersey.. they got all of Graves, Seigenthaler, and Marino for a reclamation project (Smith), a B-/C+ prospect, 2nd, and 2 3rds. Three guys and two of them analytically are some of the best in the league. The Avs got Graves for a reclamation project, Cole as a signing (where I also think they overpaid), Manson for a 2nd and good prospect. There are 3-5 guys every year who can be signed as UFAs, 3-5 who get moved as rentals at the deadline, and 2-3 who are younger guys who get moved at any point but have term or team control.

Getting #4 defensive oriented guys is simply not hard nor expensive. The trouble is teams locking themselves into term with declining players.

I'm actually a bit surprised that we haven't seen or heard of a bunch of players requesting trades out of Arizona yet. I mean, most of them don't have a ton of leverage but as of now, they also don't have a single NHL defenseman signed past this season, other than Shea Weber.

You don't hear of private requests very often and when you do, they tend to come after the fact. The Duchene situation is much more rare compared to the Kaut/Jost situation.

Probably a bit unfair on their defense though. Soderstrom and Moser are coming off ELCs. Valimaki was a 1 year prove it extension. Durzi just got into town, but is a part of their future. Those 4 are all RFAs who will likely sign extensions and are a part of their future. Two of them are purely placeholders and Dumba was them bargain shopping in a Klingberg like situation.

That said, for many NHLers, living in Arizona in the winter while getting a prime role is not a bad gig. Especially on a team that has a clear upward trajectory.

I just mean tying yourself down to a Manson/Gudbranson/Chiarot/Savard type contract isn’t the way to go. Either pay the price to add one of these guys when they’re younger so you can get them when they’re effective or just keep them as a rental if they’re older ala Florida with Chiarot. These types of dmen are just horrible to deal with as they age.

And the good thing is these types are always available at the TDL. So I don’t see why it has to be Manson or bust for the org when they could add Dillon or someone like that again later down the line if needed.

It is a mistake that all GMs just have a large tendency to make.... every year we see these terrible contracts signed.

 

[Bill Peckerskull]

 

[Hasbro]

It is a mistake that all GMs just have a large tendency to make.... every year we see these terrible contracts signed.

And Size Queens: you wanted this!

Specifically you were brushing off durability concerns about Manson a year before the trade.

 

[AvsFan2123]

Guess this just means we’ll have an extra 4.5M to work with at the deadline lol. Which also means Jack Johnson plays more…. I was happy then sad. But also could mean Malinski time? Happy again? Not sure yet. Or it could mean MacDermid/Hunt. Thinking I’m sad again.

 

[redacted]

And Size Queens: you wanted this!

Specifically you were brushing off durability concerns about Manson a year before the trade.

Me? I was saying he was regressing hard prior to the trade. 2018/2019 you can find me singing his praises. 2021 I was saying he would be a reputation acquisition, but one the Avs would be making. I also said after the trade it would be a mistake to re-sign him.

 

[Hasbro]

Me? I was saying he was regressing hard prior to the trade. 2018/2019 you can find me singing his praises. 2021 I was saying he would be a reputation acquisition, but one the Avs would be making. I also said after the trade it would be a mistake to re-sign him.

I absolutely pointed out his time missed in 19-20 to have it brushed off.

 

[redacted]

I absolutely pointed out his time missed in 19-20 to have it brushed off.

I doubt it was by me. I'm frequently liable to make smartass comments, so out of context I could have made a smart ass comment. But I've pounded the table on Manson regression prior to the trade and after the trade. I know I stated in the summer of 21 that the Avs would be getting Manson and I said it would be a reputational trade. I stated he was regressing. I know I stated after the trade to not re-sign him.

FTR I am perfectly okay with the Avs move to get Manson. It was the right move to acquire him. It was just a bad move to lock back in with him. Bigger, physical defensive guys just do not age well at all. They hit a cliff somewhere between 27 and 30 and they continue down that cliff until they hit the abyss around 32-35.

Also FTR Pure deadline rental... I don't really care much about health of a player beyond them either being healthy at the time or projected to be healthy for the playoffs. You're talking ~40 games here as a tenure and a time where any number of injuries could happen. Along with that, players play through things in the playoffs they have no business playing through. They tend to make it work. It is a risk, but one that all players are subject to during that time. When you lock into players, that is when injuries are more of a concern.