Confirmed Trade: [COL/BUF] Casey Mittelstadt for Bowen Byram

BKarchitect

Registered User
Oct 12, 2017
7,206
12,256
Kansas City, MO
I blame video games for the mass concept among fans that being on the PK and being “good defensively” are the same thing because video games rely on some random “defensive rating” to have the CPU determine deployment.

Being good defensively is a trait. Playing on the PK is usage and deployment, pure and simple. It depends on the coach, the PK concepts and heavily on the players usage and endurance and effectiveness in the other scenarios in hockey - even strength and power play.

Good defensive forwards are often able to PK but not all of a teams best defensive forwards feature on a PK. And sometimes PKers are simply specialists who are really good at that scenario. Tactically - defending on a PK is not the same as being sound defensively in open ice, even strength play.

It’s like a kick returner in football. You catch a ball and run with speed and avoid people. It sounds a lot like being a receiver. And a lot of the best receivers are or would be great at returning kicks. But a lot of them don’t. And sometimes a great kick returner can’t have the same effect as a receiver during regular play. The skill set (catching, speed, avoiding tackles) seems similar but tactically it’s entirely different. Running a full route tree is a lot harder than having one specific task.

Well, being defensively reliable as a forward during open play is a lot harder than just being on a PK because your job is to do a lot more than simply defend your zone and prevent the puck from going in. We’ve moved on from the ideas that “player X blocks 300 shots they must be awesome defensively”. All that means is when their team has the puck, they do squadoosh in helping break the puck out of their own zone and transition the puck up the ice. But…they may still be a good PKer because when you are short-handed, you are already behind the 8-ball in terms of the pressure being in your zone.

Incidentally, the most fun PKing player I’ve ever watched is a guy who during normal play was a one-dimensional sniper. Peter Bondra. Guy scored a ton of shorthanded goals and was actually a weapon out their on the PK because his puck instincts and explosive acceleration were a one-man breakaway waiting to happen - and teams up a man had to respect that and alter their functionality accordingly.

TLDR; Mittelstadt has turned into an extremely strong two-way player, and PK usage has very little relevance to this.
 

Chainshot

Give 'em Enough Rope
Sponsor
Feb 28, 2002
150,885
100,785
Tarnation
If he is that good defensively, why aren’t they using him on the PK?

Again, not saying he isn’t a solid player but a lot of the stats don’t back up what people are saying about him.

Five on five, he's an excellent defensive player. His back pressure and ability to strip pucks off sticks, quickly turn and get the play moving back onto the attack is one of his best features. He stick is extremely active in wall battles and he can lean on someone enough to get just a smidgeon of separation to get the puck away. He's not Datsyuk, but it's that sort of thing. He leverages a desire to get the puck back with his hands and passing to mine pucks and then get it to a teammate quickly, even in short areas. And there are few times that Casey's got an extra gear like he does when he's lost the puck - the guy wants it back and puts in the effort to get it back. That was evident in Buffalo, even if he was not playing up the lineup.

PKing ain't that.
 

PAZ

.
Jul 14, 2011
17,419
9,799
BC
Toews is the only one that truly took a discount. Even with Mack being the highest paid player in the league, I guess his might be considered one as well.

Makar got market rate and got his preferred term. Rantanen got market rate and Marner got overpaid. Landy had UFA offers and Avs matched the total AAV with the 8th year.

Nuke was considered overpaid by many on this board, same with Lehky.

Mitts will be looking at 6.25-6.75 mil imo, which is again fair for what he currently brings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GirardSpinorama

BKarchitect

Registered User
Oct 12, 2017
7,206
12,256
Kansas City, MO
Wonder if a 3-year type extension would work better for everybody?

CM takes a slight shave on a short term deal so he can hit free agency at that prime 28-year old age range, still at his peak, his reputation burnished by several years on a contender and the cap even higher for him to get that ultimate unrestricted free agency contract. I thing long-term, that would be more fruitful than him signing a 6 or 7 year deal now that takes him into his early 30’s before his next contract.

Meanwhile, it settles the Avs current window but takes a contract off the books when Makar will need his new deal. It would also give you the right amount of time to groom Cal Ritchie (if he’s the real deal) to eventually take over that role.
 

IWantSakicAsMyGM

Registered User
Oct 13, 2011
9,794
3,997
Colorado
Wonder if a 3-year type extension would work better for everybody?

CM takes a slight shave on a short term deal so he can hit free agency at that prime 28-year old age range, still at his peak, his reputation burnished by several years on a contender and the cap even higher for him to get that ultimate unrestricted free agency contract. I thing long-term, that would be more fruitful than him signing a 6 or 7 year deal now that takes him into his early 30’s before his next contract.

Meanwhile, it settles the Avs current window but takes a contract off the books when Makar will need his new deal. It would also give you the right amount of time to groom Cal Ritchie (if he’s the real deal) to eventually take over that role.

I can see the appeal for Mittelstadt, but I don't like it at all for the Avs.

A - the whole point of giving up Byram was to try to get a long term solution, not a 3 year stop gap. They shouldn't be looking to sign anything less than 5 years, in my opinion, and I wouldn't complain about 7 or 8 at the right cap hit.

B - Ritchie looks promising, but you don't count your chickens before they hatch. Much better to slide someone to wing (or make a hockey trade for something we need) if Ritchie is legit and ready in 2-3 years than be without a 2C if he's not.

And C - Colton, Lehk and Girard are already coming off the books when Makar needs a new deal, so the cap flexibility isn't much of a selling point for me.
 

IWantSakicAsMyGM

Registered User
Oct 13, 2011
9,794
3,997
Colorado
Toews is the only one that truly took a discount. Even with Mack being the highest paid player in the league, I guess his might be considered one as well.

Makar got market rate and got his preferred term. Rantanen got market rate and Marner got overpaid. Landy had UFA offers and Avs matched the total AAV with the 8th year.

Nuke was considered overpaid by many on this board, same with Lehky.

Mitts will be looking at 6.25-6.75 mil imo, which is again fair for what he currently brings.

Even with Toews, I'm not so sure it was that much of a discount when it was signed, even though it quickly became an amazing deal for the Avs. He was 26 years old, only had 116 NHL games on his resume, and was coming off a 68 game, 28 point 2nd season with the Islanders where he looked good, but not yet great. What was his case for a bigger pay day at that point?
 

GirardSpinorama

Registered User
Aug 20, 2004
21,202
9,918
Toews is the only one that truly took a discount. Even with Mack being the highest paid player in the league, I guess his might be considered one as well.

Makar got market rate and got his preferred term. Rantanen got market rate and Marner got overpaid. Landy had UFA offers and Avs matched the total AAV with the 8th year.

Nuke was considered overpaid by many on this board, same with Lehky.

Mitts will be looking at 6.25-6.75 mil imo, which is again fair for what he currently brings.
6.25 would be amazing. Kadri put up 90+ one year, I can see that from mitts if mack misses time. Just from eye test, mitts is as talented as Kadri.
 

PAZ

.
Jul 14, 2011
17,419
9,799
BC
Even with Toews, I'm not so sure it was that much of a discount when it was signed, even though it quickly became an amazing deal for the Avs. He was 26 years old, only had 116 NHL games on his resume, and was coming off a 68 game, 28 point 2nd season with the Islanders where he looked good, but not yet great. What was his case for a bigger pay day at that point?
It's his current deal that's a discount. 7 x $7.25 was a fairly decent discount, especially considering when he signed it. He left ~$8 mil on the table, which is fairly significant considering he only made ~$18 mil in career earnings before this deal.
 

Sergei Shirokov

Registered User
Jul 27, 2012
15,820
6,413
British Columbia
I blame video games for the mass concept among fans that being on the PK and being “good defensively” are the same thing because video games rely on some random “defensive rating” to have the CPU determine deployment.

Being good defensively is a trait. Playing on the PK is usage and deployment, pure and simple. It depends on the coach, the PK concepts and heavily on the players usage and endurance and effectiveness in the other scenarios in hockey - even strength and power play.

Good defensive forwards are often able to PK but not all of a teams best defensive forwards feature on a PK. And sometimes PKers are simply specialists who are really good at that scenario. Tactically - defending on a PK is not the same as being sound defensively in open ice, even strength play.

It’s like a kick returner in football. You catch a ball and run with speed and avoid people. It sounds a lot like being a receiver. And a lot of the best receivers are or would be great at returning kicks. But a lot of them don’t. And sometimes a great kick returner can’t have the same effect as a receiver during regular play. The skill set (catching, speed, avoiding tackles) seems similar but tactically it’s entirely different. Running a full route tree is a lot harder than having one specific task.

Well, being defensively reliable as a forward during open play is a lot harder than just being on a PK because your job is to do a lot more than simply defend your zone and prevent the puck from going in. We’ve moved on from the ideas that “player X blocks 300 shots they must be awesome defensively”. All that means is when their team has the puck, they do squadoosh in helping break the puck out of their own zone and transition the puck up the ice. But…they may still be a good PKer because when you are short-handed, you are already behind the 8-ball in terms of the pressure being in your zone.

Incidentally, the most fun PKing player I’ve ever watched is a guy who during normal play was a one-dimensional sniper. Peter Bondra. Guy scored a ton of shorthanded goals and was actually a weapon out their on the PK because his puck instincts and explosive acceleration were a one-man breakaway waiting to happen - and teams up a man had to respect that and alter their functionality accordingly.

TLDR; Mittelstadt has turned into an extremely strong two-way player, and PK usage has very little relevance to this.

I think with Mittelstadt its more how far he's come, in the beginning of his career he definitely seemed to be a work in progress defensively while not living up to the elite talent many saw offensively even. The offensive game has come & his defensive game has come more recently aswell, I've been impressed especially with his strength. Given his size since he entered the league you don't expect him to be the strongest guy on pucks but he is actually pretty good.

Put me in the group that's been proven wrong on Mittelstadt, he's found his role not as a flashy Zegras-type offensive player (like he might've been thought of originally) but as a complete top 6 player, and for a playoff team that's more valuable.
 

Panthaz89

Buffalo Sabres, Carolina Panthers fan
Dec 24, 2016
13,340
5,839
Buffalo,NY
I blame video games for the mass concept among fans that being on the PK and being “good defensively” are the same thing because video games rely on some random “defensive rating” to have the CPU determine deployment.

Being good defensively is a trait. Playing on the PK is usage and deployment, pure and simple. It depends on the coach, the PK concepts and heavily on the players usage and endurance and effectiveness in the other scenarios in hockey - even strength and power play.

Good defensive forwards are often able to PK but not all of a teams best defensive forwards feature on a PK. And sometimes PKers are simply specialists who are really good at that scenario. Tactically - defending on a PK is not the same as being sound defensively in open ice, even strength play.

It’s like a kick returner in football. You catch a ball and run with speed and avoid people. It sounds a lot like being a receiver. And a lot of the best receivers are or would be great at returning kicks. But a lot of them don’t. And sometimes a great kick returner can’t have the same effect as a receiver during regular play. The skill set (catching, speed, avoiding tackles) seems similar but tactically it’s entirely different. Running a full route tree is a lot harder than having one specific task.

Well, being defensively reliable as a forward during open play is a lot harder than just being on a PK because your job is to do a lot more than simply defend your zone and prevent the puck from going in. We’ve moved on from the ideas that “player X blocks 300 shots they must be awesome defensively”. All that means is when their team has the puck, they do squadoosh in helping break the puck out of their own zone and transition the puck up the ice. But…they may still be a good PKer because when you are short-handed, you are already behind the 8-ball in terms of the pressure being in your zone.

Incidentally, the most fun PKing player I’ve ever watched is a guy who during normal play was a one-dimensional sniper. Peter Bondra. Guy scored a ton of shorthanded goals and was actually a weapon out their on the PK because his puck instincts and explosive acceleration were a one-man breakaway waiting to happen - and teams up a man had to respect that and alter their functionality accordingly.

TLDR; Mittelstadt has turned into an extremely strong two-way player, and PK usage has very little relevance to this.
This literally has nothing to do with any point they said Mitts was better than them at everything but scoring goals which is laughable that was just one thing they were obviously better than him at. I wouldn't have to bring in Cozens being the 2nd fastest skater on the team or Thompson's numerous offensive skills. Thompson and Cozens main problems were being oblivious and giving away the puck.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad