promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted
Pat asked in SportsHockey · 9 years ago

Did the Avalanche get fleeced on the Varlamov trade?

It seems like everybody is ragging on that trade. Even Caps GM George McPhee essentially admitted that he fleeced the Avs.

HOWEVER, by checking out Avs blogs and forums, it seems like those fans are happy with what went down. They think that they got good value for that trade. They also have been yelling at me and calling me a whiner for complaining about what I see as a lopsided trade.

So from impartial fans, who won that trade and was it even close? I feel like the Caps won it by a landslide but that's just me. Of course all the Avs fans who yelled at me also still think they won the Stewart-Shattenkirk for Eric Johnson trade as well.

Am I right or are they? Opinions are appreciated. Thanks!

9 Answers

Relevance
  • Favorite Answer

    They got bent over twice.

    They could have offer sheeted Varlamov for the dollar amount he signed for and given up less than they did.

    The guys from Mile High Hockey were livid about the Liles trade (a 2012 2nd round pick that was the bonus kicker on the Kaberle trade) so that's two.

    Varlamov was gone. That was abundantly clear.

    The kicker is this- they're sold on Varlamov and yet they signed Giguere as well.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    I know you want impartial fans, but I'm an Avs fan who can give impartial opinions.

    Caps won this trade at face value. Varly, while a good goalie, hasn't played more than 30 games in a year and that's a risk to give up two picks for him. Another thing I'm worried about is how happy he is. He was planning in playing in the KHL for more money, and we're paying him less than $3 million. Our last unhappy goalie was Craig Anderson, and the difference in how he played when he was happy and unhappy with us couldn't be less different than black and white.

    I will defend Greg Sherman, however, by saying he didn't have much of a choice. Giguere's days as a starter are done. A lot of other goalies had already been signed (I'd been looking at Mike Smith in particular, but he went to Phoenix). And before you say Vokoun, the guy's 34 and he wants to win. The Avs are looking at a long-term approach. Vokoun would not have signed with us. Still, I would've preferred Sherman giving those two picks up for Neuvirth. I don't know if the Caps would've rolled with that, though.

    I always have an idea of who will win the trade at face value, but the jury's out. Caps got the better value, but if next year's draft class is weak and Varly ends up playing over half the season and doing well (half the season's a start, anyway), then face value won't pan out.

    Edit: Oh, just a word on the offer sheet... the Caps would have let him walk. They didn't qualify him so an offer sheet wouldn't have been possible. He would've been a UFA and would've gone to the KHL to play for upwards of $5 million a year.

    Edit #2: Oh, just a thought... perhaps we're super excited about Varly because we're comparing him to a Craig Anderson who didn't care, a career backup in Peter Budaj, and Brian Elliott, who needs no introduction or explanation. Again, just a thought.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    If Varlamov can stay healthy, than it's a fair deal. He is a good goalie with a lot of potential. However, after the Avs took Giguere from free agency, trading a first and second round draft pick for Varlamov seems unnecessary. Capitals fans should be happy with the trade because they already had another starting goalie plus they received valuable draft picks, and Colorado should be happy with the trade because they needed a good, young starting goalie. In the end, both teams feel like they won the trade.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    I'm a Sharks fan so I'm not biased.

    It's hard to say who won the trade yet, it depends on many factors. If you manage to sign Varlamov and he's plays to the potential he seems to have you might be the winners, but if he runs off the the KHL you lose BIG TIME.

    But also if you end up in the playoffs next year or close and don't get that high a draft pick, the to picks Washington got, might not turn into any special players, but if you end last and Washington get's the first pick of the draft, then it'll be a little like when Boston got Seguin last season.

    So I don't really think anyone has been fleeced in that trade yet....we'll just have to wait and see

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 9 years ago

    Hi

    Lioncross sums up my view nicely.

    Yes there is a risk, but there is a chance at a very big reward. I have seen potential in Varlamov to be a very special goalie. Going into this next season the Avs had one huge whole to fill in their line up, and personally I think they went after the best option. As it was said he would have left for the KHL, but because of there now being an offer made, that is not an option. As a young goalie he has to realize that if he pulls an Anderson he is only going to hurt himself as the Avs can bury him on a bench in the AHL for the next three years and then he can try and get a job in Russia. JS claims he still has it in him to be a starting goalie in the NHL, if that is the case he is cheap insurance and motivation to get the most out of Varlamov, who preformed very well in Washington in the same situation.

    I look at Colorado's current line up and I personally think it looks about the best I have seen it in 5 years and it is a very cheap line up. If they play up to potential, that first round draft pick will not be a huge issue. The division they play in has one strong team, the other three are either over the hill or developing, this should help them take number two in the division. They may even be buyers come February.

    Another comment on Varlamov, I trust the D in Colorado to not hang him out to dry as much as the D in Washington would, again a significant factor in future performance. I also have a feeling he was told if he wants to be a 5 million dollar goalie in the NHL to go out and prove it and the money is there.

    Thank You

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Andrew
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    I'm an Avs fan and a Caps fan, so the bias cancels out (represent both Conferences, ya know).

    Anyways, I think it's a bad deal for the Avs. They gave way more than they needed to for a goalie of his caliber. Sure, he may turn out to be a great starter in Denver, but that wouldn't justify the deal; I can't see why the Caps would decline just one of the draft picks for a guy that's running to the KHL anyways.

    With all the cap space they have, signing Vokoun still seemed like the better move. Still wish they hadn't traded Anderson, though; 2010 playoffs got forgotten quickly (see: Halak, Niemi).

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    As a Caps fan and from my biased, because I say so opinion. Y'all got snowed! Washington definitely made out like bandits on this deal. Not only did we get rid of a player that was about to go to the KHL (where we would've gotten nothing for him), we got two high up draft picks! not bad at all for us. He's an unproven, but potentially good goalie. I wish him the best of luck. Unless he's playing the Caps :)

    Source(s): ROCK THE RED!!!(in October!)
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    Hello.

    For a team that finished where it did last year, you got fleeced. You gave up a first and second for a goalie who played in a very offensive system and who was threatening to go to Russia. Washington would have let him because they have Neuvirth and Holtby. So if Varlamov isn't miraculous and you finish bottom 5 you are giving up a potential superstar for an average goalie.

    In addition, if you would have offered him that contract in an offersheet the compensation would have only been a 2nd rounder o_O

    In conclusion, you got fleeced.

    Sincerely, Justin Vaughan

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • soria
    Lv 4
    3 years ago

    certainly. that's yet another tax-sucking sham foisted upon us less than the guise of "sense-sturdy" hippie flashback, unworkable nonsense. The Pilgrims tried socialism & had to be saved with the help of the close by individuals, and then taught the thanks to live to inform the tale by skill of man or woman production & commerce. 1/2 nonetheless died. If no longer for the close by American help, all might want to have. we will be 0.33-international in one day, and that is the plan. imagine the authorities will guard you? What 0.33-international u . s . has wonderful social classes? ... i will wait ... organisation (I recommend some thing of the industries) will bypass to the position this nonsense would not exist, then what? ... i will wait ... in this u . s . the real 10% earn 40 4% of the wealth & pay sixty 8% of the tax. the real 25% pay 80 5% of the tax. the bottom 50% earn 13% of the wealth & pay 3% of the tax. this is a flat tax, which will outcome everybody both. the large men can manage to pay for it, are you able to? look on the numbers above. nonetheless imagine the same for everybody is sturdy? if so, your days of having deep wallet and short fingers are over. i'll't have self assurance everybody is this uninformed ... and performance a lot spite for the prosperous ... and one of those lust for lost revenge, that they could screw themselves. un f-ing accessible.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.