Name a team with worse asset management than COL.

[KingsFan7824]

2020/21 2021/22 had far more value than they do now. Would’ve traded them then. Rob Blake for ya. Could’ve got some decent prospects still for them. Also if they don’t go and make that fiala trade they would have Clarke faber for years and years. Fiala trade never made sense he was never going to be the guy to put then over the top Edmonton or no Edmonton.

More value than now, of course. In 2020, Kopitar is 33, at a $10m hit for 4 years, and can only be traded to 7 teams of his choosing. In a realistic trade scenario, that asset has little value. The only reason you're trading him, is to do right by him. In 2020, Doughty is 30, with 7 years on a deal, at $11m, with a NMC. Also an asset with little real value in a realistic trade scenario.

The last time Kopitar would've had real value was July 2014. Doughty, his last real valuable year would've probably been Blake's first year. 2016, or 2017. Maybe 2018, after his career season, with a year left on the contract.

Realistically, 30 year olds don't bring anything back in deals. Certainly not 20 year old building blocks. Not directly at least. If you get a conditional 1st, and a couple years later, the team you traded with happens to suck, and you get a top 5 pick, the trades looks great, but that's not the realistic trade you made at the time. Realistically, you were agreeing to take like the 25th pick, which has low odds of ever being anything in the NHL.

 

[frontsfan67]

Realistically, 30 year olds don't bring anything back in deals.

Kopitar and doughty retained at 25 or 50% doesn’t bring much back? Kopitar is a 5x all star, perennial 60+ point guy with selke level defence, also has 2 cups, 2 selkes, 2 lady byngs, a mark messier leadership award. Think that goes for a lot whether he’s 30 or not.

Doughty has a u18 gold, WJC gold, 2 Stanley cups, an olympic gold, a World Cup of hockey, is a 4 nations champ, a Norris trophy (3time finalist) both of those guys are worth a TON at 30 still. Not so much 37 and 35.

Certainly not 20 year old building blocks. Not directly at least. If you get a conditional 1st, and a couple years later, the team you traded with happens to suck, and you get a top 5 pick, the trades looks great, but that's not the realistic trade you made at the time. Realistically, you were agreeing to take like the 25th pick, which has low odds of ever being anything in the NHL.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

The Avs really should have gone hard after Eichel when he was available, they clearly looked I and Eichel himself mentioned that he thought he was headed to Colorado.

Alternatively, they should have done everything they could to get Horvat once it was clear that Newhook wasn’t going to be a 2C option.

A huge part of their problem has been that they go with the cheap option until the glaring hole is so obvious that it causes them problems and then they have to overpay.

To me, going with the cheap option because that's what you can fit under the cap is the reality in the salary cap era. When it works out well, you end up with guys Kadri making $4.5m, and Toews at $4.1 and Nuke at $2.5. Finding guys like that who can outplay their cap hit is how you build a team that goes 16-4 in the playoffs. But, then those guys are going to want raises on their next contracts, so you're back to trying to find another diamond in the rough that fits under the cap, just like everyone else.

As for your two examples, I'm not sure how Eichel or Horvat fit under the cap and leave enough cap space to still have halfway decent wingers for him to play with on the 2nd line, let alone depth. Is it worth paying Eichel $10m if the 2nd line wingers are LOC and Miles Wood?

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

To me, going with the cheap option because that's what you can fit under the cap is the reality in the salary cap era. When it works out well, you end up with guys Kadri making $4.5m, and Toews at $4.1 and Nuke at $2.5. Finding guys like that who can outplay their cap hit is how you build a team that goes 16-4 in the playoffs. But, then those guys are going to want raises on their next contracts, so you're back to trying to find another diamond in the rough that fits under the cap, just like everyone else.

As for your two examples, I'm not sure how Eichel or Horvat fit under the cap and leave enough cap space to still have halfway decent wingers for him to play with on the 2nd line, let alone depth. Is it worth paying Eichel $10m if the 2nd line wingers are LOC and Miles Wood?

Getting Eichel means you’re not getting “depth” like Colton or Wood, and it also means we aren’t trading for a Mitts/Coyle either. I think Eichel on his own out performs that combo of three players. Would also just allow Bednar to play the lines the way he likes. Line 1 and 2 would eat up 50-ish minutes, 3 and 4 would be barely played (just the way Beds likes it)

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Getting Eichel means you’re not getting “depth” like Colton or Wood, and it also means we aren’t trading for a Mitts/Coyle either. I think Eichel on his own out performs that combo of three players. Would also just allow Bednar to play the lines the way he likes. Line 1 and 2 would eat up 50-ish minutes, 3 and 4 would be barely played (just the way Beds likes it)

It also likely means that you're not getting Lehk (or keeping him), since there's that much less cap space to work with that season. Would also likely lose Manson, and probably Nuke after the season is over, due to not being able to afford him.

But, I'm sure Eichel would play amazingly with LOC and whatever UFA they signed for league minimum on his wings.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Kopitar and doughty retained at 25 or 50% doesn’t bring much back? Kopitar is a 5x all star, perennial 60+ point guy with selke level defence, also has 2 cups, 2 selkes, 2 lady byngs, a mark messier leadership award. Think that goes for a lot whether he’s 30 or not.

Doughty has a u18 gold, WJC gold, 2 Stanley cups, an olympic gold, a World Cup of hockey, is a 4 nations champ, a Norris trophy (3time finalist) both of those guys are worth a TON at 30 still. Not so much 37 and 35.

I have yet to argue that either are worth anything today. And as far as I know, the Kings aren't even discussing trading either one today, so not sure why you're bringing up their current value.

Again, I said a realistic trade scenario. The odds of anyone retaining 25-50% for half a decade are low.

Go back over time. Find the guys traded around 30 years of age. For sure in the cap era. See what the return was. Other than lucking out, you don't tend to get anything. You can point to Florida getting Tkachuk for Huberdeau, but that was Calgary being forced to trade a guy, and being desperate in doing so. Why would you trade Tkachuk for an older player? Only Calgary does that, with their never rebuild attitude. Also a 29 year old Huberdeau, with 1 year on the deal. That's not initially committing to a 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 year old guy. The Flames are the ones that gave him that stupid contract after the deal.

 

[Dolemite]

Current - Sabres

Past - Milbury duh

Colorado’s problem isn’t asset management, their coaching staff couldn’t architect an offensive zone game to save their lives. If their front office can’t see that then the problem is bigger than we originally thought.

 

[OkimLom]

- Traded away a franchise center away, after not icing a competitive enough team doing the very minimal, and traded him as he was injured, getting the least amount of value for him.

- Traded away top 6 winger that could’ve filled a center position on the team, but traded away because the team again didn’t want to be competitive enough.

- traded away their top draft pick from drafts 2011-2024 - 9 times out of 14 drafts(10 total 1st rounders) with no end in sight of a playoff drought.

- expediting the development of multiple prospects by gifting them roster spots at a time you don’t need to, leading to long term contracts for larger than necessary payouts for players with stunted growth

- not utilizing cap space to acquire players/draft picks to help fill roles on a young team with vets that could help with experience.

- yo-yoing a young goaltender that you gifted a roster spot to, not making any improvements to help ease his development into the NHL, breaking the guys confidence. Eventually sending him down finally to get him right.

- Running a defense, of one of the youngest teams, with the majority of young/inexperienced players in prominent roles with next to no vet experience.

I get the feelings and thoughts of Colorado who is a good team, I would estimate one would think in spite of management, but Buffalo has given a master class of how not to handle assets for an organization in the form of level of team competitiveness, making the organization not attractive to players, agents, coaches, management roles, and it’s all been self inflicted with a smugness and ill-gained confidence that they know better than their peers.