Speculation: What (if anything) does Colorado do about their goaltending?

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Kuemper's stats were solid which is why you traded for him. That is accurate. But it don't reveal the true potential of how someone like Kuemper can carry a team in the playoffs like Price can. Price gives you an added edge. It's similar to the edge Roy gave you back when.

The main point is not to overvalue or under value regular season stats. It's context you can use but it don't usually reveal the true potential and in Price's case, he is proven and it's a question about health more than anything else. Reality

"Trust me, you don't want the Honda minivan that has data to back up why it's good, what you want is this 1986 Alfa Romeo because it might be able to go faster once you manage to get it running"

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

This is more reasonable than some of your other posts. I applaud you for coming around on it. We have been giving each other a hard time but we might be closer than it appears

Considering everything I just said is exactly the same thing I've been saying in literally every other post I've made, you can keep your applause. The only thing that seems to have changed is that you've gotten tired of building strawmen and finally understood what I said.

 

[keglu]

You're missing the point. Several posters are talking about Kuemper and other goalie's "regular season" stats suggesting that they are better than Price where Team Canada is waiting for Price to get healthy and if he is, he is their goalie. Go figure eh. This is very good context into what I am saying... A healthy Price is a game changer and you would be a fool to pick a healthy Kuemper over a healthy Price. Price's ability should not be in question but I repeat... several posters trying to say they have just as much faith in Kuemper (or more) than Price. That's comical

Committing to 4 years past this year from age 34-38 has nothing to do with the side twists of comparing Kumper to Price today. Those are two different conversations. Price's ability today when healthy and with retention vs how long he can hold his value.

The truth is in the middle here but there are way to much Price devalue narratives going on. Price just took the Habs to the finals at age 33 and people are acting like he is 38 already

If you asked Avs fan if they would take Price for free for one year to replace Kuemper most would probably agree. However if you talking about dowgrading your roster to trade for him and commiting for few years thats different question.

 

[Habs Halifax]

"Trust me, you don't want the Honda minivan that has data to back up why it's good, what you want is this 1986 Alfa Romeo because it might be able to go faster once you manage to get it running"

Lets say this situation happens... Habs and Avs have an agreement on a trade idea (Price with 50% retention) and both teams allowed MacKinnon and Price to talk. Would you value and trust what truth Price has to say about his ability to be the goalie he can be moving forward with the Avs?

 

[Habs Halifax]

If you asked Avs fan if they would take Price for free for one year to replace Kuemper most would probably agree. However if you talking about dowgrading your roster to trade for him and commiting for few years thats different question.

Depends on what you consider downgrading your roster is? My asking price is a late 1st (20+) and a Grade A and Grade B not turned pro yet. That's kind of a platform to see if there is any conversations that need to continue.

There is a fair amount of Habs fans who would not retain 50% on Price but I would. I would keep the 3 retention spots to use on Price, Gallagher, and Petry so we can move them to teams they can help win while we get futures. My future asking price is more in the future than the now or NHL ready prospects kind of thing. IMO, Habs will not need cap space while we rebuild so I'm not afraid of the retention and the Habs will make profits cause fans will still tune in to the games regardless of a rebuild or not. I think Molson would be open to that idea if Gorton/New GM presets that plan.

Retaining up to 50% on all 3 of Price, Gallagher, and Petry is a serious decision. It would be historic but tough decisions need to be made in Montreal. Something to keep an eye on moving forward. None of those 3 will want to stay in a rebuild IMO. Keeping them around during a rebuild is a distraction IMO. So yeah, make tough decisions to get the rebuild going in the right direction or risk a half ass rebuild that leads to nowhere

 

[Stubu]

This is what I think of reading through this thread. You've got the used car salesmen going "ignore the Carfax showing all the wear and tear and miles. Just think about how shiny it might be if you wax it."

You destroyed your joke with the "carfax" typo. It's not too late to edit. Or is it some obscure Halifax reference? It's an awesome town.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Depends on what you consider downgrading your roster is? My asking price is a late 1st (20+) and a Grade A and Grade B not turned pro yet. That's kind of a platform to see if there is any conversations that need to continue.

That IS downgrading our roster since we can use those first round picks to upgrade other aspects of the team. And a grade A prospect is likely a contributor already or will be so in the near future.

Now, maybe we can do contingent picks, where the picks only get exchanged IF Price stays healthy and productive through the entirety of the contract.

 

[Habs Halifax]

That IS downgrading our roster since we can use those first round picks to upgrade other aspects of the team. And a grade A prospect is likely a contributor already or will be so in the near future.

Now, maybe we can do contingent picks, where the picks only get exchanged IF Price stays healthy and productive through the entirety of the contract.

I don't believe it's downgrading your roster cause if you do trade for Price at 50% retention, you obviously believe in his ability and how he can turn the needle in deep playoff runs. That's not a downgrade in the short span for cup contenders. If you want to use futures to get other pieces, go right ahead. Not sure a late 1st, Grade A/B (not turned pro yet) will get you someone better than Price for a few years at a fair cap hit. Not with what Price can do in the playoffs.

Unless you think you can win with Kuemper. If you think that, your choice in the end.

Thinking that you can get Price at 50% retention, have the Habs take back 1/2 cap dumps, and also acquire for cheap is unreasonable. It's not like moving Lucic... far from it.

I'll be curious to see how far Kuemper can take you in this years playoffs. Something else to watch moving forward. You might have a different opinion after his playoffs. Or not

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I don't believe it's downgrading your roster cause if you do trade for Price at 50% retention, you obviously believe in his ability and how he can turn the needle in deep playoff runs. That's not a downgrade in the short span for cup contenders. If you want to use futures to get other pieces, go right ahead. Not sure a late 1st, Grade A/B (not turned pro yet) will get you someone better than Price for a few years at a fair cap hit. Not with what Price can do in the playoffs.

Unless you think you can win with Kuemper. If you think that, your choice in the end.

Well I don't believe Price will stay healthy and productive; so I want my downside to be covered. If you believe Price will be healthy and productive; you should have no problem with contingent picks.

I will go with Kuemper and use picks/prospects to address other holes. I don't want to be stuck with a lemon.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Lets say this situation happens... Habs and Avs have an agreement on a trade idea (Price with 50% retention) and both teams allowed MacKinnon and Price to talk. Would you value and trust what truth Price has to say about his ability to be the goalie he can be moving forward with the Avs?

Not sure how MacKinnon got involved in this, or why you're back to insisting the Avs are interested... but, no, I wouldn't trust what Price said. Am I supposed to expect Price to be able to predict his health over the next 4 years without wanting to see him actually demonstrate that he can stay healthy?

I also don't know why anyone would trust players to say anything but positives about their partners in the NHLPA. "He's a great guy and will be a great addition to the team. We trust our management to give us a great chance to win, and we're just going to have to get the puck down low and work hard and hope we get some good bounces." Is that an exact quote, or did I paraphrase a bit?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Well I don't believe Price will stay healthy and productive; so I want my downside to be covered. If you believe Price will be healthy and productive; you should have no problem with contingent picks.

I will go with Kuemper and use picks/prospects to address other holes. I don't want to be stuck with a lemon.

If you don't believe he will stay healthy and be productive, don't trade for him. Habs are not looking to dump him, retain, and take back whatever. That's not the approach we are taking. If the returns are meh, Price stays.

You have this idea you can get him at 50% retention cause we trying to move him out like he is a problem like Lucic was with the Oilers. That's far from reality on this bud

 

[GirardSpinorama]

If you don't believe he will stay healthy and be productive, don't trade for him. Habs are not looking to dump him, retain, and take back whatever. That's not the approach we are taking. If the returns are meh, Price stays.

You have this idea you can get him at 50% retention cause we trying to move him out like he is a problem like Lucic was with the Oilers. That's far from reality on this bud

No one can possibly take Price at 10M. Good luck with a 38 year old goalie at 10M in year 4 of the rebuild. If you were so confident about his health and contract, you wouldn't have left him exposed in the expansion draft.

You also literally contradicted your own post

"Retaining up to 50% on all 3 of Price, Gallagher, and Petry is a serious decision. It would be historic but tough decisions need to be made in Montreal. Something to keep an eye on moving forward. None of those 3 will want to stay in a rebuild IMO. Keeping them around during a rebuild is a distraction IMO. So yeah, make tough decisions to get the rebuild going in the right direction or risk a half ass rebuild that leads to nowhere"

So yes, you do need to trade your aging players. It is a problem.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Not sure how MacKinnon got involved in this, or why you're back to insisting the Avs are interested... but, no, I wouldn't trust what Price said. Am I supposed to expect Price to be able to predict his health over the next 4 years without wanting to see him actually demonstrate that he can stay healthy?

I also don't know why anyone would trust players to say anything but positives about their partners in the NHLPA. "He's a great guy and will be a great addition to the team. We trust our management to give us a great chance to win, and we're just going to have to get the puck down low and work hard and hope we get some good bounces." Is that an exact quote, or did I paraphrase a bit?

Sorry man but can you try again. There is a lot of spins into what you are saying compared to the question I asked and it's very disingenuous. Nowhere have I said "that the Avs should be insisted on trading for Price". It's a hypothetical question. Go back and read it again.

I don't think you comprehended that question well. So I'm not even going to reply on your context spin. It's a rabbit hole. Here is the question again (Below)... It's not about what they would say to each other not face to face. It's about what Price's word is worth if both the Avs and Habs allowed MacKinnon to talk. I'm assuming based on what you said, you would not value that conversation?

Lets say this situation happens... Habs and Avs have an agreement on a trade idea (Price with 50% retention) and both teams allowed MacKinnon and Price to talk. Would you value and trust what truth Price has to say about his ability to be the goalie he can be moving forward with the Avs?

 

[Habs Halifax]

No one can possibly take Price at 10M. Good luck with a 38 year old goalie at 10M in year 4 of the rebuild. If you were so confident about his health and contract, you wouldn't have left him exposed in the expansion draft.

You also literally contradicted your own post

"Retaining up to 50% on all 3 of Price, Gallagher, and Petry is a serious decision. It would be historic but tough decisions need to be made in Montreal. Something to keep an eye on moving forward. None of those 3 will want to stay in a rebuild IMO. Keeping them around during a rebuild is a distraction IMO. So yeah, make tough decisions to get the rebuild going in the right direction or risk a half ass rebuild that leads to nowhere"

So yes, you do need to trade your aging players. It is a problem.

I don't blame you thinking that way cause you think Price is a problem like Lucic was with the Oilers. I don't believe we are trading Price cause he is a problem like that. You seem to be a GM fan trying to circle around like a vulture trying to capitalize on the 50% retention where you think we will unload him for cheap just cause.

We are not on the same page. There are others who feel the late 1st, Grade A/B (not in the NHL yet) is not a horrible ask for Price at 50% retention and we are also taking back a 1/2 year cap dump. You're trying to double down on the 50% while you acquire for cheap. It's not why we are retaining 50% and not sure you comprehend that well cause you think once again... he is a problem like Lucic was. Not the case IMO and your not getting Price for a cheap price and with retention.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Sorry man but can you try again. There is a lot of spins into what you are saying compared to the question I asked and it's very disingenuous. Nowhere have I said "that the Avs should be insisted on trading for Price". It's a hypothetical question. Go back and read it again.

I don't think you comprehended that question well. So I'm not even going to reply on your context spin. It's a rabbit hole. Here is the question again (Below)... It's not about what they would say to each other not face to face. It's about what Price's word is worth if both the Avs and Habs allowed MacKinnon to talk. I'm assuming based on what you said, you would not value that conversation?

Lets say this situation happens... Habs and Avs have an agreement on a trade idea (Price with 50% retention) and both teams allowed MacKinnon and Price to talk. Would you value and trust what truth Price has to say about his ability to be the goalie he can be moving forward with the Avs?

Maybe you should try to rewrite it instead, because I read your post again and it still reads exactly the same. You want me to pretend that the Avs have interest in Price (which they don't), and would come to some hypothetical trade agreement for Price at 50% (which they wouldn't) and would let MacKinnon answer media questions about this trade (eh, maybe, but highly doubtful). But, then you ask if I'd believe what Price says about himself. How is MacKinnon being allowed to talk important to the question you asked about Price? And why do I need to imagine 3 nearly impossible things for this to even remotely matter? Don't those 3 nearly impossible things make this a pointless exercise with no way for it to be remotely relevant?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Maybe you should try to rewrite it instead, because I read your post again and it still reads exactly the same. You want me to pretend that the Avs have interest in Price (which they don't), and would come to some hypothetical trade agreement for Price at 50% (which they wouldn't) and would let MacKinnon answer media questions about this trade (eh, maybe, but highly doubtful). But, then you ask if I'd believe what Price says about himself. How is MacKinnon being allowed to talk important to the question you asked about Price? And why do I need to imagine 3 nearly impossible things for this to even remotely matter? Don't those 3 nearly impossible things make this a pointless exercise with no way for it to be remotely relevant?

Still never answered the question. It's belittle narrative and you are wasting both our time now. If you don't like the post or question, don't reply.

 

[weinsink]

Go get rask!

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Still never answered the question. It's belittle narrative and you are wasting both our time now. If you don't like the post or question, don't reply.

Which question didn't I answer? The one that was supposed to be about MacKinnon but only happened in your head?

 

[Habs Halifax]

Which question didn't I answer? The one that was supposed to be about MacKinnon but only happened in your head?

Little value to these discussions. I was sincere with how I presented that question and you spin and twisted it in belittle narratives. Wasting more time

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Sorry man but can you try again. There is a lot of spins into what you are saying compared to the question I asked and it's very disingenuous. Nowhere have I said "that the Avs should be insisted on trading for Price". It's a hypothetical question. Go back and read it again.

I don't think you comprehended that question well. So I'm not even going to reply on your context spin. It's a rabbit hole. Here is the question again (Below)... It's not about what they would say to each other not face to face. It's about what Price's word is worth if both the Avs and Habs allowed MacKinnon to talk. I'm assuming based on what you said, you would not value that conversation?

Lets say this situation happens... Habs and Avs have an agreement on a trade idea (Price with 50% retention) and both teams allowed MacKinnon and Price to talk. Would you value and trust what truth Price has to say about his ability to be the goalie he can be moving forward with the Avs?

Why exactly would MacKinnon talk to Price prior to the trade? Sakic doesn't run things by Nathan MacKinnon.

He's having a problem understanding your question, because it's a bad question. There is no value in a MacKinnon/Price conversation to the discussion of a trade of Price to the Avs.

E: Stated plainer... If Joe Sakic thinks Carey Price can be a viable goalie for several more years and wants to pay the price, he'll make the trade. If he doesn't, he won't. Nathan MacKinnon's opinion is worth the same as my opinion as to whether a trade for Price is made.

 

[EdAVSfan]

Kuemper's stats were solid which is why you traded for him. That is accurate. But it don't reveal the true potential of how someone like Kuemper can carry a team in the playoffs like Price can. Price gives you an added edge. It's similar to the edge Roy gave you back when.

The main point is not to overvalue or under value regular season stats. It's context you can use but it don't usually reveal the true potential and in Price's case, he is proven and it's a question about health more than anything else. Reality

So just to be clear, I shouldn’t over or undervalue regular season stats?

Should we not apply the same logic to playoff stats?

And it’s not just a question of health. It’s a question of health, cap concerns, trade value and lost assets.

Roy is a lazy comparison. It’s nowhere close to an actual comparison to be made. Price may or may not give an edge. IF he plays, IF he’s healthy, IF age doesn’t affect him moving forward.

this is a futile exercise. The Habs aren’t retaining 50% for 4 years, and Joe Sakic even more assets into a goalie before even seeing if his plan A works out.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I don't blame you thinking that way cause you think Price is a problem like Lucic was with the Oilers. I don't believe we are trading Price cause he is a problem like that. You seem to be a GM fan trying to circle around like a vulture trying to capitalize on the 50% retention where you think we will unload him for cheap just cause.

We are not on the same page. There are others who feel the late 1st, Grade A/B (not in the NHL yet) is not a horrible ask for Price at 50% retention and we are also taking back a 1/2 year cap dump. You're trying to double down on the 50% while you acquire for cheap. It's not why we are retaining 50% and not sure you comprehend that well cause you think once again... he is a problem like Lucic was. Not the case IMO and your not getting Price for a cheap price and with retention.

The retention is literally the only thing that would make any Price trade possible to a team he'll go to (i.e. a contender). Between every contender in the NHL, name one that can take 10M in their cap structure.

The retention doesn't ADD value to Price, its a necessity of a trade.

Now, I would only pay a "cheap" Price for Carey because of his injury and age risk. 5M is still a lot of money and RISK if Price gets injured frequently or declines or retires due to mental wellness concerns. Even if he can be LTIR'd, you're stuck with having to look for a replacement goalie or have to get a strong backup just in case. Its not ideal. Thats why I'd want any picks to be contingent on health/performance.

Like I said before, if Price was healthy and had a one year deal, I'd possibly pay a 1st/prospect. A one year gamble with no long term consequences, might be worth it. You want people to pay you assets for a potential lemon. Especially teams that are already up against the cap and need every bit of cap space to be useful.

 

[Habs Halifax]

The retention is literally the only thing that would make any Price trade possible to a team he'll go to (i.e. a contender). Between every contender in the NHL, name one that can take 10M in their cap structure.

The retention doesn't ADD value to Price, its a necessity of a trade.

Now, I would only pay a "cheap" Price for Carey because of his injury and age risk. 5M is still a lot of money and RISK if Price gets injured frequently or declines or retires due to mental wellness concerns. Even if he can be LTIR'd, you're stuck with having to look for a replacement goalie or have to get a strong backup just in case. Its not ideal. Like I said before, if Price was healthy and had a one year deal, I'd probably pay a 1st/prospect. A one year Gamble with no long term consequences, might be worth it. You want people to pay you assets for a potential lemon.

You probably disagree but I'm not "adding" value after the retention though. It's not like trying to move Lucic and retaining.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Little value to these discussions. I was sincere with how I presented that question and you spin and twisted it in belittle narratives. Wasting more time

I explained that there was little value in having this discussion again at the beginning, and you insisted we do it all again anyway, so here we are.

I also don't care how sincere you were with how you presented a question, it still didn't make sense, so I asked questions. I'm sorry if trying to make sense of your question before answering hurt your fragile ego.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I explained that there was little value in having this discussion again at the beginning, and you insisted we do it all again anyway, so here we are.

I also don't care how sincere you were with how you presented a question, it still didn't make sense, so I asked questions. I'm sorry if trying to make sense of your question before answering hurt your fragile ego.

I didn't insist on anything. It was a question. Two completely different things. Your just spinning it into a "I insist" narrative.