Friday night Apocalypse

by An Unmitigated Disaster on Jun 25, 2009 10:16 AM MDT Comment 20 comments

So, in the vane of that epic fail of a FA signing--which I'd also like to add that I would probably go to the local rink and just start taking runs at all the pee-wee players. Because if the avs went out and signed the souless one (Tyler Arnason) then there is no god and I bet I can really cream them into the boards. So, how would you feel about the avs trading down to the 6-10 picks? What would it take? How pissed would you be?

I would definatly have mixed emotions, right now I'm used to the avs getting one of the big 3...your thoughts?

MileHighHockey.com is a fan community, allowing members to post their own thoughts and opinions on the Colorado Avalanche and hockey in general. These views and thoughts may not be shared by the editors of MileHighHockey.com.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Schenn + 7th would do it for Toronto, if Tavares is there. But they wouldn’t do it.

Frankly, the cost to move up for other teams should be so high they don’t want to.

by thedoctor on Jun 25, 2009 1:15 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I would have a knockdown dragout unmitigated hissy fit if we made that trade. As much as I believe that Duchene is the answer for us, to give up Tavares, who promises to be a day 1 offensive contributor, in favor of Schenn, a nice, probably top 2, definitely top 4 defensive defenseman and somebody, who, while doubtlessly a strong prospect at #7, is not particularly likely to be ready to start day 1. With out current offensive power (or utter lack thereof) and our relative strenght at defense in the prospect pool, this trade sucks to me the more I think about it. My $0.02.

by Hopfenkopf on Jun 25, 2009 2:47 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmmm, hosed up the italics function there.

by Hopfenkopf on Jun 25, 2009 2:48 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

i meant the stud defenseman they already have AND the 7th (most likely MSP), not the younger brother coming out this year. my bad.

by thedoctor on Jun 25, 2009 3:16 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I presumed that you meant D Luke Schenn. I’m pretty sure that his brother is a C.

I remain unconvinced as to MSP’s NHL potential, but not that of Tavares. Seems to me that trading for further strength on D, where we systematically have some semblance of strength, at the cost of a day 1 stud forward, is folly. But I understand that the premise is intruiging. Just less and less so the more that I think about it.

by Hopfenkopf on Jun 25, 2009 3:57 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

so you don’t like Schenn? I thought he was pretty damn good the couple times I saw him, a top 2 cornerstone, and a physical defensive one at that. we’ve got lots of defensive depth coming up, but none of it has what Schenn brings, that nasty Kronwall/Foote/Orpiks meanness. and I think we need that.

you’re probably right about Tavares being a better choice though. MSP is a good prospect but not the stud scorer Tavares will be…I tell ya though, MSP + Schenn, those are 2 closed holes for a long time… all you need with them is Wolski to grow and and a goalie, and you’re solid.

by thedoctor on Jun 25, 2009 4:33 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not that I don’t like Schenn. I think the kid is a rock star. I’m just not certain that he’s of the same caliber as Tavares. I’m also not certain what to do with Schenn’s incremental $2.9M cap hit in addition to something that is likely to look similar if MSP can actually step up and play on our second line. They’d almost have to agree to take Tucker and/or Clark back just to keep us in a somewhat tenable cap position.

by Hopfenkopf on Jun 25, 2009 4:50 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

you’re right, and I doubt they’d blink at taking on Clark or something. They’ve plenty of cap room this year.

by thedoctor on Jun 25, 2009 4:58 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think I’d make ’em take Tucker just for the sheer irony of it all.

by Hopfenkopf on Jun 25, 2009 5:09 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs

ahaha, and then they buy him out…again…that might be a mark never touched again!

by thedoctor on Jun 25, 2009 5:43 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldnt mind one bit

IF they took some of our dead salary weight (ahem…Tucker, Clark) as well as gave us their very own starting goaltender. They’d have to take some of that salary from us in order to afford said goaltender. And I dont mean Emery, either. Hiller or Quick would be good, for example, as they are young as well.

Someone old (PL), Someone new (TBA), Someone borrowed (nobody this year), someone blue (me).
History with Avs: Began dating--Winter 1996; Engaged--Fall 1998; Married to it--February 21, 2001

by Avsgirl on Jun 25, 2009 4:17 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't dangle that 3rd pick at all unless

1. We received another fairly high pick (definitely top 8 or so) this year in return.
2. We also received the team’s first rounder next year.
3. We received an established, young, and reasonably priced player that could step in and help the team now.
4. We also were able to unload some dead salary, say Clark and Tucker.

Maybe then, and only MAYBE then, I listen. So the Avs will give it up for a retread, a low first, and throw Hejduk the other way too.

MHH: Shagging Dater one contributor at a time.

by Bob in Boulder on Jun 25, 2009 5:37 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs