Toggle sidebar

Rumor: 2024-2025 Trade Rumors and Free Agency Talk | The Slow Crawl to the Season

Status
Not open for further replies.
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Wait...why are we trading our top prospect for a guy that hasn't been good in years in the hope and prayer that he suddenly becomes good again?
Click to expand...

Because it’s the most pressing need for our team and his ceiling is higher than all of the other reclamation project options available.

We have to swing for the fences over the next 2 years. Nothing after that window matters, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perratrooper, missionAvs, CobraAcesS and 4 others
RoyIsALegend said:
Because it’s the most pressing need for our team and his ceiling is higher than all of the other reclamation project options available.

We have to swing for the fences over the next 2 years. Nothing after that window matters, IMO.
Click to expand...
Yea, that just sounds like the same logic that led to Forsberg being traded for Erat and that worked great for the Capitals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: avsfan09 and Alienblood
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Wait...why are we trading our top prospect for a guy that hasn't been good in years in the hope and prayer that he suddenly becomes good again?
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't think he's that great a prospect.

And literally no goalie who's available won't have some red flags. Avs have had several chances over the years to fix this issue more cheaply. They didn't, so they're left with the Hail Mary option at this point.

SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Yea, that just sounds like the same logic that led to Forsberg being traded for Erat and that worked great for the Capitals.
Click to expand...
That was just a stupid AF panic trade, and McPhee was one of the most panicky GMs in the history of the game--one reason why he never won the Cup as a general manager.

It could very well blow up in their faces--I think a more accurate comparison would be when the Blues traded for a washed-up Ryan Miller--but they gotta do something. Standing pat will not be acceptable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: missionAvs, CobraAcesS and The Moops
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Yea, that just sounds like the same logic that led to Forsberg being traded for Erat and that worked great for the Capitals.
Click to expand...
Question for this logic. How many games do you think the Avs win with a goalie thats 25-30% better? Personally thats 4-5 more wins from games i've watched.

I think Ritchie is great and all, but if you get a goalie who can step in and be even 50% more consistent the Avs aren't close to .500. I also think this takes pressure off of the top guys having to play big minutes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and The Moops
RoyIsALegend said:
If we are trading a 1st round pick that has trended up and will likely have a very strong showing for Canada at the WJC, I’d expect retention on Gibson and them taking Georgiev.

Ritchie and Georgiev for Gibson(50% retained) is something I could maybe get behind.
Click to expand...
If it doesn't work you're seriously f***ed because you still don't have a goalie, your best trading chip is gone and you now have a bad contract to deal with for 2 extra years.

And considering how Gibson's career has been trending in the last 3-4 years the chances it wouldn't work are probably well over 50%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: obZen, avsfan09, LOFIN and 1 other person
Pokecheque said:
Personally, I don't think he's that great a prospect.

And literally no goalie who's available won't have some red flags. Avs have had several chances over the years to fix this issue more cheaply. They didn't, so they're left with the Hail Mary option at this point.


That was just a stupid AF panic trade, and McPhee was one of the most panicky GMs in the history of the game--one reason why he never won the Cup as a general manager.

It could very well blow up in their faces--I think a more accurate comparison would be when the Blues traded for a washed-up Ryan Miller--but they gotta do something. Standing pat will not be acceptable.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The Avs basically have this season, and maybe next year to get a cup depending on what happens with Rantanen. At this point you pay the price and do what you can. No one will care about Ritchie if the Avs win a cup.

Nor do we care about everyone that we traded to get Lehky and Manson. They won a cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and Pokecheque
I would 100% trade Ritchie AND a 1st if it meant solving our goalie problems. Not that goalies usually fetch that much anyway.

Gibson is not a guaranteed solution. He is a GIANT risk though. I want nothing to do with that contract. Even at 50% it's a risk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alienblood
I'm with @RoyIsALegend on the notion of moving Ritchie.

1) Even if Landy goes LTIRetirement, the team still has Drouin, Nuke, Lehky and (though I am against it) Mikko tied up for the next 5+ years.
2) Ritchie does not play a Bednar 3rd line style, so the absolute best case scenario is that he replaces Mitts at 2C in 4 years - a time frame where the Avs start looking like this year's Bruins or Pens.
3) At absolutely freaking best, the Avs have this season and 2 more where they have a legit chance to reach the SCF. More likely the next two. Perhaps just one more 'all-in' shot this year.
4) The projected World Junior rosters are in all the major media today. Ritchie is penciled in at 1C in most. He may never have a higher value in the trade market than this afternoon.

Two cups in 4 years is a nice result in a cap-constrained system. The saddest part is that inept management might well have prevented the Avs from competing well for 4 cups in 6/7 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and RoyIsALegend
I don't think anyone is against moving Ritchie++ for the right goaltender. The issue is with how limited our trading chips are if we make a move we have to hit.

Gibson is a substantial gamble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Perratrooper and avsfan09
Hasbro said:
The board who bitched incesantly about trading a 1st for Keumper AFTER the Avalanche won the Cup with him would be okay trading our top prospect to fill the goalie hole on short notice?
Click to expand...
Were there really a lot of people who bitched about that?

Never mind...of course there were.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CobraAcesS
Like others have said... Ok ritchie goes and raises his value. We still need to find someone with a goalie that can play better than ours that's available. Gibson would be a risk.. I'd be ok with him 50% retained but I don't think ritchie is the guy you move for him. His track record says he may well be done being good. I think that risk and contract length means ritchie doesn't go for him..

Then your back to "ok who do we go after" and that list is.. Not good to look at
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and Alienblood
Pokecheque said:
Were there really a lot of people who bitched about that?

Never mind...of course there were.
Click to expand...
I really don't remember that. I remember people thinking it was a high price but worth it because we got the cup. I think it's revisionist history to say people were bitching about anything that summer
 
The Moops said:
I really don't remember that. I remember people thinking it was a high price but worth it because we got the cup. I think it's revisionist history to say people were bitching about anything that summer
Click to expand...

Oh no, there were definitely people on here saying they could've won the Cup with ANYONE, even though Kuemper was working off one good eye for all but, like, two games of the postseason. Never mind the fact that he made huge key saves in game six to seal the deal that IMO the goalies the Avs have now most certainly wouldn't have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Moops
Pokecheque said:
Oh no, there were definitely people on here saying they could've won the Cup with ANYONE, even though Kuemper was working off one good eye for all but, like, two games of the postseason. Never mind the fact that he made huge key saves in game six to seal the deal that IMO the goalies the Avs have no most certainly wouldn't have.
Click to expand...
I must have had my head in the clouds :DD
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pokecheque
cinchronicity said:
I'm with @RoyIsALegend on the notion of moving Ritchie.

1) Even if Landy goes LTIRetirement, the team still has Drouin, Nuke, Lehky and (though I am against it) Mikko tied up for the next 5+ years.
Click to expand...
Lehkonen is signed for 2 years after this season, and Drouin is only signed for this season.

Rantanen is only signed for this season also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: obZen
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom