Pears Posted September 14, 2016 Share Posted September 14, 2016 38 minutes ago, Virtanen#18 said: Where is the source on Marleau??? Got me all excited... the guy has a lot to offer still.... an instant boost to our PP! You're excited about the fact that getting Marleau would be a waste of assets and makes absolutely no sense for us to go after? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 4 hours ago, qwijibo said: These are players we're discussing. The value is purely objective and a players perceived value is set entirely by what the gm who is looking at acquiring the player. The only time that isn't true is if there is more than one suitor. Different teams have different needs and have different assets to trade. To say "the market is set" ignores every point of variability. We aren't talking about real estate where the value is easy to assess. Quite frankly it's an inane comparison. No it's not. The comparison is exactly correct for this matter. If Elvis wants to live on my street, he pays 3 million, or he lives elsewhere. If Sakic wants an elite shut down (young) D, he pays the asking price, or he goes without. The market is set. Pay up, or do without. Sakic can live in the burbs. Simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garthsbutcher Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 2 hours ago, Virtanen#18 said: Where is the source on Marleau??? Got me all excited... the guy has a lot to offer still.... an instant boost to our PP! MARLEA NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 5 hours ago, Apple Juice said: Hutton-Tanev Tryamkin-Gudbranson Sbisa-Larson/Biega Stecher Doesn't look great but it`ll give the chance for a young guy to step up. We can always go out and look for a defenceman in free agency to fill the gap. Examples: Kris Russell, Nicklas Grossmann, Mike Weber I think Landeskog is a big piece on any teams core. I would love to have him on our forward group. Tanev would be more likely to go than Edler given he doesn't have to go anywhere unless he's convinced it's a good thing for him. Maybe he would be happy to go who knows. Like my last post says though, there are 29 other suitors available for the Avalanche, who knows maybe they would prefer to send him out of conference...or to a team that can give them back equal value without stacking two to three players and a bunch more cap their way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwijibo Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 38 minutes ago, Alflives said: No it's not. The comparison is exactly correct for this matter. If Elvis wants to live on my street, he pays 3 million, or he lives elsewhere. If Sakic wants an elite shut down (young) D, he pays the asking price, or he goes without. The market is set. Pay up, or do without. Sakic can live in the burbs. Simple. There is nothing about the real estate analogy that applies to the so called " market" for players. Nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 26 minutes ago, qwijibo said: There is nothing about the real estate analogy that applies to the so called " market" for players. Nothing . Alf finds you funny. . And wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweathog Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 With the Avs defensive core seriously lacking, along with the talented young forwards they have, a Landeskog-Tanev trade would put the Avs back in the playoffs. Which is what Sakic needs to keep his job. Landeskog is a talented forward but hardly elite, Tanev+2nd is more than fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 7 hours ago, Alflives said: So you think you will buy my Vancouver house for 2 million, even though a lesser one next door just sold for three million? You are wrong on this one Elvis. If Sakic wants an elite shut down D (Tanev) he will pay the price, that the current market states. JB is likely demanding more than just Landeskog, and that's what is holding up any deal. So, you're saying that $3M house is lesser than yours, but the assessment and any other property evaluators say it's not, and another house that is arguably very similar went for $1.25M, yet you're going to hold out for $3M? Be prepared to not sell your property at all. Sakic doesn't have to move Landeskog, and he doesn't have to do it for a shutdown defenceman. This is particularly true for a RHD, when they have two of those in the top 4 already signed long term. He could go after a package of an up and comer, a lesser forward prospect and maybe a pick, but you're sold on Tanev being the best young right shot shutdown defenceman in the NHL today and one trade being the only possible trade to set the market regardless of the conditions surrounding that. If you ignore all the facts about your house compared to other houses, you'll never get a reasonable buyer - only people that will undercut your unreasonable price and walk away with a foul taste in their mouths around future deals when you stubbornly refuse to see reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 6 minutes ago, elvis15 said: So, you're saying that $3M house is lesser than yours, but the assessment and any other property evaluators say it's not, and another house that is arguably very similar went for $1.25M, yet you're going to hold out for $3M? Be prepared to not sell your property at all. Sakic doesn't have to move Landeskog, and he doesn't have to do it for a shutdown defenceman. This is particularly true for a RHD, when they have two of those in the top 4 already signed long term. He could go after a package of an up and comer, a lesser forward prospect and maybe a pick, but you're sold on Tanev being the best young right shot shutdown defenceman in the NHL today and one trade being the only possible trade to set the market regardless of the conditions surrounding that. If you ignore all the facts about your house compared to other houses, you'll never get a reasonable buyer - only people that will undercut your unreasonable price and walk away with a foul taste in their mouths around future deals when you stubbornly refuse to see reason. You are cute. Assessment means nothing, when the market was set by recent local sales. The elite shut down D market is set. If Sakic wants Tanev he will need to pay the price. If he doesn't someone else will. My neighbour's house, which is lesser than mine ( Larsen) sold for 3 mil. (Hall) I wouldn't even look at a 2 mil offer. (Landeskog) unless it came with a downtown condo worth 1.5 mil( second round pick). See, exactly like real estate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustABandwagoner Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 22 hours ago, canuktravella said: u under value edler and virtanen and boeser Then looks like you wont be getting landeskog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HorvatToBaertschi Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 I would pay Tanev + the CBJ 2nd and thats it. I mean Landeskog is clearly the better player but in this day and age the mentality of every GM is that defence wins you championships. We'vé been proven that for thé Last 5 years as offensive numbers have declined and number of 1 goal games have Increased. Tanev is an elite shut down D and I think the way the market has been going, that this is à great deal for thé avalanche. I mean they lose their captain but they definetely shore up their D while maintaining MacKinnon and Duchene Its definetely à pipé dream but it would be à great trade for both sides in thé long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realtor Rod Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 We are not getting Landeskog. /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 16 hours ago, Apple Juice said: Hutton-Tanev Tryamkin-Gudbranson Sbisa-Larson/Biega Stecher Doesn't look great but it`ll give the chance for a young guy to step up. We can always go out and look for a defenceman in free agency to fill the gap. Examples: Kris Russell, Nicklas Grossmann, Mike Weber Jeez man that first pairing would be overrun and due to Tanev's lack of physicality Hutton would be wrecked before Christmas trying to clear the crease on his own. Imo that's the worst pairings I've seen on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfstonker Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 13 hours ago, Rush17 said: I would love that outcome of Landeskog + but realistically the D market won't stay the same. if we can do 1 for 1 it would still be a great trade for us. I just hope we don't hold our cards too tight. but there is a lot of time and we have a very rare d man in tanev. he may lack offense at this stage in his career but he has one of the best corsi ratings of defensive d men in the game. Does nobody want to see this D with Tanev Edler, Guddy, Hutton, Tryampkin and Sbisa in it? - Nobody??? I am super excited, this could be the best D we have had for years backstopping our emerging youth talent. How can the likes of McDavid, Getzlaf, Benn, Eichel, etc hurt us if they can't break us defensively? Meanwhile we have added Loui, Sutter and Rodin - wow bring it on, I am amped to the red zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73 Percent Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 4 minutes ago, alfstonker said: Does nobody want to see this D with Tanev Edler, Guddy, Hutton, Tryampkin and Sbisa in it? - Nobody??? I am super excited, this could be the best D we have had for years backstopping our emerging youth talent. How can the likes of McDavid, Getzlaf, Benn, Eichel, etc hurt us if they can't break us defensively? Meanwhile we have added Loui, Sutter and Rodin - wow bring it on, I am amped to the red zone. I'm not defending the trade. I'm pretty neutral on that proposal. But you have to understand that defensive defensman that doesn't play physical is the most boring style of play in hockey. So no. Not many people are excited to see Tanev on the back end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoseTruckWasIt Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 On 9/14/2016 at 0:58 PM, Rush17 said: That would be the dream. I wonder if it could be Subban making a stretch :D The one player we rarely have heard of on media lately is Pedan. He is the forgotten guy. They seem to just assume he will be waived lol. I wonder if that's because he looks like **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 17 hours ago, IBatch said: I think Landeskog is a big piece on any teams core. I would love to have him on our forward group. Tanev would be more likely to go than Edler given he doesn't have to go anywhere unless he's convinced it's a good thing for him. Maybe he would be happy to go who knows. Like my last post says though, there are 29 other suitors available for the Avalanche, who knows maybe they would prefer to send him out of conference...or to a team that can give them back equal value without stacking two to three players and a bunch more cap their way. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, value wise it makes sense. But Colorado has enough right handed D. Johnson and Barrie already playing top 4 minutes. There's no way they'd make Tanev or any of those two play on their off wing. They lack left handed D. Their best left handed D is Beauchemin followed by Fedor Tyutin.. With Edler, it pushes them down a spot in the depth chart and Edler compliments their D core much better than Tanev handed-wise anyways. Not that I'm pushing for an Edler trade but it just makes more sense position-wise. 6 hours ago, alfstonker said: Jeez man that first pairing would be overrun and due to Tanev's lack of physicality Hutton would be wrecked before Christmas trying to clear the crease on his own. Imo that's the worst pairings I've seen on here. I just drafted it up real quick based on talent and skill. It's not like those would be the actual pairings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 6 hours ago, alfstonker said: Does nobody want to see this D with Tanev Edler, Guddy, Hutton, Tryampkin and Sbisa in it? - Nobody??? I am super excited, this could be the best D we have had for years backstopping our emerging youth talent. How can the likes of McDavid, Getzlaf, Benn, Eichel, etc hurt us if they can't break us defensively? Meanwhile we have added Loui, Sutter and Rodin - wow bring it on, I am amped to the red zone. Bueller? Bueller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoseTruckWasIt Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 22 hours ago, Alflives said: So you think you will buy my Vancouver house for 2 million, even though a lesser one next door just sold for three million? You are wrong on this one Elvis. If Sakic wants an elite shut down D (Tanev) he will pay the price, that the current market states. JB is likely demanding more than just Landeskog, and that's what is holding up any deal. What if the guy who paid 3 mill had a bunch of cash to wave around, but is now out of the market? You can ask whatever you want, but you can only talk to someone who wants to buy a house. How long will you wait to sell? You could just keep the house forever, insisting that only you know it's worth. But it's actual worth can only be determined by deal-making, which takes two. Chiarelli: "No, I'm gonna need Larsson and a first". Shero: "Okay, call me next week." It's called pressure. Which side has to make a deal? Also, the housing market analogy is useless for about 26 reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhoseTruckWasIt Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 19 hours ago, Pears said: You're excited about the fact that getting Marleau would be a waste of assets and makes absolutely no sense for us to go after? Can't be all that many assets, I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.