GDT: Game 56: Canucks @ Avs | Tuesday, February 9th, 7pm MT | Ready to Riot

[The Kingslayer]

Soda is a top-tier complimentary piece to a core though, so at least they did something right in that regard.

Soda, Beauch and Skille were all good signings this summer. Comeau aswell if he wasnt on the 2nd line. Agreed that Soda is a top tier complimentary player. Soda has been our most consistent forward all season.

 

[the_fan]

Wait till Landy gets 26 and MacKinnon 24... Im sure someone in the blackhawks thread said something like you said, back when Kane and Toews were "kids"

Avs don't have the talent level that Hawks do. They have a Norris trophy d-man PPG+ winger, excellent captain and solid supporting cast.

Again the problem is that a lot of people just have way to high of expectations for the Avs core and they're simply not that good. They are good just not as good as people think

 

[The Kingslayer]

Holy jabroni Iginla is a -17? The next forwards that bad are Everberg and Rantanen at -5. Plus/Minus is usually a useless stat but damn thats something else.

 

[5280]

Avs don't have the talent level that Hawks do. They have a Norris trophy d-man PPG+ winger, excellent captain and solid supporting cast.

Again the problem is that a lot of people just have way to high of expectations for the Avs core and they're simply not that good. They are good just not as good as people think

I'm personally going to give them one more coach, I think Sacco was a moron and I'm really starting to think Roy isn't the answer. They keep doing the same old ****. They are inconsistent, don't know how to play with a lead, don't show up in "must win games"..... It's like the Sacco years rebooted. It hasn't really gotten any better.

 

[the_fan]

I'm personally going to give them one more coach, I think Sacco was a moron and I'm really starting to think Roy isn't the answer. They keep doing the same old ****. They are inconsistent, don't know how to play with a lead, don't show up in "must win games"..... It's like the Sacco years rebooted. It hasn't really gotten any better.

Roy is bad but the players don't really show any will to win, Landeskog being the captain is a question mark too. When comparing the Avs core players to let's say the Hawks, not only Hawks have better talent but their top guys have a lot of heart and leadership and actually want to win unlike the Avs top guys.

 

[JoemAvs]

Roy is bad but the players don't really show any will to win, Landeskog being the captain is a question mark too. When comparing the Avs core players to let's say the Hawks, not only Hawks have better talent but their top guys have a lot of heart and leadership and actually want to win unlike the Avs top guys.

How do you measure "Will to win"?

Did Crosby lack a will to win under Johnston?

Do you really think that proven winners like MacKinnon or Duchene or the guy that was annointed to be the next Toews leadership wise at the age of 17 in Landeskog really lack the will to win or heart?

Sorry but that is just an annoying hockey stereotype that is mostly ********.

Those guys are professionals. Aside from a few bad eggs all of those guys are desperate to win. Otherwise they wouldn't have made it into the league.

Those cliches do nothing but cloud the real issues.

The Avs issues are that they have to rely on their very young players because (aside from Beauch and Soda) they have no one else doing much on this team that is older than 27. We have done such a poor job at rebuilding (if you even want to call what we did rebuilding) that we are one of the few teams that have real depth issues.

We also clearly have system/coaching issues (those possession stats for example are just not justifiable) and our defense has been a problem for a decade+ now.

Our franchise player is 20. Our captain 23.

Can we maybe wait another 2-3 years before we give up on them?

Look at ROR. Is he so much better than Landeskog, Mac or Duchene?

He is seen as a franchise caliber player on a bad team right now. Everyone is amazed how good he is. He even said that he did not get the opportunities with the Avs.

And I loved the guy but he was maybe on the same level but not really superior to the others.


So do you want to see another one of our young stud blossoming somewhere else just because the Avs were too stupid to put them into a position they could succeed in or what is your plan?

This organisation was in a terrible state talentwise after Sakic retired. We never really committed to a rebuild but we somehow still found a way to scrap together a very decent core.


Why the hell do we want to tear all of this down right now just because they are playing atrocious? Because our young players are at fault for the terrible rebuilding job our management has done?

Atleast give them another 2-3 years (without any stupid "go for it" -moves like Stuart/Berra or Iginla) and another coach (not a rookie coach for once please. Look at the impact of Hitchcock, Sutter, Trotz, Boudreau, Ruff or Babcock on teams who had similar problems than us).



/End rant

 

[5280]

Roy is bad but the players don't really show any will to win, Landeskog being the captain is a question mark too. When comparing the Avs core players to let's say the Hawks, not only Hawks have better talent but their top guys have a lot of heart and leadership and actually want to win unlike the Avs top guys.

I don't think we have any lack of will to win, really. The "How" to win is really escaping us, though. I'm not sure where the blame lies, though.... Is it the Captain, the coach, the core, are we just getting sick of waiting? The easiest thing to change is the coach, but I think Roy definitely gets the 4 years he signed up for, so I guess that is a mute point at the moment.

I guess, now that I think about it, it's clear to me that Sakic and Roy are really focusing on the bigger picture by intentionally keeping Rants and Zads down in San Antonio. They are sticking to their guns and obviously don't want to stunt their development by bringing them up prematurely. I think this is the right philosophy for the long run, it just is frustrating right now.

I just don't really get a lot of what Roy does as a coach. Maybe that's just me and maybe I am just sick of waiting for their bigger vision to unfold, but the same old same old crap every night gets really old.

 

[dahrougem2]

Atleast give them another 2-3 years (without any stupid "go for it" -moves like Stuart/Berra or Iginla) and another coach (not a rookie coach for once please. Look at the impact of Hitchcock, Sutter, Trotz, Boudreau, Ruff or Babcock on teams who had similar problems than us).



/End rant

You do realize that once upon a time, every single one of those coaches was a "rookie" coach, right?

I'd vomit if this team hired Ken Hitchcock or Bruce Boudreau.

Mike Babcock is a good coach but he's no saviour. 1 Stanley Cup in 16 years now.

Barry Trotz made the most out of what he had in Nashville but never got over the hump. Now he has talent. Shocking what talent will make a coach look like. Same goes for Darryl Sutter.

Fact is this, teams with lots of talent tend to have coaches who are "good". There's no doubt good coaches and bad coaches, but our team is so devoid of talent that the fact Roy, in 3 years, has 1) won a division title; 2) finished 8 games above .500 last season; and 3) has this team in the 2nd wildcard spot this season, to me, gives me faith in him when he does actually acquire the requisite talent.

There are no doubt things that Roy does which anger me, like his continuous usage of Nate Guenin prior to this season, or playing John Mitchell like he's a top-6 forward, or over-playing Beauchemin. But every coach has their flaws. I'm willing to give Roy a lot more time given what he's done with the rosters he's had to work with his first 2.5 years.

 

[JoemAvs]

You do realize that once upon a time, every single one of those coaches was a "rookie" coach, right?

I'd vomit if this team hired Ken Hitchcock or Bruce Boudreau.

Mike Babcock is a good coach but he's no saviour. 1 Stanley Cup in 16 years now.

Barry Trotz made the most out of what he had in Nashville but never got over the hump. Now he has talent. Shocking what talent will make a coach look like. Same goes for Darryl Sutter.

Fact is this, teams with lots of talent tend to have coaches who are "good". There's no doubt good coaches and bad coaches, but our team is so devoid of talent that the fact Roy, in 3 years, has 1) won a division title; 2) finished 8 games above .500 last season; and 3) has this team in the 2nd wildcard spot this season, to me, gives me faith in him when he does actually acquire the requisite talent.

There are no doubt things that Roy does which anger me, like his continuous usage of Nate Guenin prior to this season, or playing John Mitchell like he's a top-6 forward, or over-playing Beauchemin. But every coach has their flaws. I'm willing to give Roy a lot more time given what he's done with the rosters he's had to work with his first 2.5 years.

Of course I do realize that. But the Avs have had 2 coaches since 2009. One was a terrible failure (that managed to make the playoffs once) and one is still up in the air.


My whole point is that you change the coach first before you trade your core players.

And your post is not really true IMO. Look at Johnston for example.
Look at Dallas prior to Ruff. Look at STL before Hitchcock. Look at LA before Sutter.

A good coach is very important and often the difference between a team that makes the playoffs every year and a team like the Avs.


I am not convinced with Roy. I think he is a great motivator and the guys love playing for him.

But I do not really believe that he is a good enough X's and O's coach.


Our whole core has never really had a coach before that had a working system/philosophy and that cares for possession.


Before I trade my core guys, I try to bring another coach to fix that first.

I am not even saying that they should fire Roy. He together with Varly managed to have the team perform decently from December until the Allstar break.
That should give him another year.

I am saying that before you do something drastic with our core or continue to put the blame for this mess entirely on them, you better try another coach first.

 

[dahrougem2]

Of course I do realize that. But the Avs have had 2 coaches since 2009. One was a terrible failure (that managed to make the playoffs once) and one is still up in the air.


My whole point is that you change the coach first before you trade your core players.

And your post is not really true IMO. Look at Johnston for example.
Look at Dallas prior to Ruff. Look at STL before Hitchcock. Look at LA before Sutter.

A good coach is very important and often the difference between a team that makes the playoffs every year and a team like the Avs.


I am not convinced with Roy. I think he is a great motivator and the guys love playing for him.

But I do not really believe that he is a good enough X's and O's coach.


Our whole core has never really had a coach before that had a working system/philosophy and that cares for possession.


Before I trade my core guys, I try to bring another coach to fix that first.

I am not even saying that they should fire Roy. He together with Varly managed to have the team perform decently from December until the Allstar break.
That should give him another year.

I am saying that before you do something drastic with our core or continue to put the blame for this mess entirely on them, you better try another coach first.

Do me a favour and go look at those teams' rosters prior to those coaches coming along, and then come back to me. It's not like these coaches are the missing pieces. In very few instances they are (L.A. with Sutter). It takes time. It takes patience and the development of a system that benefits both players and coach. and most of all it takes talent. The Avs don't have the talent, thus Roy can't implement his system, and the players currently henceforth struggle. Until the Avs get talent, we'll see much of the same.

Luckily, players like Rantanen, Bigras, and Zadorov are on the way seemingly quicker than expected. The sooner this team doesn't have to rely on players like John Mitchell, Jarome Iginla, Alex Tanguay, Cody McLeod, Blake Comeau, and whoever is on the 3rd pairing to play a significant role, the sooner we will see success. As I said, Roy is now in his 3rd season and all three seasons, to date, have been winning seasons. He deserves a lot more time.

 

[StLAvsFan]

How do you measure "Will to win"?

Did Crosby lack a will to win under Johnston?

Do you really think that proven winners like MacKinnon or Duchene or the guy that was annointed to be the next Toews leadership wise at the age of 17 in Landeskog really lack the will to win or heart?

Sorry but that is just an annoying hockey stereotype that is mostly ********.

Those guys are professionals. Aside from a few bad eggs all of those guys are desperate to win. Otherwise they wouldn't have made it into the league.

Those cliches do nothing but cloud the real issues.

The Avs issues are that they have to rely on their very young players because (aside from Beauch and Soda) they have no one else doing much on this team that is older than 27. We have done such a poor job at rebuilding (if you even want to call what we did rebuilding) that we are one of the few teams that have real depth issues.

We also clearly have system/coaching issues (those possession stats for example are just not justifiable) and our defense has been a problem for a decade+ now.

Our franchise player is 20. Our captain 23.

Can we maybe wait another 2-3 years before we give up on them?

Look at ROR. Is he so much better than Landeskog, Mac or Duchene?

He is seen as a franchise caliber player on a bad team right now. Everyone is amazed how good he is. He even said that he did not get the opportunities with the Avs.

And I loved the guy but he was maybe on the same level but not really superior to the others.


So do you want to see another one of our young stud blossoming somewhere else just because the Avs were too stupid to put them into a position they could succeed in or what is your plan?

This organisation was in a terrible state talentwise after Sakic retired. We never really committed to a rebuild but we somehow still found a way to scrap together a very decent core.


Why the hell do we want to tear all of this down right now just because they are playing atrocious? Because our young players are at fault for the terrible rebuilding job our management has done?

Atleast give them another 2-3 years (without any stupid "go for it" -moves like Stuart/Berra or Iginla) and another coach (not a rookie coach for once please. Look at the impact of Hitchcock, Sutter, Trotz, Boudreau, Ruff or Babcock on teams who had similar problems than us).



/End rant

Even talent-poor teams can play a workmanlike, tight-checking style of hockey that keeps nearly every game close on the scoreboard provided every player buys into a sound system & hustles every shift. With the Avs, the talent is there, but the structure isn't. The overall compete level is also pretty low on most nights---at least over the course of a 60 minute game. In other words, too many "star" players on this team are gung-ho when it comes to trying to score pretty goals, but they're woefully lacking when it comes to paying the price in grunt work along the boards & in front of the net to get the job done---both offensively & defensively. Can anyone honestly say that the Avs are a hard-nosed, hard-working hockey team? I seriously doubt it.

 

[JoemAvs]

Do me a favour and go look at those teams' rosters prior to those coaches coming along, and then come back to me. It's not like these coaches are the missing pieces. In very few instances they are (L.A. with Sutter). It takes time. It takes patience and the development of a system that benefits both players and coach. and most of all it takes talent. The Avs don't have the talent, thus Roy can't implement his system, and the players currently henceforth struggle. Until the Avs get talent, we'll see much of the same.

Luckily, players like Rantanen, Bigras, and Zadorov are on the way seemingly quicker than expected. The sooner this team doesn't have to rely on players like John Mitchell, Jarome Iginla, Alex Tanguay, Cody McLeod, Blake Comeau, and whoever is on the 3rd pairing to play a significant role, the sooner we will see success. As I said, Roy is now in his 3rd season and all three seasons, to date, have been winning seasons. He deserves a lot more time.

I absolutely agree with that part. Where did I say anything different?

I am just making a point that we should rather fire Roy than trade any of our core guys.

I also stated my personal opinion that I do not really believe that Roy is capable of leading us to the promised land because I am absolutely not convinced tactically with him. That has nothing to do with talent.


I also said that he will get atleast another year and I am fine with it.
Maybe he even proves me wrong and fixes our terrible possession game and implements a working system once our overall talent increases. That would be great.

I also believe that Avs fans criminally underrate the impact of coaches because of our history of never really valuing them.

I for example think that the Avs during the Roy/Sakic/Forsberg era could have won easily a few more cups if they had better coaching.



@StlAvs:

Yeah but what is the Avs system exactly? We are probably the only team that does not value possession and our quick-strike offense relies heavily on the top level skill of our star players. Structure is on the coaches not the players. It is hard to keep your compete level high all the time when you are spending much more time in your own zone than other teams do.

 

[Balthazar]

I do not really believe that he is a good enough X's and O's coach.

Thats true. However, if he really does promote the run and gun style that the AVS have been playing for the last 3 seasons (ie: "capitalizing on your opportunities" instead of "controlling the play") he'll never be a successful coach in the NHL.

 

[StLAvsFan]

I absolutely agree with that part. Where did I say anything different?

I am just making a point that we should rather fire Roy than trade any of our core guys.

I also stated my personal opinion that I do not really believe that Roy is capable of leading us to the promised land because I am absolutely not convinced tactically with him. That has nothing to do with talent.


I also said that he will get atleast another year and I am fine with it.
Maybe he even proves me wrong and fixes our terrible possession game and implements a working system once our overall talent increases. That would be great.

I also believe that Avs fans criminally underrate the impact of coaches because of our history of never really valuing them.

I for example think that the Avs during the Roy/Sakic/Forsberg era could have won easily a few more cups if they had better coaching.



@StlAvs:

Yeah but what is the Avs system exactly? We are probably the only team that does not value possession and our quick-strike offense relies heavily on the top level skill of our star players. Structure is on the coaches not the players. It is hard to keep your compete level high all the time when you are spending much more time in your own zone than other teams do.

I agree with you, they have no system in place to fall back on when their offense sputters. And yes, that's definitely a coaching issue. And the result is what we see. A team that looks pretty dangerous for a few games, or a few weeks at a time when the goaltending is sharp & the talent players pot some goals, followed by totally inept stretches where they look like a lazy AHL team getting b^tch-slapped all over the ice by the likes of Columbus, Vancouver or Carolina. It's ridiculous. Look, I have no problem with the Avs being a .500 team, but for God's sakes at least work hard & show some pride in yourself and your team when you lose. I don't see that often enough with this bunch unfortunately.

 

[Jarey Curry]

Avs don't have the talent level that Hawks do. They have a Norris trophy d-man PPG+ winger, excellent captain and solid supporting cast.

Again the problem is that a lot of people just have way to high of expectations for the Avs core and they're simply not that good. They are good just not as good as people think

We are a different team than the blackhawks, their players are amazing and ahead of us but they're getting older when our core hits their prime years and although Crawford is a 2 time SC champion, I know we have better goaltending than them

 

[tigervixxxen]

Avs don't have the talent level that Hawks do. They have a Norris trophy d-man PPG+ winger, excellent captain and solid supporting cast.

Again the problem is that a lot of people just have way to high of expectations for the Avs core and they're simply not that good. They are good just not as good as people think

Just because they aren't PPG players doesn't mean they are trash. There are only so many elite players in the league and certain teams are lucky to have them. If Duchene, Landy and even Mack are ~60-65 point players, that's fine. You know what they can do and then it's even more important to build around them. You just want to get rid of core players for the fun of it, like someone is going to give us an elite player in return? Or just keep trying to win the lotto? What else are they supposed to do?

And every single team has games where they look like garbage, lose to bad teams. Even the mighty Blackhawks. The parity in this league makes any team able to beat anyone any given night. Too much focus is placed on who we lose to, it's not about that. There are no gimme wins, not for anyone. It's those games where they just needed one damn goal to either put it away or take the lead. That's where this team is the difference between being a winner and a loser. It's more about not scoring on a 5 on 3 and those PPs last night and not because ehrmagherd it's Vancouver. Or Columbus or Carolina. It's because those games were one damn goal puts the game away. That's how you beat teams consistently in this league.

 

[SuperJoe]

Wait till Landy gets 26 and MacKinnon 24... Im sure someone in the blackhawks thread said something like you said, back when Kane and Toews were "kids"

Toews and Kane had 3 cups at that age, give or take a few months, wrong guys to illustrate your point.

 

[SuperJoe]

Just because they aren't PPG players doesn't mean they are trash. There are only so many elite players in the league and certain teams are lucky to have them. If Duchene, Landy and even Mack are ~60-65 point players, that's fine. You know what they can do and then it's even more important to build around them. You just want to get rid of core players for the fun of it, like someone is going to give us an elite player in return? Or just keep trying to win the lotto? What else are they supposed to do?

Nobody accused theses three guys of being bottom 6 players, the point is are they good enough to take us somewhere like a Stanley Cup appearance? How many more years are we to wait for that to happen? I keep hearing of that rebuilding Renaissance the Avs have undertaken and other than the return from the ROR trade(which is really from the 09 draft), Mikko and probably Bigs, who is suppose to come and help us within the next 3 years? Will that be enough to take us there? The only other prospect might be Meloche, but big if and at least 3 years away, nothing else on forward. The cupboards are not as full as they appear.

I'm not advocating trading guys or anything else, just judging this team on where I think it is going.

 

[Tweaky]

Toews and Kane had 3 cups at that age, give or take a few months, wrong guys to illustrate your point.

Oh come on, I totally see us winning the next 3 cups, or 3 of 4 at worst.

(if we do, I will shave my beard off with a retired Zamboni blade)

 

[JoemAvs]

Nobody accused theses three guys of being bottom 6 players, the point is are they good enough to take us somewhere like a Stanley Cup appearance? How many more years are we to wait for that to happen? I keep hearing of that rebuilding Renaissance the Avs have undertaken and other than the return from the ROR trade(which is really from the 09 draft), Mikko and probably Bigs, who is suppose to come and help us within the next 3 years? Will that be enough to take us there? The only other prospect might be Meloche, but big if and at least 3 years away, nothing else on forward. The cupboards are not as full as they appear.

I'm not advocating trading guys or anything else, just judging this team on where I think it is going.

We will wait as long as it takes.
You can't just trade your way to a cup. Either those guys are good enough to get it done or we will be back to rebuilding and drafting high in 4-5 years under a different management.

There really is no middle ground. A Seguin trade impactwise only happens once every 3-5 years.

So we are stuck with those guys for better or worse. Can you swap one or maybe two of em ? Yeah sure. But odds are that we would lose those trades because our core is not the problem. We could use an elite #1 D but those are not easy to find.


The Avs have :

#1 C : MacKinnon/Duchene (great)
#1 W: Landeskog/Rantanen/Duchene (great)
#2 C: Duchene / Soderberg (very good)
#1 D: EJ (upgrade here would be nice)
#2 D: Barrie (too early to say. potential to be very good)
#1 G: Varlamov (great)

young top4 Ds with potential: Zads, Bigras, maybe Meloche
potential top9 forwards: Compher, Bleackley, Beaudin (?)


That is a solid start. Now we need to start hitting on depth players or later picks or great value signings in UFA to fill out the roster. Our core is among the better ones in this league IMO. From now on it is about development/good coaching and good management.

 

[AslanRH]

Just because they aren't PPG players doesn't mean they are trash. There are only so many elite players in the league and certain teams are lucky to have them. If Duchene, Landy and even Mack are ~60-65 point players, that's fine. You know what they can do and then it's even more important to build around them. You just want to get rid of core players for the fun of it, like someone is going to give us an elite player in return? Or just keep trying to win the lotto? What else are they supposed to do?

And every single team has games where they look like garbage, lose to bad teams. Even the mighty Blackhawks. The parity in this league makes any team able to beat anyone any given night. Too much focus is placed on who we lose to, it's not about that. There are no gimme wins, not for anyone. It's those games where they just needed one damn goal to either put it away or take the lead. That's where this team is the difference between being a winner and a loser. It's more about not scoring on a 5 on 3 and those PPs last night and not because ehrmagherd it's Vancouver. Or Columbus or Carolina. It's because those games were one damn goal puts the game away. That's how you beat teams consistently in this league.

While you may be right, over the last few games, this team has needed more than just that one damn goal.

I can't wait until I can start saying this team "played well enough to win" again. The play over this last slump has not really been close to that level for me.

 

[CobraAcesS]

While you may be right, over the last few games, this team has needed more than just that one damn goal.

I can't wait until I can start saying this team "played well enough to win" again. The play over this last slump has not really been close to that level for me.

We've played worse in this stretch than we did in a lot of the games early in the season IMO. Sad to see them look that flat out there.