Adrian Dater
Buy low, sell high. We’ve all heard that one. All things considered, the Avalanche got Sam Girard in a package that now would seem like a pretty great bargain. Matt Duchene brought in quite a haul, and it remains the masterstroke of Joe Sakic among his many very good acquisitions in his time as GM (that still feels weird saying he’s not the actual GM anymore).
Which is why I don’t think it makes sense to trade Sam Girard right now, nor do I think he will be traded – especially when it comes to clearing cap space to re-sign Nazem Kadri. I do not believe the Avalanche are actively shopping him and here’s why:
Let’s face it: the Avalanche actually won the Stanley Cup because of a dominant defense. Of course, they had/have a ton of top players up front and that’s a huge reason too. But the Avalanche finally won the damn thing again because of a suffocating defense, the kind that limited the two-time defending Cup champion Tampa Bay Lightning to just four shots on goal in the third period of an eventual 2-1 Game 6 win on enemy ice.
Colorado allowed 15 goals in the six games – six in one game, Game 3. They always had the puck. You win most games when you always have the puck more than the other guys.
I know what you might be saying: “Dater, the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup without Girard. He got hurt in Game 3 of the second round and never played again in the postseason. We need a 2C like Kadri more than we need Girard on D, especially with Bo Byram ascending now.”
It’s a valid argument. I’ve thought that way at times myself. But the more I’ve thought about it, the more I believe keeping Girard makes more sense, even if it costs a Kadri.
He’s 24 years old. The Avalanche have team control of him for the next five years, at $5 million per. He’s a very good puck-handler, and he still has good offensive instincts and talent. I think I would rather have a top-six again on defense that is absolutely loaded than overpaying on a long-term deal for a soon-to-be-32 Kadri. And my hunch, as a reporter, is that the Avalanche feels the same way.
Don’t get me wrong: I would much rather have a Nazem Kadri on my team that not having him on my team. But, as Cyndi Lauper once sang: money changes everything.
Could Kadri still be back? Yeah, but only on a short-term deal I think. The Avalanche would have to clear some existing cap space still, but I don’t think it’ll be Girard anymore. I’m thinking more like a J.T. Compher. Then, the Avalanche would likely still need to clear more cap space to keep Kadri.
Could it be that the Avalanche privately would rather try to move Erik Johnson and his $6 million cap hit? If that’s the case, I have not been told that, publicly or privately by anyone around the Avalanche. EJ is still a damn good player and obviously a fan favorite and locker-room leader. Plus, he has a no-trade clause. But let’s face it: moving EJ’s money looks like a smarter decision than moving a 24-year-old with a lot of talent, who’s on a relative bargain long-term contract.
On Byram: It all is great for the kid again, and hurray for that. But will we not all be maybe just a little nervous, given his concussion history, that it could go bad again with one hit? That can be said about any player, though, and you can’t think like that. But I’m just trying to be real here. If Byram were not in the lineup, a guy like Sam Girard suddenly becomes really valuable again.
Oh, and by the way: In the six games Girard played, the Avalanche went 5-1 and really dominated most of the games.
Sam Girard may well be traded before those final five years on his deal are up. But I don’t think it’ll be now. And I don’t think it should be now.