Skip to content
The Stanley Cup final is always firmly on the calendar, but this clash is particularly appealing in terms of star power and impact on the league landscape. The Tampa Bay Lightning, a burgeoning dynasty, is attempting to collect their third straight trophy, a feat that seemed impossible in the 21st century. At the same time, the Colorado Avalanche has the hallmarks of a franchise that could begin its own dynastic run. With an excess of skill at splitting the ice, the propensity could be to lean into overs. Instead, I love the Unders and the home team.
Tampa Bay Lightning at Colorado Avalanche
Saturday, June 18 – 8:00 p.m. ET
Hockey results can be deceiving. A team can be dominated but stay close because of goalkeeping. In contrast, a hard-fought 5v5 game can result in a one-sided result due to special teams. A score tells the outcome but can mask the story.
Game 1 of the cup final was decided in overtime, but the game was decisive in Colorado’s favour. The Avs almost doubled the Lightning in 5v5 shots. In the underlying metrics, Colorado finished with 2.66 goals expected, while Tampa Bay managed a meager 1.22. I choose the Avs to win again in Game 2 for three reasons.
First the pre-check. The Avalanche were immensely successful in disrupting and blocking the path of Lightning’s forecheckers to the puck. This gave the Colorado defenders time to get the puck and take readings to finish their end clean. Conversely, the Avs forecheck was excellent, as evidenced by Valeri Nichushkin’s goal.
On the Nichushkin tally, a Lightning breakout imploded from a relentless Avs precheck. Victor Hedman’s course pass on Ross Colton was thwarted. A pass to the outlet, Nick Paul, was blown up by a pinched Cale Makar, and Nathan MacKinnon grabbed the puck and found his linemate for Colorado’s second goal.
With the Lightning failing to deter the Avalanche forecheckers, Colorado gleefully took away the wall of the Lightning breakout and turnovers multiplied as the puck pushed over the boards.
Adjustments will inevitably be made for Game 2. I think Tampa Bay will try to use more area passes to get off its end. In fact, towards the end of Game 1, Tampa Bay turned out the puck to see the game play out in the neutral zone.
The St. Louis Blues are the template for Avalanche opponents as they were the only team this postseason to have moderate success against the Juggernaut. One thing the Blues tried was to use their forwards against the Avalanche defenders on open ice. Of note, Colorado’s defenders had to defend without the help of their forwards at goals scored by Nick Paul and Ondrej Palat and were beaten.
Another reason I like the Avalanche is the traction they get off the bike. The Lightning play man-to-man defense, and when Colorado played high in the offensive zone with three widths, it scored favorable matchups.
On JT Compher’s third-half opportunity when he was left alone by the near post, Brandon Hagel allowed him to get behind and instead opted to try to front the puck. But Compher’s matchup against Hagel had been orchestrated by Colorado, as Jan Rutta had been dragged to the point where Colorado was stacking their bodies in threes on top of each other at the top of the offensive zone.
When I entered the series, I assumed Nikita Kucherov would be the easiest defensive line-up for the Avalanche. But in another sequence, Hagel’s questionable read allowed Makar to get behind him, only this time Devon Toews opted for the shot instead of the pass to Makar. The Avs’ offensive zone configurations didn’t do anything for them in Game 1, but if the Lightning continue to mess up on their own end, they’ll get burned in Game 2.
The third reason to go with the Avalanche is the Lightning’s secondary scoring issues. Against Rangers, the Kucherov Line became the sole provider of goals and that was acceptable as Rangers failed to score in a 5-on-5. In a low-scoring series, one line may suffice. But Game 1 of the Cup Finals showed just how troublesome Tampa Bay’s bottom nine forwards could be. The Kucherov Line produced six shots in 5-on-5; the other three lines produced eight. The Kucherov line had five highly dangerous chances. The other three lines combined for two.
The Lightning thrive with their backs to the wall. Once you disregard them and denounce them for appearing tired and sluggish, the Lightning play like gangbusters. I think Andrei Vasilevskiy will be much better for the Lightning on Saturday, but Darcy Kuemper should also improve as he was pretty terrible in Game 1.
The Avalanche looks like the faster, deeper, and more rested team. I think both teams will play better in Game 2 and I’m not betting against the Avalanche at their best.
Tip: Avalanche -155
The breakneck pace of the NHL schedule means praise is fleeting. The Anthony Cirelli line was crucial as Lightning defeated Rangers and advanced to the cup final. In Game 1 on Wednesday, the good vibes were replaced with the new reality of lightning. A swipe from Mikhail Sergachev helped the Cirelli line score, but most of the time on the ice the trio spent chasing the puck.
The numbers for the Cirelli line were really ugly. The Avalanche tripled her in shots when the Tampa Bay Shutdown Line was on the ice and nearly doubled her in shot attempts. In scoring chances, the Cirelli Line had a -9 difference, creating zero scoring chances in a 5v5.
In fairness, trainer Jon Cooper gives the Cirelli triumvirate the toughest minutes. They are stalwart attackers in the defensive zone. They played the lion’s share of their minutes against the lines of MacKinnon and Mikko Rantanen. However, even if they get more offensive zone time in Game 2, which seems inevitable, I doubt they’ll find the back of the net in a second game in a row.
Killorn is stuck in a senseless 12-game crisis. It’s a brutal stretch for a forward who has scored 25 goals this season, finishing behind only Kucherov and Steven Stamkos in points. But Cooper uses Killorn in a shutdown role, which isn’t conducive to point accumulation.
One way Cirelli could get a point is as a face-off man on the power play. In Game 1, he used the first pass to start the man advantage and then immediately left the ice. In one of the ties won by Cirelli, Victor Hedman carried the puck to Kucherov, who almost buried it in the top corner. Getting beaten with a Cirelli assist like this is a terrifying possibility. But the window of opportunity for him to take a man advantage point is small.
When ESPN’s Emily Kaplan interviewed Avs coach Jared Bednar during the game about the Lightning power play, the first thing he mentioned was that he would stop Point in the slot. I don’t know if he necessarily stated the hierarchy of needs, but the Avalanche defended the slot well, and every time Point touched the puck on the power play, the walls caved in for the Bolts. Along the same lines, surrounded by bodies and sticks, I think Point’s ability to create with his death is squashed.
Point missed not only a shot on the power play, but also an attempted shot – for the entire game. Fading a battered point – joining a Lightning powerplay unit that probably won’t get many chances against the disciplined Avalanche – seems like a worthwhile proposition. The price is steep, but all powerplay points are below that. Compared to others in the same range, this one seems to hit the safest.
Tip: Anthony Cirelli U 0.5 points -160, Alex Killorn U 0.5 points -175, Brayden Point U 0.5 power play points -200
The context is important. At first glance, it might seem risky to bet an under on a player who has four points in their last two games and 12 points in their last 15 games. But the Game 4 Lehkonen against the Edmonton Oilers and the Game 2 Lehkonen against the Lightning have one big difference: linemates.
Against the Oilers, Lehkonen played with Rantanen and Andre Burakovsky. Burakovsky is a fickle player who has spent some time as a healthy scratch this postseason, while Rantanen is an elite talent.
But in Game 1 of the cup final, Lehkonen was put on what was supposed to be a checkline with Darren Helm and Logan O’Connor. Sometimes the line looked good, getting the puck under the goal line and trapping the Lightning’s best players in their own end. They created four high-risk chances and conceded two and Lehkonen was an undeniable catalyst. Finally, he’s a gifted forechecker, has no qualms about creating traffic around the crease, and can play the F3 role when the Avs run their three-set in the offensive zone.
After all that, Lehkonen was moved to a bottom six of the forward energy line with an effort to slow down the Lightning’s top players. The ability to fade a bottom six forward on a reasonable line is a coup.
Of course, Lehkonen didn’t score 5v5 in the last game, but 5v3, and his role on the power play is significant. Lehkonen plays the bumper on the Avs’ man advantages and is a danger to deflect shots or receive a pass from the playmaker on the goal line. But the Lightning penalty has been solid in these playoffs, and if they’re disciplined, Lehkonen might not see much opportunity with the man advantage.
The last time Lehkonen stringed together a points streak of more than two games he was a Canadian from Montreal and that was in late February and early March. He had another points streak of three or more games, and that was in January. I think goals will be difficult to come by on Saturday and I don’t see Lehkonen extending his points streak.
Choice: Artturi Lehkonen U 0.5 points -120