GDT: SEA @ COL | 7:30pm MT | Game 7 Emergency

henchman21

Mr. Meeseeks
Sponsor
Feb 24, 2012
62,990
47,258
Even if they went for it in 2020 and magically didn’t have those injuries, I don’t think they would’ve gotten past the Lightning. 2021 was a real failure though and that was the one time they really choked a series away as well.

There have certainly been core groups that won more than the 90s-00s Avs and the 20s Avs but I think people are underestimating how hard it is to build a new winning group. From 96 onwards only the Avs and Lightning have actually won with 2 entirely different groups. If you go back to 90 you can add the Pens to that. Despite 5+ year gaps between Cups, the Wings, post lockout Pens and Devils all had pieces that were parts of the earlier Cup winning cores
Personally, I'd rather they have gone for it and failed than only going for it hard one season.
 

dahrougem2

Registered User
Dec 9, 2011
37,333
39,043
Edmonton, Alberta
Rantanen had 7 goals and 10 points.
Mackinnon had only 3 goals and 7 points.

Second season in a row Rants outscored Mack in the playoffs. Third time overall.

Unreal.
I think it is very obvious you don't watch the games so this argument is probably pointless but game 6 MacKinnon created the first two goals and was instrumental in the 3rd. He didn't get a point on any of them.
 

chet1926

Registered User
Jan 9, 2008
12,469
5,896
Denver
I think it is very obvious you don't watch the games so this argument is probably pointless but game 6 MacKinnon created the first two goals and was instrumental in the 3rd. He didn't get a point on any of them.
It's pretty obvious who the best forward is. Scoring doesn't really mean a whole ton. 29 dictates play and creates a ton, 96 knows how to find the openings, but often disappears.
 

GeoRox89

Registered User
Nov 16, 2013
4,768
6,037
Fires of Mt Doom
Personally, I'd rather they have gone for it and failed than only going for it hard one season.
Makes sense. Even with the injuries, I think not going hard this year and 2021 were massive failures. C Mac/Sakic really let the core down those years

I’m still not sold on 2020. Just coming off a surprise run to game 7 of round 2 and Bruins, Lightning, Blues and Vegas were all contenders most would’ve ranked ahead of the Avs. Who knows if they even win last year if they blow all their assets the two years before. I definitely would rather have a bunch of deep runs with the 1 Cup than what we have now. I’d sure rather have the playoff record we do now than 3-4 trips to the WCF/SCF and no Cups out of it though
 
  • Like
Reactions: NOTENOUGHRYJOTHINGS

Nihiliste

Registered User
Feb 8, 2010
11,555
4,686
To be fair, there is a model that does do that. The difference is you need to win a Cup when the majority of your core is 20-23. The results prior should help the drafts prior be more successful and carry the depth of the team for 5-6-7 years. Problem is the Avs won their Cup too late for that to be realistic.

We also can’t draft players past 10. If we got quality NHL players out the Jost, Newhook, Kaut, OO picks and a couple later rounders we would either have some depth right now or guys we can trade. But right now the cap is flat and the cupboard really is bare. To me the inability to draft is the main reason we’re unlikely to get more than one cup with this core.

I’m grateful we got one though. It was a dream to see it happen as an adult after the early wins as a kid
 

Foppa2118

Registered User
Oct 3, 2003
52,347
31,517
You can't go all in for the Cup every year. It's not feasible or prudent to do so.

If you're gonna pick which years to do so, last year was one of the best years, and this year was the absolute last year they should have gone all in. Like throwing assets in the trash.

Hopefully next year is different.
 

Nihiliste

Registered User
Feb 8, 2010
11,555
4,686
Even if they went for it in 2020 and magically didn’t have those injuries, I don’t think they would’ve gotten past the Lightning. 2021 was a real failure though and that was the one time they really choked a series away as well.

There have certainly been core groups that won more than the 90s-00s Avs and the 20s Avs but I think people are underestimating how hard it is to build a new winning group. From 96 onwards only the Avs and Lightning have actually won with 2 entirely different groups. If you go back to 90 you can add the Pens to that. Despite 5+ year gaps between Cups, the Wings, post lockout Pens and Devils all had pieces that were parts of the earlier Cup winning cores

Agreed, 2021 was the failure. They were good enough as a core group to win it all but instead of adding for example a 3C, a quality dman, and a depth player they actively made the team worse.

Then the goalie situation in the offseason was a big error wasting two good assets.

You can't go all in for the Cup every year. It's not feasible or prudent to do so.

If you're gonna pick which years to do so, last year was one of the best years, and this year was the absolute last year they should have gone all in. Like throwing assets in the trash.

Hopefully next year is different.

They definitely shouldn’t keep their first at the draft. Don’t want to see another OO or Kaut pick
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Moops

Foppa2118

Registered User
Oct 3, 2003
52,347
31,517
They definitely shouldn’t keep their first at the draft. Don’t want to see another OO or Kaut pick

I've been thinking about that.

Really the only move that would require a 1st is for 2C. They probably need to shed one of GIrard/Toews to make cap room for a 2C anyway, and them alone plus maybe Newy might be enough.

Then maybe they can fill out the wings with UFA's on bargain deals. They're good at finding those.

I think they should be willing to part with the 1st if it's a high end center like maybe Crosby, but keeping it would be beneficial too. Could give them a cheap ELC at forward in 2-3 years that they could use.
 

Nihiliste

Registered User
Feb 8, 2010
11,555
4,686
I think they should be willing to part with the 1st if it's a high end center like maybe Crosby, but keeping it would be beneficial too. Could give them a cheap ELC at forward in 2-3 years that they could use.
They’ve struck out so many times with that hope that I really have zero optimism remaining about their ability to find players outside the top 10
 

bromando

Registered User
Jun 4, 2013
891
164
They definitely shouldn’t keep their first at the draft. Don’t want to see another OO or Kaut pick
Caveat I'd add to this is that the defensive drafting in late 1st and early 2nd has been alright. Justin Barron looking solid and strengthened as an asset over time. Drew Helleson strengthened as an asset before plateauing. Not sure how people view him now. Timmins also improved. Behrens was looking good last year...not sure how he is viewed now. All that to say, the basically 100% strikeout rate has been on the forward side of things. If Avs have a few guys in mind in that range on D I don't mind seeing a pick.

Also you have to think at some point they hit on a forward in the first beyond the lottery picks. It's got to happen by complete random chance at some point...right?
 

Foppa2118

Registered User
Oct 3, 2003
52,347
31,517
They’ve struck out so many times with that hope that I really have zero optimism remaining about their ability to find players outside the top 10

Actually I forgot they'll be picking late with the new format because they won the division. 25th I think?

I thought they may be picking a little higher in a better draft than recently. So yeah, they should probably just move it, unless they're really high on a player that slipped.
 

Alex Jones

BIG BOWL 'A CHILI!!
Jun 8, 2009
33,527
6,010
Conspiratron 9000
Sigh...

I just don't think a sustained run is in the cards. Not with so many mistakes made in the draft, cap issues aplenty, and the fact that the core is not really that young.
We are in year five of a being a contender, that's a sustained run in the modern day. Sucks but sometimes you realize that the party is over when you think it's just begun.
 

Pokecheque

I’ve been told it’s spelled “Pokecheck”
Sponsor
Aug 5, 2003
46,188
29,318
The Flatlands
www.armoredheadspace.com
We are in year five of a being a contender, that's a sustained run in the modern day. Sucks but sometimes you realize that the party is over when you think it's just begun.
Fair point. We have been treated to some damned fine hockey these past few years.
 

BleedWell

Registered User
Jan 6, 2018
1,120
512
It's pretty obvious who the best forward is. Scoring doesn't really mean a whole ton. 29 dictates play and creates a ton, 96 knows how to find the openings, but often disappears.
Scoring doesn't matter?
That's like...
Unreal.

Like I said second season in a row 96 left 29 behind.
 

Bender

Registered User
Sep 25, 2002
17,329
8,599
That's not what really happened though. Chicago won their Cup and was in immediate cap hell. They had to sell off and re-tool to build back up. Once they did, they won 2 Cups in 3 years. That middle year between Cups 2 and 3, they went for it... they just lost to LA in the WC finals. LA also won 2 Cups in 3 years while going for it each time. The year they lost was the year Chicago got their revenge in the WC finals. There really wasn't a one year on, one year off situation with those teams. They were runs that just ran into one of the other great teams of the era.

Avs are really not like those teams, especially early in their runs. Avs are more akin to the Caps in reality. A team that struggle to get out of the 2nd round, broke through in a great year with middle to late core.
This feels like a bit from Joe vs The Volcano.



All I'm saying :

2022 - Colorado Avalanche
2023 - somebody else (probably New Jersey)
2024 - *maybe Colorado Avalanche again?

Not sure how you can draw an argument from that but be my guest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: henchman21

henchman21

Mr. Meeseeks
Sponsor
Feb 24, 2012
62,990
47,258
This feels like a bit from Joe vs The Volcano.



All I'm saying :

2022 - Colorado Avalanche
2023 - somebody else (probably New Jersey)
2024 - *maybe Colorado Avalanche again?

Not sure how you can draw an argument from that but be my guest.

Not trying to argue. I’ll lay out my thoughts here of what I’m saying. I take the term of ‘go for it’ as really trying everything in that year. So going for it every other year would be all in next year while leaving this year meh. That doesn’t draw a good parallel to those Hawks and Kings teams… who if they hadn’t run into each other, would likely have had 3 in a row. Both teams pushed hard over a 3 year span. Then after the end of that span they were spent. Avs not pushing this year isn’t akin to the Hawks or Kings falling short in their middle years.

Clearly someone didn't get enough ketchup this morning.
Just mad about Kakko
 
  • Like
Reactions: dahrougem2

Bender

Registered User
Sep 25, 2002
17,329
8,599
Not trying to argue. I’ll lay out my thoughts here of what I’m saying. I take the term of ‘go for it’ as really trying everything in that year. So going for it every other year would be all in next year while leaving this year meh. That doesn’t draw a good parallel to those Hawks and Kings teams… who if they hadn’t run into each other, would likely have had 3 in a row. Both teams pushed hard over a 3 year span. Then after the end of that span they were spent. Avs not pushing this year isn’t akin to the Hawks or Kings falling short in their middle years.


Just mad about Kakko
Sequel to 'Mad about You' with Paul Reiser ? Sounds horrible but I would watch every minute.
 
  • Like
Reactions: henchman21

Muffin

Avalanche Flavoured
Aug 14, 2009
16,832
19,221
Edmonton
Absolutely.

But we should have won at least another cup in that span.

That´s just my personal opinion.
We definitely could've made the finals in the bubble if we didn't lose both goalies. We could've won against Vegas as well, that series was lost on Graves' dumb play, if we win game 5 I bet we take that series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Moops

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad