The case for an upset watch against the Avalanche

The first-round playoff match-ups are set. And whether you are the Boston Bruins sitting atop the NHL pecking order or the 16th-seed Florida Panthers, eyes are affixed to 16 wins and a Stanley Cup.

The first-round is notorious for delivering some of the NHL’s most compelling hockey, owing in large part to the likelihood of upsets. Playoff hockey may be a different animal relative to the regular season, but at the end of the day this is still a lower-scoring league with highly volatile single-game outcomes. Better teams win often, but not always, and certainly less than that of their National Basketball Association counterparts.

And this year, I think there is one team in particular that is on upset watch. It just so happens to be the defending Stanley Cup champion Colorado Avalanche.

What makes the Avalanche – a terrifying team at the top of their game – ripe for a potential upset? Much of it has to do with a comically poor run of luck in the injury department.

The team has ran a de facto medical ward for most of the year, with marquee players like Gabriel Landeskog and Cale Makar missing significant time. Landeskog in particular has been ruled out for the entirety of the post-season. Add the bumps-and-bruises to their top players up, then add the depth concerns: Denis Malgin, Josh Manson, Andrew Cogliano, and Darren Helm are all battling one injury or another. And while some of them may play as early as game one, we know they are not at full health (Note: no team lost more man games).

I think there is tremendous hope this team is getting healthy at the right time – betting markets have the Avalanche at nearly 72 per cent to advance, which is trying to price that in. That line is equal parts dismissive of some of the injury concerns, and dismissive of their opponent.

And this is not the same Seattle Kraken team.

So what’s the argument on Seattle’s behalf? There are a few. Let’s start with an obvious one: Seattle didn’t have tremendous difficulty with this Avalanche lineup during the regular season. Again, Colorado’s been fighting holes in their lineup for much of the year, but there is a striking difference between this series (and, I suppose, New York and New Jersey) versus every other match-up:

Yost 1

Even though these teams only play each other a handful of times a year, we know match-up performance can be predictive of future playoff outcomes, and Seattle played very competitively in those spots. After a 3-2 regulation win back in October, the Kraken would drop a 2-1 affair by way of the shootout in January, and pick up another one-goal win to finish the series in March. Notably, the games were uniquely defensive affairs, with goaltenders (including Alex Georgiev and Philipp Grubauer) stopping 92 per cent of shots apiece. Not only is that well above league averages observed on the year, it’s very counterintuitive to what you would expect in games featuring the firepower of the Avalanche and the depth of the Kraken.

So, check one box: the Kraken have played very competitively with the Avalanche, full stop.

Now let’s talk about how each team is progressing into the playoffs. We also know recent performance should be overweighted relative to how teams are playing in October or November– it’s simply more reflective of “today’s” lineup, which is sensitive to injuries, recent player acquisitions, and the like. It’s one of the stronger predictive tools we have for post-season success.

The below graphs show how each team’s real goal and expected goal differentials trended over the course of the regular season. What do you see?

Yost 2

My answer is three-fold.

1. Both teams are entering the playoff fray exactly how you want to see – a sharp performance move to the upside, beating opponents back with considerably high margin of victories

2. Colorado caught fire towards the end of the year, which seems a logical byproduct of getting healthy, but also of a team converting on nearly 11 per cent of their shots

3. Seattle’s expected goal rates surged towards the end of the year, well ahead of where Colorado was to end the season. Notably, their real-goal differential climbed in parallel. It’s a story as old as time: own the puck, control the neutral and offensive zone, and win games by building up advantageous shot and scoring chance volumes.  

Colorado has second-to-none calibre playmaking ability, especially on the rush, and tend to feast on bad goaltenders. And suffice to say, they are not playing against Connor Hellebuyck nor Ilya Sorokin here. But to play that type of style, you also need to be able to pulverize opponents through speed and pace of play. The Kraken may not have top-shelf goaltending, but they are nightmarishly good at maintaining puck control, which naturally mitigates much of that risk.

And lastly: what the Kraken lack in top-end talent, they make up by the way of depth. We are talking about a team that rostered thirteen players with thirty points or more on the year. And notably, we are talking about a roster scant of players out-scored on the season:

Yost 3

From Seattle’s top-line through their fourth-line, the Kraken generally won match-ups at even-strength. In fact, only two players – forwards Alex Wennberg and Jaden Schwartz – were net-negatives in terms of goal differential over the course of the season. Contrast that with this year’s Colorado team, injury-riddled, frequently changing lineups, and routinely dipping deeper and deeper into the bench.

There was considerably weakness further down the lineup relative to the juggernaut we have grown accustomed to. And yes, this is what happens when your star players miss meaningful time – it not only puts more burden to produce on mid-tier players, it effectively mandates your depth players become net-positives. That’s a difficult thing to achieve in a hard cap league.

I have tremendous respect for this Avalanche team and no team in this post-season would be more capable of making this piece look foolish and silly. But Colorado’s been fighting adverse health all season long, and their opponent is the type of team that could give them an awful lot of trouble.

Maybe Seattle’s goaltending bombs, or Colorado’s health is fully realized – at least enough to advance past round one. But that’s a lot of positive thinking for a team priced by betting markets like they are going to advance in four or five games.

Upset alert, Colorado.

Data via Natural Stat Trick, NHL.com, Evolving Hockey, Hockey Reference