IMO, if the Avs are smart and Stastny still doesn't have a contract by the deadline, he's gone.
It simply doesn't make sense to risk losing a valuable asset for nothing when you're still rebuilding. The rebuild is almost over, yes, but there are still missing pieces.
I've seen some start to rationalize the risk of losing Stastny by saying, "think of Stastny like a rental!"
OK, let's continue along this line of reasoning. What do rentals cost? Roster players, prospects, draft picks. That's what we'd be "trading" by not moving Stastny.
Now for what reason, exactly, are we giving up pieces for a rental? To get to the second round of the playoffs before that defense is eaten alive?
If we're treating Stastny as a rental, fine -- I'd still be just as angry as if the Avs gave up a roster player, prospect and pick for, say, Vanek. The time isn't right. It's a waste of assets.
Or perhaps we're taking this risk because of a shaky hope that we can get Stastny to re-sign in the offseason. But considering the development of our other centers, Stastny will soon be the weakest link at our deepest position, the risk outweighs the reward.
It's just not a smart gamble. The Avs have to get something for Paul, unless the something is so abysmally poor that it makes more sense to keep him. I can't imagine that being the case, though.
