Denver Post sports writer Mike Chambers responds to questions in the Avs Mailbag every other week during the regular season.
Pose an Avalanche- or NHL-related question for the Avs Mailbag.
What team would present the Avs’ most favorable matchup in the first round of the playoffs? Least favorable?
— Jack, Hooper
If and when we resume play, Jack, I would think the Avs’ least favorable would be St. Louis, but that’s not possible if those teams finish 1-2 in the Central Division, in whatever order. Remember, the Central champ plays a wild card (likely No. 8 seed) and the Central runner-up opens against the third-place Central team. As for most favorable, that’s a dangerous question because the C3 and either of the WC teams are good. But besides St. Louis — a really strong neutral-zone trap team that has found a way to slow Colorado down — I don’t think the Avs have a preference in opening against Dallas (likely C3), or possible WCs Calgary, Winnipeg, Nashville, Vancouver or Minnesota.
Hey Mike, what do you have an update on MacKinnon yet? Really need to have the best player in hockey on the ice for the Avs to make a strong playoff run.
— Tim, Denver
It seems like every game I track online the Avs lose the faceoffs won/lost battle. Apparently this doesn’t affect the outcome of the games too much or the Avs wouldn’t be at the top of the standings, but it makes me wonder why they aren’t better at winning faceoffs and how they could improve. Is it something they need more practice at? Is it that they don’t care about winning faceoffs that much? Can you shed some light on this statistic for me?
— Jeff, Boise, ID
Sure, Jeff. The Avs have actually improved in faceoffs from the previous two years, when they were last or near the bottom. They are currently at 49.6%, which is 19th in the 31-team league. But I hear you — they seem to lose more big faceoffs than they win. Why? If Nathan MacKinnon has a weakness, it’s faceoffs; he’s at 43.1% this season. Which is why Gabe Landeskog (56.4%) usually takes draws on that line, and the power play. Pierre-Edouard Bellemare (53.0%) and J.T. Compher (47.7%) are Colorado’s other top draw guys.
I have a rules question that I hope you can answer. In our recent loss to Anaheim, it appeared that Anaheim’s third goal that came on the power play should not have happened, at least in the way it did. Before we committed the penalty that resulted in us being short handed, Anaheim was offside and drove to the net, causing a hooking penalty. My question is this: Can a replay review show that there was indeed an offside and nullify the penalty, as it should’ve never incurred and was a direct result of being offside? My guess is no and is only to be used on scoring plays, but I wonder if it should? We were dominating the game at that time and it changed the whole complexion of the game.
— Todd Gilbert, Littleton
Yes, a coach’s challenge for offside can only be used to try to overturn a goal, so the offside has to come in the same offensive rush as the goal.
Hey Mike, isn’t it concerning that the Avs are so bad in overtime 3-on-3? I know it won’t matter in the playoffs, but it’s crazy to think MacKinnon, Landeskog, Rantanen and Makar have a losing record against any other team’s best three skaters.
— Sam Kempter, Cedar City, Utah
Well, sans MacKinnon and Rantanen, they’re coming off an OT win in their last game against the Rangers. Big discussion about this last season, if you remember. Avs were like 3-15 in OT/shootouts, something crazy one-sided, but then they went 3-0 in OT in the playoffs.
Are the Avs really ready for prime time, meaning a Stanley Cup run? While being an outstanding team on the road, they are just slightly above average at home. They seem to play to their level of competition with examples being two home losses to the Ducks this season, losing to the Kings in the outdoor game, etc. On the road, they barely squeaked by a bad Red Wings team. Against the lowly Ducks, they had a chance to pull within one point of the Blues with a game in hand, but yet could not do it. This has happened many times throughout the year. I understand the injuries, but the Ducks were without their top four defensemen and the Avs still could not win.
— Eric Kea, New York City
It’s hard to really judge the Avs’ “bad” losses lately with all the injuries, as you mentioned. The Avs just had poor puck luck against the Ducks after that first flukey goal. The 2-1 win at Detroit was with Michael Hutchinson in net and Cale Makar out. Yes, the Avs aren’t nearly as dominant at home as they have in the past. But they can win on the road and, come playoffs (if/when), home-ice advantage heats up with the energy (assuming fans will be able to attend).
Mike, please explain: Upper Body?? Lower Body??? Why is it the NHL is the only major sport that treats injury information like it’s a classified state secret? Why can’t they just publish the specifics? It doesn’t change a thing whether we know that a player has a knee injury, concussion, etc. They’re still injured. Maybe you can clear this up for us?
— Dan Rish, Albuquerque, NM
Dan, it stems from injuries to the hand/wrist or shoulder. Teams don’t want to divulge those injuries because their opponent can slash or cross-check those areas to limit the player’s usefulness. That behavior was worse in the clutch-and-grab days (before 2005-06). So they decided to disclose injuries in the region of the body, and it stuck. Too bad. If I see a player on crutches with his lower leg in a boot, I’ll disclose that he has a leg injury (which includes ankle and foot). The Avs don’t want me to write that, but I don’t work for them — I work for you.