Speculation: AVS Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents & Related Topics 2016-17 Part XVII
- Thread starter SoundwaveIsCharisma
- Start date
- Status
Foppa
Future Norris Winner
Half this board will have a meltdown if we have two top 4 picks and don't pick a defender irregardless if there is one worth taking. I can see the "First we pass on Chychrun and then on Liljegren" hot takes coming already.
Hell that will be a hot take if we end up with just our pick at 3 or 4 and pass on him.
Vilardi and Tippett sounds like an intriguing duo. Seems like a lot of their relative strengths and weaknesses dovetail well together. The cerebral, responsible platmaker and the fast, strong sniper. Have they played together on the same line in any international or all star type events?
SoundwaveIsCharisma
Moderator
The whole "we need to draft a defender" thing is pretty ridiculous IMO. There really hasn't been a defender that has demonstrated that they are deserving of being a Top-4 selection this year, and taking one at that spot would be an idiot move catering towards uninformed casuals (who basically get all their information from the media). The offense is equally as terrible.
I'd also be very intrigued by a Vilardi/Tippett duo, even if those two don't end up together it gives the Avs two big needs. A big two-way C, and a true sniper. It also alleviates some of my personal hesitation of taking Tippett (who I fear would turn out like Virtanen...but that's just because they are both big sniping wingers who have Q's about their hockey sense). A future Top-6 of Jost-MacKinnon-Rantanen, Landeskog-Vilardi-Tippett, or some combination of that could be extremely hard to play against and give this team a lot of looks.
Bubba Thudd
is getting banned
The meltdown wouldn't be because we didn't draft a D at #3 or #4.
The meltdown would be because we traded Duchene and didn't get any D for him.
If we don't get D for Duchene, where will we get it?
The meltdown would be because we traded Duchene and didn't get any D for him.
If we don't get D for Duchene, where will we get it?
SoundwaveIsCharisma
Moderator
I agree about the meltdown over a Duchene trade not bringing back a D. I do think that there will be a meltdown from "the experts" as well as casual fans. I can see them immediately saying how drafting one of the Top-4 forwards does nothing to fix our defense, while completely ignoring the fact that our offense this year was completely inept.
I think at this point my ideal deal for Duchene is either with Nashville (if we get Ekholm and Fabbro), or with Vegas (if they get Brodin and Manson and want to deal for a "face of the franchise" guy). I know people want that flashy, home run prospect. I just don't see us getting that player for Duchene. I feel like Ekholm/Brodin-EJ gives us a legitimate 1st Pair and takes a lot of the pressure off everyone else.
Last edited:
Ararana
Registered User
If there was a Jones/Hanifin/Provorov/Werenski in this draft class, then yeah probably. But there isn't.
I refuse to believe there won't be a better option in the trade market. I think there's still a lot of teams that would want Duchene. Get a good young defenseman with upside + a mid 1st and draft a defender there.
Bubba Thudd
is getting banned
TheForsbergShow
Registered User
Not really sure how those would be a comparable. Heard was deemed a horrible pick by pretty much everyone, so that was just pure dumbness.
Only real luck I see is the year you are bad and if their is a few elite guys at the top of the draft or not. So far we haven't gotten that true Franchise player (although I still believe in Mack to get there).
There is a reason why teams like Tampa turn a lot of later picks into good players and it isn't just them getting lucky every year. Sure you may get lucking drafting a Datsyuk guy in the last round but at the same time you have to unlock their potential as well by knowing how to.
Different sport, but I think this is an interesting article about Cleveland Browns GM Paul Depodesta and his approach to accumulating draft picks for a rebuild. It is something that we have seen from other NHL organizations recently (Toronto, Arizona), but the Avs have seemingly not jumped on board. Perhaps the opportunity has not presented itself.
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/04/03/cleveland-browns-paul-depodesta-nfl-draft-peter-king
"Let's try something else, then. The one thing that's obvious about the Cleveland approach-and it has to be a big part of the DePodesta way, seeing that he's the strategy guy-is the accumulation of draft choices. When he starts talking about that, clues start surfacing.
"We've looked ourselves in the mirror and said, 'Do we think that we are actually superhuman when it comes to picking players?' And we pretty easily answered that with a resounding no. So how are we going to increase our chances? We need to have more picks. So, if we have the same number of picks every year as everyone else, we don't expect do better than anyone else.""
http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2017/04/03/cleveland-browns-paul-depodesta-nfl-draft-peter-king
"Let's try something else, then. The one thing that's obvious about the Cleveland approach-and it has to be a big part of the DePodesta way, seeing that he's the strategy guy-is the accumulation of draft choices. When he starts talking about that, clues start surfacing.
"We've looked ourselves in the mirror and said, 'Do we think that we are actually superhuman when it comes to picking players?' And we pretty easily answered that with a resounding no. So how are we going to increase our chances? We need to have more picks. So, if we have the same number of picks every year as everyone else, we don't expect do better than anyone else.""
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,515
- 12,800
In the hypothetical and not-at-all likely Vegas scenario where we pick 3-4, I'd say Vilardi and Tippett. I'm not a huge fan of picking Tippet at 4 if that's our only pick, but if we're also getting a "safer" guy in Vilardi, taking a chance on Tippett is smart. If he works out, he'll be a great goal scorer, I'm just not terribly convinced that he'll ever get there.
Perratrooper
Registered User
I personally would go Vilardi and Elias Pettersson if we're going a slightly riskier prospect at 4. I'd hope Vegas would give us a bit more than their first round pick for Duchene, maybe JJ is he isnt protected by Cbj
JoemAvs
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2011
- 13,671
- 4,116
Yeah. Also hire Pierre Lacroix and I might be so pissed off with this mess that I just might find the strength to walk away for good. So there is some upside to this...
Nightmare scenario is probably underselling it.
I have warmed a bit to Vilardi and could be ok with taking him but getting him AND Tippett would be just too much.
A season should only hurt so much. Losing Duchene, suffering through a season like this and getting those guys in return would make me puke so hard.
I mean maybe they would pan out but drafting two more wingers would just be pure and utter madness.
But sure. Try to build a winning team from the wings out. That always works in the NHL...
I mean we barely have players who are comfortable on the wings between Landeskog, Rantanen, Jost, Compher, MacKinnon, Andrighetto..
Lets load up on this vital position!
If it is 3 and 4 give me Mittelstadt and Liljegren....
Not getting a D for either our pick or Duchene would just be hilariously awful GMing. Especially if it is 2 wingers...
So knowing the Avs, there is a very good chance of this happening...
Especially given that if Duchene leaves, we could use someone new to question over their decision making and limited hockey IQ...
Tippett could make Nate look very smart in comparison. So win-win I guess?
Last edited:
The winger depth on this team is abysmal. In this hypothetical, having the 3 and 4 pick, it is better to take BPA instead of forcing a D pick. There is no defenseman in this class worth a top 5 selection.
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,515
- 12,800
The only true top six wingers we have are Rantanen and Landeskog. Maybe Andrighetto if he can continue playing this way. We've been desperately needing top six wingers for years (think about who Duchene has had to play with over the years). Yes, centers are important, but between MacK, Jost, Soderberg and Compher we are OK at that position. As long as one of those last 3 can become a 2C (Soderberg was a fine 2C last season) I feel like we're OK down the middle. You can't just have six top six centers and expect four of them to play wing.
agentblack
Registered User
Maybe., but in a scenario where we have two top 5 picks, you leverage the other and trade down into the middle of the draft, grab that D and another juicy asset or a pick in the 2nd and you can draft some good wingers there.
One of those teams with like a million 2nds im sure would like to move all the way up to the 4th
JoemAvs
Registered User
- Jul 2, 2011
- 13,671
- 4,116
How many "true" top six wingers did other contending teams have when they were bad?
I will never understand Avs fans on this one. It looks like we have had an abundance of good forwards and a ****** defense for so long that fans are comfortable with that.
I mean our top6 depth in the future stacks up very well with other bad teams.
Our defense however is a joke. But for some reason people are always more concerned about the 5th or 6th best forward (who I honestly at this stage of our rebuild don't give a damn about) than they are about our top end Ds...
Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, Jost, Compher, Ghetto, Greer, Soda, etc...
All of those guys will have to be paid sooner or later. I honestly don't give a damn about our 4th or 5th best wingers right now.
Not with so many questionmarks on defense.
I am pretty sure that Mac, Rantanen, Jost and probably even Compher have a good chance of being on this team 4-5 years from now. And maybe even add Landeskog if he survives the incoming purge.
Aside from Zadorov I am not sure any of our Ds will be here in 4 years.
So I personally would like to adress the big elephant in the room instead of the broken clock on the wall and focus heavily on our D but that is just me I guess.
I have confidence that a more capable front office should not have any problems getting us another top6 complimentary guy or two once we are ready to contend.
Problem is we will never contend with this D and a competent front office is not on the horizon yet so we will probably never find out if I am right.
At this point I very much rather ask Carolina if they give us their #1 (hopefully Valimaki or atleast Heiskanen would be there), Bean (don't really like him but he has some upside) + Gauthier + 2nd for Duchene.
Or maybe Lindholm instead of Gauthier + 2nd.
Would like that way more than getting Owen Tippett for Matt Duchene...
Oh brother....
No one here is saying that this is the deal that they are hoping for, nor is anyone saying that the defense doesn't need to be addressed. We are all in agreement that our defense needs to be upgraded, long before our forward depth, but goodness. If there is not a sure fire top defenseman in the draft, what is the point on forcing a depth defenseman when an impact pair of forwards could be added. I could throw out a million hyphotheticals regarding picks, but to sit there and say that no one sees, nor understands the problem the roster is comical. What if we ended up moving Duchene for the 3rd overall, and then Landeskog to fill in that needed D-man spot? Then we have another hole in the forward corp that needs to be filled while still addressing D. Or moving Duchene for a D-man, Barrie for forward help and keeping Landeskog. There are a litany of ways to address the issues.
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,515
- 12,800
I did say that the trade was unlikely and purely hypothetical. Of course I would rather get D for Duchene. The question was who would I pick at 3 and 4 if I had those two picks and Hischier and Patrick were gone. Picking Liljegren or Valimaki there is just too much of a reach. Yes we need to draft D, but we also have to work with what we're given; and we have been given a forward this year.
I also really disagree about wingers being meaningless. Put Comeau and Martinsen on Crosby's wings and see how dominant he is when he has to do it all by himself. Just because wingers are slightly less important than centers doesn't mean you can just get good centers and put no-names on their wings and expect your offense to be fine. You can't put a 2C with two third a line wingers and expect that line to produce at a 2nd line pace. And no, we haven't exactly had an "abundance" of good forwards for a very long time considering that Comeau and McGinn spent long stretches in our top six since the rebuild started.
Last edited:
AvsFan2123
Registered User
Anyone else see the Hockey News article about MacKinnon being no longer untouchable? He's been playing phenomenal lately and given his still high chance of being elite if not a really good 1C, I'm calling BS. Sakic himself said he's untouchable. They based this article off an Edmonton journalist saying they'll listen to offers. I mean management is pretty stupid, but not stupid enough to trade MacKinnon right? Players like him don't grow on trees they need to build around Jost, Rantanen, and Mack.
Mr Serious
Registered User
- Jul 23, 2011
- 3,051
- 31
Is MacKinnon untouchable? No.
Would it take a king's ransom for someone to acquire him? Pretty much.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,203
- 37,463
I don't understand what they'd be trying to accomplish by trading Mackinnon. Even if he has been slightly disappointing and even if we realize he lacks the IQ to ever become what we hope there is simply no other option anywhere near as close to being our #1C of the future.
I get frustrated by a lot of what Mackinnon does but he's a 1C right now and he's only going to get better. If we move Mackinnon that hole at centre becomes an even bigger hole than that one we've been trying to fill on defense for the last decade. To go from having 4 #1C's to 0 in 3 years would be the most ridiculous thing to ever happen to a hockey team. That's coming from me, the guy who thinks Mackinnon is better suited at wing but I understand how much we need him down the middle.
P.S. I know you guys are reading this and thinking I'm forgetting Duchene but I'm not. He's just as good as gone and I'm realistic, not blind.
henchman21
Mr. Meeseeks
- Feb 24, 2012
- 67,095
- 53,590
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,203
- 37,463
And Duchene isn't a #1C anymore.
He certainly isn't playing like it, but he is. He will be a freak again when he moves elsewhere.
- Status
