LGR4GM Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I like the concept of Barrie but idk what I would give up. That #8 pick I would be hesitant to move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I like the concept of Barrie but idk what I would give up. That #8 pick I would be hesitant to move. Why give up anything when you can just sign him to an offer sheet that might cost a second round pick next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 Why give up anything when you can just sign him to an offer sheet that might cost a second round pick next year? I doubt Barrie signs for under 3.9mil a year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannepanne Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 FWIW, Chris Kreider and Nichushkin are RFA's this season. As for the latter, well it makes paying Goligoski that much harder. Also, Soupy is a UFA I like the idea of bringing in Soupy for a year or two if other alternatives don't come to fruition. Draft or trade for a younger LHD prospect and let Soupy play in his place until he is ready. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_ Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I'd rather bring in Goligoski than Campbell. There's nothing wrong with Campbell's style, but I prefer someone with a little more bite in their game. If we're going to commit to an offense only D, then why not just go hard on Yandle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I like the idea of bringing in Soupy for a year or two if other alternatives don't come to fruition. Draft or trade for a younger LHD prospect and let Soupy play in his place until he is ready. I saw a couple of goals against Florida in the playoffs that prompted me to pump the brakes on bringing back Campbell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) I mean, holy ######. The Avs can't be this dumb, right? This year, the Colorado Avalanche ranked worst in the NHL in Corsi For percentage, Fenwick For percentage, and Shots For percentage in 5-on-5 play. The Avalanche finished with the eighth worst Goals For percentage at even strength as well, missing the playoffs for a second consecutive season......Rumors have it that the Avalanche are looking to add size to an already beefed up team, but more concerning Colorado is interested in adding players with a strong plus-minus. Analytics proponents have long loathed the use of this metric for a few reasons......Meanwhile, the best guesses at potential fits for Colorado continue to be poor possession players with the reputation of being “hard-nosed” — shot-blockers or hitters — because well-run organizations are looking to drop those players on naïve organizations. http://www.todaysslapshot.com/colorado-avalanche/column-avalanche-unlikely-fix-problems-offseason/ So, Bogo? Edited May 16, 2016 by WildCard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I mean, holy ######. The Avs can't be this dumb, right? http://www.todaysslapshot.com/colorado-avalanche/column-avalanche-unlikely-fix-problems-offseason/ So, Bogo? I think their recent decisions make it not only possible, but likely. Party at my place if we pull off a Bogo-Barrie swap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 If they can't afford Barrie at 3.9, how are they going to afford Bogosian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I think their recent decisions make it not only possible, but likely. Party at my place if we pull off a Bogo-Barrie swap. He fits what they want to a tee. He is the perfect player for that swap. I was saying it in the lineup thread, but I really think we're going to have one hell of a great offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 He fits what they want to a tee. He is the perfect player for that swap. I was saying it in the lineup thread, but I really think we're going to have one hell of a great offseason. Repeating myself because this is on a new page now: They can't afford Bogosian. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 If they can't afford Barrie at 3.9, how are they going to afford Bogosian? Where did the $3.9 come from? Barrie will get much more than that form an RFA extension I believe Repeating myself because this is on a new page now: They can't afford Bogosian. They're also rumored to jettison Duchene, to pay MacKinnon and get rid of him for pissing off Roy when he celebrated a goal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 If they can't afford Barrie at 3.9, how are they going to afford Bogosian? I'd assume Barrie is looking for the $6.5 million range. And it has nothing to do with ability to afford, but rather, desire to pay for a player who doesn't exude the old school hockey qualities those clowns look for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I mean, holy ######. The Avs can't be this dumb, right? http://www.todaysslapshot.com/colorado-avalanche/column-avalanche-unlikely-fix-problems-offseason/ So, Bogo? Don't make me choose, I actually like Bogo. Repeating myself because this is on a new page now: They can't afford Bogosian. I'd disagree only in the sense we don't know what Barrie wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 Grigorenko is a RFA, Iginla ($5m) a UFA, and they'll be paying Boedker this year too. Barrie is gone, and likely one of Landeskog or Duchene. Strange because Landeskog fits their mold of players WAR chart for Buffalo, Anaheim, Dallas, and Colorado's d-men. The further right you are, the worse your teammates. Corsi Rel % is colored, sized by TOI, and the y-axis is points/60. Tyson Barrie would be a steal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I see Goligoski at the top there too. Imagine signing Goligoski, trading for Barrie, and potentially drafting an impact player at either defender or forward at #8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I see Goligoski at the top there too. Imagine signing Goligoski, trading for Barrie, and potentially drafting an impact player at either defender or forward at #8 I'm honestly not sure which one I'd rather have. Barrie is younger and likely more expensive; without cost and age in factor, evaluating which player is actually better could make for a good discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I see Goligoski at the top there too. Imagine signing Goligoski, trading for Barrie, and potentially drafting an impact player at either defender or forward at #8 I think Barrie would require the #8 overall. Granted I may be willing to do that, though we'd have a logjam on the right side, we'd suddenly have 2 40+pts D men Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I see Goligoski at the top there too. Imagine signing Goligoski, trading for Barrie, and potentially drafting an impact player at either defender or forward at #8 I'm still not a fan of relying on McCabe/Gorges to be 2nd pair, but: Goligoski-Risto Gorges-Barrie McCabe-Pysyk Is not completely nauseating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I think Barrie would require the #8 overall. Granted I may be willing to do that, though we'd have a logjam on the right side, we'd suddenly have 2 40+pts D men I wonder if you could trade #38, #68, Pysyk, Zemgus for him I'm still not a fan of relying on McCabe/Gorges to be 2nd pair, but: Goligoski-Risto Gorges-Barrie McCabe-Pysyk Is not completely nauseating. Did you trade Bogosian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 I'm still not a fan of relying on McCabe/Gorges to be 2nd pair, but: Goligoski-Risto Gorges-Barrie McCabe-Pysyk Is not completely nauseating. That's new sheets Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 Where did the $3.9 come from? Barrie will get much more than that form an RFA extension I believe They're also rumored to jettison Duchene, to pay MacKinnon and get rid of him for pissing off Roy when he celebrated a goal Someone said something about 3.9 upthread. Not sure what it was anymore. I'd assume Barrie is looking for the $6.5 million range. And it has nothing to do with ability to afford, but rather, desire to pay for a player who doesn't exude the old school hockey qualities those clowns look for. I'm not so sure about that. A few talking heads have mentioned Colorado's internal cap with respect to Barrie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) Barrie is at 2.6mil now so I would guess he will ask and get at least 5-5.5 looking at his numbers. Edited May 16, 2016 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 Someone said something about 3.9 upthread. Not sure what it was anymore. I'm not so sure about that. A few talking heads have mentioned Colorado's internal cap with respect to Barrie. The 3.9 was me commenting on your offer sheet for only a 2nd rounder. You'd only be able to offer up to 3.9mil for the cost to be a 2nd rounder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted May 16, 2016 Report Share Posted May 16, 2016 (edited) The 3.9 was me commenting on your offer sheet for only a 2nd rounder. You'd only be able to offer up to 3.9mil for the cost to be a 2nd rounder $1,205,377 to $1,826,328 Third-round pick $1,826,328 to $3,652,659 Second-round pick $3,652,659 to $5,478,986 First- and third-round pick $5,478,986 to $7,305,316 First-, second-, and third-round pick $7,305,316 to $9,131,645 Two first-round picks and a second- and third-round pick this was the comp for 2015/2016 according to wikipedia, which means 3.9 is probably right with the cap going up. Edited May 16, 2016 by LGR4GM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.