Value of: Brad Marchand to Colorado

[KillerMillerTime]

A plug, a donkey, and a lotto ticket? These are sad times

I wanted to see what that persons view was going somewhat to each extreme with actual NHL players are. I actually want Boston to do a 2 month tank to get a top 5-10 pick. So more trying to flush out his trade parameters.

That said Kiviranta is pacing for 17G this year.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Utterly nonsense! Recchi had a significant impact on the Bruins in his time in Boston beyond 2011.

But he only played 29 games (18 regular season + 11 playoff games) as a rental after being acquired on March 4th, 2009. Everything else he did in Boston came after they re-signed him as a UFA.

 

[PlayMakers]

You guys got Recchi and a 2nd in exchange for Martins Karsums and Matt Lashoff in 2009, two years before you won the Cup. You could have kept the trade capital and signed him as a UFA and gotten the same result.

It also rained in Vancouver that day.

I don't see the relevance of either.

Colorado fans were downplaying Marchand's impact because he's 36. I made a point about how Recchi had a huge impact on Boston's Cup run, despite being old. What difference does it make how or when we acquired him? The point still stands that older players can have a huge impact on a playoff run.

 

[nightonthesun]

I wanted to see what that persons view was going somewhat to each extreme with actual NHL players are. I actually want Boston to do a 2 month tank to get a top 5-10 pick. So more trying to flush out his trade parameters.

That said Kiviranta is pacing for 17G this year.

If I’ve done anyone an injustice there, it’s Kivi, who’s had a couple of great performances this year. Either way, if I were a Boston fan, I’d be bummed about that return. I don’t know how valid the Recchi comp is (and like I said, I also don’t have an educated position on Marchand’s current value, but if he was solid in the playoffs last year…)

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

It also rained in Vancouver that day.

I don't see the relevance of either.

Colorado fans were downplaying Marchand's impact because he's 36. I made a point about how Recchi had a huge impact on Boston's Cup run, despite being old. What difference does it make how or when we acquired him? The point still stands that older players can have a huge impact on a playoff run.

The relevance is that if the Avs are trading for Marchand, the return should be similar to what Recchi cost as a rental, not inflated because Recchi was good while on the subsequent UFA contracts he signed with Boston. If you want to offer Marchand + 2nd for a couple of nothing prospects like Olausson and Foudy, I'm pretty sure most of my fellow Avs fans would accept. But when Bruins fans start talking about Nuke or Ritchie or Gulyayev or 1st round picks, then the answer quickly becomes a hard no. Recchi's play 15 years ago doesn't really change that.

 

[StewieP19]

If Colorado want Marchand they need to give Colton to ckearde Marchand Salary on cap space.
What Colorado need to add when Marchand is there as a rental and Colton got term ?

 

[PlayMakers]

The relevance is that if the Avs are trading for Marchand, the return should be similar to what Recchi cost as a rental, not inflated because Recchi was good while on the subsequent UFA contracts he signed with Boston. If you want to offer Marchand + 2nd for a couple of nothing prospects like Olausson and Foudy, I'm pretty sure most of my fellow Avs fans would accept. But when Bruins fans start talking about Nuke or Ritchie or Gulyayev or 1st round picks, then the answer quickly becomes a hard no. Recchi's play 15 years ago doesn't really change that.

Oh I see. You're nuts.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Oh I see. You're nuts.

Says the guy expecting a huge return for a 36 year old 60 point rental.

 

[yeaher]

Marchand is not a very good player anymore, the last few playoffs he has come up woefully short for Boston, and Brad Marchand has once in his career scored more goals in the playoffs than Nuke put up last year in 7 games and it took Marchand 23 games. Haha as I said this trade makes no sense for the Avs, maybe Nuke for Pasta.

 

[a mangy Meowth]

Haha as I said this trade makes no sense for the Avs, maybe Nuke for Pasta.

lol are you trying to start a war in here, sir?

 

[Freaky Styley]

Oh I see. You're nuts.

He's exaggerating, but realistically of those assets mentioned only a 1st round pick would be on the table. Avs need to target a top 4D first and foremost and use their assets towards that. They will likely add another forward if Landeskog remains out, but there are plenty of useful top 9 wingers they can target at a cheaper price.

Marchand is a great player but he's a luxury and not a need for the Avs. And he's a 36 year old UFA luxury. They aren't going to move their top assets for him and it's not really CMac's M.O. I don't see how Marchand is a significant difference maker for the Avs than a different top 6 winger who is younger and likely comes with some term.

I think a realistic move would be a 1st, a B prospect and perhaps another pick. Or something like a 1st and Will Zellers. Avs might have to pay a 4th or so for retention or include a roster player for cap space. If the Avs can acquire a guy like Jones for a good price, maybe Ritchie becomes available in a deal like this. But the org is high on him and they are making moves toward becoming younger (Necas). I'm not sure how well Marchand fits in Bednar's system either, he doesn't seem the most fleet of foot and speed is really how the Avs thrive (see Mittlestadt, Casey)

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

He's exaggerating, but realistically of those assets mentioned only a 1st round pick would be on the table. Avs need to target a top 4D first and foremost and use their assets towards that. They will likely add another forward if Landeskog remains out, but there are plenty of useful top 9 wingers they can target at a cheaper price.

Marchand is a great player but he's a luxury and not a need for the Avs. And he's a 36 year old UFA luxury. They aren't going to move their top assets for him and it's not really CMac's M.O. I don't see how Marchand is a significant difference maker for the Avs than a different top 6 winger who is younger and likely comes with some term.

I think a realistic move would be a 1st, a B prospect and perhaps another pick. Or something like a 1st and Will Zellers. Avs might have to pay a 4th or so for retention or include a roster player for cap space. If the Avs can acquire a guy like Jones for a good price, maybe Ritchie becomes available in a deal like this. But the org is high on him and they are making moves toward becoming younger (Necas). I'm not sure how well Marchand fits in Bednar's system either, he doesn't seem the most fleet of foot and speed is really how the Avs thrive (see Mittlestadt, Casey)

No, I'm not exaggerating. Giving up a 1st+ for a big name rental is an objectively bad idea, given that I can't remember the last time a team did so and actually won the Cup that season. It's the role players and depth D that usually have the biggest impact, and they usually don't cost a 1st. Keeping the 1st means you can draft kids like Ritchie or Gulyayev, or trade down and grab a G like Nabokov, and continue to be competitive after the current bunch of non-core guys get too expensive to keep, or fall off. Since there are no guarantees with anything, the option that could potentially provide long term solutions is the better one to me. Going all in is risking future success on both goalies staying healthy, which has been a problem for the Avs.

 

[Freaky Styley]

No, I'm not exaggerating. Giving up a 1st+ for a big name rental is an objectively bad idea, given that I can't remember the last time a team did so and actually won the Cup that season. It's the role players and depth D that usually have the biggest impact, and they usually don't cost a 1st. Keeping the 1st means you can draft kids like Ritchie or Gulyayev, or trade down and grab a G like Nabokov, and continue to be competitive after the current bunch of non-core guys get too expensive to keep, or fall off. Since there are no guarantees with anything, the option that could potentially provide long term solutions is the better one to me. Going all in is risking future success on both goalies staying healthy, which has been a problem for the Avs.

The window shuts when Makar and Mackinnon leave their prime. That's ~3 years away, any prospect drafted this season won't help what the Avs need - even Ritchie/Gulyayev/Nabokov won't be impactful until the very end of that.

I know it's Hockey's Future but not all drafts are built the same. The 2025 draft is a weak draft and we own two 2nd rounders - both of those should be moved. 2026 and 2027 are even further out so those 1st round picks are better used to try to win now than drafted and developed.

I agree with you in part though because the Avs aren't a Brad Marchand away from winning the Cup. We should be using these valuable assets to fill more long-term and larger needs. I think next year would be more appropriate to go big-game rental shopping

 

[T_Cage]

Marchand is a great player but he's a luxury and not a need for the Avs.

This is why I don't see a deal happening

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

The window shuts when Makar and Mackinnon leave their prime. That's ~3 years away, any prospect drafted this season won't help what the Avs need - even Ritchie/Gulyayev/Nabokov won't be impactful until the very end of that.

I know it's Hockey's Future but not all drafts are built the same. The 2025 draft is a weak draft and we own two 2nd rounders - both of those should be moved. 2026 and 2027 are even further out so those 1st round picks are better used to try to win now than drafted and developed.

Maybe you're right. But if the Avs trade away the things that might help after they leave their prime, they're ensuring the window slams shut and likely stays shut for a while. Seems to me like the best way to keep a window open longer is by adding good youth that can contribute when the older guys start to decline, and the best place to find good youth without paying through the nose for it is the 1st round of the draft, even if it's never guaranteed.

I have no problem trading the 2nds this year to address the roster needs. Or even with trading 1sts for longer term pieces. I just don't see any point in throwing away the future to go all in for a single season by going after high priced rentals, given how infrequently it actually results in a team lifting the Cup.