Speculation: In-season Proposals, Rumors, Free Agents & Roster Moves (related topics) XXXV

[henchman21]

There is no reason to trade Stastny IMO. There just really isn't a way to get back what you need out of him combined with signings to make a better team. If you get rid of Stastny you simply have to have a much stronger top 6 than the Avs currently have. It is easier to build a rotation of 3 second lines (Duchene-PAP line with a better winger is a 1st line) than it is to have a strong top 6 with the pieces that the Avs currently have.

The only reason to trade him is if it is obvious we can't keep him and ROR and have to choose between the two.

 

[R S]

There is no reason to trade Stastny IMO. There just really isn't a way to get back what you need out of him combined with signings to make a better team. If you get rid of Stastny you simply have to have a much stronger top 6 than the Avs currently have. It is easier to build a rotation of 3 second lines (Duchene-PAP line with a better winger is a 1st line) than it is to have a strong top 6 with the pieces that the Avs currently have.

The only reason to trade him is if it is obvious we can't keep him and ROR and have to choose between the two.

The other big thing was if we were going to pick 2nd or 3rd and would've maybe drafted MacKinnon. Then it would have made sense to deal Stastny.

 

[henchman21]

The other big thing was if we were going to pick 2nd or 3rd and would've maybe drafted MacKinnon. Then it would have made sense to deal Stastny.

I would have agreed then. Try to fill the top 4 defensemen hole by trading Stastny, but since Jones is going to be the pick, I really don't see a way trading Stastny helps the team (unless you are just trying to get something for him before he leaves as a UFA). It weakens the offense and the return and UFA market cannot make up for that loss.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

Both are still young players, learning to play defence. Nobody ever said that they were going to come into the NHL and be rocks in their own zone.

People who watch hockey enough can tell that both are uniquely talented and are on the verge of blossoming into legit offensive threats as NHL players. At the end of the day, that's why they got to the NHL as quickly as they did.


I bet you'll be singing a different tune in 18 months when they both improve defensively and turn out to be two of the top 10-20 offensive defensemen in the entire NHL.

I've watched thousands of hockey games and have evaluated hundreds, if not thousands, of players. I've watched way more hockey than I probably should have. The "people that watch hockey" statement is not relevant in my case.

I get the "it takes a long time for defensemen to develop" philosophy and am not saying that Barrie and/or Elliott are at their apex. They both will very likely get better with more experience and more maturity; both physical and emotional. They certainly better.

The question can be asked: did Barrie and Elliott make the NHL so quickly because they are that good or perhaps is it because the rest of the Avs defense was/is that bad?

I see Barrie and Elliott joining the rush frequently, and they will occasionally skate the puck through the neutral zone and into the offensive zone, however I see a lot more turnovers than I do scoring chances created. I also don't see big booming shots from the blue line and I don't see them making a good first pass out of the Dzone to get the transition game going often enough. Again, I see a lot of turnovers and I see them both getting beat defensively far too often.

I've seen all the gushing reviews from the Avs HFBoard members but I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will ever be anywhere close to receiving Norris considerations. As I said they'll likely be OK offensive defensemen that are liabilities in their own end. Nothing special however.

In 18 months you may be eating your words on how good you thought Barrie and Elliott were going to become.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Moving Staz would make the most sense at the deadline, his value will be at its max as opposed to the offseason. I'm not an advocate of moving him or releasing him personally, but that's another topic.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

the fact that the two of them are playing in the NHL at age 21 is more reflective of their skills than how they look on ice. Less than 30 dmen from the 09 draft have made the show and Elliott and Barrie have played more NHL games than all but 9 of them.

Did Barrie and Elliott make the NHL because they are so gifted or perhaps was it because the rest of the Avs defense was so piss poor?

The numbers indicate the Avs defense has been extremely poor the last few years.

 

[icesniper]

I've seen all the gushing reviews from the Avs HFBoard members but I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will ever be anywhere close to receiving Norris considerations. As I said they'll likely be OK offensive defensemen that are liabilities in their own end. Nothing special however.

In 18 months you may be eating your words on how good you thought Barrie and Elliott were going to become.

Interesting post. Do you think Barrie or Elliott, if paired with Seth Jones and assuming Jones becomes the elite D player he's getting hyped as, will elevate their games by naturally being paired with him?

 

[Freudian]

I think both Barrie and Elliott were the least turnover prone defenders we had this year and they both were stronger defensively than in the past. I didn't see the mistake machines you obviously saw.

I don't think anyone has talked about them in Norris terms. Not that I have seen. If anyone has, they're obviously getting carried away.

 

[henchman21]

I've watched thousands of hockey games and have evaluated hundreds, if not thousands, of players. I've watched way more hockey than I probably should have. The "people that watch hockey" statement is not relevant in my case.

I get the "it takes a long time for defensemen to develop" philosophy and am not saying that Barrie and/or Elliott are at their apex. They both will very likely get better with more experience and more maturity; both physical and emotional. They certainly better.

The question can be asked: did Barrie and Elliott make the NHL so quickly because they are that good or perhaps is it because the rest of the Avs defense was/is that bad?

I see Barrie and Elliott joining the rush frequently, and they will occasionally skate the puck through the neutral zone and into the offensive zone, however I see a lot more turnovers than I do scoring chances created. I also don't see big booming shots from the blue line and I don't see them making a good first pass out of the Dzone to get the transition game going often enough. Again, I see a lot of turnovers and I see them both getting beat defensively far too often.

I've seen all the gushing reviews from the Avs HFBoard members but I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will ever be anywhere close to receiving Norris considerations. As I said they'll likely be OK offensive defensemen that are liabilities in their own end. Nothing special however.

In 18 months you may be eating your words on how good you thought Barrie and Elliott were going to become.

Question... did you watch Yandle during the 07-08 season with Phoenix when he first entered the league? I ask because you would have been saying the same thing, but if you were evaluating pure talent you would have seen that he was going to break out soon.

Young defensemen make mistakes (because of this coaches rarely use young defensemen as they can cost a borderline coach his job), but when the talent is there you can see it. Both Barrie and Elliott have a boatload of talent. Barrie has great hockey smarts and passing ability... his shot is underrated, but will never be regarded as great. Elliott has dynamic offensive ability. His wrist shot is absolutely elite, best wrist shot on this team since Sakic left.

 

[CobraAcesS]

I think both Barrie and Elliott were the least turnover prone defenders we had this year and they both were stronger defensively than in the past. I didn't see the mistake machines you obviously saw.

I don't think anyone has talked about them in Norris terms. Not that I have seen. If anyone has, they're obviously getting carried away.

I agree with this, and the Norris is a joke now anyways. The requirement for being in the running for the Norris Trophy is which defender can put up the most points over the season. It has absolutely nothing to do with actual defense or Karlsson wouldn't be considered the favorite to win it every year.

Now that hes out it's on to all the other close or at a PPG defenders like Subban and Letang. Does anyone really believe Suter/Chara/Weber are going to win it anytime soon? I personally doubt it...

They really need to come up with a new trophy because the Norris is even more of a joke than the Selke now, and 'points' have always been a factor with the Selke but not THE DECIDING factor.

A little bit of a rant here but this **** really makes me want scream WTF at the top of my lungs.

Edit: I'm not 'bashing' guys like Letang and Karlsson, lets just make that clear.

 

[R S]

I've watched thousands of hockey games and have evaluated hundreds, if not thousands, of players. I've watched way more hockey than I probably should have. The "people that watch hockey" statement is not relevant in my case.

I get the "it takes a long time for defensemen to develop" philosophy and am not saying that Barrie and/or Elliott are at their apex. They both will very likely get better with more experience and more maturity; both physical and emotional. They certainly better.

The question can be asked: did Barrie and Elliott make the NHL so quickly because they are that good or perhaps is it because the rest of the Avs defense was/is that bad?

I see Barrie and Elliott joining the rush frequently, and they will occasionally skate the puck through the neutral zone and into the offensive zone, however I see a lot more turnovers than I do scoring chances created. I also don't see big booming shots from the blue line and I don't see them making a good first pass out of the Dzone to get the transition game going often enough. Again, I see a lot of turnovers and I see them both getting beat defensively far too often.

I've seen all the gushing reviews from the Avs HFBoard members but I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will ever be anywhere close to receiving Norris considerations. As I said they'll likely be OK offensive defensemen that are liabilities in their own end. Nothing special however.

In 18 months you may be eating your words on how good you thought Barrie and Elliott were going to become.

I've never claimed that both guys would end up being anywhere near Norris-calibre defenceman or that they would ever end up being near perfect in their own zone. I simply think both will be well above average offensive defenceman in the NHL. I've seen them both progress since they have been 16 and 17 years old and they continue to get better at each level as they gain experience.

Sure, I might end up eating my words, but I am more than confident in what I've seen from the two to say that we have two very solid puck moving defenceman in our organization for years to come.

Your point about "the Avalanche defence being poor" is a good one in regards to why they even had a sniff of the NHL, but I don't see how that can be held against them at all. We obviously differ greatly into how we break down their play. You say you don't see them making good outlet passes often enough, I think that's pretty ridiculous, for example.

At the end of the day I will hold my position on the two guys and think we could have a pair of Dan Boyle-ish type of prospects on our hands. Guys that will greatly help our offence and fit a puck-possession style of game, even if that means sacrificing a little something defensively.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

I agree with this, and the Norris is a joke now anyways. The requirement for being in the running for the Norris Trophy is which defender can put up the most points over the season. It has absolutely nothing to do with actual defense or Karlsson wouldn't be considered the favorite to win it every year.

Now that hes out it's on to all the other close or at a PPG defenders like Subban and Letang. Does anyone really believe Suter/Chara/Weber are going to win it anytime soon? I personally doubt it...

They really need to come up with a new trophy because the Norris is even more of a joke than the Selke now, and 'points' have always been a factor with the Selke but not THE DECIDING factor.

A little bit of a rant here but this **** really makes me want scream WTF at the top of my lungs.

I don't think you caught my point.

Barrie and Elliott are being touted as potentially very good "offensive" defensemen. The Norris, as you say, is typically given to the best offensive defenseman. I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will be given any serious consideration for the Norris trophy thus they're not really all that great offensively.

Make sense?

 

[CobraAcesS]

I don't think you caught my point.

Barrie and Elliott are being touted as potentially very good "offensive" defensemen. The Norris, as you say, is typically given to the best offensive defenseman. I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will be given any serious consideration for the Norriss trophy thus they're not really all that great offensively.

Make sense?

Rotfl, yeah it does. (I mostly just wanted to get that out of my system, I hate what the Norris Trophy has turned into.)

I do think their upside is a little higher than you seem to, but no I don't see either of them turning into point per game (Norris) defenders.

I could see them both being fairly consistent 40-50 point guys though.

 

[henchman21]

I don't think you caught my point.

Barrie and Elliott are being touted as potentially very good "offensive" defensemen. The Norris, as you say, is typically given to the best offensive defenseman. I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will be given any serious consideration for the Norris trophy thus they're not really all that great offensively.

Make sense?

Both have 40+ point potential, I'd even so far as to say that Elliott has 50-55 point potential (with 10-15g).

 

[hoserthehorrible]

Question... did you watch Yandle during the 07-08 season with Phoenix when he first entered the league? I ask because you would have been saying the same thing, but if you were evaluating pure talent you would have seen that he was going to break out soon.

Young defensemen make mistakes (because of this coaches rarely use young defensemen as they can cost a borderline coach his job), but when the talent is there you can see it. Both Barrie and Elliott have a boatload of talent. Barrie has great hockey smarts and passing ability... his shot is underrated, but will never be regarded as great. Elliott has dynamic offensive ability. His wrist shot is absolutely elite, best wrist shot on this team since Sakic left.

Yes, of course I watched Yandle when he first came up. Different player in a different organization though.

Do players with great hockey smarts get caught out of position because they are puck watching and not playing the opposition? I saw Barrie get caught puck watching and not paying attention to the situation and the opposition so many times I can't begin to count them all. Barrie may have some offensive skills but he's not good in his own end; at all.

I think Barrie is actually better carrying the puck out of his own end than he is passing it. I saw numerous times where Barrie banged the puck up the boards time after time after time only to see turnover after turnover after turnover last year. At some point a smart Dman needs to realize that he needs to try something else if it isn't working. Doesn't he?

Elliott has a very good wrist shot; that I will wholeheartedly agree with. One of the best the Avs have had in a while. That is a tangible asset that can produce points and might be enough to overlook his defensive shortcomings. That is one of the reasons I believe Elliott has a higher ceiling than Barrie but he is probably more risky than Barrie too though.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

I don't think you caught my point.

Barrie and Elliott are being touted as potentially very good "offensive" defensemen. The Norris, as you say, is typically given to the best offensive defenseman. I don't believe Barrie or Elliott will be given any serious consideration for the Norris trophy thus they're not really all that great offensively.

Make sense?

So you're saying if you don't contend for the Norris you're not a very good defenseman? Makes sense.

 

[henchman21]

Yes, of course I watched Yandle when he first came up. Different player in a different organization though.

Do players with great hockey smarts get caught out of position because they are puck watching and not playing the opposition? I saw Barrie get caught puck watching and not paying attention to the situation and the opposition so many times I can't begin to count them all. Barrie may have some offensive skills but he's not good in his own end; at all.

I think Barrie is actually better carrying the puck out of his own end than he is passing it. I saw numerous times where Barrie banged the puck up the boards time after time after time only to see turnover after turnover after turnover last year. At some point a smart Dman needs to realize that he needs to try something else if it isn't working. Doesn't he?

Elliott has a very good wrist shot; that I will wholeheartedly agree with. One of the best the Avs have had in a while. That is a tangible asset that can produce points and might be enough to overlook his defensive shortcomings. That is one of the reasons I believe Elliott has a higher ceiling than Barrie but he is probably more risky than Barrie too though.

I think you need to go re-watch some games from this past season. Your memory is failing you a bit. Yes, Barrie had some mental lapses in the defensive zone, that is normal for a rookie defensemen (yet he was still better in his own zone than everybody on the team except Johnson and Hejda). Hell, I could get get a game tape of any defensemen in the league and point out multiple defensive zone lapses. Overall, he played pretty well in his own zone, but he needs to get stronger to handle more physical forwards.

The off the boards clearing is more because Sacco's 'system' (there actually is one) isn't very advantageous to a break out pass from deep in the zone. In other words the forwards are not getting open like they should, so up the boards is the only play to make that doesn't result in a turnover in the middle of the ice. Sacco's system is very reliant on good skating defensemen carrying the puck up to the blueline or near to it... which frees up the forwards and then the pass can be made. This is why Liles worked very well in the system, but the other teams in the NHL quickly found out that if you pressure the defensemen heavily and force them to pass from the faceoff dots instead the 'system' breaks down because there is little forward support. Sacco never adjusted his system, nor was he given the proper defensemen to run his system. This is why there has been very little transition game the last ~3 years unless it was against a soft team.

Sacco's system will also work very well in the World's because the defensemen will be able to carry the puck up on the bigger ice. The US will do better than the roster they are playing suggests, I'd say a 3rd or 4th finish.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

So you're saying if you don't contend for the Norris you're not a very good defenseman? Makes sense.

I'm saying if you don't contend for the Norris you're not a top notch "offensive" defenseman. Both Barrie and Elliott are being touted as having the potential to be very good "offensive" defensemen.

I say I don't think either one will get many, if any, consideration for the Norris thus I don't see them as being all that great offensively. I think they'll be OK offensive defensemen but will be weak defensively.

 

[henchman21]

I'm saying if you don't contend for the Norris you're not a top notch "offensive" defenseman. Both Barrie and Elliott are being touted as having the potential to be very good "offensive" defensemen.

I say I don't think either one will get many, if any, consideration for the Norris thus I don't see them as being all that great offensively. I think they'll be OK offensive defensemen but will be weak defensively.

So... lets throw out a few names and let us know what you think of them...

Kevin Shattenkirk
Brian Campbell
Dan Boyle
Mark Streit
Keith Yandle
Michael Del Zotto
Cam Fowler

 

[R S]

I'm saying if you don't contend for the Norris you're not a top notch "offensive" defenseman. Both Barrie and Elliott are being touted as having the potential to be very good "offensive" defensemen.

I say I don't think either one will get many, if any, consideration for the Norris thus I don't see them as being all that great offensively. I think they'll be OK offensive defensemen but will be weak defensively.

Where did all this Norris talk come from anyway? It sounds like you're just trying to stir this place up.

Most fans are in agreement here:

- Barrie and Elliott are both young, yet improving.

- Barrie and Elliott both have the potential to be above-average offensive defensemen.

- Barrie and Elliott aren't likely ever going to be above-average defensive defensemen.


Not sure exactly what you're trying to prove.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

Both have 40+ point potential, I'd even so far as to say that Elliott has 50-55 point potential (with 10-15g).

In the last 20 years only two defensemen won the Norris trophy with as "little" as 50 points. One was Zdeno Chara who had 19 goals and the other was Rob Blake who had 23 goals.

40 point potential does not make a top of the league offensive defenseman and unless you're scoring 20 goals even 50 points typically isn't good enough. I might add that Chara and Blake had some defensive ability as well as offensive ability so that may have helped them a little even though the Norris is an award for offensive defensman.

As I said... Barrie and Elliott will be OK offensive defenseman and both will be relatively weak defensively. Not real bad but not real good either.

 

[henchman21]

In the last 20 years only two defensemen won the Norris trophy with as "little" as 50 points. One was Zdeno Chara who had 19 goals and the other was Rob Blake who had 23 goals.

40 point potential does not make a top of the league offensive defenseman and unless you're scoring 20 goals even 50 points typically isn't good enough. I might add that Chara and Blake had some defensive ability as well as offensive ability so that may have helped them a little even though the Norris is an award for offensive defensman.

As I said... Barrie and Elliott will be OK offensive defenseman and both will be relatively weak defensively. Not real bad but not real good either.

Little point in continuing this, but as a FYI the player that finished fifth (top 5 is definitely elite offensive production) in defensemen scoring in 11-12 had 51 points, 10-11 51, 09-10 55, 08-09 59.... 20th in all those years 11-12 38, 10-11 43, 09-10 44, 08-09 39... but I guess facts are useless in this. Also, there are many legit #1 defensemen (let alone #2 and middle pairing types) that never win or contend for a Norris trophy.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

Where did all this Norris talk come from anyway? It sounds like you're just trying to stir this place up.

Most fans are in agreement here:

- Barrie and Elliott are both young, yet improving.

- Barrie and Elliott both have the potential to be above-average offensive defensemen.

- Barrie and Elliott aren't likely ever going to be above-average defensive defensemen.


Not sure exactly what you're trying to prove.

Stir this place up? I'm not sure what that's all about. This is a discussion board and I thought a few of us were discussing the potential of Barrie and Elliott. I don't see any personal attacks or "rough" play by anyone.

I'm saying that most folks are over rating Barrie and Elliott and I'm trying to show some specifics of why I believe that is the case. I believe they will be OK offensive defensemen but nothing all that special (hence the Norris reference) and they will both be relatively weak defensively.

 

[Lonewolfe2015]

Stir this place up? I'm not sure what that's all about. This is a discussion board and I thought a few of us were discussing the potential of Barrie and Elliott. I don't see any personal attacks or "rough" play by anyone.

I'm saying that most folks are over rating Barrie and Elliott and I'm trying to show some specifics of why I believe that is the case. I believe they will be OK offensive defensemen but nothing all that special (hence the Norris reference) and they will both be relatively weak defensively.

I believe the problem (feel free to correct me if it seems I'm reaching here) is you feel a defender needs to be Norris caliber to be special. Whereas we feel any defender that pushes the 40-50 point barrier a few times with good defense is special. Take Dan Boyle for instance, if Barrie can carve out a role like him he'd have an exceptionally good career, Norris or no Norris.

 

[hoserthehorrible]

Little point in continuing this, but as a FYI the player that finished fifth (top 5 is definitely elite offensive production) in defensemen scoring in 11-12 had 51 points, 10-11 51, 09-10 55, 08-09 59.... 20th in all those years 11-12 38, 10-11 43, 09-10 44, 08-09 39... but I guess facts are useless in this. Also, there are many legit #1 defensemen (let alone #2 and middle pairing types) that never win or contend for a Norris trophy.

Facts are good.

The fact is Barrie has two goals and 13 points in 42 NHL games over his first two years in the league. Not bad but not exactly ripping the league up offensively either. A very small sample size to be sure but that projects out to less that 26 points in a full 82 game season. He will make progress but expecting Barrie to be one of the elite offensive defensemen in the league is wishful thinking (that's an opinion of course and not a fact).

Another fact is that Elliott has five goals and 17 points in 52 games in his first two seasons in the league and unfortunately he actually digressed this year. I certainly think he'll get better and will improve over time however I don't see Elliott becoming one of the elite offensive defensemen in the league either (another opinion and not a fact).

You said Barrie and Elliott have 40 point "potential." Assuming they reach that potential they'd still be short of the top five "offensive" defensemen in the league according to your numbers. Again, based on what you said, 50 points might even be possible but I'm guessing that's a pretty big leap of faith.

As for "legit #1 defensemen (let alone #2 and middle pairing types) that never win or contend for a Norris trophy"... I agree. However those players are typically solid defensively and bring more to the table than just offense. Barrie and Elliott are offensive defensemen that are below average defensively. If their offensive isn't ranked up there with the top offensive defensemen in the league then in my opinion they are OK offensive defensemen that are relatively weak defensively but they aren't anything special.