Mikko Rantanen - MOOSE - 96

[Freaky Styley]

Maybe the same way you dont see the difference between Mikko and Jarvis, despite the latter having almost 40 points less currently
Perhaps they believe that there are Trenin/Duhaime types to be found paid league minimum. Its definitely more likely than finding out Rantanen types paid 4 millions.

BTW, i dont think people dont think that depth is important. More better players is always better. In this particular case, it just means if we need money to get/keep those, it shall be Landeskog or Nichuskin dealt away. Regardless of how good they are and what they bring, they are both easier to be replaced than Mikko. And unlike Mikko, both have their downsides - one in his health concerns, another in his personal issue concerns. Both older as well.

When did I say there was no difference in the two? The question I'm posing is what's more valuable to the Avs - someone like Jarvis (+ add ons in a trade) or Drouin (+mikko trade assets) at ~4M or Mikko at 12M+? It's really odd that this narrative keeps getting drastically warped. It's not about finding a Rantanen type at 4M, I'm saying that the only thing Mikko brings is offense and we can replace about 3/4 of Mikko's offense at about 1/4 of the price. We are the highest scoring team in the league and our offense doesn't run through Mikko, so that part of our game won't suffer greatly with a different offensively talented top 6 winger.

And I think you're more delusional to think Landeskog would ever get traded before Mikko. He's the captain, and also just kind of untradeable at the moment. I also disagree that both are easier to be replaced than what Mikko brings to the team. Nichuskin is kind of a unicorn in the league and I've already stated why i think he's more important overall to our team's success (the record doesn't lie). Plus, the team would benefit more from Mikko moving because unlike those 2, Mikko isn't signed long term and moving them + finding a replacement would not net us nearly as much cap as replacing Mikko. Like if you find adequate replacements for Lehkonen/Landeskog/Nichuskin/Girard/Manson you're saving what, a maximum of 1-2M per guy? You can save like 7M+ to replace a lot of what Mikko brings ------> that's the difference and entire rationale behind this thought experiment

Anyways I think most people here understand the Avs are going to re-sign Mikko whether or not it's best for the long-term success of the franchise, so I'm through arguing about it.

 

[The Abusement Park]

Never the less, if it Tkachuk for Huberdeau was supposed to be example of trading significantly inferior player for a superstar, it was not a good example.

It’s literally exactly what you were asking for

Florida traded away the superior player and got better afterwards. You can’t just bury your head in the sand and say it isn’t true because you don’t like the answer.

 

[LOFIN]

The big problem in a potential Mikko trade is cap hit.

 

[NorthernAvsFan]

Fine.

Find me a trade partner that will give us a guy coming off a 115 point season, a legit top pairing Dman, a good prospect and a 1st round pick for Rantanen and we can talk.

Until then, if your trade proposals start with Seth Jarvis you might as well just give up the fight now because it will never happen.



A hockey trade is one thing. Like the Byram for Mittlestadt trade.

But some of these posts in here suggesting we trade Rantanen for guys like Seth Jarvis and picks and prospects is laughable.

Manson, Girard, Georgiev and Wood would all go first if we need cap space.

I think some just want to solve the cap issues for next year in one fell swoop with one trade.

Everybody likes the team this year and wants to keep as many players as possible.

The reality is, they’ll be losing a few guys and will have to be creative in their approach to fill the gaps.

 

[Miri]

It’s literally exactly what you were asking for

Florida traded away the superior player and got better afterwards. You can’t just bury your head in the sand and say it isn’t true because you don’t like the answer.

It was not me who was asking for it.

And no, its not, because again, Florida did not trade away superior player. The trade was a wash, Tkachuk had 104 points, when Huberdeau had 115.

If you are claiming that they traded better player away, then how do explain they got better after that? Let me guess, it happened IN SPITE of that trade. Sure.

Seems i am not the one burying head into the sand, if my preconceived beliefs are not reflected in reality.

 

[JH21]

When did I say there was no difference in the two? The question I'm posing is what's more valuable to the Avs - someone like Jarvis (+ add ons in a trade) or Drouin (+mikko trade assets) at ~4M or Mikko at 12M+? It's really odd that this narrative keeps getting drastically warped. It's not about finding a Rantanen type at 4M, I'm saying that the only thing Mikko brings is offense and we can replace about 3/4 of Mikko's offense at about 1/4 of the price. We are the highest scoring team in the league and our offense doesn't run through Mikko, so that part of our game won't suffer greatly with a different offensively talented top 6 winger.

And I think you're more delusional to think Landeskog would ever get traded before Mikko. He's the captain, and also just kind of untradeable at the moment. I also disagree that both are easier to be replaced than what Mikko brings to the team. Nichuskin is kind of a unicorn in the league and I've already stated why i think he's more important overall to our team's success (the record doesn't lie). Plus, the team would benefit more from Mikko moving because unlike those 2, Mikko isn't signed long term and moving them + finding a replacement would not net us nearly as much cap as replacing Mikko. Like if you find adequate replacements for Lehkonen/Landeskog/Nichuskin/Girard/Manson you're saving what, a maximum of 1-2M per guy? You can save like 7M+ to replace a lot of what Mikko brings ------> that's the difference and entire rationale behind this thought experiment

Anyways I think most people here understand the Avs are going to re-sign Mikko whether or not it's best for the long-term success of the franchise, so I'm through arguing about it.

Drouin and Jarvis or Rantanen? Seriously?? Come on man

 

[GirardSpinorama]

We need players on a steal of a deal to trade away Mikko. If you just use mikko's cap hit on UFAs its stupid, they get overpaid all the time. Drouin at 4MM is an okay deal but not a steal given his history. Hes certainly not guaranteed to hit 80 and not guaranteed to not regress to being unplayable. Obviously i hope he doesnt. Jarvis would be a good get if we can lock him down for 4MM long term, which is unlikely.

 

[Freaky Styley]

We need players on a steal of a deal to trade away Mikko. If you just use mikko's cap hit on UFAs its stupid, they get overpaid all the time. Drouin at 4MM is an okay deal but not a steal given his history. Hes certainly not guaranteed to hit 80 and not guaranteed to not regress to being unplayable. Obviously i hope he doesnt. Jarvis would be a good get if we can lock him down for 4MM long term, which is unlikely.

IMO Drouin at 4M is a conservative measure. I think he'd come in closer to 3.5 or even 3M long term and you know I believe he can reach 70-80 points tied to MacK's hip. The kicker is that you would also get a steal of an ELC ideally in a Rants deal, so really you could have Drouin + a high end rookie (amongst other valuable assets) for under 5M. That's the way I'd go at least if it happened. You could also get Jarvis to that number on a bridge deal IMO, and after ~3 years things will look a lot different anyway. But it's a moot point

 

[BobRossColton]

Who is another player like Jarvis?

 

[JH21]

IMO Drouin at 4M is a conservative measure. I think he'd come in closer to 3.5 or even 3M long term and you know I believe he can reach 70-80 points tied to MacK's hip. The kicker is that you would also get a steal of an ELC ideally in a Rants deal, so really you could have Drouin + a high end rookie (amongst other valuable assets) for under 5M. That's the way I'd go at least if it happened. You could also get Jarvis to that number on a bridge deal IMO, and after ~3 years things will look a lot different anyway. But it's a moot point

Or we just resign the guy who is practically guaranteed to score 50 instead of hoping Drouin can score 30 points over his career averages and relying on a young guy on an ELC?

But hey, if your goal is to win games I guess that’s not the best logic.

 

[Ceremony]

I was looking for something the other day and found a poll I made a few years ago: forums.hfboards.com/threads/who-will-score-more-points-in-their-career-mikko-rantanen-or-patrik-laine.2526725/

Shame I can't bump the thread. Maybe I should make a new one and ask if anyone's opinions have changed.

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

Who is another player like Jarvis?

Maybe not a similar player but a guy like Tuch has a reasonable cap hit and a decent track record for a top 6 position if you were to trade Rantanen. Buffalo has the cap space to pay him, probably could use a superstar to help get them to the next level and have young roster players and futures to round out a deal for him . Could do worse than a package of Tuch, maybe a Krebs or Benson, an unprotected 1st, and Ostlund or Wahlberg depending on where everyone thinks the value is at for an extended Rantanen.

 

[niwotsblessing]

Maybe not a similar player but a guy like Tuch has a reasonable cap hit and a decent track record for a top 6 position if you were to trade Rantanen. Buffalo has the cap space to pay him, probably could use a superstar to help get them to the next level and have young roster players and futures to round out a deal for him . Could do worse than a package of Tuch, maybe a Krebs or Benson, an unprotected 1st, and Ostlund or Wahlberg depending on where everyone thinks the value is at for an extended Rantanen.

1st, Tuch, and Byram.

 

[JH21]

100 points for Rantanen now. I really hope we can get a solid pick and prospect for him to improve our depth.

 

[Oan]

100 points for Rantanen now. I really hope we can get a solid pick and prospect for him to improve our depth.

100 points for a winger is worth less than 100 points for a center.

 

[JH21]

100 points for a winger is worth less than 100 points for a center.

What’s your point? We have 3 good centres now.

 

[The Moops]

100 points for Rantanen now. I really hope we can get a solid pick and prospect for him to improve our depth.

Not after his kidneys got amputated today. He's doing to need a donor. We'll be lucky for a 7th

 

[the_fan]

What’s your point? We have 3 good centres now.

Don’t you get it? We have to trade Mikko for couple of players like Evan Rodrigues to improve our depth

 

[Oan]

What’s your point? We have 3 good centres now.

Point is that even if Rantanen tied MacKinnon in points he would never be viewed his equal.

 

[Brett44]

What do you think about
Rantanen for JJPeterka ,Ohlund and 1st 2024

 

[missionAvs]

100 points for Rantanen now. I really hope we can get a solid pick and prospect for him to improve our depth.

100 points? Yeah sure but all I see is 100 secondary assists.

 

[niwotsblessing]

Don’t you get it? We have to trade Mikko for couple of players like Evan Rodrigues to improve our depth

No, we trade him to keep Drouin, Trenin, Walker (if his rib cage survived), Lehkonen (the people who suggest we trade him are utterly mad), and so we can sign Mittelstadt properly. All of whom are far better in their roles than E-Rod.

 

[JH21]

No, we trade him to keep Drouin, Trenin, Walker (if his rib cage survived), Lehkonen (the people who suggest we trade him are utterly mad), and so we can sign Mittelstadt properly. All of whom are far better in the roles than E-Rod.

We can keep them all. There’s no need to trade Mikko.

 

[JH21]

100 points? Yeah sure but all I see is 100 secondary assists.

Lol.

Are you purposely ignoring his 130 goals the past 3 years??

The Mikko hate in here is unreal. Now we are criticizing HOW he gets 100 points.

 

[JH21]

What do you think about
Rantanen for JJPeterka ,Ohlund and 1st 2024

I guess if your goal is to not win many games we do that trade.

Or you want a worse return than what we got for O’Reilly. Sure

You’d think fans would have learnt their lesson by now