I like the adds unto themselves, I just hate seeing KK as starter.

He will look good behind that much improved dcore and forward group. However, if things go dicey, Fitzgerald should be uber aggressive about targeting a goalie in season.

Tbh I’d much rather just not risk it and spend the assets for a star goalie.. I’m completely done with giving guys a chance in goal at this point and KK played like 6 games for the devils last year (which were good) but I’m not looking for any sample size less than 2 full seasons of star caliber goaltending

Edit: I do like the other moves though and what’s your thing with Trenin? Don’t know much about him but I can’t figure out what you like about him lmao

Trenin is an excellent bottom 6er. He kills penalties at an extremely high level, good defensively, relatively fast, physical. I can't think of a guy I'd rather target than Trenin.

Based on current prices It's just not worth going for a goalie, and the cap issues from a star goalies cost would be very detrimental to the rest of the roster. But again, we still have the assets available to be very aggressive for a goalie if need be during the season

Noted on Trenin but you can’t trade for a goalie mid-season.. they typically struggle and the window is honestly now for NJ… they have the capability to move Palat next season when is MNTC kicks in with a 10 or 15 team list so that’s 6 million gone right when we need it.. I’ve built out 12 year plans many times using Google Sheets and they’re fine as long as the goalie is under 7 million and that’s with very generous raises for the guys you’d expect.. money won’t be an issue past next season which is the choke point.. cap frees up again when Casey/Gritsyuk hit the roster the year after

Which goalie are you getting under 7 million that you can truly trust? The only 1 I see fitting that bill is Swayman. If you can find me a proposal that gets me swayman, I am 100% aboard, but that seems very unlikely

Saros and Ullmark fit the bill and both will probably get small raises that put them around that number. And yeah I’d love Swayman but it won’t happen.. that’s a package I’d move Mercer for but Boston never goes for it unless contract talks sour this summer

Saros is getting 8. He was bang average this year and heading into his 30s.
Ullmark has yet to show it in the playoffs. I do like him as a target, but he doesn't guarantee anything.

Definite no from the Avs.

Both of the offers are 100% more than what you paid for Colton. His play has not particularly improved. Colorado is in a cap crunch.

Have you made an ACGM yet of what next year will look like for the Avs cap wise? If Landeskog comes off LTIR there will without a doubt have to be cap shedding moves made. And if he doesn't, there is still a crunch.

Would you be able to show me what building the rest of the roster would look like?

It's been done over and over and over and over on here. The Avs have to move one contract in the 4-5 mil range. That is all. Cap crunch or no, the Avs have a management team who know how to get the best out of deals and that ain't it. If a team comes after him like NJ are here (you're an NJ fan making the proposal, not the Avs trying to shop him) then they'll need to ante up. Were Colton made available (and if the Avs decide he's the guy to move, you can bank on them looking at doing it before the NTC kicks in) they'd get better offers. You can argue it's more than the Avs paid and I will re-iterate time and again that the Avs paid that for his RFA rights not a signed Colton. Also are they pieces the Avs want or need. To that I'd argue not particularly. His play has certainly improved. If you're talking points production alone as 'his play' then you aren't looking at the full picture.

Regarding signed vs RFA: Colton was not signed on any particular bargain. I'd value his RFA rights as virtually equal to 3x4.

Teams trying to move players for cap reasons (especially up against a deadline such as Colton's NTC kicking in) generally do not have leverage. They very rarely get market value.

There is no history of the Avs getting top of the market when clearing cap space. The only moves I can think of in recent memory are Graves for Late 2nd and Saad for the rights of Zadorov. Neither particularly massive hauls.

The eye test and advanced analytics don't suggest his play has improved either.

In terms of needs, the Avs are currently playing Jack Johnson at 3LD. I do not see an imminent replacement that will be ready by next year. Bahl is 23, solid enough for the role he will be in, and very cheap money wise. If you can suggest an alternative, but from my view it is by far the biggest hole on the roster filled.

Graeme Clarke would be there to fill the hole left by Drouin at a cheap cap hit. It does not appear that Colorado has a guy in the system ready to fill that role. Unless of course Ritchie is ready for NHL hockey next year.

Who is this team willing to beat this offer for Colton? Why would they have not simply bought him the previous year when he only cost 37th overall. If you're suggesting it's because Colton wouldn't sign there, then again, you are really racing against that NTC clock.

Point 1. Signed players with term have a higher value than rights.
Point 2. The Avs aren't trying to move Colton in this scenario. NJ are looking to acquire him. Regardless of the cap situation the Avs can look to whatever the best deal is for Girard, Manson, even Lehkonen if they wish, to achieve the same ends (or any other player or combination thereof). Any move makes a hole they have to fill. This makes arguably one of the worst (ref point 5 finding a new 3C vs a 3LD).
Point 3. I'm not aware of the Avs ever particularly clearing anyone for cap space per se in the past. It's never really been an issue. Graves wasn't moved for cap space, he was moved to avoid losing him for nothing in expansion and the Avs got fair value for him at the time. Zadorov's rights were traded for a proven playoff performer in Saad, again, not a specific cap move.
Point 4. The eye test? As an Avs fan I'd say that certainly shows he's improved, I've watched him enough. Stats and analytics appear to show stability or improvement bearing in mind adapting to new team, systems etc and playing predominantly at C rather than as a W.
Point 5. The Avs 3LD will likely be a vet cup chaser or guy on low end deal. Possibly Jones comes back, maybe they turn to someone like JMac again. Plenty of options out there. Nothing flashy. No need to make a trade for it and give up any of their limited assets. If something comes back in a trade that works (and I'm not argiung Bahl isn't ok, just isn't a glaring need), then that's cool but to say Bahl is a NEED is a stretch.
Point 6. The Avs don't NEED Clarke. He's an unproven and small forward but with some decent AHL stats so to say he can jump in and replace JD as a top 6 wing is a major stretch. The Avs also have Kovalenko who may well get that shot, and their own former first rounder Olausson who may get a shot at it as well plus numerous others. Then there is Ritchie as you rightly mention though I suspect the plan for him is a more long term project so as not to ruin him early as they have arguably done with others.
Point 7. Conjecture. There are any number of teams who might look to add Colton in theory. Not just NJ. Could it be 2? 3? 14? 22? Who knows? Neither you nor I. But I'd put the bank on there being more than just New Jersey.

1) the rights to Ross Colton (looking for 4x4) vs Ross Colton with a 3x4 signed aren't particularly different. I think you are massively undervaluing RFA rights.
2) The avs are looking to move someone to clear cap. If it's Colton, then the leverage isn't there. If it isn't then NJD moves elsewhere, but call us about whoever else you decide to move for cap reasons. You are trying to disingenuously keep up 3-4 players values by using the others to make a loop of "we don't have to sell ___ because we can sell ___ instead".
3) A scenario where the AVs were in a roster/cap crunch losing leverage and hurting the return yes
4) Yes, the eye test from an unbiased perspective (I have no ties to Tampa or Colorado)
5) You seem to be manipulating the word need a lot. Sure, you don't NEED Bahl. But he is objectively an improvement to a very clear point of weakness on Colorado. If you prefer "filling a hole" I can use that term.
6) So there are question marks about who can fill the hole. Clarke leads the AHL in 5v5 goals over the last 2 years. Not a guy who needs PP time. He is another option to fill that hole, and probably better than the other available options next year. And he is not being priced as an expensive piece.
7) Conjecture based on common sense. If teams really wanted Colton, he would have cost more than 37th overall. Especially since it wasn't a scenario where Colorado offered a piece of need (every team has picks), or a prospect they really wanted (since the trade occurred before the draft). Common sense dictates that teams did not want to pay more than 37th overall for Ross Colton. So then the question is what would have meaningfully changed their view.

1. We'll have to agree to disagree because I think you're overvaluing them.
2. There is no being disingenuous. The Avs can simply look to move whoever gives them the best return. I'd still say that's likely Girard. Fans like to win trades and it's a mindset I try (and often fail) to stay out of. I don't believe GMs think in terms of 'winning' trades. They think about getting the best deal they can to help their team. If NJ lowball offers for Colton and (just as an example) say Pittsburgh makes a good offer for Girard, they can take the good offer. In this instance NJ are chasing the player. It really is that simple.
3. I'll re-iterate that it wasn't to do with cap space it was to do with the expansion draft and they got fair value for Graves. The Saad trade was for a guy they weren't going to sign at the price he was going to take to sign. That's cap management, not a cap crunch. Trading a piece you aren't prepared to sign at a particular price for a piece you hope will help win a cup is standard practice.
4. Again would have to agree to disagree. Colton has certainly not regresssed. I would say improved, and the analytics for the most part support that he is stable at least.
5. There is no manipulating the word need. As you've just stated we don't NEED Bahl. We can replace the 3LD cheaply, easily and effectively so it's more to say he has no major value to us in a trade.
6. There are always question marks. JD might sign a team friendly deal to return to play with MacK for all we know. But the Avs have options internally and to state that they don't IS being disingenuous.
7. As I stated it's conjecture and it's not necessarily 'common sense'. Maybe the Avs were the only team to enquire. We don't know how many did or how many GMs might be kicking themselves that they didn't. What would have meaningfully changed their view is the valuation that we disagree on vis a vis rights and term and regression/stability/improvement. Personally you don't value him high enough to pay what it would take and that's ok. Personally I value him more than you're willing to pay and that's ok too. That's why I say the Avs decline.

I remember Lightning fans saying the exact same stuff about what Ross Colton would fetch in a trade this time last year.

Teams get discounts on higher cap hit guys in the offseason (It's how the Avs got colton at the price they did).

When there are a boatload of UFAs that can be available for free, paying money AND assets for a player becomes less appealing. It is the reality we see every year. Colton, Girard, etc market would probably heat up after the 1st wave of free agents for teams who miss out on their guys. Unfortunately, by that point, Colton's NTC will have kicked in

They were probably all hoping and praying to get some of the ridiculous return back that they paid for Jeannot lol.

Girard is the obvious candidate in many ways for the Avs to move but the feeling, somehow, is always there that if the Avs were going to move him then they'd have done it by now. I think with Behrens & Malinski being similar style of players and Behrens now being signed and a lefty (plus others in the system) going forward he may now be the one. Whether the PAP time has affected his value or not (rightly or wrongly) I'm not sure but he still likely gets the Avs the best return. Manson there is no replacement in the system for and they'd be paying out heftily for a similar guy to replace him. Lehky and Val I simply can't see being moved and Colton arguably makes the biggest hole that they've recently filled (with the obvious assumption that Mitts is re-signed and if he isn't then Colton's value to the Avs simply goes up). There are potentially cheaper guys who could fill it though they'd effectively be paying out whatever return they got for him to acquire a replacement.

What returns are you looking for for the following:

Colton:
Girard:
Manson:
Georgiev:
Any other potential cap casualties:

That would get you to move them.

Put it in terms of 1 pick. For example Colton: 25th overall if that’s how you value him.

And then tell me what specifically the Avs are looking for, because if it’s not cost controlled 3LD and cost controlled offensive minded forwards idk what it is.

Just looking for how you view it

Well it appears the cap problem is solved

Remembering these are all just how I personally view them, not necessarily how other Avs fans or the Avs management do lol. I've also looked at them principally 'in a vacuum' as I appreciate that if the Avs made wholesale changes then how much cap space there would be to alter in different positions changes. Basically considered the idea of the one contract the Avs will simply have to move assuming Landy returns. I realise if the Avs moved Manson AND Girard for example and somehow acquired two other hypothetical cheaper D then trading Georgie and acquiring a more expensive G option could be possible.

Colton - I don't believe the Avs move him bar a significant(?) overpay, i.e. what they paid for him plus a piece they highly value (or the value of the trade combines as such), and that piece is probably the part that's up for debate, the overpay and what it is, how significant it is, and I think where you and I probably differ in our valuations.

Girard - Hronek trade framework or thereabouts (plus/minus - debatable, whether value has taken a hit from PAP time for example). Probably the easiest to value in that sense with a recent trade of a similar standard D and also with the Avs trade of Newhook to MTL in mind (no question Girard is more valuable than Newhook and Newhook returned a late first and early second). Mid 1st plus mid 2nd with a 4th going back was the Hronek deal. I'd imagine if we're talking purely with NJ in mind then it would be based around 2025 picks for a number of reasons. From the Avs point of view it would suit as they have no 2025 high end picks. From NJ's PoV it would be expected to be lower than this year's pick I would think? Can't see them having as bad a year next year as this year was kind of a perfect storm of things going pear-shaped and they still stayed relatively competitive. Trade is also more likely to be made after this year's draft anyway (were it to happen) and also not sure if the 2025 draft is expected to be better or worse but I don't think from what I've read that '25 is expected to be anything 'special'.

Manson - Don't believe the Avs would get enough value in a trade to move him versus what he gives to the team (which they can't replace easily), and they have no other D (even in the system bar counting perhaps Middleton who is a lefty and won't ever be an NHL regular I wouldn't think) who are similar. He is however also probably the one to move IF you're going to take a pure loss to gain cap space due to age etc, and the loss would be more palatable in that sense. Avs could maybe make a move for a big defensive D but with a little less nasty to replace him but the nastiness is a big part of what the Avs need there. Got to at least have some imo even nowadays.

Georgiev - Again wouldn't get value for him (even with all the wins this year, he hasn't been in great form as most well know) and would have to replace him with someone who likely costs more. Not really a move the Avs can make that makes a huge amount of sense in goal that I can see. Almost any change would either be a pretty big gamble or else a guy they really can't afford. Avs likely stand pat in goal and hope he bounces back.

The only other guys that I could see potentially being moved are:

a) Wood - who I honestly have no idea how to value atm. I think he has more value to the Avs than he gets in a trade.
b) O'Connor - Similar to the above. For what he delivers so cheaply he wouldn't get value in a trade and it would take an overpay to move him imo. Maybe if they don't think they can re-sign him he's potentially on the block however.

And as outside bets:

c) Lehkonen - Whopping overpay to get him and risk upsetting Rantanen and Bednar simply loves Lehky.
d) Nichushkin - Value again may have taken a hit from the PAP time but just can't see him being moved bar, again, a whopping overpay.

Weeeelll sheeeet! It would appear so!

Obviously can discount that 'd)' lol.

Been good chat with you as always regardless of whether or not it's all moot. Even when we disagree!

You make a lot of good points very often. I tend to speak in a binary of 2 scenarios

1: player is on market, value is so and so (every value I propose in general tends to assume that a player will be on the market for whatever reason)
2: player isn't on market, no offers will be made

Which comes off weird to a number of fanbases for players who are not currently on the market.

See (Tkachuk, Brady where I say "Tkachuk should never be traded, but if he demands a trade here are *insert comps*")

And I'm sure the same applies with Colton. My mind goes to the easy comp of Colton being traded 1 year ago, and so if he was actively on the market he would return approximately that.

But of course, as of today, and now with the news, he is not on the market.

We could go on forever I'm sure and you're certainly a guy I could have a lengthy hockey debate with over a beer were I that side of the pond and tbh I probably tend to go too much into convoluted scenarios on occasion (sometimes simplified, with no disrespect meant in that, in a binary fashion may be better or at any rate less of a headache lol) but I like to 'try' to think in that way as the reality IS more complex than we 'mere fans' can ever know. It makes for good debate however and I have to say my respect for the NJ fan base only ever increases on here. Always civil, even if occasionally heated, debate and had some of the most fun chat and debate with yourself and others in threads on here.

The nuance 100% comes a lot easier when it comes to players on your own team. Just from watching every game and keeping up with everything.

Much more difficult to come up with for other teams, so when possible I try to avoid it to simplify. And I try my best (although I can be stubborn) to take into account that insight and nuance when it's explained to me by those fanbases