Toggle sidebar

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pokecheque said:
I still am left wanting. He just isn’t the game breaker I thought he would be.
Click to expand...
Media hyped him up as Ovechkin 2.0, he seemed to try buying into it with physical play and even the fight against Ovechkin and he just ain't it.

35-40 guy who is a passenger, not a driver. Which is fine, I'll take a guy like that any day on my team BUT Carolina has made the mistake of believing he's a guy who can help lead you to a Stanley Cup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pokecheque
RoyIsALegend said:
“Hey guys, I know I just gave up assets for an impending UFA goalie and signed him to what is probably a slight overpayment, but we’ve decided to go asset management mode regarding Mikko and traded him away for some picks/prospects and a 2nd/3rd line forward.

No no, I know he’s 2nd in the NHL in points. I know he’s a beast in the playoffs. I hear you MacK, you’re not getting any younger. We know this was a key year to go all-in for a Cup win, but trading him and looking towards the future is what is best for business.

Good luck guys, we believe in you.”
Click to expand...
Those dumbass ‘01 Avs getting nothing for Sakic, Blake and Roy on expiring contracts!
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeoRox89, PR33StPatrick, avsfan09 and 3 others
Connor Murphy is the guy I want at the deadline, and then maybe swap Malinski with a similar LH Dman if one of De Haan or Kylington can't hang there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alienblood
There's basically a 0% chance we trade Mikko IMO. He's either re-signing(I still think this is like 90%), or he walks away as a UFA this summer but there's no way the Avs move him.

For shits and giggles, if something insane happened and they did decide to at least entertain a trade, I wouldn't trade him as a rental. I would only deal him if teams were willing to offer returns as if he was fully extended, or maybe even do a sign and trade if the situation gets that ugly.


Admittedly, there's a few interesting scenarios under the purely hypothetical "Trade Mikko" world that are kind of interesting. Being able to possible spread his $12.5M across 2-3 positions would create some interesting scenarios, but it's really hard to imagine one that would position us better then simply having the 110 point Forward signed anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chiarelli
The fact that Lehky is producing more next to Mack than Mikko has been able to produce away from Mack tells me that if we get a guy like Necas and plug him with our 1C we'll still have a 100 pts winger. For half the AAV.

I love Lehky but he isn't on pace for 44 goals if he's playing with a normal center :laugh:

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chiarelli, GeoRox89, Colorado Avalanche and 8 others
CobraAcesS said:
So more like Mikko frustrating?


If by some miracle the Canes are willing to give up a player like that my initial preference would be Svechnikov, but I haven't watched the Canes this season to see Necas break out.
Click to expand...
I mean frustrating in the sense of if they aren’t producing they aren’t much for the team. Idk, I think Necas could probably do well in the role Bura was in here. But if he’s supposed to be the Mikko replacement…. He’s just not good enough to do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and GirardSpinorama
Balthazar said:
The fact that Lehky is producing more next to Mack than Mikko has been able to produce away from Mack tells me that if we get a guy like Necas and plug him with our 1C we'll still have a 100 pts winger. For half the AAV.

I love Lehky but he isn't on pace for 44 goals if he's playing with a normal center :laugh:

Click to expand...

Im still wondering what the trade Mikko camp wants. Another over 100 point winger whos gonna ask 12-13mil in next contract and is new to the team or 2 50 point guys? So which is it?

If you think you can get 100 points winger for less money your delusional. Or that someone is gonna trade one with 3-4 year of 8-9 mil contract left to a 12-13 mil guy.
 
Part of me expects the Avs to grab Panarin from the struggling Rangers (retained of course). They really wanted him before, the Rangers are struggling, Rants at risk of walking. Could see it working out.

Plus…Panarin-MacKinnon-Rantanen, terrible defensively, but there’s a good chance that they’ll be too dominant offensively for it to matter

Edit: does it address the teams weaknesses? Absolutely not. Is it the best use of resources? Nope. Would it be something I would be shocked by? Not at all
 
  • Like
Reactions: Murzu, AvalancheSpeedsters and dahrougem2
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Part of me expects the Avs to grab Panarin from the struggling Rangers (retained of course). They really wanted him before, the Rangers are struggling, Rants at risk of walking. Could see it working out.

Plus…Panarin-MacKinnon-Rantanen, terrible defensively, but there’s a good chance that they’ll be too dominant offensively for it to matter

Edit: does it address the teams weaknesses? Absolutely not. Is it the best use of resources? Nope. Would it be something I would be shocked by? Not at all
Click to expand...
What do you think the cost would be? Bread man would need significant retention to fit under the cap
 
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Part of me expects the Avs to grab Panarin from the struggling Rangers (retained of course). They really wanted him before, the Rangers are struggling, Rants at risk of walking. Could see it working out.

Plus…Panarin-MacKinnon-Rantanen, terrible defensively, but there’s a good chance that they’ll be too dominant offensively for it to matter

Edit: does it address the teams weaknesses? Absolutely not. Is it the best use of resources? Nope. Would it be something I would be shocked by? Not at all
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if he waived.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS and RoyIsALegend
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
Part of me expects the Avs to grab Panarin from the struggling Rangers (retained of course). They really wanted him before, the Rangers are struggling, Rants at risk of walking. Could see it working out.

Plus…Panarin-MacKinnon-Rantanen, terrible defensively, but there’s a good chance that they’ll be too dominant offensively for it to matter

Edit: does it address the teams weaknesses? Absolutely not. Is it the best use of resources? Nope. Would it be something I would be shocked by? Not at all
Click to expand...

Problem is he turned down the Colorado River before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS, avsfan09, Alienblood and 1 other person
SoundwaveIsCharisma said:
I could see him doing it just because it’s a shorter commitment, and with how dysfunctional the Rangers are right now.
Click to expand...
No way are the Rangers sending him away at full retention without exacting a huge price.

I definitely see Bread going somewhere before his deal is up, but not Colorado.
 
hockeyfish said:
Come on, the guy who traded Drury has been dead for 4 years. Any relevance it has to the current front office is tiny, if it exists at all. And ROR was an ass who had no desire to play here. Also, not relevant.
Click to expand...
It was more about the team moving on from players who were a big part of the team and popular in the room rather than a specific example.

Besides, we know that it's not 100% the same but PL did train Sakic during the lean years so it stands to reason the Avs won't overpay Rantanen if they don't feel he's worth what they think he is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS
dahrougem2 said:
Panarin signed with NYR after they had missed the playoffs two years in a row. I don't think he gives a f*** how the team looks. He loves NYC.
Click to expand...
There was even a story at the time that Panarin himself would've liked the Avs better. But, his then GF, now wife wanted New York for her modelling career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS
So Pettersson wouldn't fit into this room either. Instead of Miller getting on him it'd be MacKinnon here
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom