SalarySwishSalarySwish
Forums/Armchair-GM

What would it cost

Created by: KingLundqvist30
Team: 2020-21 Colorado Avalanche
Initial Creation Date: Jul. 23, 2020
Published: Jul. 23, 2020
Salary Cap Mode: Basic
Trades
DraftRound 1Round 2Round 3Round 4Round 5Round 6Round 7
2020
Logo of the COL
Logo of the TOR
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the FLA
Logo of the COL
2021
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
2022
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
Logo of the COL
ROSTER SIZESALARY CAPCAP HITOVERAGES TooltipBONUSESCAP SPACE
15$81,500,000$63,735,595$0$2,500,000$17,764,405
Left WingCentreRight Wing
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$5,571,429$5,571,429
LW, C
M-NTC
UFA - 1
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$6,300,000$6,300,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$9,250,000$9,250,000
RW, C
UFA - 5
Logo of the Carolina Hurricanes
$5,400,000$5,400,000
LW, RW
UFA - 4
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$4,500,000$4,500,000
C
M-NTC
UFA - 2
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$3,900,000$3,900,000
RW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$2,850,000$2,850,000
LW, RW
UFA - 1
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$3,500,000$3,500,000
C, RW
UFA - 3
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$1,800,000$1,800,000
C, LW
UFA - 1
Left DefenseRight DefenseGoaltender
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$3,450,000$3,450,000
LD/RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$6,000,000$6,000,000
RD
M-NTC, NMC
UFA - 3
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$3,333,333$3,333,333
G
UFA - 1
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$5,000,000$5,000,000
LD/RD
UFA - 7
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$880,833$880,833 (Performance Bonus$2,500,000$2M)
RD
UFA - 1
Logo of the Colorado Avalanche
$2,000,000$2,000,000
G
UFA - 2

Embed Code

  • To display this team on another website or blog, add this iFrame to the appropriate page
  • Customize the height attribute in the iFrame code below to fit your website appropriately. Minimum recommended: 400px.

Text-Embed

Click to Highlight
Jul. 23, 2020 at 10:23 a.m.
#1
Rangers 2023
Avatar of the user
Joined: Nov. 2017
Posts: 19,043
Likes: 5,430
Newhook+
Jul. 23, 2020 at 10:27 a.m.
#2
CbjSabresDucks
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2020
Posts: 4,720
Likes: 2,180
one of newhook or byram, burakovsky, 1st. honestly that probably doesn't even do it
villenash liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 10:29 a.m.
#3
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 4,174
Likes: 1,646
To much
villenash liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 10:34 a.m.
#4
RETIRED
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2019
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 2,481
Quoting: Bdawwwgy1
one of newhook or byram, burakovsky, 1st. honestly that probably doesn't even do it


LMAO you are dreaming. Byram is a no go.
COL would be trading to add a top 6 F, why would they then trade away Bura to deduct 1 top 6 F?
Newhook + 1st + lesser prospect is absolute most youd get
Jul. 23, 2020 at 10:50 a.m.
#5
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2020
Posts: 3,525
Likes: 3,374
Another guy Chicago traded away for peanuts. At least it allowed them to keep Seabrook though.

That aside, he's not available. Carolina has no incentive to move him.
KingLundqvist30 liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:01 a.m.
#6
Thread Starter
Breadman likes Bread
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jul. 2017
Posts: 3,492
Likes: 1,729
Quoting: SuckMyAvs
Another guy Chicago traded away for peanuts. At least it allowed them to keep Seabrook though.

That aside, he's not available. Carolina has no incentive to move him.

My reasoning for it is if Landeskog asks for too much money, Teuvo can be a replacement.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:03 a.m.
#7
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 10,200
Likes: 7,089
Quoting: McRanteskog
LMAO you are dreaming. Byram is a no go.
COL would be trading to add a top 6 F, why would they then trade away Bura to deduct 1 top 6 F?
Newhook + 1st + lesser prospect is absolute most youd get


Then you're not getting Teuvo. CAR has absolutely no reason to trade him, and he's on a great contract. If you're not willing to give up quality to get quality, they you won't be able to make deals like this. You may be unwilling to pay the price tag, but to suggest that it's a ridiculous ask is in itself ridiculous.

Over the past two seasons:
Rantanen 1.1 ppg -- current age = 23 -- current contract = 5 years at $9.25m
Landeskog 0.94 ppg -- current age = 27 -- current contract = 1 year at ~$5.5m
Teravainen 0.93 ppg -- current age = 25 -- current contract = 4 years at $5.25m

Teravainen is on a steal of a contract and his producing at nearly a point-per-game pace. That will cost A LOT to acquire. A late first + a good prospect in Newhook + a lesser prospect that you didn't even bother naming is not good enough to acquire Teravainen from a team that has 0 reasons to consider trading him.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:24 a.m.
#8
RETIRED
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2019
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 2,481
Quoting: villenash
Then you're not getting Teuvo. CAR has absolutely no reason to trade him, and he's on a great contract. If you're not willing to give up quality to get quality, they you won't be able to make deals like this. You may be unwilling to pay the price tag, but to suggest that it's a ridiculous ask is in itself ridiculous.

Over the past two seasons:
Rantanen 1.1 ppg -- current age = 23 -- current contract = 5 years at $9.25m
Landeskog 0.94 ppg -- current age = 27 -- current contract = 1 year at ~$5.5m
Teravainen 0.93 ppg -- current age = 25 -- current contract = 4 years at $5.25m

Teravainen is on a steal of a contract and his producing at nearly a point-per-game pace. That will cost A LOT to acquire. A late first + a good prospect in Newhook + a lesser prospect that you didn't even bother naming is not good enough to acquire Teravainen from a team that has 0 reasons to consider trading him.


Why would you quote me? This isnt my AGM.
AGM was proposed by someone else, I gave my take. No need to quote me to challenge the whether or not he would be moved. I discuss whats proposed.

CAR doesnt move Tera, COL doesnt move Byram, trade doesnt work
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:33 a.m.
#9
Lenny7
Avatar of the user
Joined: Jan. 2017
Posts: 13,291
Likes: 11,051
Quoting: McRanteskog
Why would you quote me? This isnt my AGM.
AGM was proposed by someone else, I gave my take. No need to quote me to challenge the whether or not he would be moved. I discuss whats proposed.

CAR doesnt move Tera, COL doesnt move Byram, trade doesnt work


You challenged the value, he gave you justification behind the value that was set. Pretty simple, friend.
villenash liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:34 a.m.
#10
Avatar of the user
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 10,200
Likes: 7,089
Quoting: McRanteskog
Why would you quote me? This isnt my AGM.
AGM was proposed by someone else, I gave my take. No need to quote me to challenge the whether or not he would be moved. I discuss whats proposed.

CAR doesnt move Tera, COL doesnt move Byram, trade doesnt work


Relax. The OP just posted a question with no actual trade involved about what it would take to acquire Teravainen, and you gave your response to a different user other than OP. That's how this site works... just defend your ideas and don't get upset when someone else thinks differently from you.

I agree -- Teravainen doesn't get moved and Byram doesn't get moved.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:34 a.m.
#11
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2019
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 1,142
COL and CAR are bad trade partners, to many similar needs and strengths
Anus_McLeod and villenash liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 11:44 a.m.
#12
John 3 16
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2020
Posts: 9,580
Likes: 4,618
Quoting: Xqb15
COL and CAR are bad trade partners, to many similar needs and strengths


Yeah, we both have great depth in the same positions (i.e. forward and LHD), so I don't think we're great trade partners. Unless we're simply trading prospects or picks (eg. I'd be interested in acquiring Roland McKeown for example).

Carolina have zero need to trade Teravainen so this will never happen. It would have to be Newhook++ but that doesn't make sense from Colorado's perspective as we need Newhook to be our future 2C.

That said, Carolina do need a goalie upgrade, and if for whatever reason Sakic decides to move on from Grubauer this offseason then I would think Carolina would be a prime destination for him, given that Carolina actually offered Washington a better deal (i.e. a higher 2nd) than we offered Washington for Grubauer in 2018. For now there's no reason to move Grubauer, but that could change if he flops and/or if Francouz takes the starting role in the playoffs.
Xqb15 liked this.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 12:38 p.m.
#13
CbjSabresDucks
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2020
Posts: 4,720
Likes: 2,180
Quoting: McRanteskog
LMAO you are dreaming. Byram is a no go.
COL would be trading to add a top 6 F, why would they then trade away Bura to deduct 1 top 6 F?
Newhook + 1st + lesser prospect is absolute most youd get


teuvo is one of the better wingers in the league lol. you aren't getting him for a prospect, a late first and a B level prospect. Bura is a big time downgrade from TT.
Jul. 23, 2020 at 12:43 p.m.
#14
RETIRED
Avatar of the user
Joined: Apr. 2019
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 2,481
Quoting: Bdawwwgy1
teuvo is one of the better wingers in the league lol. you aren't getting him for a prospect, a late first and a B level prospect. Bura is a big time downgrade from TT.


Never stated you couldnt get more/better package elsewhere.
My point was that Byram wouldnt be included, period.
Then moving onto the remaining pieces, COL needs to add one top 6 F so including Bura to add Teuvo means they still need to add another top 6 F (essentially not filling there true need of adding one F).
They just arent compatible trade partners
Jul. 23, 2020 at 2:43 p.m.
#15
Avatar of the user
Joined: Dec. 2019
Posts: 304
Likes: 66
Carolina will trade Bean + Bokk + 1st for Rantanen
 
Reply
To create a post please Login or Register
Question:
Options:
Add Option
Submit Poll