Proposal: Landeskog to Isles

[CodeE]

No Avs fans in this thread are touting Rantanen or Jost to be elite level players.

Whereas I've seen multiple Isles fans in this thread, touting Pulock to be the next sure fire top end dman after playing a whole 15 regular season games and 6 playoff games. Which as an Avs fan is hard to take seriously because he's played a whopping 21 games as a NHLer how could one possibly know what his career trajectory is at this point in time.

The poster was just pointing out that many fanbases have touted a certain prospect(s) to be on the up and up and sure fire top end, just have them turn out to be average or even below average.

While I personally think Pulock is a very solid prospect, I'd put him in the same boat as Rantanen. Which is talented, but needs to show what he's got as a full time player before any further analysis can happen. Let's wait a full 82 game season and see where Pulock is at that point.

As for a deal with Landeskog around Pulock, the Avs would be dumb to make such a deal, and if they did take that deal management should be fired immediately. Trade an already established all-star caliber, young, team captain, for a higher end prospect, a question mark player in Strome and a 1st...that's not good business.

What thread are you reading? Where is all this unwarranted arrogant Pulock hype coming from Islander fans?

This thread is only 3 pages long, and there is a lot more Avs fans ragging on Pulock and saying he may never amount to anything than Islander fans saying he's a sure fire d-man. Yashin for President said he would "explode after a solid half season", that's probably the biggest hype I can find. Meanwhile Avs fans are comparing Pulock to Tinordi and Cowen and saying things like "I could give less of a **** who Pulock is".

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

What thread are you reading? Where is all this unwarranted arrogant Pulock hype coming from Islander fans?

This thread is only 3 pages long, and there is a lot more Avs fans ragging on Pulock and saying he may never amount to anything than Islander fans saying he's a sure fire d-man. Yashin for President said he would "explode after a solid half season", that's probably the biggest hype I can find. Meanwhile Avs fans are comparing Pulock to Tinordi and Cowen and saying things like "I could give less of a **** who Pulock is".

when you're talking for landeskog, if comparision, this is very true.

in general, no it isnt though i understand your point.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

What thread are you reading? Where is all this unwarranted arrogant Pulock hype coming from Islander fans?

This thread is only 3 pages long, and there is a lot more Avs fans ragging on Pulock and saying he may never amount to anything than Islander fans saying he's a sure fire d-man. Yashin for President said he would "explode after a solid half season", that's probably the biggest hype I can find. Meanwhile Avs fans are comparing Pulock to Tinordi and Cowen and saying things like "I could give less of a **** who Pulock is".

Please show me exactly where anyone directly compared Pulock to Tinordi and Cowen. The only reference to them I can find is pointing out that we heard similar claims about them being ready to break out and be the next great thing.

And, in a trade involving Landeskog, the Avs fans shouldn't be expected to do in depth research to figure out how good the main piece being offered is (which is what the last comment was in response to). If it's not apparent from what they've done in the NHL, they probably aren't good enough to be the main piece coming back.

 

[Yashin for President]

No Avs fans in this thread are touting Rantanen or Jost to be elite level players.

Whereas I've seen multiple Isles fans in this thread, touting Pulock to be the next sure fire top end dman after playing a whole 15 regular season games and 6 playoff games. Which as an Avs fan is hard to take seriously because he's played a whopping 21 games as a NHLer how could one possibly know what his career trajectory is at this point in time.

The poster was just pointing out that many fanbases have touted a certain prospect(s) to be on the up and up and sure fire top end, just have them turn out to be average or even below average.

While I personally think Pulock is a very solid prospect, I'd put him in the same boat as Rantanen. Which is talented, but needs to show what he's got as a full time player before any further analysis can happen. Let's wait a full 82 game season and see where Pulock is at that point.

As for a deal with Landeskog around Pulock, the Avs would be dumb to make such a deal, and if they did take that deal management should be fired immediately. Trade an already established all-star caliber, young, team captain, for a higher end prospect, a question mark player in Strome and a 1st...that's not good business.

Lets put aside the trade offer. Ive been an Isles fan for a very long time. Have seen players come and go. Have seen great players as prospects get traded knowing they were going to be solid NHLers. I have to admit, Pulock is the real deal. Can't remember Islander defensive prospect that I was this excited about. I was so surprised how he handled playing at the NHL level. For the Colorado fans that that don't know about the Islander fans, we are very serious about our team. There is a lot of pressure on the players to perform here and he did. That being said, Pulock is no slouch. This kid is a manchild that is on the cusp of being a top 4 dman and will most likely be our top PP guy for this season no question. Lets wait until midseason to grade Pulock so the Av fans understand who he is. Better yet lets mark our calendars when the isles play Colorado.

 

[CodeE]

Please show me exactly where anyone directly compared Pulock to Tinordi and Cowen. The only reference to them I can find is pointing out that we heard similar claims about them being ready to break out and be the next great thing.

And, in a trade involving Landeskog, the Avs fans shouldn't be expected to do in depth research to figure out how good the main piece being offered is (which is what the last comment was in response to). If it's not apparent from what they've done in the NHL, they probably aren't good enough to be the main piece coming back.

I get that it's a "trade me quality for quantity" deal and those rarely go over well on the trade forums. But if Colorado is hunting for a defensive upgradem this offseason has shown that if you want a top-4 defenseman at the cost of a forward, you're gonna need to overpay. Hall-for-Larsson type of overpayment. If you want to stick with your young guys like Zadorov and Bigras, feel free, but don't expect to win any trade where you're giving up a quality winger and getting back a quality defenseman. Who knows, maybe the market will shift by midseason but top-4 defensemen are a highly coveted asset right now and Pulock is pretty much locked into an NHL role for next season with the option to take over Boychuk's top-4 minutes if he can perform. That's nothing to sneeze at in today's NHL.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Lets put aside the trade offer. Ive been an Isles fan for a very long time. Have seen players come and go. Have seen great players as prospects get traded knowing they were going to be solid NHLers. I have to admit, Pulock is the real deal. Can't remember Islander defensive prospect that I was this excited about. I was so surprised how he handled playing at the NHL level. For the Colorado fans that that don't know about the Islander fans, we are very serious about our team. There is a lot of pressure on the players to perform here and he did. That being said, Pulock is no slouch. This kid is a manchild that is on the cusp of being a top 4 dman and will most likely be our top PP guy for this season no question. Lets wait until midseason to grade Pulock so the Av fans understand who he is. Better yet lets mark our calendars when the isles play Colorado.

Almost everything you said about Pulock, many Avs fans would say about Bigras and Zadorov. Like you said, let's wait and see what they do this season.

 

[PROMputt]

You are -40 in points over two years. In any other organization the coach would get fired. Tell me this a healthy organization. Roy had no business coaching an NHL franchise (see: his QMJHL coaching career) and Sakic had no business managing an NHL franchise.

LOL this is funny. You do know our beloved Garth Snow was the backup goalie when promoted to GM- right?

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

I get that it's a "trade me quality for quantity" deal and those rarely go over well on the trade forums. But if Colorado is hunting for a defensive upgradem this offseason has shown that if you want a top-4 defenseman at the cost of a forward, you're gonna need to overpay. Hall-for-Larsson type of overpayment. If you want to stick with your young guys like Zadorov and Bigras, feel free, but don't expect to win any trade where you're giving up a quality winger and getting back a quality defenseman. Who knows, maybe the market will shift by midseason but top-4 defensemen are a highly coveted asset right now and Pulock is pretty much locked into an NHL role for next season with the option to take over Boychuk's top-4 minutes if he can perform. That's nothing to sneeze at in today's NHL.

For the millionth time this off-season, the actions of a desperate GM don't really change the value of every defenseman.

And, this thread is an Isles fan trying to get Landeskog, not the Avs trying to get Pulock. Not sure why you're trying to spin it like we're desperate to get Pulock and are lowballing you by only offering Landeskog.

 

[chet1926]

Lets put aside the trade offer. Ive been an Isles fan for a very long time. Have seen players come and go. Have seen great players as prospects get traded knowing they were going to be solid NHLers. I have to admit, Pulock is the real deal. Can't remember Islander defensive prospect that I was this excited about. I was so surprised how he handled playing at the NHL level. For the Colorado fans that that don't know about the Islander fans, we are very serious about our team. There is a lot of pressure on the players to perform here and he did. That being said, Pulock is no slouch. This kid is a manchild that is on the cusp of being a top 4 dman and will most likely be our top PP guy for this season no question. Lets wait until midseason to grade Pulock so the Av fans understand who he is. Better yet lets mark our calendars when the isles play Colorado.

I'm not undervaluing Pulock, but even you mentioned it in your post, the kid is a prospect. Nothing more, nothing less at this point. Albeit a talented one with lots of promise, but still a prospect that has proved very little at the NHL level. Even though Pulock showed well in his 21 games, lots of players over the years have played well early on only to level out or regress later on. A perfect example of this is a guy named Marek Svatos. Rookie year he came in and scored 32 goals in 61 games for the Avs. I thought the guy was going to be a 1st line goal scoring winger for the next 10+ seasons. Anyone who scores 30+ goals in their rookie season is going to be a stud...Right??? Turns out that was kind of the peak, had two other decent seasons but that was it.

Pulock is just like every other talented prospect around the league. Just like Rantanen, Jost, Bigras etc. talented but mostly unproven.

It's probably going to be at least 2 full seasons before any one of us can judge how any of them turn out, and Pulock could very well turn out to be a higher end dman, but he may just level out a 2nd/3rd pairing guy who is a solid PP contributor as well, it's impossible to say based on the current data.

I've also seen trades involving prospects for players. I've seen them work out, I've also seen them backfire. In this particular instance, I'd call it extremely boneheaded if the Avs considered trading a 23 year old, all star caliber, team captain for a higher end prospect and other parts. Pulock is not a sure thing, even though you want him to be, he is not an Eichel or a McDavid or a Mathews etc. those type of guys are about the only prospects I'd consider a "sure thing"

 

[a mangy Meowth]

I get that it's a "trade me quality for quantity" deal and those rarely go over well on the trade forums. But if Colorado is hunting for a defensive upgradem this offseason has shown that if you want a top-4 defenseman at the cost of a forward, you're gonna need to overpay. Hall-for-Larsson type of overpayment. If you want to stick with your young guys like Zadorov and Bigras, feel free, but don't expect to win any trade where you're giving up a quality winger and getting back a quality defenseman. Who knows, maybe the market will shift by midseason but top-4 defensemen are a highly coveted asset right now and Pulock is pretty much locked into an NHL role for next season with the option to take over Boychuk's top-4 minutes if he can perform. That's nothing to sneeze at in today's NHL.

I sneezed like 6 times during this post

Achoo!!

 

[CodeE]

For the millionth time this off-season, the actions of a desperate GM don't really change the value of every defenseman.

And, this thread is an Isles fan trying to get Landeskog, not the Avs trying to get Pulock. Not sure why you're trying to spin it like we're desperate to get Pulock and are lowballing you by only offering Landeskog.

They don't change the value of every defenseman in the league, just the good ones. The sure fire young top-4 guys, Larsson quality or higher, you're not gonna get them for cheap or even for "equivalent" forwards.

Bottom pairing guys, guys over 33 or terrible contracts like Girardi and Staal are still quite obtainable. The guys you acquire believing they'll give you 6-8 years of solid top-4 play are insanely expensive right now. Do you really think Chia just accepted the first offer to fall into his lap, or did he desperately try trading Eberle and/or RNH first to get his top-4 RHD? He looked everywhere for defense and the best one he could find was Larsson, at the cost of Hall.

 

[CodeE]

I sneezed like 6 times during this post

Achoo!!

Continue to pile on with nasty comments about how little value Pulock has, then cry and complain that Islander fans are the ones being jerks for daring to think one of our blue-chip prospects has a bright future.

 

[The Abusement Park]

I'm not undervaluing Pulock, but even you mentioned it in your post, the kid is a prospect. Nothing more, nothing less at this point. Albeit a talented one with lots of promise, but still a prospect that has proved very little at the NHL level. Even though Pulock showed well in his 21 games, lots of players over the years have played well early on only to level out or regress later on. A perfect example of this is a guy named Marek Svatos. Rookie year he came in and scored 32 goals in 61 games for the Avs. I thought the guy was going to be a 1st line goal scoring winger for the next 10+ seasons. Anyone who scores 30+ goals in their rookie season is going to be a stud...Right??? Turns out that was kind of the peak, had two other decent seasons but that was it.

Pulock is just like every other talented prospect around the league. Just like Rantanen, Jost, Bigras etc. talented but mostly unproven.

It's probably going to be at least 2 full seasons before any one of us can judge how any of them turn out, and Pulock could very well turn out to be a higher end dman, but he may just level out a 2nd/3rd pairing guy who is a solid PP contributor as well, it's impossible to say based on the current data.

I've also seen trades involving prospects for players. I've seen them work out, I've also seen them backfire. In this particular instance, I'd call it extremely boneheaded if the Avs considered trading a 23 year old, all star caliber, team captain for a higher end prospect and other parts. Pulock is not a sure thing, even though you want him to be, he is not an Eichel or a McDavid or a Mathews etc. those type of guys are about the only prospects I'd consider a "sure thing"

Was Marek Svatos our last 30 goal scorer? Well before Duchene this past season?

 

[Yashin for President]

I'm not undervaluing Pulock, but even you mentioned it in your post, the kid is a prospect. Nothing more, nothing less at this point. Albeit a talented one with lots of promise, but still a prospect that has proved very little at the NHL level. Even though Pulock showed well in his 21 games, lots of players over the years have played well early on only to level out or regress later on. A perfect example of this is a guy named Marek Svatos. Rookie year he came in and scored 32 goals in 61 games for the Avs. I thought the guy was going to be a 1st line goal scoring winger for the next 10+ seasons. Anyone who scores 30+ goals in their rookie season is going to be a stud...Right??? Turns out that was kind of the peak, had two other decent seasons but that was it.

Pulock is just like every other talented prospect around the league. Just like Rantanen, Jost, Bigras etc. talented but mostly unproven.

It's probably going to be at least 2 full seasons before any one of us can judge how any of them turn out, and Pulock could very well turn out to be a higher end dman, but he may just level out a 2nd/3rd pairing guy who is a solid PP contributor as well, it's impossible to say based on the current data.

I've also seen trades involving prospects for players. I've seen them work out, I've also seen them backfire. In this particular instance, I'd call it extremely boneheaded if the Avs considered trading a 23 year old, all star caliber, team captain for a higher end prospect and other parts. Pulock is not a sure thing, even though you want him to be, he is not an Eichel or a McDavid or a Mathews etc. those type of guys are about the only prospects I'd consider a "sure thing"

Cant compare Svatos and a guy like Pulock. Defensive prospects rarely put it all together at his age plus he has the size to go with it. Im happy if he stays with the Isles but most teams that have a high end forwards lacking on D would look for Pulock type players that are just about ready to play full-time in the NHL. There is a lot of value in that. Just look at the Larsson for Hall trade. That really is the market value unfortunately. Pulock, Strome and a first rounder next year isn't that far off folks.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

They don't change the value of every defenseman in the league, just the good ones. The sure fire young top-4 guys, Larsson quality or higher, you're not gonna get them for cheap or even for "equivalent" forwards.

Bottom pairing guys, guys over 33 or terrible contracts like Girardi and Staal are still quite obtainable. The guys you acquire believing they'll give you 6-8 years of solid top-4 play are insanely expensive right now. Do you really think Chia just accepted the first offer to fall into his lap, or did he desperately try trading Eberle and/or RNH first to get his top-4 RHD? He looked everywhere for defense and the best one he could find was Larsson, at the cost of Hall.

Are you insinuating that Pulock is a "sure fire young top-4 guy, Larsson quality or higher" after 21 NHL games during which he averaged less than 16 minutes per night? And, you wonder why Avs fans aren't agreeing with your valuation?

 

[CodeE]

Are you insinuating that Pulock is a "sure fire young top-4 guy, Larsson quality or higher" after 21 NHL games during which he averaged less than 16 minutes per night? And, you wonder why Avs fans aren't agreeing with your valuation?

No, I didn't bring up Pulock's name once in that post. I've said multiple times in this thread he's a blue chip prospect who Isles management believes will develop into a top-4 defenseman, as soon as next season. Try to stick to what I'm saying as opposed to what you think I'm "insinuating".

If he does develop into that kind of player, Pulock's value skyrockets. If he looks lost, confused, and Griffin Reinharty in his first full NHL season, his value drops. Ditto for Rantanen - if he becomes the next Kucherov or Tarasenko his value skyrockets, if he stagnates like Nichushkin his value drops.

 

[chet1926]

Cant compare Svatos and a guy like Pulock. Defensive prospects rarely put it all together at his age plus he has the size to go with it. Im happy if he stays with the Isles but most teams that have a high end forwards lacking on D would look for Pulock type players that are just about ready to play full-time in the NHL. There is a lot of value in that. Just look at the Larsson for Hall trade. That really is the market value unfortunately. Pulock, Strome and a first rounder next year isn't that far off folks.

That's fine if you don't want to use Svatos as an example, I'll use a player like Luke Schenn or Jake Gardiner. Both had great rookie campaigns and solid junior/NCAA careers, both were hyped prospects, both looked to be well on their way to becoming higher end dmen...and then Schenn never progressed and has bounced around from team to team as a 3rd pairing guy and Garidner has maintained about the same pace as his rookie season. Not everyone gets better, some stay at a certain level. It just happens. Not saying this will happen will Pulock, just saying that it is possible for highly touted young defensive prospects to just kind of level out.

You can't use the Hall for Larsson trade as an example for a couple reasons. First it was an awful trade by Edmonton, terrible value from a team desperate for a dman they should have been able to secure at minimum a 2nd quality asset on top of Larrson for Taylor Hall. That's just bad GMing. Second, Larsson has proved a hell of a lot more than Pulock. Larsson has played almost 275 NHL games, and played at least one full season as a top pairing guy. Pulock played 21 games total. His value is nowhere near Larsson's value.

Landeskog's value is less than Hall's but his value is much closer to Hall's than Pulock's is to Larsson they are not even in the same discussion at this current time. Maybe in two or three seasons, but not now.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

No, I didn't bring up Pulock's name once in that post. I've said multiple times in this thread he's a blue chip prospect who Isles management believes will develop into a top-4 defenseman, as soon as next season. Try to stick to what I'm saying as opposed to what you think I'm "insinuating".

If he does develop into that kind of player, Pulock's value skyrockets. If he looks lost, confused, and Griffin Reinharty in his first full NHL season, his value drops. Ditto for Rantanen - if he becomes the next Kucherov or Tarasenko his value skyrockets, if he stagnates like Nichushkin his value drops.

So, even though we're in a thread discussing Pulock as the main piece in an offer for Landeskog, you not using his name in a single post should be a clear indication that you aren't talking about the topic of the thread?

And, sure, if Pulock proves himself, he'll be more valuable. Until then, he's just another highly touted prospect, and doesn't have anywhere near the value to get Landeskog, even with Strome and a 1st added to him.

 

[tucker3434]

Cant compare Svatos and a guy like Pulock. Defensive prospects rarely put it all together at his age plus he has the size to go with it. Im happy if he stays with the Isles but most teams that have a high end forwards lacking on D would look for Pulock type players that are just about ready to play full-time in the NHL. There is a lot of value in that. Just look at the Larsson for Hall trade. That really is the market value unfortunately. Pulock, Strome and a first rounder next year isn't that far off folks.

We have Zadorov and Bigras. Zadorov is likely a full time NHLer this year. Bigras probably becomes one by Christmas. Prospect defenders aren't a huge need for us right now regardless of what the roster looks like.

 

[CodeE]

So, even though we're in a thread discussing Pulock as the main piece in an offer for Landeskog, you not using his name in a single post should be a clear indication that you aren't talking about the topic of the thread?

And, sure, if Pulock proves himself, he'll be more valuable. Until then, he's just another highly touted prospect, and doesn't have anywhere near the value to get Landeskog, even with Strome and a 1st added to him.

"After the Larsson trade, you're not getting a sure-fire, proven top-4 defenseman for cheap"

"Wow, so you're clearly saying Pulock is a sure-fire proven top-4 defenseman? Wow, just wow. Wow. *Help emoticon*. *Shaking head emoticon*."

Again, stick with what I've said instead of trying to "insinuate".

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

"After the Larsson trade, you're not getting a sure-fire, proven top-4 defenseman for cheap"

"Wow, so you're clearly saying Pulock is a sure-fire proven top-4 defenseman? Wow, just wow. Wow. *Help emoticon*. *Shaking head emoticon*."

Again, stick with what I've said instead of trying to "insinuate".

If you aren't referring to Pulock as a "sure fire top 4 defenseman", what relevance does your comment about the value of "sure fire top 4 defensemen" have to the trade proposal we're discussing in this thread? Sorry for expecting you to actually have a relevant point about this topic.

 

[CodeE]

If you aren't referring to Pulock as a "sure fire top 4 defenseman", what relevance does your comment about the value of "sure fire top 4 defensemen" have to the trade proposal we're discussing in this thread? Sorry for expecting you to actually have a relevant point about this topic.

Are you following the conversation we're currently having? You said the Larsson trade doesn't affect every defenseman's value, I said it does for top defensemen which I stand by. You then accused me of saying Pulock was a top defenseman because I had to be talking about him and him alone.

Is this really that hard for you to follow?

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Are you following the conversation we're currently having? You said the Larsson trade doesn't affect every defenseman's value, I said it does for top defensemen which I stand by. You then accused me of saying Pulock was a top defenseman because I had to be talking about him and him alone.

Is this really that hard for you to follow?

The only thing I can't follow is the relevance of the market value of top defensemen to a discussion where Pulock (an unproven prospect) is the only defenseman involved.

So, why don't you explain that connection to me, since I'm obviously too stupid to follow your logic here.

 

[strictlyrandy]

All I'm seeing is Isles fans not understanding that Avs have zero reason at all to trade Landy.

Chiarelli had to do something drastic. Avs do not.

Sakic is a fine GM. It's Roy that is the problem.

 

[Brock Radunske]

To Colorado: Ryan Pulock, Ryan Strome and 1st round pick 2017

To islanders: Gabriel Landeskog

This seems very fair to me as Colorado gets stronger at center and defense. Isles get stud winger they were looking for.

It doesn't address the Avs needs but IMO that's way too much for Lando.