In the immediate aftermath of the Downie trade there was a substantial amount of chatter about how Downie was prone to taking bad penalties. This comment by Jibblescribbits in the aftermath of the trade tends to succinctly summarise this school of thought:

I think any benefit he gets is downsized by the fact he takes a lot of penalties. He takes more than he drawns too. Being a player that makes the Avs go on the PK more is not a good thing.

However, when one looks at Downie's career stats it becomes clear that this is not the case. In fact, Downie tends to draw more penalties than he takes.

Continue reading this post »

Following on from MHH's stellar Johnson coverage and ongoing questions concerning how good he is going to be, I decided to take a different approach to evaluating Erik Johnson. Namely, by literally comparing Johnsons with Johnsons so to speak.

Continue reading this post »

Following up from MHH's collective commentary on the Varlamov trade and what that says about the Avs front-office, our future and a number of other perspectives - I decided to look at other trades involving goalies since the lockout.

The principle aim of this article is to test the proposition, summarised by Seesixwhores, that "goalies are Expensive and Teams do not let them go for Nothing." I have ignored trades that involve draft picks beyond the 4th round or where the "centrepiece" is not a goalie in a multi-player trade

2005-6 season:

1. Thibault for a 4th round draft pick
2. Leighton (drafted in the 5th round) for Bartovic (a 2nd round pick)
3. Theodore for Aebischer
4. Roloson for a 1st and a conditional 3rd round draft pick

2006-7 season:

1. Luongo, Krajicek and a 6th round draft pick for Bertuzzi, Auld and Allen
2. Rask for Raycroft
3. Denis for Norrena and Modin
4. Cloutier for a 2nd round draft pick
5. Tellqvist for a 4th round draft pick
6. Biron for a 2nd round draft pick

2007-8 season:

1. Toskala and Bell for a 1st (13th overall), 2nd and 4th round draft picks
2. Vokoun for a 1st round draft pick
3. Montoya (6th overall) and Marcel Hossa (16th overall) for LeNeveu (46th overall), Sjostrom (11th overall) and Gratton (undrafted)

2008-9 season:

1. Mason for a 4th round draft pick.
2. Garon for Sabourin, Stone and a 4th round draft pick.
3. Tellqvist for a 4th round draft pick (again).

1. Giguere for Toskala and Blake.
2. Lehtonen (2nd overall) for Vishnevskiy (27th overall) and a 4th round draft pick

2010 to present:

1. Halak (271st overall) for Eller (13th overall) and Schultz
2. Salak (undrafted) and Frolik (10th overall) for Skille (7th overall), Jessiman and Pacan
3. Bryzgalov for Clarkson and a 3rd round draft pick

In total, there are 21 relevant trades. The question becomes, which of these are most comparable to Varlamov? Varlamov was drafted 23rd overall and is currently 23 years old. Due to this we can strike out most of the trades involving established goaltenders. I would consider that the 4 transactions in bold are the most similar to the Varlamov trade.

In each of these situations the goalie was a young prospect (with the possible exception of Toskala), who was the second option on the team (Price over Halak, Pavelec over Lehtonen, Lundqvist over Montoya, Nabokov over Toskala). Varlamov's position currently is probably more established than Montoya's at that time - so this would dictate that the return should be higher than this. Likewise, Lehtonen, despite having played more games for Atlanta (R.I.P) had a more extensive injury history than Varlamov has had. Nevertheless, a prospect who was drafted in the 1st round was still received for him.

This leaves the Toskala and Halak trades. Toskala was 28 or 29 at the time he was traded and had played 114 games in the NHL. Varlamov is 23 and has played 59 games in the NHL. However, Varlamov still has plenty of time to improve - whereas Toskala had reached his ceiling at this point (as was illustrated by his subsequent decline in play). Despite this, Toskala got a return in excess of what the Avs surrendered to the Capitals.

However, Halak is probably a better comparison here. He was 25 at the time and had played 101 regular season games. Again, you can make the point that Varlamov is younger, but Halak is more proven as a goaltender. But still, Halak got a quality prospect which was drafted in the 1st round.

In conclusion, when you are trading for prospects of Varlamov's calibre - history dictates that a first round prospect or draft pick goes the other way. Goalies are expensive.

Did we pay too much? Maybe. But one look at the Avs history of draft and developing goalies, makes you doubt Calvin Pickard or any other goalie in the Avs system is likely to be the long-term solution in net.

It obvious that the Avs have been extremely active in the trade market in the last year or so - from the Avs finally giving up on TJ Hensick, to the Avs recent trade of John-Michael Liles to Toronto for a bag of magic beans. I figured it would be interesting to compare this past year of trades to other years since the lockout.

The Avs have made 31 trades in total since the lockout ended. This is the history of how many trades occurred in number each year:

• 2005-06: 3 trades
• 2006-07: 4 trades
• 2007-08: 4 trades
• 2008-09: 4 trades
• 2009-10: 4 trades
• 2010-11: 11 trades
• 2011-12: Currently 1 trade

The first thing that is interesting is how consistent the Avs were in making trades throughout the Lacroix, Giguere and early in the Sherman-era.

The fact that Sherman made 11 trades is cause for concern in some ways - as it is far above average. Although this is not a record for a season (the 17 trades by the Oren Koules and the Tampa Bay Lightning in 2008-9 is probably a record), it raises an issue of whether Sherman is being too impatient with prospects (Cohen, Shattenkirk and Bournival spring to mind) or getting a poor return for the assets he has (such as the Liles and the Hunwick trades).

In light of this, I am curious as to if the MHH community thinks that Sherman's pro-activity in the trade market was a good move - especially in light of the impeding free-agency period.

When considering who the Avs should draft in the 2011 draft, it is worthwhile looking at how the top draft prospects perform in certain situations. To do this I taken 6 forwards which are considered to be top 10 selections - 2 from each of the major junior leagues (WHL, OHL and QMJHL). I looked at Gabriel Landeskog and Ryan Strome from the OHL, Ryan Nugent-Hopkins and Sven Bartschi from the WHL and Sean Couturier and Jonathon Huberdeau from the QMJHL.

Continue reading this post »

Just to wallow in the Avs hugely successful tanking campaign - I figured I would go back and look at the MHH community's wide-eyed optimism concerning the Predict and Win Contest set up earlier this season. I know that generally people wait until the end of the season before checking this - but why not cheer for the Avs to tank and attempt to win something at the same time...

Continue reading this post »

As this is the time of year where the Avs keep from giving - I figured a look at the performance of the Avs when the game was close is warranted. This gives us some idea of who scores the important goals.

Numbers are from Vic Ferrari's timeonice pages.

Continue reading this post »

Most Avs fans may have thought that going 8-9-1 post-Olympics was pretty bad, especially when there was the chance that Calgary would take the 8 seed. In particular, the lack of any wins in regulation against fellow Western Conference playoff teams would appear disconcerting (3-5-1 record overall).

However, there are some significant positives to be taken from this adversity. Namely, the fact that Anderson is not playing at his peak means that the offense and the defense have been picking up the slack.

Without invoking the power of Corsi, this improvement is most basically seen through the shots-for and shots-against over the period compared with the season average and the hot start to the season (the first 15 games):

• First 15 games: 23.9 SF v 33.1 SA.
• Post-Olympics: 29.7 SF v 32.1 SA.
• Season average: 27.7 SF v 31.8 SA.

As generally, shooting more leads to more goals, there is definite improvement in the Avs performance in this regard. The 6 shot difference is equal to approximately .63 of a goal more per game (use the Avs average of 2.91 GPG with 27.7 SPG).

What might appear worrying is the 32.1 shots against per game - but if big early lead that the Avs sat on against STL is stripped from the numbers, the Avs averaged only 30.5 shots against per game - also below the season average.

If this is combined with Anderson regaining some of that lost form - there is no doubt that the adversity that the Avs have faced over the post-Olympic period is going to be beneficial in the playoffs and into the future.

Has Mueller helped the powerplay? Yes. But, how much?

Now...this article is intended as a companion piece for Beachie's Mueller/Porter-Wolski trade analysis after 11 games.

Comparing the 11 games since Mueller joined the Avs and the games prior to this some interesting patterns emerge. Some raw numbers on the powerplay:

• In Mueller's 11 games with the Avs, there have been 52 powerplay shots on goal (4.73 shots per game). Mueller has been on ice for 35 of them. This means he is on-ice for basically 2/3's of shots on the powerplay.
• In the 62 games prior, the Avs took 303 powerplay shots on goal (4.89 shots per game).

Analysing these figures, Mueller's addition has not actually had a significant effect on the number of shots taken on the powerplay per game - Mueller's arrival has actually slightly decreased the number of shots per game on the powerplay. Granted, this may be because there has been an increase in the number of quality scoring chances which has generated more goals and has prematurely ended the powerplay.

But, if you compare powerplay units with Mueller on it versus powerplay units without Mueller you get a better sense of his value:

• Since Mueller, the Avs have spent 56:07 on the powerplay.
• Mueller has played 24:40 on the powerplay and has been on ice for 35 scoring chances. This translates to 1 scoring chance per 42.3 seconds of powerplay ice time.
• Powerplay's without Mueller have spent 31:27 on the ice for 17 scoring chances. This translates to 1 scoring chance per 111 seconds of powerplay ice time.

This difference is significant - Mueller-manned powerplays generate shots 2.6 times more than their non-Mueller counterparts. Obviously, some of the effect seen here can be attributed to the disparity between the strength of the 1st and 2nd powerplay units and also to the other players on the 1st powerplay unit clicking with Mueller (in particular Liles) - but regardless having Mueller is clearly helping.

Interestingly, the conversion rate of shots into goals is roughly the same on Mueller (4/17 = 24% conversion) and non-Mueller powerplays (7/35 = 20% conversion). Obviously, this proves one conclusion that people draw when the powerplay doesn't work - Shooting More = More Powerplay Success. Further, it eliminates the idea that Mueller is simply riding a wave of good luck as far as shooting percentage goes (his overall shooting percentage since joining the Avs is 21%).

The Isles are a frustrating team this year - possibly more so than last. There are the glimpses of the future that offer intrigue and hope. Then there are 7 game losing streaks where you get outscored 9 to 27.

Anyhow, one thing that is seriously troublesome is the performance of the Isles in the 3rd period. The Isles have only scored 31 times - the worst in the league by a significant amount (Calgary is the next worst with 40 goals). Further, the Isles have allowed 66 goals, meaning they have a goal differential of -35 -- the worst goal differential for any period of any team in the league.

However, rather than leave it at this, I decided to look at the games where the Isles score and are scored on in more detail. The results are interesting...

Continue reading this post »

Despite the successes of the Avs to this point, when the Avs have a 2-goal lead it appears that there is an impending sense of doom as the opposition mounts their comeback. So, how often does this happen and what are the results of such games?

More after the jump...

Continue reading this post »

After the Avs triumphant return to 1st in the Northwest and a 5 day holiday for the team - now is a time (not a good time - 41 games would be a good time) to look at where the Avs sit and what some reasonable expectations are for the rest of the season.  

Continue reading this post »

Came across this article at Puck Prospectus on the 2009 draft. It said some interesting things to say the least, especially on Duchene:

It seems that Los Angeles and Atlanta made out well with their first round picks, while Colorado went with the hype rather than the numbers.

...it looks like someone has issues.

Further...by their reckoning Stefan Elliot is not only the best choice by the Avs in the draft but the 5th best choice overall for the 2009 draft...

I guess we'll see if their statistical crystal ball is accurate or not (...I'd guess the latter)