dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 5,348
- 5,398
Value of: Mikko Rantanen
- Thread starter PatrickMcC
- Start date
Pretty comparable, yeah.
... Well, except for the part where Rantanen is 7 years younger and on a much less burdensome contract. But other than that!
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
But saying "he's not available" to every thread where someone asks what it would take makes for a very boring message board, so why not discuss what it might take? And the reality is that what it might take is something the Avs need even more than a 27 year old 50 goal/100 point winger who has helped lead his team to the Cup, and that list is pretty much a youngish low end 1C on a great contract to be the 2C behind Mack. It's not so much a demand as just what it would take to change the answer from a hard no to a maybe.
Erik Karlsson was traded to the San Jose Sharks on September 13, 2018 when he was 28 years old.
He had one year left on his 6.5m cap hit contract.
Rantanen is currently 27 years old with this year and next left on his 9.5m cap hit contract.
Karlsson was the more impactful player at the time of the trade on a lower cap hit % wise but I think of all the recent trades that one is a good barometer.
That's what I get for not reading "To SJ"... In my defense I'm not fully awake and alert until noon.
But now you’re talking about a player who is far more valuable than Rantanen, and yet you say the other team would have to add to that? It’s just ridiculous and pointless. Nobody with a young 1C on a great contract with term is moving him for a rental/2-year player. I don’t care who it is.
Perratrooper
Registered User
Hahaha how is an elite 2C an insane demand. Thanks for the chuckle
Younger on a great contract with term? Nobody gives that up for a rental/2-year player.
You need to understand that rentals/2-year players are acquired by teams looking to win now; the return is picks, prospects, and/or expendable roster players. Nobody with a high-end 2C/low-end 1C who is looking to win now is going to give that up, especially when that player is younger, on a great deal with more term, and plays a more valuable position. But then the weak-minded always laugh at that which they are incapable of understanding.
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
If they want one of the best wingers in the game today that just had 55 goals/105 points last year, and led all Avs forwards in playoff scoring en route to the Cup the year before, then yes, they would absolutely need to add to their low end 1C to get the Avs to consider it. If that's too expensive for the teams out there, then the Avs will very happily keep Rantanen and not lose a minute of sleep over it. What we don't do is accept a massive downgrade without a significant sweetener.
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
How many contending teams have traded away a 100 point winger for scraps they don't need?
Do you people not comprehend that age, cap hit, and especially term matter? Or are you all just living in a fantasy world, being incapable of comprehending basic concepts of reality?
Perratrooper
Registered User
Man I can’t keep this conversation going if you’re going to continue to insist I am saying something that I am not, the lack of reading comprehension or purposefully interpreting what I am saying incorrectly is wild. I’ll try to put this in more simple terms so the initial starting value is more clear.
A player of similar age or younger means that the Avs wouldn’t be interested in receiving a player that is significantly older than Rantanen. The contract coming into play means that depending on the term and AAV of the contract impacts the caliber of the player that would be returned in the trade.
I don’t know how else to plainly state that. If you continue to insist I’m asking for a younger player on a great contract I’m just gonna have to assume you don’t actually want to add to the conversation.
Man this guy is just wasting our time, he thinks Rantanen will only return a third line center.
Again, as I said it makes no sense for the Avs to trade him. But if you do you aren’t getting anything close to what you dreamers are imagining. Nobody, I repeat nobody, has ever given up anything close to that for a player with so little term left. Karlsson didn’t return anything close to that and he was clearly more valuable than Rants is. But if you don’t want to face reality I’m not going to waste my time trying to enlighten you - I’ll just stay here in the real world and converse with rational, intelligent adults (what few there are in this forum.)
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
Do you not comprehend that a massive difference in skill level is going to have an even greater impact on value? We're talking about trading a 100 point winger for a 60-70 point low end 1C. Do you honestly think that being a couple years younger and signed for reasonable 2C money for a couple years longer is going to even come close to making up that difference? And you think we're the ones living in a fantasy world?
IWantSakicAsMyGM
Registered User
Karlsson was traded for 2 1sts, 2 2nds, Norris, Tierney, Demelo and Balcers. What low end 1C is worth anywhere close that much, let alone more?
Ek is my favorite nhl player and has been for a while now. That said as a wild fan I would be open to some type of deal around Ek for Rantanen.
I think in a vacuum the players have similar values with the edge going to Mikko. When you take their contracts into consideration though I’d probably ask for a sweetener from the wilds perspective.
From the Wild - EEK
From the Avs - Rantanen and 2024 2nd
Wild are able to ice a forward group for two years consisting of….
Kap Yurov Zucc
Boldy Rossi Rantanen
Duhaime Hartman Foligno
X Dewer X
I’d be totally fine if Ek never wore another sweater too , in fact I’d prefer that. Rantanen is a stud though and the thought of him and Boldy on the same line is ridiculous
I think in a vacuum the players have similar values with the edge going to Mikko. When you take their contracts into consideration though I’d probably ask for a sweetener from the wilds perspective.
From the Wild - EEK
From the Avs - Rantanen and 2024 2nd
Wild are able to ice a forward group for two years consisting of….
Kap Yurov Zucc
Boldy Rossi Rantanen
Duhaime Hartman Foligno
X Dewer X
I’d be totally fine if Ek never wore another sweater too , in fact I’d prefer that. Rantanen is a stud though and the thought of him and Boldy on the same line is ridiculous
a mangy Meowth
Ross Colton Fan
El Travo
Why are we still here? Just to suffer?
- Aug 11, 2015
- 14,724
- 18,611
I'm sorry, but what the hell even is this?
pth2
Registered User
- Jan 7, 2018
- 3,478
- 2,759
Seems like Avs fans were hoping to get someone like Nick Suzuki - a low-end #1C, would probably be a perfect #2 behind someone like Mac, and he has a long-term contract (not a cheap one, but I think a reasonable one)
The problem is, teams with guys like Suzuki that are rebuilding (like the Habs) aren't looking to move a core piece to improve in the short term, and better teams with similar players aren't looking to move core pieces and shorten their window, while possibly messing up team chemistry.
(of course, Subban for Weber kind of shortened Montreal's window, on D..., so such things do happen).
You'd need to find a team with an emerging top-6C who is pushing aside a #1B center, and a team willing to sell off that #1B to improve rapidly. So, if Montreal won the lottery, picked Celebrini, and he and Dach were clearly, at this point in a year,the future top-6C, maybe this kind of a deal would appeal to management.... but this is quickly becoming a very narrow set of circumstances, and not a generic trade value, since I think as others have said, most high-end players that teams have decided won't/can't be resigned, are dealt for a combination of lesser players, picks and prospects.
I'd actually say that the key decision is whether or not Rantanen is to be kept around at his future cap hit, and the hypothetical return is not as important as we imagine on here.
The problem is, teams with guys like Suzuki that are rebuilding (like the Habs) aren't looking to move a core piece to improve in the short term, and better teams with similar players aren't looking to move core pieces and shorten their window, while possibly messing up team chemistry.
(of course, Subban for Weber kind of shortened Montreal's window, on D..., so such things do happen).
You'd need to find a team with an emerging top-6C who is pushing aside a #1B center, and a team willing to sell off that #1B to improve rapidly. So, if Montreal won the lottery, picked Celebrini, and he and Dach were clearly, at this point in a year,the future top-6C, maybe this kind of a deal would appeal to management.... but this is quickly becoming a very narrow set of circumstances, and not a generic trade value, since I think as others have said, most high-end players that teams have decided won't/can't be resigned, are dealt for a combination of lesser players, picks and prospects.
I'd actually say that the key decision is whether or not Rantanen is to be kept around at his future cap hit, and the hypothetical return is not as important as we imagine on here.
pth2
Registered User
- Jan 7, 2018
- 3,478
- 2,759
Wouldn't this shorten any window for Minnesota to an unacceptable degree ? Either you have 2 years before moving on, or you have to resign Rantanen to a long-term deal that leads him deep into his 30s, which brings its own issues.
Send him back to Montreal for Anderson and the Avs 2nd rounder !
Avsboy
Registered User
- Dec 12, 2006
- 32,246
- 16,658
Lehkonen was probably the best trade pickup for Avs in the last decade. Clutch during the Avs run, very steady 2-3rd liner, well loved. If he leaves Avs should pack up and return to Quebec. How is Barron?
Did I stutter or is English not your first language?
You might be able to look at it like that but it also gives the wild some insurance in the event that they have to move Kap. Plan would be to resign one of Kap or Mikko unless both want to stay on semi reasonable deals because of the team. Probably pipe dreaming but I think Kap wants massive money or he walks and I don’t want it to get that far.
