SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

NMAvsFan

Representing the 505
Member Since
Sep. 13, 2020
Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
Forum Posts
4485
Posts per Day
3.4
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 1 at 4:57 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 31 at 11:03 p.m.
Thread: Stamkos Leonard Manson Skjei
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TJTwolf</b></div><div>Yep, you and I are very much in opposite camps on this one as far as which D to trade, I'd noted that one previously. I can however see both sides of the argument there. Thing is I'd prefer they traded one of the forwards over any more of the D even if Girard would be my choice there ahead of Manson. As much as I've liked Colton's play I think it was a mistake to sign him to that deal (they pretty much had to after trading for him and probably were hoping for less and I think it's come back to bite them in proverbial) probably even more than signing Manson to his. He would be my first choice to move if any. He's the most easily replaced of the 4-5 mil contracts imo.</div></div>

I understand you're position as well. I agree that moving Colton would probably be the best play. I see a few options to replace that 3C spot if they did decide to let Colton go: Wennberg, Roslovic, possibly Domi. All of those come with their own risks but if they can get Wenny on a "bounce-back" deal, he could tide them over until Ritchie is ready.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 31 at 7:35 p.m.
Thread: Stamkos Leonard Manson Skjei
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>TJTwolf</b></div><div>Value-wise that would probably be fair for Manson but I think the fact he's the only really physical and somewhat nasty D the Avs would have at that point means I see the Avs keeping him and would be more likely to trade Girard if they move a D. Possibly an unpopular take but I see him as surprisingly harder to replace even though I suspect Girard would be more coveted by teams and cost more in a trade.</div></div>

I'm one who disagrees with that. Manson is much older than Girard and has less term; I believe they can find another 3rd pair level guy that can play physically enough to replace that aspect of Manson's game even if he can't replace the offense and puck-moving. Plus, Manson has a lengthy injury history; what happens if Manson gets hurt 20 games into next season and they have no Girard? I am in the camp that believes it would be a mistake to trade Girard rather than Manson if they do go down the path of trading a D to create cap space.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 31 at 1:53 p.m.
Thread: Mighty Mighty Bosstones
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GiggywithGibby</b></div><div>Mitts isn't going to take less that 7AAV, and go look at your injury log this season and tell me it's a good idea to run a 21 man roster.</div></div>

If there's anything we should have learned it's that making statements like, "Player X isn't going to take deal Y" in such absolute terms is folly; players get deals that makes sense for them that don't always align with our idea of what a player "should" or do end up getting. I would ask: who are Mitts' comps and what are the possible scenarios for him at his age, production and role? One comp that really makes sense is Dylan Strome; he's a year older than Mitts and had 65 point production the year before his arb-eligible RFA deal was played. Mitts might make it to 60 points (he's at 54 right now) but, let's be real: just like Strome, he isn't a high-end 2C but is a guy you can count on to give you steady play, especially if you put him with good wings. That deal looks good so far as Strome is having another 60+ point season at a cost of $5M/season.

Also, what is the effect of the salary cap increase going to play? Are we going to see a concomitant rise in player salaries or is it just going to be the stars that can expect to see more money coming their way? What MacFarland has said is they did their due diligence before they acquired him so, apparently, they feel like they can get some sort of deal done that works for the Avs and, presumably, Mitts and his camp.

All-in-all, if Strome is a reasonable comp and Mitts isn't determined to extract every last penny he can, something along the lines of $5.5-6Mx5-6 years isn't at all farfetched.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 28 at 9:01 a.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 26 at 7:39 p.m.
Thread: Serious rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>YoungPattyKane</b></div><div>I think there is some interesting decisions here. I think a lot of Drouin's success is a MacKinnon effect. I'd sign for the vet min not much more. Also heavy on the UFA d-men? I'm not fully familiar with the Avs prospects, but what is the plan with Behrens? start him in the minors or can he plug and play on the big boys?</div></div>

Yes, it is probably true playing a lot with MacKinnon (and Rants, Cale and Toews) has a lot to do with his resurgence. Other teams might look at him and say, "No chance he replicates that here because we don't have enough guys like that to shelter him with." But I don't think they can get away with signing him to a minimum deal given his actual production. It will be interesting to see if he chooses being in a comfortable situation where he gets to be a supporting player but plays for a lot less than his "market value." You would think, given his history, he might just prefer to remain in his current environment for his own sense of health even if it means leaving a lot of money on the table. But he might decide to bet on himself and go get some more money elsewhere. Definitely worth keeping an eye on.

Behrens is probably going to have to go through the A before he ever gets a shot at the NHL. I honestly thought he'd be a guy they dealt and they still could but he projects as a decent 3rd pair defensive D that can move the puck and the Avs need that so maybe they want to hang onto him so they can have a cheap option there.
Forum: Armchair-GMMar. 26 at 12:58 p.m.
Thread: An Optimistic Attempt
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MeetYourMakar</b></div><div>I wouldn't move Manson to keep Walker. Manson does more around the puck and plays with a presence. JJ likely wont be back so they need some size and Walker's offence can be found elsewhere, like Malinski.</div></div>

Malinski seems to have taken a step back since returning to the Eagles; his production is down which is disappointing. Ideally, he would have built off his success in the NHL. That doesn't mean he won't get another shot but the Avs are very impatient with guys like him. But I do agree that Manson does have a "presence" around the puck, even if he makes mistakes and takes penalties. That being said, I do think they can find someone that may not be able to do what he does offensively but can be a good defensive stalwart.