clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

MHH Trade Deadline Survey Results

New, comments

Ok, first things first, I should read the fine print on these free trial websites.  Apparently you only get 100 responses for "Basic Accounts" and then the survey is locked down.  That and you can't do all the fancy cross-tabulation and filtering without shelling out $19.95 a month.  And I can't link to the results.  Or download them.  Damn. Long story short, the economy is in the crapper and Daddy Mike isn't about to drop twenty bones on you bums.  If I can think of a good survey during the off-season, I'd be happy to, but given that I don't think I did a very good job wording some of these questions, and it was a lame time-filler anyway, no dice this go around. Plus, my graphic on the last post seems huge and somewhat lame.  I gotta do something about that...

Here's the breakdown of responses:

Question #1: Are you a member of the MHH community (http://milehighhockey.com) on SBNation?

Yes - 54%

No - 46% (Losers..., but not these Losers, cuz they're cool)

IMO, that's a pretty good mix of respondants for a survey that was up for less than a day! That means that I'm a genius, right?

Question #2: AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SEASON, how did you feel about the following moves made by the management of the Colorado Avalanche?*

The Darcy Tucker and Andrew Raycroft signings landed surprisingly close at 54.7% and 54.2% being disappointed with the signings, respectively.  The overwhelming majority could give two squirts about Per Ledin (70.8% Didn't Care) or how long it took to get Joe Sakic to sign on the dotted line (63.5% Didn't Care). People were REALLY unhappy with the failure to retain Andrew Brunette with a whopping 85.4% being disappointed. The hiring of Tony G. didn't sit well at 64.6% being disappointed. The loss of Jose Theodore was pretty split, with 44.8% being "Excited" he left and 36.5% not caring.

In summary, while about half of the fanbase was not exactly thrilled with the two big free agent signings, the biggest problem they had going into the season was the loss of Andrew Brunette and the promotion of Tony Granato to head coach.

Question #3: What was your general feeling about the Avalanche PRIOR TO THE START OF THE SEASON?

The majority of the respondents felt that this was a team built to have a better than average shot at the playoffs, with 33.3% thinking they were a legit playoff team and 32.3% thinking they were on the bubble. NOBODY thought they were a lottery team and one schizo bastard thought they were Stanley Cup contenders!  Oh, it would be nice to dream about that again, wouldn't it?

Question #4: AS THE TRADE DEADLINE APPROACHES, how do you feel about the following moves made by the management of the Colorado Avalanche?

Wow, Sham Wow did NOTHING to improve his lot during the course of the season.  94.8% (!!!) of respondents think his signing was a bad move, compared to Raycroft's lot actually improving to only 39.6% thinking his signing wasn't that great.  The rest are apathetic to Rayzor (47.9% Don't Care) so it appears he at least didn't make any new enemies in the Mile High City.  The same can't be said about Tony Granato who now garners a 80.2% "Bad Move" rating as the trade deadline approaches.  The loss of Brunette continues to sting like a wasp as it got tweaked up to 89.6% counting it as a bad move.  Nobody thought the Per Ledin signing impacted the season as his "Don't Care" number hovered at 67.7%.  The Joe Sakic Waiting Game went up to a 74% neutral rating though, likely due to the injuries.  The loss of Jose Theodore was still pretty split, with 39.6% being OK with his departure and 34.3% not caring.

In general, nothing shocking there as the majority of sentiments shown in the survey jibe with what we've been saying here at MHH for a while. I was heartened to see that NOBODY thought the promotion of Tony G. to the helm was a "Good Move So Far."  There is hope for huge Manatee yet.

Question #5: What is your general feeling about the Avalanche AS THE TRADE DEADLINE APPROACHES?

Over half of the respondents (60.4%) think that the Avs are OUT of the playoffs for sure and 33.3% think that they should be actively pursuing a lottery pick.** I reached the 60.4% number by combining "No Chance at  the playoffs" and "Other" since the three anwers for "Other" included comments like:

"We're doomed, we're all doomed." and "5.4% FTW"

Another sign that perhaps we aren't all doomed (as a hockey society) is that ZERO respondents think the Avs are a playoff contender.

Question #6: What do you personally think is the most positive thing to happen to the Avalanche this year?

Lots of good stuff on this one. 44.8% of respondents thought Wolski's move to center was a bright spot, even though he hasn't lit the lamp in a while.  The play of Cody McLeod and the RPM line also ranked high at 21.9% and 17.7% respectively. The six responses from the "Other, Please Specify" camp are below:

Stewart may not be a bust.
The play of Chris Stewart
STEWART STEWART STEWART
Promise shown by Chris Stewart.
Chris Stewart
The emergence of Chris Stewart

I'm not exactly a rocket scientist (in fact, I know little about the topic), but I think that represents a clear pattern.

Question #7: What do you personally think is the worst thing to happen to the Avalanche this year?

And now a chance for all of the haters to hate!! The play of the defense came in at 24%, while the play of the offense ranked 11.5%, and the play of the goalies ranked 18.8%.  Interestingly (at least to me), SoS's injury ranked 21.9%.  Nobody gave a lick about Foote's injury, and one lone respondent was heart-broken about Forsberg saying "Thanks but no thanks" to the Avalanche (What are the odds it's JonHaven?). The write-in responses (15.6%) were pretty spread out between slamming Tony Granato and Tyler Arnason or stating "All of the Above."

This one interested me because the play of the defense and goalies are intertwined to a large degree and the numbers are pretty similar, but I expected more people to be upset with the pop-gun offense.  Sure the boys in Burgundy and some-shade-of-Blue have good nights, but they REALLY struggle against teams with anything resembling a semblance of a defensive system.  They also have a knack for making back-up goalies look like the second coming of Roy (see: Lacosta, Dan).

Question #8:Do you consider the Colorado Avalanche Buyers or Sellers as the NHL trade deadline approaches?

Wow.  Maybe I'm not preaching to the choir on this one.  64.6% chose "Sellers: Management should look to move a small portion of the roster for draft pics/prospects/upgrades" while 27.1% selected "Sellers: Kick the majority of the roster to the curb and bring in wholesale changes for next season in the form of draft picks and prospects."  That seems like a pretty clear mandate to management to me, with 91.7% of the respondents hoping management does SOMETHING for next year and not try and salvage this season.  (I'd be remiss if I don't mention that one fella or filly thought that the team only needed minor tweaks to make a run at the playoffs. I'd personally advise that person seeks professional psychological help, but that's just me and my opinion.)

Question #9: If the Avalanche are sellers, who would you shop as their most attractive piece? (Choose all that apply)***

Brett Clark led all candidates with 62.5% of the vote, while fan favorites Tyler Arnason and Darcy Tucker came in at 60.4% and 52.1%, respectively. The Svats Machine was up there with 59.4% and Leopold ranked 49%.  The other end of the spectrum had ZERO votes for Sakic, 2 votes for SoS (WTF?), 1 for Stewie, 4 for Jones, and 5 for The Baron.  We also had one vote for Tony Granato, but I'm not sure the NHL would allow that.

Again, lots of the same names we've been tossing around here at MHH and other places for a while now.  Maybe Joe, DD, and I are finally getting through to you people?

And last but not least...

Question #10: What should the Avalanche focus on acquiring through any Trade Deadline moves?

An overwhelming majority (54.2%) wanted the Avs to look to the future with a combination of draft picks and prospects. Next on the wish list was "Established Goaltending" with 18.8%.Again, this appears to be a clear-cut desire from the fanbase to see management look ahead rather than try and pull something out of the crapper for this season.  What does that mean? Probably that they'll screw the pooch and trade Stastny straight up for Curtis Joseph.

Some of the better (i.e. funnier) responses to the fill-in answer included:

f*cking offense
A goaltender to back up Raycroft for the remainder of the season

Sure, they're funny for different reasons, but you get the point.

Anyway, that was MUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH longer than it should have been, but at least I feel like I did something this month.  Thanks to everybody who replied, and let me know if this was an interesting look at something or if it was a total waste of your time.  You won't hurt my feelings.  I'm Toadstool. My sights are set pretty low as it is.

*Now the first problem I had in hindsight with this survey (remember, I created it so self-bashing is OK!) was this question.  Why?  It required honesty from the respondent about their feelings in the past. We all know that Avalanche fans are delusional.  Hell, some of them thought the Raycroft signing was for the #1 goalie position!  I kid, I kid.

**Another problem I had was this answer.  I should have said "Deliberately Tanking" but went all wordy and proper English instead.  Stupid.

***My biggest problem with this survey was the wording of this question.  It was ambiguous and open to interpretation. As I stated in the original post's comments, I really meant to say something like "Who can the Avs realistically shop and get value back that would make moving player X palpable?" Ehh, you live and learn. Take the above results with the misinterpretation possibilities in mind.