Mailbag
Avalanche Mailbag 2.0: Necas’ Next Contract, Trade Value, and Bottom-Six Depth Uncertainty
Here’s the second part of the post-July 1 CHN Avalanche mailbag. You can use the link below to see the first half that was posted yesterday.
Thanks again to everyone who submitted a question!
Read More: Avalanche Mailbag 1.0: Stanley Cup Window, Offseason vs Mid-Season Trades, and the Landeskog Effect
Question from Taro Tsujimoto
Is there any chance the Avs would let Martin Necas play out the end of his contract? It is the “not letting them go for nothing” train of thought that had us cut ties with Mikko Rantanen. Why not ride it out with players who have every incentive to play well for their next contract? Do teams ever do this?
Aarif’s Response
It happens pretty often, but I just don’t think Necas is the guy to do that with. Rantanen was. That’s what got them into this entire mess (and a first round exit) in the first place.
I just think Necas is a great player that you can’t afford to let make nearly as much money as a superstar caliber player like Rantanen or Mitch Marner in Vegas. If you can lock up Necas now for 5-to-8 years at around $9.5 million, you do it. But if you can’t, the thought of him putting up 95 points with MacKinnon then asking for $11 million+ is scary. You should’ve just kept Rantanen at that point.
I really have no idea how this one ends or what they’re thinking. Maybe we all wake up to news of an extension in the coming weeks and this could all be put to rest.
Question from Nik S
What is your sense on the Necas contract situation? Seems inevitable they trade him IMO if they traded Rantanen due to a gap in contract talks they won’t hesitate to move a guy like Necas.
Aarif’s Response
This is something I keep going back to. If you were worried about Rantanen’s ask, then what changes with Necas? I think if it extends into the season, it can’t be for longer than a month before you put a hard deadline on Necas signing or exploring a trade. It’s a tough situation either way.
Maybe the best way to find a middle ground is to only give him four or five years so he can cash in on one more deal around 31-32 years old. Would anyone be upset with Necas for one year at $6.5 million followed by four years at $9.25 million, for example?
Question from Brett
You mention, Aarif, that you expect several roster moves while remaining very vague. If not for the uncertainty surrounding Necas, the team is practically already complete. Signing a third- or fourth-line forward or a left-handed third-pair defenseman seems plausible, but unless Necas is traded, there likely won’t be major movement from the Avalanche between now and the start of the season. I invite you to take a look around the NHL, most teams already have 95% of their roster set.
Aarif’s Response
You’re not wrong. But, what you’re missing here is that any depth move they make, to me, is notable. Avs aren’t looking for a top-six forward or a starting goalie. They have their 2C locked up. Right now, Kiviranta re-signing, or an addition like Matt Grzelcyk on the blueline, and Victor Olofsson and Joe Veleno up front, are notable moves. (Those are just examples, not guys I think they’re getting.)
Question from Justin Houde
About Burns and the structure of his contract. Should he meet all the requirements to cash in his 3M in games played bonuses, how does that is managed cap wise this year and/or next year?
Also, with the Avs having now four NHL-caliber right shot defensemen penciled for next year, could MacFarland have the plan of waiting way after the season starts to trade one of them (let’s say Malinksi or Manson) in order to get the best return out of that? Like, could extending Manson be part of that plan? Merci.
Aarif’s Response
Here’s the easiest way to explain Burns’ contract. If he hits $3 million in bonuses, and the Avalanche only have $1 million in cap space, the remaining $2 million will be deducted from next season’s cap. I wonder if they’ll try to use LTIR to have enough space for the entire bonus before the season concludes. We’ll see how it plays out.
As for the right shot thing, the Manson extension makes me think Malinski is more likely to be traded. But I genuinely don’t know what to think anymore. I thought the Burns signing meant Manson was gone, but then he re-signed. And I don’t think they did that to trade him. So, is Malinski’s time in Colorado coming to an end this year?
Or is Burns a one-year thing, and Makar, Manson, and Malinski remain the right side trio in future years? I’d rather Manson is on the third pair, but will that work in their salary structure at $3.95 million? We shall see.
Question from Quinn McMahon
If Ross Colton, Samuel Girard, and Necas were going to get moved, what are realistic expectations for what a return package would look like? Is there any world in which they are able to re-sign Necas and be able to build up the third line and bottom two pairings?
Aarif’s Response
Yes to the second part of your question. For the first part, I’m not even sure trading Colton makes sense right now anymore. That was always my suggestion if the Avs can get a Bowen Byram or Ivan Provorov on the second pair. Trade the expensive third-line winger to upgrade on your already expensive second pair defenseman.
I still feel like Girard should and will get traded but I’ve been wrong so many times before. It feels like every move they make on defense adds more questions than answers. Signing Malinski made it clear that they want to use him on the third pair. But then they also added Burns, which said to me that he’s on the second pair and Manson is expendable. But now they’ve signed Manson to an extension, so are one of these three guys going to shift to the left and all play? And if so, is Girard still on the second pair or relegated to third pair? And do they still want his (lack of) size on the blueline? It’s all very interesting to watch moving forward.
Question from Joe Cerwinske
Which AHL players do you think are most likely to get considerable playing time (or stick around full-time like Malinski did last year) in the NHL this season? Is it likely all of Ivan Ivan, Nikita Prishchepov, Taylor Makar, and Bardakov are vying for the same 1-2 roster spots in camp? Can Gavin Brindley be added to that group? How about Sean Behrens for the 3rd pairing?
Aarif’s Response
Yes to every single one of those names, including Brindley. Those are all the guys that I expect to get a look early. We’ve seen this before, with Conor Timmins and Justin Barron getting early-season games before they were eventually used as trade chips.
Last year was weird with all the injuries and Nichuhskin’s suspension to start. It felt more like Bednar was forced to dress so many young players that he didn’t yet trust. This time, he’ll get a chance to dip each of their toes into the deep end to see who sticks out and gets a longer look.
As for Behrens, yes, that includes him. I can see him being like Malinski was in 2023-24, where he gets an opportunity to shine but not in a full-time role. I do wonder how he’ll look in general coming off a lost season. Hopefully it doesn’t pull him back too much.