SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Nqutilus

Jones is Underpaid
Member Since
Mar. 22, 2021
Favourite Team
Colorado Avalanche
2nd Favourite Team
Chicago Blackhawks
Forum Posts
1481
Posts per Day
1.3
Forum: Armchair-GMNov. 11, 2022 at 6:25 p.m.
Thread: Deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>Oh dear heavens. The Blues do not help rivals win. I'm not sure what is confusing. And Colorado can't compete with most other teams in terms of prospects/draft position, so the chances they could table the best offer are slim to none anyway.</div></div>

If you’re going to complain about my point, then let me put this directly. <strong><em>WHY NOT?</em></strong> Why are you against the idea of a mutually beneficial exchange with a rival, putting aside Colorado for a second? Literally what do you have to lose if a rival offers the best offer for one of your rentals and you’re out of a playoff spot? Seriously, what? Are really thinking about this from a emotional “he my rival!” standpoint? This is a business. You make business decisions, rivalries shouldn’t affect business decisions when both teams have needs that the other team can meet. That’s called being blinded by irrationality.

My point isn’t that it hasn’t happened, it’s that the idea of “if we can’t win we won’t let them” is stupid.
Forum: Armchair-GMNov. 11, 2022 at 9:40 a.m.
Thread: Deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>The Blues do not help rivals, let alone handing them their captain. And let's be real, Colorado doesn't have the prospects and higher picks to compete with other teams who might be interested if he goes on the market, which likely ain't happening anyway. Your idea for an offer is more quantity than quality. To send a star player to a rival, it would need to be absolute fleecing (like Federko to Detroit).</div></div>

You talk a lot about my example and none about my logic. Why would you NOT do a deal with a rival? Just saying you don't isn't an explanation, just a statement. Even if you dislike my example offer, if a rival team has the best offer and the Blues are out of a playoff spot, why wouldn't you look into that offer. Can you explain <em><strong>why </strong></em> it makes sense as opposed to just stating it hasn't happened?
Forum: Armchair-GMNov. 10, 2022 at 8:53 p.m.
Thread: Deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>The Blues do not trade impact players to rivals. They have not done so in like 20 years. It's just something they do not do. And this offer is weak anyway.</div></div>

Why not? If a return is mutually beneficial (which you think this one is not and I won't argue with you about that), why wouldn't you? It seems like poor asset management to let somewhat arbitrary rivalries stand in the way of business. Obviously this doesn't mean you have to trade O'Reilly to the Avs, but what's wrong with trading him (or any other important UFA) to a rival team if they offer a good deal?

(e.g. say we offered Olausson, Behrens, the 2023 1st and 2025 2nd for O'Reilly at 50% vs. Boston offering Lysell, their 2023 1st and 2023 2nd, would you not be more inclined to look into the Avs offer?)

My point being: I don't deny that's what the Blues <em>have</em> done, but I don't think it makes sense for them to continue this when there is no detriment. Colorado goes on another deep run and/or goes B2B while St. Louis loads up on prospects + picks and still has the chance to bring back O'Reilly as a UFA.
Forum: Armchair-GMNov. 3, 2022 at 5:24 p.m.
Thread: Trade deadline
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Xqb15a</b></div><div>This is the deepest draft since 2015. The Avs have basically traded away every pick in the 2022 and 2023 drafts except for the 1st. It will sting a lot down the road if COL has a gaping massive development whole with no prospects because there were none taken. COL did all in last year, need to have some faith that a full season of Manson, Lehkonen, and Byram and continued development of Newhook along with Georgiev can at least bridge some of that Kadri, Burakovsky, Kuemper production. I mean sometimes you just have to dance with who you brought.</div></div>

I think this is just a difference in how we see things long-term. I'm willing to tank if it means we can get a few overpowered teams, obviously there are futurish-current assets we shouldn't move (Newhook, Byram) due to cap reasons, but I don't see a reason why we shouldn't go all-in while we have a window with MacKinnon, Makar, etc. Sure, we may deplete our prospect pool, but for a few more years, we can be contenders.