Toggle sidebar

Rumor: 2024 Trade Rumors and Free Agency Thread: Post Deadline

Freaky Styley said:
Malinski has really turned the corner since the deadline. I think he was afraid he'd be the one to get moved and has felt a confidence boost from management
Click to expand...

Yeah I noticed a clear change after the deadline in Malsinki's confidence too.

He probably knew there was a good chance he'd be moved just like many of us did. It just made sense if they were to target another defenseman. They just didn't trade for one.

I'm guessing that was the original plan. That's probably why Malinski was scratched for Middleton the game before the deadline and why they started playing Manson and Lindgren together.

I think they might have been planning on a move like that, perhaps Mitts + Malinski + 1st for Coyle + Carlo. Though I would have liked them to target a better RD. But after they heard Mikko might be traded again, probably to Dallas, they got more aggressive in landing a big name C like Nelson, and still made the Coyle trade because they weren't sure if they'd be able to keep Nelson.

They didn't have enough good assets left after that. Gulyayev is portal the only one. This will be a problem if Nelson/Coyle don't work out and if they want another RD in the off season too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tommy Shelby and Richard88
  • Like
Reactions: Richard88
Tommy Shelby said:
I'm almost certain he was supposed to get moved at the deadline, as part of a Carlo trade, but the Leafs beat us out
Click to expand...
Yeah that seems likely. Boston got a better return for Carlo from Toronto, and instead of Malinski they pivoted to Jokiharju who is pretty similar to Malinski stylistically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tommy Shelby
Freaky Styley said:
Schneider is the ideal target. I think Peeke and Kessel would be solid targets too, stylistically at least. Whoever grabs Spence out of LA (if they don't trade Clarke) is going to be pleased
Click to expand...
Agree on Schneider, stylistically he's exactly what the Avs would need. But why would NYR trade him? I guess they have Fox and just signed Borgen to a $4m long term deal, so they could probably afford to move Schneider to plug holes elsewhere. But at $2.2m Schneider is pretty good value in their bottom 4 so they'd need a decent forward to consider it. Maybe something around Lehkonen/Schneider similar to my Nemec idea above?

Peeke is another name that stood out to me too. More bottom pairing but at least he'd fit stylistically.
 
Foppa2118 said:
Yeah I noticed a clear change after the deadline in Malsinki's confidence too.

He probably knew there was a good chance he'd be moved just like many of us did. It just made sense if they were to target another defenseman. They just didn't trade for one.

I'm guessing that was the original plan. That's probably why Malinski was scratched for Middleton the game before the deadline and why they started playing Manson and Lindgren together.

I think they might have been planning on a move like that, perhaps Mitts + Malinski + 1st for Coyle + Carlo. Though I would have liked them to target a better RD. But after they heard Mikko might be traded again, probably to Dallas, they got more aggressive in landing a big name C like Nelson, and still made the Coyle trade because they weren't sure if they'd be able to keep Nelson.

They didn't have enough good assets left after that. Gulyayev is portal the only one. This will be a problem if Nelson/Coyle don't work out and if they want another RD in the off season too.
Click to expand...
This is an interesting and reasonable theory. Even if it wasn't a known plan, I'm sure he breathed a sigh of relief post-deadline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foppa2118
Richard88 said:
Filtering for minimum 30mins TOI:

The early returns for the Girard-EJ pairing are great (60.47 CF%).

Same with Lindgren-Manson (57.14 CF%).

View attachment 996146
View attachment 996147
Click to expand...

Backs up my eye test. EJ and Girard have been good together.

They've been very good at getting the puck to each other in the D zone under pressure, so they can get it out of the zone. Hence the good analytics.

Their chemistry is their biggest strength. They read off each other very well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tommy Shelby and Richard88
I think Manson still has very good value on the market (as long as he stays healthy). Other than health he checks all the boxes that contender are looking for (RD, physical, can play top 4 minutes, can skate, cup pedigree....)

Wonder if next summer we can get a Cal Ritchie level dman prospect for him. Kinda like the Nelson trade but the other way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Linds and Murzu
Balthazar said:
I think Manson still has very good value on the market (as long as he stays healthy). Other than health he checks all the boxes that contender are looking for (RD, physical, can play top 4 minutes, can skate, cup pedigree....)

Wonder if next summer we can get a Cal Ritchie level dman prospect for him. Kinda like the Nelson trade but the other way.
Click to expand...
The Avs should be all-in again next year while Necas and Drury are still on their current deals. So trading Manson as a rental doesn't make any sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Foppa2118
Richard88 said:
Agree on Schneider, stylistically he's exactly what the Avs would need. But why would NYR trade him? I guess they have Fox and just signed Borgen to a $4m long term deal, so they could probably afford to move Schneider to plug holes elsewhere. But at $2.2m Schneider is pretty good value in their bottom 4 so they'd need a decent forward to consider it. Maybe something around Lehkonen/Schneider similar to my Nemec idea above?

Peeke is another name that stood out to me too. More bottom pairing but at least he'd fit stylistically.
Click to expand...
Ya I was suggesting they would move him, just that he would be the most ideal fit. Can't see NYR moving him unless it was in a package for a difference maker/upgrade
 
Richard88 said:
2027 and 2028 1st and 2nd rounders. Gulyayev, Behrens, Nabokov. Plus whatever lesser picks they still have in the next 3 drafts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those are their best non NHL assets, but I'm not sure they can outbid teams with those 1st rounders years down the road, and I'm not sure how much value Gulyayev, Behrens, and Nabokov actually have.

They can probably bring in someone, but I'm not sure it can bring in an impact player, or the kind of D man that's an upgrade on Manson.

As of now they have 0 picks in the first three rounds of the next two drafts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard88
Moved the discussion here to not derail the Landeskog thread.

For context: this started by me saying if Landeskog is back and we face a cap crunch and needed to shed salary, I would move (in order): Wood, Colton, Girard, Manson. There has been pushback on me having Girard at #3.
The Abusement Park said:
I mean there's Behrens and Guly in the system... But neither of them are anywhere close to being the 3D on this team. They have some upside for sure, but aren't going to be able to replace Girard. You also have Malinksi and Lindgren... who also aren't able to fill his role. Lindgren due to play style, he won't be able handle the puck moving duties Girard does. And Malinski while decently skilled with the puck stills leave a bit to be desired without it. I think the team would take a step back with him on the 2nd pair. Even if Girard fetches more, you have to replace him and have to replace the far superior player.

As for Manson replacements someone like Connor Murphy would likely be attainable and would be a decent compliment to Girard on the 2nd pair. I mean you have to be open to all options... But I just don't see Girard making sense to move personally.
Click to expand...
You've missed the point entirely. The scenario we're talking about is one where the Avs are at a cap crunch, which means staying equally good and deep is simply not an option. Replacing Manson's 4.5m cap hit with Murphy's 4.4m cap hit makes no sense. Also, why would Malinski be on the 2nd pair if Manson is still on the team? See below for more of a response to your post.
Richard88 said:
I appreciate your viewpoint but I disagree on the parts in bold copied below.

1. If they trade Girard, there are tons of guys who could replace at least his role on the team
No, there aren't. Lindgren doesn't have the puck skill Girard has. Malinski isn't as good defensively. You lose a lot either offensively or defensively if you remove Girard for those guys. And neither Behrens or Gulyayev are anywhere near taking a 3D spot.

2. There are quite a few teams who could use a reliable puck mover like Girard, and at 5M he's very affordable.
One of those teams who could use him is the Avs! The arguments you're making are exactly why the Avs should keep him.

3. Taking from an area of strength to address an area of weakness can often be a very smart move.

If you remove Girard for picks/assets you'll be weakening what is the most important part of Bednar's system. His system relies on zone entry denial, quick puck retrievals, and quick transitions, which Girard is extremely good at. And as for areas of weakness, the Avs D group is the weakest part of the roster right now as they're set in net, at center, and on the wings, so it makes zero sense to take from the blueline to fill areas elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I've numbered the points.
1. I said they could replace his role, not everything he does or do it as well as he can. If we're shedding salary, we are going to get a bit worse. But Malinski taking on Girard's PP and puck moving duties would not be a massive downgrade. I was also referring to free agents as possible guys who could be puck movers for us at a lower cap hit.

2. I agree the Avs should keep him, but if they are at the cap ceiling, they can't afford a 5m depth defenseman.

3. If you remove Manson for picks/assets, you'd be weakening what is the most important part of the team in the playoffs. The playoffs rely on having players who can withstand the physical nature of play, clear the front of the net, and intimidate opposing players, which Manson is extremely good at. If we have Makar, Toews, Lindgren, Manson and Malinski, I think we have a very solid defense group, especially if you add a decent cheaper puck mover to that group.

I think though what we're missing is clarity. Here's a potential roster. Who are you moving off this roster before Girard? Or do I have the cap hits completely wrong?
1742525169066.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS
Wood and Manson are clearly the first two to go. They aren't being missed. Lindgren can replace a lot of what Manson brings but will replace it for cheaper, and while both guys have taken a beating through their careers, Lindgren is at least younger.


I also, on the one hand really dont want to move Colton, he's a completely different player on the wing and I think a Landy/Coyle/Colton 3rd line could be the best 3rd line in hockey next year.

But, if you keep Colton that basically secures Kivi as being lost to free agency since I dont think they'd be able to afford his raise at that point and also you still have LOC/Drury/Kelly all signed for next year and all of which are solid 4th liners anyway.

So maybe you do move Colton. Certainly doesn't hurt his value for him to be having the stretch run he's having. A strong deep playoff run and we could probably improve on the cost it took to acquire him in the first place.
 
Foppa2118 said:
Yeah, those are their best non NHL assets, but I'm not sure they can outbid teams with those 1st rounders years down the road, and I'm not sure how much value Gulyayev, Behrens, and Nabokov actually have.

They can probably bring in someone, but I'm not sure it can bring in an impact player, or the kind of D man that's an upgrade on Manson.

As of now they have 0 picks in the first three rounds of the next two drafts.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think you're right. It's why I've started mentioning Lehkonen as a guy who could be needed in a trade for a RHD. The Avs just simply don't have any assets to win bidding wars with for in-demand RHD's. Unless of course CMac pulls another Toews-for-2 2nd's trade out of nowhere.

I don't think the Avs necessarily need a RHD that's an upgrade on Manson though. Getting someone who's more or less at the same no.4 D level (and healthy/available) would be enough.

Maybe the smart move from an asset perspective is to trade Manson this offseason though, and re-sign Lindgren to replace him, even if it's his off hand. Then by next TDL you look to add a RHD to bump Lindgren back down to 3LHD.
 
Last edited:
MarkT said:
Moved the discussion here to not derail the Landeskog thread.

For context: this started by me saying if Landeskog is back and we face a cap crunch and needed to shed salary, I would move (in order): Wood, Colton, Girard, Manson. There has been pushback on me having Girard at #3.

You've missed the point entirely. The scenario we're talking about is one where the Avs are at a cap crunch, which means staying equally good and deep is simply not an option. Replacing Manson's 4.5m cap hit with Murphy's 4.4m cap hit makes no sense. Also, why would Malinski be on the 2nd pair if Manson is still on the team? See below for more of a response to your post.

I've numbered the points.
1. I said they could replace his role, not everything he does or do it as well as he can. If we're shedding salary, we are going to get a bit worse. But Malinski taking on Girard's PP and puck moving duties would not be a massive downgrade. I was also referring to free agents as possible guys who could be puck movers for us at a lower cap hit.

2. I agree the Avs should keep him, but if they are at the cap ceiling, they can't afford a 5m depth defenseman.

3. If you remove Manson for picks/assets, you'd be weakening what is the most important part of the team in the playoffs. The playoffs rely on having players who can withstand the physical nature of play, clear the front of the net, and intimidate opposing players, which Manson is extremely good at. If we have Makar, Toews, Lindgren, Manson and Malinski, I think we have a very solid defense group, especially if you add a decent cheaper puck mover to that group.

I think though what we're missing is clarity. Here's a potential roster. Who are you moving off this roster before Girard? Or do I have the cap hits completely wrong?
View attachment 996608
Click to expand...
Thanks for moving the conversation to the appropriate thread.

1. I said they could replace his role, not everything he does or do it as well as he can. If we're shedding salary, we are going to get a bit worse. But Malinski taking on Girard's PP and puck moving duties would not be a massive downgrade. I was also referring to free agents as possible guys who could be puck movers for us at a lower cap hit.

Malinski is developing well, but there's a reason he was healthy scratched right before the deadline by CMac pending a possible trade, and why a lot of posters here wanted to bring in a more veteran RHD. He's played great since the deadline but he has a long way to go before he can be thought of as a no.3 on a contending team.

As for free agents that can be puck movers at a lower caphit, I immediately think of Kylington and Brannstrom who were brought in for exactly that purpose, and both of which didn't impress. Are there any specific free agents you'd be targeting this offseason if you traded Girard? Presumably those free agents would be the $1m caphit variety since you signed Lindgren at $5m... so more of the Kylington/Brannstrom types who are cheap for a reason.

2. I agree the Avs should keep him, but if they are at the cap ceiling, they can't afford a 5m depth defenseman.

Girard is not a depth defenseman.

3. If you remove Manson for picks/assets, you'd be weakening what is the most important part of the team in the playoffs. The playoffs rely on having players who can withstand the physical nature of play, clear the front of the net, and intimidate opposing players, which Manson is extremely good at. If we have Makar, Toews, Lindgren, Manson and Malinski, I think we have a very solid defense group, especially if you add a decent cheaper puck mover to that group.

I don't want to remove Manson for picks/assets. Moving Colton and Wood would open enough to get guys signed.

I think though what we're missing is clarity. Here's a potential roster. Who are you moving off this roster before Girard? Or do I have the cap hits completely wrong?

From your roster I'd simply let Lindgren walk and keep Girard. Losing Lindgren sucks but bottom pairing LHD's are one of the easiest positions to fill at the TDL each year so I wouldn't lose much sleep over that one. If Nelson decides to walk though I'd happily re-sign Lindgren though.

The roster below has 22 guys and is $55k under the cap ceiling. I've traded Colton and Wood, just as you've done. If you need to find more money for someone else you simply let Kiviranta walk. He'll probably be asking for closer to $2m after a 16 goal season anyhow which might be too much. In fact, it would probably be wise to let Kiviranta walk and use that money to get an extra year or two from Malinski (eg. $2m x 3 years instead of $1.5m x 2 years). RHD's are harder to find than bottom 6 wingers, and he is trending well right now.

Ideally we'd find a ~$800k LHD for the bottom pairing to partner Malinski and to push Middleton to no.7, but for the purpose of this exercise I've just used EJ at $800k.

1742552211060.png

1742552522328.png
 
Pierce Hawthorne said:
Wood and Manson are clearly the first two to go. They aren't being missed. Lindgren can replace a lot of what Manson brings but will replace it for cheaper, and while both guys have taken a beating through their careers, Lindgren is at least younger.


I also, on the one hand really dont want to move Colton, he's a completely different player on the wing and I think a Landy/Coyle/Colton 3rd line could be the best 3rd line in hockey next year.

But, if you keep Colton that basically secures Kivi as being lost to free agency since I dont think they'd be able to afford his raise at that point and also you still have LOC/Drury/Kelly all signed for next year and all of which are solid 4th liners anyway.

So maybe you do move Colton. Certainly doesn't hurt his value for him to be having the stretch run he's having. A strong deep playoff run and we could probably improve on the cost it took to acquire him in the first place.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure Lindgren will come in cheaper than Manson's $4.5m. He's been earning that until now, and with a rising cap and the crazy prices teams pay for Dmen in UFA he could very well get a contract in that range again. His metrics in NYR this season weren't great, but he's doing well with us so far, and a good playoff run will bring his value up again for sure. GM's will note that he was being overplayed in NY on their top pairing, but that he can be good value in a more appropriate bottom 4 role on a team that isn't a complete mess.

Do you move Manson before you move Colton? I'd hesitate to do that simply because of how difficult it is to find RHD's. But if someone wants to give me good assets for Manson in the offseason and I can turn around and sign Lindgren for the same money then that's worth considering even if it would mean playing Lindgren or Girard on their off hand.

Colton would bring back decent value as well. He has consistently paced for ~40 points in Colorado (41 to be exact) with 67 points in 133 games, including 27 in 53 this season (42 point pace). He's not taking faceoffs a lot this season but he's at 51.3% for his career on the dot (almost 2,000 draws taken). He leads the team in hits. 2 years at $4m with a rising cap. There's a lot to like there. If I move him I'd ideally be looking to get back a young RHD that plays similar to Manson (eg. Helleson or Schneider if they can be had).
 
  • Like
Reactions: lionsDen and CobraAcesS
You must log in or register to reply here.
adding hide avatars option

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom