Friedman: Avs interested in Nick Hjalmarsson

[OtherThingsILike]

The discussion occurred because it was asserted that the Avs underachieved, and when it was pointed out that injuries played a large part in that, it was then asserted that championship teams overcome injuries all the time. The 2017 Penguins didn't lose both their starter and their backup, so I struggle to understand how "common sense" agrees with the baseless claim that they were somehow "more injured".

Because common sense says that the impact of being without Letang for the entire playoffs > the impact of being without both Grubauer and Francouz for three games.

 

[Avaholic29]

The discussion occurred because it was asserted that the 2020 Avalanche were too injured to win. The 2017 Penguins were cited as a team that overcame injuries in order to win. The disagreement was whether or not the 2017 Penguins had more significant injuries than the 2020 Avalanche. Common sense agrees with the idea that the 2017 Penguins were more injured. You'll need to do better than that.

Edit: Alternatively, you could say that your opinion is that the 2020 Avalanche were more injured, we could say the 2017 Penguins were more injured in our opinion, and we could simply agree to disagree. I was just wondering if you had something more than just your opinion as your reason for believing so.

My opinion was based off your response that it isn’t proven that missing key players and being down to your third goalies doesn’t indicate difficulty in winning. I think that is absurd. Being without one player does not compare to being without two goalies, top PK dman, two Top PK forwards and one pp2 forward, top LW and captain for game 7. The PK was drastically affected without Johnson, Calvert, donskoi and grubauer. Anyone with half a brain thought the avs take that series with AVERAGE goaltending let alone having a handful of core players in the lineup.

 

[OtherThingsILike]

My opinion was based off your response that it isn’t proven that missing key players and being down to your third goalies doesn’t indicate difficulty in winning. I think that is absurd. Being without one player does not compare to being without two goalies, top PK dman, two Top PK forwards and one pp2 forward, top LW and captain for game 7. The PK was drastically affected without Johnson, Calvert, donskoi and grubauer. Anyone with half a brain thought the avs take that series with AVERAGE goaltending let alone having a handful of core players in the lineup.

The 2017 Penguins were without more than one player throughout the entire playoffs. Letang was just the example given because he was absent for the whole thing, whereas the other players just missed some games.

Edit: Also, my understanding was that everyone thought the Avs' defensive play that cost them the series, not the goaltending. Of course, I haven't taken a survey, that was just the gist from the comments I saw.

 

[BKarchitect]

The Avs were seriously hampered by their injuries, more so than most teams in the playoffs have experienced. Only a dolt would argue otherwise. Grubs was terrific this year and there’s little evidence to suggest he can’t be the answer in goal especially given his relatively young age for a netminder and the volatility of the position in general. And for THE critical game of the season literally a quarter of the first team was out including the captain and an incredible amount of defensive ability.

The Avs are still an inexperienced team on the up - to suggest this performance was under achieving given the circumstances is idiotic.

Does Sakic have work to do? For sure. Were they “ready to win” against all odds this year? Nope. Would a guy like Hammer at a cheap price and with other defenders moved out help? Sure I think so. But it’s certainly not panic time in Denver and Sakic certainly doesn’t have to rush out for “fixes” by putting his “balls on the table”. I think Sakic will do what he has done - carefully and patiently consider moves to improve the team. There is definitely a window, he’s definitely going to need to be proactive. But let’s skip the hyperbole nonsense please...

 

[Avaholic29]

The 2017 Penguins were without more than one player throughout the entire playoffs. Letang was just the example given because he was absent for the whole thing, whereas the other players just missed some games.

Edit: Also, my understanding was that everyone thought the Avs' defensive play that cost them the series, not the goaltending. Of course, I haven't taken a survey, that was just the gist from the comments I saw.

The defending wasn’t great but the scoring chances dallas capitalized on at 5 on 5 were very stoppable chances. The PK being without 3/4 guys and a starting goalie is what really killed us down the stretch, lost the special teams battle.

 

[PAZ]

He came out in February prior to the deadline and said he wanted a depth goalie and they were scouting PIT like every game from Jan to Feb.

And yes, I don’t think he is going to come out after an emotional loss and bury Grubs or Francouz.

You do realize what a depth goalie means, right?

If Sakic was serious about getting a better than a 3rd stringer he would've paid more for Lehner, Miller, etc. It was clear he was happy with the roster and simply wanted some depth because our team was decimated by injuries at the TDL, which is why he only spent a 4th and a AHL defenseman to shore up temporary positions of need. Considering we went out and got Namestnikov, my guess is that he was looking at depth players like Kahun just to shore up the team until the playoffs (before Covid hit).

You forget that heading into the playoffs we had Rantanen, Burakovsky, Kadri, Grubuaer, Calvert, Wilson, Mackinnon, Johnson, and Makar all injured or playing injured. No GM predicted Covid, so Sakic was expecting to go into the playoffs with either an injured or playing injured #1C, #1 RW, #2 LW, #2C, #1G, #1D, #3D, their best bottom 6 player, and the ghost of Wilson. Would've made no sense to go all-in this year.

 

[Gurglesons]

You do realize what a depth goalie means, right?

If Sakic was serious about getting a better than a 3rd stringer he would've paid more for Lehner, Miller, etc. It was clear he was happy with the roster and simply wanted some depth because our team was decimated by injuries at the TDL, which is why he only spent a 4th and a AHL defenseman to shore up temporary positions of need. Considering we went out and got Namestnikov, my guess is that he was looking at depth players like Kahun just to shore up the team until the playoffs (before Covid hit).

You forget that heading into the playoffs we had Rantanen, Burakovsky, Kadri, Grubuaer, Calvert, Wilson, Mackinnon, and Makar all injured or playing injured. No GM predicted Covid, so Sakic was expecting to go into the playoffs with either an injured or playing injured #1C, #1 RW, #2 LW, #2C, #1G, #1D, their best bottom 6 player, and the ghost of Wilson. Would've made no sense to go all-in this year.

Kahun wasn’t on the market until Rutherford said he wanted Sheary tho.

The last statement is bizarre.

 

[PAZ]

Kahun wasn’t on the market until Rutherford said he wanted Sheary tho.

The last statement is bizarre.

Bizaare because... it's true?

 

[Gurglesons]

Bizaare because... it's true?

No team with the Avs players is writing a year off.

 

[PAZ]

No team with the Avs players is writing a year off.

When there's that many injuries there it doesn't make sense to go all-in. There would've been a decent chance we would've been bounced in the 1st round with all the injuries. This was our line-up the last game before Covid:

Landeskog - Compher - Namestnikov
Nishushkin - Jost - Donskoi
Kaut - Bellemare - Nieto
Barberio - Kamenev - O'Connor

Graves - Makar*
Girard - EJ*
Cole - Zadorov

Francouz
Hutchinson

* = playing injured

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Because common sense says that the impact of being without Letang for the entire playoffs > the impact of being without both Grubauer and Francouz for three games.

The fact that the Penguins won the Cup without Letang, and there isn't a single example of a team winning while losing their starting and backup goalie, would indicate that your "common sense" is probably wrong.

 

[OtherThingsILike]

The fact that the Penguins won the Cup without Letang, and there isn't a single example of a team winning while losing their starting and backup goalie, would indicate that your "common sense" is probably wrong.

No, it would indicate that a team losing both their starting and backup goalie is probably much more rare than a team losing its 1D.

 

[Richard88]

You do realize what a depth goalie means, right?

If Sakic was serious about getting a better than a 3rd stringer he would've paid more for Lehner, Miller, etc. It was clear he was happy with the roster and simply wanted some depth because our team was decimated by injuries at the TDL, which is why he only spent a 4th and a AHL defenseman to shore up temporary positions of need. Considering we went out and got Namestnikov, my guess is that he was looking at depth players like Kahun just to shore up the team until the playoffs (before Covid hit).

You forget that heading into the playoffs we had Rantanen, Burakovsky, Kadri, Grubuaer, Calvert, Wilson, Mackinnon, Johnson, and Makar all injured or playing injured. No GM predicted Covid, so Sakic was expecting to go into the playoffs with either an injured or playing injured #1C, #1 RW, #2 LW, #2C, #1G, #1D, #3D, their best bottom 6 player, and the ghost of Wilson. Would've made no sense to go all-in this year.

How many teams in the league have a 3rd string goalie in the playoffs as good as Lehner, Miller, etc? Rangers would be the exception but that's a bit of an excepional circumstance due to them having a generation veteran and two very young guys who've broken in fast.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Sakic did exactly what he planned to do at the deadline. He got a 3rd string goalie like he said he was going to. Grubauer and Francouz were both signed to one way NHL deals for a year beyond this one and they both had phenomenal numbers. Nobody expected both to get nailed with injuries.

Hindsight is great. And I’m sure if Sakic knew both Francouz and Grubauer would get hurt in the August playoffs he would have made a play for a guy like Lehner. However that’s just bad luck and nobody would have predicted that in February.

Also for those saying the Avs are wasting away prime years, do you all realize that this season was the first season since 2014 that Colorado was actually expected to make the playoffs? They snuck in the last spot in both 18 and 19 but at the beginning of those seasons most projections had them on the outside. I realize contention windows are short and the Avs will have some contracts making things tight in a few years but this season certainly wasn’t a waste or a failure. They were an OT goal away from the conference finals without their starting goalie, backup goalie, captain and top line LW’er and a RHD who happened to be leading the team in playoff ice time at the time of his injury. It sucks that they didn’t go any further but that’s a lot of sheer bad luck.

 

[SoulDynasty]

I don't understand the stupidity in this thread. Is it just COVID boredom trolling? Or just complete insanity?

Losing your top 2 goalies in the playoffs would kill 99% of any playoff team in any year (past, present, future). Arguing this point is just lunacy to me.

Unlike other Avs' fans, I do believe Sakic should upgrade our goalie situation. Trade Francouz for a Lehner-type goalie, and run with two strong number 1 goalies throughout the season and playoffs.

 

[Esq]

Hjalms was one of my favorite Hawks on the cup teams. How much has his play fallen off in the last few years?

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

No, it would indicate that a team losing both their starting and backup goalie is probably much more rare than a team losing its 1D.

Or, that it's a lot easier to make up for losing 1 of 6 defenseman, than losing 1 of 1 goalies, twice. With the margins being so tight in the playoffs, just one bad play can be the difference in a game. It's not hard to shelter your 7D a bit, play him maybe 15 minutes per game, and put more of the workload on your 5 remaining top 6 defensemen. How exactly do you shelter a goalie who is on the ice for all 60 minutes?

And, since it's so rare, let's open up the scope a bit. How many teams have lost both their starter and backup to injury for a significant number of games in the regular season and still made the playoffs? 2014-15 Ottawa with Hammond's crazy 20+ games run, and who else?

 

[57special]

1970 Montreal Canadiens went to their 3rd string goalie for their Cup run. He did play 6 regular season games, but the majority of the regular season games were played by Rogie Vachon and Phil Myre.

 

[OtherThingsILike]

Or, that it's a lot easier to make up for losing 1 of 6 defenseman, than losing 1 of 1 goalies, twice. With the margins being so tight in the playoffs, just one bad play can be the difference in a game. It's not hard to shelter your 7D a bit, play him maybe 15 minutes per game, and put more of the workload on your 5 remaining top 6 defensemen. How exactly do you shelter a goalie who is on the ice for all 60 minutes?

And, since it's so rare, let's open up the scope a bit. How many teams have lost both their starter and backup to injury for a significant number of games in the regular season and still made the playoffs? 2014-15 Ottawa with Hammond's crazy 20+ games run, and who else?

Off the top of my head, Vegas in 2017-18 comes to mind. Fleury and Subban both missed nearly a month of games. Fleury himself was gone for nearly two months.

 

[rt]

Hjalms was one of my favorite Hawks on the cup teams. How much has his play fallen off in the last few years?

He’s been excellent when healthy for Arizona until the bubble. He wasn’t good in the bubble. Small sample, but a little worrying.

 

[rt]

Jost for Hjarmalson?

This is interesting, I think. Given how low Hjalmarsson’s actual salary is, I wonder if AZ would retain in order to get Colorado to add to this (or if Colorado is even interested).

 

[COHawk]

Byram-Hjalmarsson on the third pairing sounds pretty interesting.

I just wish broadcasters wouldn't butcher Hjalmarsson's name so badly.

"Jarl-Muh-Sun"

It has definitely always annoyed me.

 

[John Mandalorian]

I can see this being Cole (1 yr at 4.25) for Hjalmarsson (1 yr at 5.xx).

It seems like the Coyotes are cash strapped and heading into a rebuild. Any scenario involving a trade for a comparable player and comparable term that’s cheaper seems realistic at this point.

 

[John Mandalorian]

"Jarl-Muh-Sun"

It has definitely always annoyed me.

Jönköping and Strålman might really get under your skin then.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

I can see this being Cole (1 yr at 4.25) for Hjalmarsson (1 yr at 5.xx).

It seems like the Coyotes are cash strapped and heading into a rebuild. Any scenario involving a trade for a comparable player and comparable term that’s cheaper seems realistic at this point.

Hammer is owed just 2M in actual cash right now while Cole is owed 3 so that ain’t it.