The New Jersey Devils are not the right match for Johnny Gaudreau
Follow me on Twitter @ToddCordell | @InfernalAccess
Be sure to join the Discord channel to talk hockey, and everything else, with me and fellow subscribers.
The Calgary Flames are going to make big changes this off-season.
All signs have suggested as much for a while now. Given the way Calgary bowed out of the playoffs – three straight defeats, topped off by a Game 6 loss where they allowed seven consecutive goals – I’m even more sure the Flames will be reshuffling the deck.
I think Sean Monahan, an inconsistent offensive center who can’t defend or drive play, is the most likely name-brand player to be moved. He should be, anyway.
It is, however, possible the team moves on from Johnny Gaudreau. Eric Francis poured gasoline on the fire in a recent article at Sportsnet.
Let’s, for the sake of argument, say Gaudreau will be made very available. Should the Devils have interest?
Probably not.
Gaudreau is a really good player but I’d have plenty of reservations about the Devils trading for him.
For one, Gaudreau’s game fell off a cliff this season. His even-strength offense dipped from +11 Goals Above Replacement (GAR) to +1.2. For perspective, Travis Zajac’s even-strength offense was worth 1.0 GAR this season. Yeah.
Gaudreau’s overall GAR dropped from 17+ in consecutive years to +3 this season.
Things didn’t get any better in the playoffs. Gaudreau failed to muster up a single point at 5v5 in 10 playoff games. It wasn’t a coincidence. He ranked 9th among Flames forwards – behind guys like Milan Lucic and Tobias Rieder – in Expected Goals. He didn’t generate much of anything at 5v5.
Speaking of Expected Goals, the Flames controlled only 41.84% with Gaudreau on the ice. That ranked him 15/15 among Flames players who logged at least 100 minutes of ice.
Now, Sean Monahan was largely horrible and Elias Lindholm was inconsistent. But those guys are both 25 and Gaudreau had no problem piling up the points with them a year ago. It can’t be *all* on them.
Generally speaking, should teams be trying to buy low on Gaudreau and hoping for a rebound? Absolutely! He put up 58 points in 70 games, which equates to 68 points over 82, in a ‘down’ season. You can argue that is still worth the money.
My issues with Gaudreau as a fit for the Devils are as follows: he has two years left on his contract, and he’ll be 30 before he plays a game on a new deal.
Two years is a problem because, if GM Brad Treliving is doing his job right, you’d have to give up a lot to get Gaudreau. It doesn’t make sense to pay a premium for two years of hockey if you’re not ready to contend.
In theory, you’d have to re-sign Gaudreau for it to be worth the cost of acquisition. The problem is his entire contract would be played on the wrong side of 30 and, if he re-establishes himself a little bit, he’s probably going to command $8-9 million on a long-term deal.
Paying premiums for stars in that age range is one thing if you’re contending and need to keep the player around to extend the window for a few more years. It’s another if, as a team, you’re just starting to climb the mountain and in a short period of time you’re going to have a bad contract anchoring you down.
I like Gaudreau. I really do. I think Calgary would probably be best to keep him and move other pieces. If he does move, I’m sure he’ll do well at his next landing spot.
But I don’t think a Devils team – one so far away they couldn’t make a 24-team postseason – should be trading high-end assets for Gaudreau.
They’re not going to win within the next two years, and I don’t think it makes sense for them to pay a premium to lock up Gaudreau for six or seven years as he steadily declines.
numbers via naturalstattrick.com and evolving-hockey.com
This is going to trigger the Facebook Devils fans
I agree, not right with their timetable.