Proposal: 3 way trade between TOR COL ANA

[Northern Avs Fan]

[Please don't misinterpret my points, nothing will come of any discussion is you misrepresent my position like the one in bold. ]

I mean Tor has definitely thought that way for the past few years and Fla before that. If you could find an example of a successful team that is built that way I think there would be more strength to your claim, but in the current day results it is not what we see.

While I think that offensive dmen were GREATLY underrated for the better part of the past 20 years and that the league is now finally appropriately rating them, completely disregarding size is a massive over correction and also not correct. Going fully in either direction is incorrect.

The Avs tried the Makar and Girard pairings and if your hypothesis was correct then it would have stuck but it ended pretty quickly.

Modern day defense definitely has the correct focus on skating, skill and good transitional play but it is also about creating pairings that complement each other. Having a dman who can use their size to protect the net and win board battles along side a strong puck mover is still the predominant model as there aren't any areas for the other team to exploit. Its also the reason why we see the actual pairings that we do.

Finally for clarity, in case you still truly have not understood the point that I have iterated on twice now. You said it would be a waste to have G and Makar on the same pairing because they are both so good at moving the puck, which I disagree with. If you had an entire team of Zads where you needed to spread out your PMD due to limited options I could agree with that, however as a whole EJ and Graves are both good puck movers themselves and thusly isn't an issue if they are paired with a dman who struggles in that area, nor require one themselves to not get trapped in their own zone on forechecks. So I disagree with your claim that puck moving ability is the main reason why the pairs are set up in the way that they are as you could have any combination of those 4 players and the transitional element of their game would not be an issue. However other elements of the lines defensive responsibility would, which is my claim.

I mean... isn’t it the Avalanche? Their two best/most important defenceman are sub 6’0.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

While I think the NHL is transitioning to a more transitional based game and are open, you still can't have an entire dline of small puck movers, just ask Tor. Its also the reason that G-Makar never became a full time thing. (Its also what makes Graves as valuable as he is, as he has that size and strength but also good transitional ability).

I'm not saying Colorado should play bad dmen, but size is still a very relevant factor for dmen when it comes to net front and board battles. Especially when you are already going to lose one of Graves and Zads, and both EJ and Cole are starting to get up there in years. It will definitely be an area of focus for the team heading forward.

Its possible that we might just disagree on this philosophy which I totally respect. Thats just my personal prediction. Any time a team has too many good players at one position one gets moved almost always, its why I was right in the previous Barrie conversations as well as before that when Col had too many good centers.

(Specifically with Timmins I don't think it will be right away has his ELC is very valuable but I think eventually he will be moved in the next 3ish years)

Who said anything about having an entire dline of small puck movers? Timmins is 6'2", 185 lbs and was voted (by the coaches) the best defensive defenseman in the OHL Western Conference 2 years ago. Byram is 6'1" and 194 as an 18 year old. I wouldn't characterize either of them as "small puck movers". I'd even struggle to describe Makar or Girard that way (Girard is small, but they are both more than just a puck mover). If we need bigger guys, we keep Graves and EJ for the next 3 years, and roll 3 defensive pairings for 18-22 minutes a night. There are also usually bigger defensive specialists on the UFA market most years that aren't too expensive.

 

[Meeqs]

I mean... isn’t it the Avalanche? Their two best/most important defenceman are sub 6’0.

I meant more like an entire unit, Avs overall are still one of the bigger groups.

Mostly in reference to when you said "The day of needing big lumbering defenders is over imo. What you need in today’s NHL is intelligence and skating."

For that to have weight we'd probably need some successful examples of dcore's primarily smaller puck movers.

 

[Meeqs]

Who said anything about having an entire dline of small puck movers? Timmins is 6'2", 185 lbs and was voted (by the coaches) the best defensive defenseman in the OHL Western Conference 2 years ago. Byram is 6'1" and 194 as an 18 year old. I wouldn't characterize either of them as "small puck movers". I'd even struggle to describe Makar or Girard that way (Girard is small, but they are both more than just a puck mover). If we need bigger guys, we keep Graves and EJ for the next 3 years, and roll 3 defensive pairings for 18-22 minutes a night. There are also usually bigger defensive specialists on the UFA market most years that aren't too expensive.

Yeah I'm not worried about BB at all. Historically the Avs have liked and we have seen the most success when Girard is paired with a Dman with more size (I would definitely consider Girard as hella tiny) in both EJ and even at times Zads. I am interested to see how a pair of G/Timmins does and while I am not ruling it out right away, I also am not at all relying on it. Timmins greatest strengths is his intelligent transition game and offensive awareness but I don't at all see him as filling the shutdown role with heavy PK minutes like EJ has transitioned to.

UFA players usually come at a premium and the ones who are cheaper tend to be too limited for a top 4 role and the ones who can definitely run at above market value.

Whether or not Timmins can fill that role though I still see him being shipped out eventually, just for different reasons. Until that day comes he seems to be a perfect fit to carry a 3rd pair with a guy like Cole/Zads/ or Graves.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

I meant more like an entire unit, Avs overall are still one of the bigger groups.

Mostly in reference to when you said "The day of needing big lumbering defenders is over imo. What you need in today’s NHL is intelligence and skating."

For that to have weight we'd probably need some successful examples of dcore's primarily smaller puck movers.

If the Avs had three Makar’s and three Girard’s I’m sure they’d prefer that over how their defence is currently constructed.

I do like having a couple big guys on defence, but Zadorov’s play this season is a prime example of size not equating to being good defensively.

 

[Meeqs]

If the Avs had three Makar’s and three Girard’s I’m sure they’d prefer that over how their defence is currently constructed.

I do like having a couple big guys on defence, but Zadorov’s play this season is a prime example of size not equating to being good defensively.

1) you couldn't pay them
2) Even if you could you would still trade half of them because diminishing returns is a thing and there are a lot of roles that teams need.

Outside of having good players is good I don't think that is an accurate assessment. There is a seperation between overall skill and ability level and the actual player skillsets that teams look for.

As I said before if you can find me any examples of successful teams I think there is more weight to your claim but until that point I think your argument is flawed and more so how you would like a defense in NHL 20 than based on actual results.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

1) you couldn't pay them
2) Even if you could you would still trade half of them because diminishing returns is a thing and there are a lot of roles that teams need.

Outside of having good players is good I don't think that is an accurate assessment. There is a seperation between overall skill and ability level and the actual player skillsets that teams look for.

As I said before if you can find me any examples of successful teams I think there is more weight to your claim but until that point I think your argument is flawed and more so how you would like a defense in NHL 20 than based on actual results.

You don’t necessarily need size, you need small defenceman who are damn good. If a team had this defence I think they’d be a pretty special team. All sub 6’0 players.

Hughes - Makar
Girard - Fox
Spurgeon - Bear

 

[Meeqs]

You don’t necessarily need size, you need small defenceman who are damn good. If a team had this defence I think they’d be a pretty special team. All sub 6’0 players.

Hughes - Makar
Girard - Fox
Spurgeon - Bear

Right but putting together an unrealistic level of talented players doesn't prove your point as its not realistic.

I think your best case for this would have been Tor over the past 3 years as thats exactly what they tried to do, but what we found is that it didn't work and everything since then has been looking for guys like Muzzin to compliment the PMD they do have.

I'm definitely open to this conversation and any points you can find but putting #1 dmen on your 3rd line isn't it. You will need to find points that doesn't over slot players in roles to overcompensate for the flaws that your method presents. Even more so I think you would need to find actual examples of teams who have built their rosters in the way you are suggesting. Otherwise its just a feeling you have that is completely unfounded or justified.

 

[DavidBL]

1) you couldn't pay them
2) Even if you could you would still trade half of them because diminishing returns is a thing and there are a lot of roles that teams need.

Outside of having good players is good I don't think that is an accurate assessment. There is a seperation between overall skill and ability level and the actual player skillsets that teams look for.

As I said before if you can find me any examples of successful teams I think there is more weight to your claim but until that point I think your argument is flawed and more so how you would like a defense in NHL 20 than based on actual results.

Have to say I agree with Meeqs. As a Ducks fan I have seen Fowler, Vatanen, Montour struggle with the more physical aspect of defending. Not to say any of these guys are exceptionally soft per say but they do best when they have a partner that makes up for their deficiencies. Its part of why Ducks fans love Manson and Gudbranson seems to have worked out. Why do we think Toronto is looking for a guy more like Manson than Barrie?

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

Right but putting together an unrealistic level of talented players doesn't prove your point as its not realistic.

I think your best case for this would have been Tor over the past 3 years as thats exactly what they tried to do, but what we found is that it didn't work and everything since then has been looking for guys like Muzzin to compliment the PMD they do have.

I'm definitely open to this conversation and any points you can find but putting #1 dmen on your 3rd line isn't it. You will need to find points that doesn't over slot players in roles to overcompensate for the flaws that your method presents. Even more so I think you would need to find actual examples of teams who have built their rosters in the way you are suggesting. Otherwise its just a feeling you have that is completely unfounded or justified.

It’s just unrealistic to ask for that. You’re not going to find hardly any defences with all small defenceman, or all big defenceman. Or a forward group with all small forwards, or all big forwards.

I think the Avs are the best example I can find you. Two sub 6’0 defenceman who are probably the 2nd and 4th, or 5th most important players on the team.

 

[Meeqs]

Have to say I agree with Meeqs. As a Ducks fan I have seen Fowler, Vatanen, Montour struggle with the more physical aspect of defending. Not to say any of these guys are exceptionally soft per say but they do best when they have a partner that makes up for their deficiencies. Its part of why Ducks fans love Manson and Gudbranson seems to have worked out. Why do we think Toronto is looking for a guy more like Manson than Barrie?

I think that he is mostly correct in terms of what aspects are currently the most valuable in the NHL atm. (Great article here on that exact thing: By the Numbers: Identifying the NHL's best puck-moving... )

Just that going to any extreme is rarely correct and he just overshot a correct take into a silly one. The NHL is always shifting and changing and the current iteration absolutely values skill, speed and transition very highly, but that doesn't mean that invalidates other facets of the game (I would actually argue the contrary) and that you can't really make such strong claims without having multiple realized real world examples that can demonstrate that while not being attributed to another variable.

As I mentioned above too, there have been NHL front offices that have believed in that same hypothesis, Tor the past few years and Fla durring the computer boy days. If he altered his argument as well you could find more compelling cases.

70% there, just gotta reel it back a bit.

 

[Meeqs]

It’s just unrealistic to ask for that. You’re not going to find hardly any defences with all small defenceman, or all big defenceman. Or a forward group with all small forwards, or all big forwards.

I think the Avs are the best example I can find you. Two sub 6’0 defenceman who are probably the 2nd and 4th, or 5th most important players on the team.

If its unrealistic to ask for supporting evidence for your claim, then your claim itself is unrealistic.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

If its unrealistic to ask for supporting evidence for your claim, then your claim itself is unrealistic.

What’s unrealistic is you inflating the importance of Erik Johnson and Ryan Graves. Those two are much more easily replaced than Makar and Girard. Take those two away and the Avs don’t make the playoffs.

 

[Mackinn on your girl]

What’s unrealistic is you inflating the importance of Erik Johnson and Ryan Graves. Those two are much more easily replaced than Makar and Girard. Take those two away and the Avs don’t make the playoffs.

I don't think anyone is saying that we should take away Makar and Girard. Size on defense still is important especially on battles down low in your own zone. I'm an Avalanche fan from Alberta and went to games 2 and 5 in Calgary last year. And although it didn't cost us, everytime Girard was in his own zone down low against Tkachuk, he lost that battle. Tkachuk would bump him back and then had as much time as he needed to make a play. I think that's the point thats trying to be made on the importance of size.
The future defence I would like to see is:
Graves Makar
Girard Johnson
Byram Timmins
I think having Byram and Timmins on the same pair would be fine as both are great at moving the puck and neither are horrible defensively. Obviously this may take a couple of years as they are both rookies and may not be ready so in the meantime we have Cole.

 

[Meeqs]

What’s unrealistic is you inflating the importance of Erik Johnson and Ryan Graves. Those two are much more easily replaced than Makar and Girard. Take those two away and the Avs don’t make the playoffs.

I don't think I have made a single claim that you have mentioned here. Always happy to continue this discussion but please go back and actually understand the points I am making first. Equally if you feel that there is something you have said that I have misunderstood I am always happy to get it clarified.

I stated your point was unrealistic because you are unable to find any actual examples that back up some of the claims I feel are inaccurate. However the points I am making you feel are unrealistic seem to stem from you simply misunderstanding what I am presenting.

Overall this post seems silly and non productive

 

[Meeqs]

I don't think anyone is saying that we should take away Makar and Girard. Size on defense still is important especially on battles down low in your own zone. I'm an Avalanche fan from Alberta and went to games 2 and 5 in Calgary last year. And although it didn't cost us, everytime Girard was in his own zone down low against Tkachuk, he lost that battle. Tkachuk would bump him back and then had as much time as he needed to make a play. I think that's the point thats trying to be made on the importance of size.
The future defence I would like to see is:
Graves Makar
Girard Johnson
Byram Timmins
I think having Byram and Timmins on the same pair would be fine as both are great at moving the puck and neither are horrible defensively. Obviously this may take a couple of years as they are both rookies and may not be ready so in the meantime we have Cole.

And then sadly for CGY, Zads smashed Tkachuk into oblivion and he disappeared from there. Zads did the same thing to E kane as well. Just targeted a player and dump trucked them out of the series.

At home the Avs were able to keep them away from those match ups to play to Makar and G's strength but couldn't on the road due to those reasons

 

[Mackinn on your girl]

And then sadly for CGY, Zads smashed Tkachuk into oblivion and he disappeared from there. Zads did the same thing to E kane as well. Just targeted a player and dump trucked them out of the series.

At home the Avs were able to keep them away from those match ups to play to Makar and G's strength but couldn't on the road due to those reasons

Completely agree with absolutely all of that. Was just pointing out the importance of having a bit of size. I think the positives for Girard and Makar far out way the size problem. It's the NHL, your team is going to get scored on and people are going to beat your defenceman. Its all just a matter of how often and the Avalanche seem to be in good shape going forward. Haven't been this excited about an Avalanche team for quite a few years now.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

And then sadly for CGY, Zads smashed Tkachuk into oblivion and he disappeared from there. Zads did the same thing to E kane as well. Just targeted a player and dump trucked them out of the series.

At home the Avs were able to keep them away from those match ups to play to Makar and G's strength but couldn't on the road due to those reasons

Zadorov sucks.

 

[Meeqs]

Zadorov sucks.

When you drastically oversimplify things to this point you are just flat out wrong.

Hockey is a nuanced game, and Zads as a player is elite in some aspects and struggles in others. How to evaluate hockey players as a whole, and what traits are given what weight over others is a constantly evolving debate with a lot of imperfect information. This makes its discussion a lot of fun.

I would encourage you to do better, because when you post "player x sucks" all you're really saying is "I dont have anything of value to contribute and am not worth listening to".

 

[Meeqs]

Completely agree with absolutely all of that. Was just pointing out the importance of having a bit of size. I think the positives for Girard and Makar far out way the size problem. It's the NHL, your team is going to get scored on and people are going to beat your defenceman. Its all just a matter of how often and the Avalanche seem to be in good shape going forward. Haven't been this excited about an Avalanche team for quite a few years now.

There is such a crazy range in the skillsets of dmen which makes the conversation about defensive construction so damned interesting and fun. It also allows for great teams to create pairs that greatly exceed their skill levels individually and can cause 2 great players to just not work. Compiled on with how much the landscape has changed over the past little while and its just flat out fun to talk about.

The Avs specifically have just an interesting blend of elite skill sets they make for an excellent example and case study.

 

[Mackinn on your girl]

Zadorov sucks.

Zadorov playing man to man defence is actually extremely good. When the coaching system forces him to play zone defence he tends to lose himself quite often. To me this seems like an adjustment the coaches could make but in all reality the team shouldn't have to change its system just because one defenceman is on the ice. I think Zadorov will be gone after this year but if he goes to a team that has a coach that plays a man to man system, look out. Also the massive hits (which admittedly fell off a cliff after he broke his jaw), I think Zadorov can be in the top 4 on another team.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

There is such a crazy range in the skillsets of dmen which makes the conversation about defensive construction so damned interesting and fun. It also allows for great teams to create pairs that greatly exceed their skill levels individually and can cause 2 great players to just not work. Compiled on with how much the landscape has changed over the past little while and its just flat out fun to talk about.

The Avs specifically have just an interesting blend of elite skill sets they make for an excellent example and case study.

I can be more specific, if you’d like. Like the poster mentioned above. Zadorov is poor in zone coverage which is primarily what is played at the NHL level. While he did register a lot of hits this year, the magnitude of those hits was not like years past.

He also provides nothing to the offence, or transition game.

 

[Meeqs]

Zadorov playing man to man defence is actually extremely good. When the coaching system forces him to play zone defence he tends to lose himself quite often. To me this seems like an adjustment the coaches could make but in all reality the team shouldn't have to change its system just because one defenceman is on the ice. I think Zadorov will be gone after this year but if he goes to a team that has a coach that plays a man to man system, look out. Also the massive hits (which admittedly fell off a cliff after he broke his jaw), I think Zadorov can be in the top 4 on another team.

He is such an interesting player, because he falls into a small group of guys, like a Maroon, that is FAR better in the post season where the reduced calls lets him take full advantage of his skill set than he is during the normal season. Like if you watch him over the year he is a dman who does some things well and has some holes, and as of now is a 3rd pairing guy who needs a partner to help with transition. However you get into the playoffs and all of a sudden you have a dman who can take any member of the opposing team out of the series by just shadowing him and physically shutting him down and that is a massive coaching tool.

As of now for a deep Avs team he does seem to be the odd man out as a luxury they no longer have the ability for, but as with a lot of guys who's main issue is consistency if he ever puts everything together whoever has him is never getting rid of him.

Just really such a rare and unique player and I'm not sure this era is the best fit for him but endlessly fascinating to watch and evaluate.

 

[Mackinn on your girl]

He is such an interesting player, because he falls into a small group of guys, like a Maroon, that is FAR better in the post season where the reduced calls lets him take full advantage of his skill set than he is during the normal season. Like if you watch him over the year he is a dman who does some things well and has some holes, and as of now is a 3rd pairing guy who needs a partner to help with transition. However you get into the playoffs and all of a sudden you have a dman who can take any member of the opposing team out of the series by just shadowing him and physically shutting him down and that is a massive coaching tool.

As of now for a deep Avs team he does seem to be the odd man out as a luxury they no longer have the ability for, but as with a lot of guys who's main issue is consistency if he ever puts everything together whoever has him is never getting rid of him.

Just really such a rare and unique player and I'm not sure this era is the best fit for him but endlessly fascinating to watch and evaluate.

I was always really hoping he would put it all together in an Avalanche jersey. I like his size and his grit but he is very inconsistent in the regular season. I agree that playoff hockey is more suited for him. He doesn't suck, he just needs the right opportunity with the right coach.

 

[Meeqs]

I was always really hoping he would put it all together in an Avalanche jersey. I like his size and his grit but he is very inconsistent in the regular season. I agree that playoff hockey is more suited for him. He doesn't suck, he just needs the right opportunity with the right coach.

The Avs as a team are so stacked I have always been incredibly fascinated seeing how smart GM's handle it. We have seen both WPG and NSH mess up similar good spots, so I will be interested to see if Sakic has learned from their mistakes and fairs better.

They are such a crazy fun team that I would really enjoy to see win a cup the next decade, maybe more. Gotta love what they are doing.