Whose side are you on in the case of Stastny v. The Avalanche...?

Question

Peter Stastny, former Quebec Nordique and father of current Avalanche forward Paul Stastny recently called out the Avs after trading Stewart and Shattenkirk to the Blues. On a St.Louis radio station, Peter Stastny was quoted on saying:

"This young team was ready to challenge, almost, for a Stanley Cup this season. They were so good. All they needed was some more chemistry and some synergies. Instead, they destroyed the team...They've moved the team about two to three years back."

Questions:

1) Is it okay for (former) players to openly criticize their former franchise?

2) Does the fact that his son Paul plays for the team have anything to do with Peter's comments?

3) Do you agree with Peter's statement that the team has been set back 2-3 years because of this trade?

4) How does this affect the relationship between Peter Stastny and the Avalanche?

5) How does this affect the relationship between Paul Stastny and the Avalanche?

Answer 1

1) It's okay as long as he doesn't expect people to take what he says seriously. It isn't really any of his business, after all. Just his opinion. However, I think it was pretty stupid of him considering his son plays for the team. Paul probably had a "hoo boy..." moment.



2) I am sure that the fact that his kid plays for the Avs had everything to do with his comments. You want the best for your kid. I question the sanity of Peter Stasny for doing this, though.



3) I suppose you could look to this years Blackhawks for insight as to what COULD happen. The fact the Stasny Senior really has no current involvement in the Avanalanche organization except his kid it probably only makes the Avalanche really ticked.



4) Peter Stasny is, apparently, kind of a hot head and from reading up on him I see that he has offended others and been offended by others. He resigned from the Slovakia Hall of Fame for cripes sakes over a disagreement. I imagine there are signs on all entrances to the Pepsi Center that says: "No admittance for Peter Stasny".



5) The Avs will be professional. They have most certainly talked to Paul about the incident and he has given his opinion. Paul knows which side his bread is buttered on and who butters it. He will do everything he can to make sure it does not affect his play. I bet he expects to be traded, though. And I think the next Stasny family dinner will be a bit uncomfortable.



PS Here is MY opinion. Peter Stasny sounds like an idiot.

Answer 2

1) Is it okay for (former) players to openly criticize their former franchise?

He is entitled to his opinion, but not the class act I would expect of him.



2) Does the fact that his son Paul plays for the team have anything to do with Peter's comments?

Obviously.



3) Do you agree with Peter's statement that the team has been set back 2-3 years because of this trade?

That is something that cannot be known at this time.



4) How does this affect the relationship between Peter Stastny and the Avalanche?

PS admitted he should not have said what he said, but then said more.



5) How does this affect the relationship between Paul Stastny and the Avalanche?

Shouldn't be a problem unless someone wants it to be one.

19 minutes ago - 4 days left to answer.

Answer 3

1. He has the right to his opinion.....but I think he shouldn't have said anything. Or, he could have said it during the Off season, that would have been better.



2. Im sure it does, I don't understand why else he would be so mad over his former franchise. That'd be like Yzerman calling out Holland and the Red Wings....he just wouldn't do it.



3. I was shocked to hear Shattenkirk got traded. Im not positive but I thought he was a pretty good key player on the team. I don't think they will be a horrible team though, they are a very fast team that just needs a little extra something to really get them going.



4. I don't know. If I were the Av's organization I wouldn't even worry about what Peter said, he is not on the team anymore so it really is none of his business.



5. It's not Paul's fault that his father said those comments, so the Avs shouldn't take it out on him. But, if Paul agrees with his father....then it definitely could be a problem.

Answer 4

1) Everyone has an opinion. See Lemieux's statement after the Isles/Pens game.

2) Yes, despite any claims to the contrary.

3) I think it was a terrible trade on Colorado's behalf. Stewart is incredibly underrated and will only get better in the years to come. Shattenkirk is also very promising. It's hard to throw away young, talented guys like that. I don't know if it "moved the team about two or three years back" but it definitly didn't move the team forward.

4) How was the relationship prior to this statement? Was Stastny involved with the organization? I don't know if it will have any affect...

5) I don't think he'll make a big deal out of it. He'll just do his job and play hockey.

Answer 5

1) Is it okay for (former) players to openly criticize their former franchise?



I think it's disrespectful but, take it for what it's worth, an opinion.



2) Does the fact that his son Paul plays for the team have anything to do with Peter's comments?



I'm sure it has more to do with his son than his former team.



3) Do you agree with Peter's statement that the team has been set back 2-3 years because of this trade?



I'm not a professional so only time will tell.



4) How does this affect the relationship between Peter Stastny and the Avalanche?



I gather the team didn't have him over for dinner anyway so I'm sure nothing changes.



5) How does this affect the relationship between Paul Stastny and the Avalanche?



That all depends on Paul. Will he keep his mouth shut and play or will he take his dad's side?

Answer 6

1. I don't think there's any set protocol to follow. And in this case, I'd forget about any unwritten rules. People can say what they want, although I kinda wish Peter didn't say anything in this case. Really, it sounded like he had no idea what he was talking about... a Stanley Cup this year? I like his optimism, but we had no defensive depth from the beginning.



2. I think so. When the Avs drafted Matt Duchene, they had a young, yet strong forward corps in Stastny, Hejduk as the veteran, Duchene, Stewart, Wojtek Wolski, and Marek Svatos (although he flopped badly that year). With Sherman trading away Wolski and now Stewart, I can't help but wonder if Peter thinks his son's next. Sherman trading away good players like Stewart and Scott Hannan probably doesn't help Peter breathe any easier. If Peter does think Paul's next to go, though, I think he's being overly paranoid. But to your question, I think it's got everything to do with Paul.



3. Not at all. We would've been set back 2-3 years if we kept relying on Hunwick, Wilson, and even offensive-minded defensemen like Liles and Shattenkirk to help our goalies out. Even if the Avs lost this trade to St. Louis, which I personally think we did, albeit not by much at all, Erik Johnson is a good start for our defense.



4. I didn't know they had a relationship besides Peter being an alumnus. I guess the situation may get more tense, though. Hopefully that won't be the case.



5. Paul should be fine. He better be, anyway. I'm sure he had his thoughts about letting two pretty good players in Stewart and Shattenkirk go, but if he's kept them to himself, hopefully the media doesn't force Paul to talk now that Peter's made these comments.

Answer 7

Before I answer this, I would like to say that Peter needs to really take a deep, long look at this Avalanche team before he says, "This young team was ready to challenge, almost, for a Stanley Cup this season. They were so good." Losing 10 straight games doesn't make a team "so good".



1. Well, it happens quite a bit in other sports, so I'm not going to start complaining now. I think it's not exactly classy, but I'm not going to stop Peter.



2. I'm sure it does. No father wants to see his son fail or lose.



3. Perhaps. It is important to remember that Colorado also received another 1st round pick in either 2011 or 2012 from St. Louis in the deal, so having 2 first round picks is a major plus. It gives Colorado a chance to package both to move up the board.



4. I didn't realize there was a major relationship between the two parties.



5. It doesn't.

Answer 8

1, Yes, but the level of vitrial will determine his ongoing popularity with the fans and management. If you consider a former player as an "alumnus" of a team, they would have a right to speak out, good or bad, about that team. They spilled blood and sweat for a team, and they have pride in how the team performs. But if they go completely off the rails and bashes everyone right down to the concession stand workers, that player likely won't have too much favor around that pond.



2. Likely so. He just wants his son to have a chance to lift the cup, and in his eyes, this move hurt that chance any time soon.



3. Time will tell, but yes, this when coupled with their apparent admiration for Brian Elliot, of all people, can't bode well for the future.



4. Did he even have much of a relationship? I read an article that made it sound as if he were far closer to the Blues management.



5. He's gotta shrug it off to a certain degree, as do the Avs. If Paul suddenly starts loafing, then there would likely be a problem. Otherwise, be a leader, leave everything on the ice (not like that minor league coach, but you get the idea) and put forward a positive persona. That's the best way to maintain a good relationship with the Avs.

Answer 9

1. He can do it. He's entitled to his opinion but I doubt Sherman is happy with this.



2. Yes. He is probably the biggest reason and I hope Peter didn't read Adrian Dater's blog mentioning Paul being traded...



3. Not sure. The Avalanche do have quite a few more than decent defensive prospects to make up for losing a really good player like Shattenkirk and adding Johnson is a step up but losing a guy who can put up 30+ goals a season is gonna sting and sting bad.



4. I don't think it will affect much. If there's more behind these statements than just a pissed off fan (Peter) expressing his anguish with this deal than I don't expect anything to change.



5. It won't.

Answer 10

1) The day they stop paying him a salary is the day that his compulsive loyalty ends.



2) I don't know enough about the Stastnys to make a judgement.



3) Hockey experts are mixed on the opinion of this trade. But for a team that is 14th place almost anywhere is up.



4) Probably takes away his free pass to the rink and he'll have to pay like all legitimate fans.



5) Shouldn't matter. Parent's comments only affect the relationship if the players' echo those.

Answer 11

1: Former players, I suppose. It's their opinion. Current players should keep their feelings more on the down low.



2: How would it really?



3: I don't know. I think over-all we lost more then we gained. McClement isn't my favorite player, I don't like him so far and Shattenkirk was very good, especially for his rookie season. But, Johnson is going to become our defense. I mean, he's going to lead them for years to come. So I don't know.



4: They might not like it, but (I think) they should really listen to him. After all, he does have a deep connection with the team having both played for the franchise and now having his son play for them and he's had so much experience. He knows his hockey and I think being brutally honest is good for them. Over-all, I don't think it'll hurt their relationship.



5: It won't. His dad is not him. If the Avalanche organization can't distinguish that, I hope Peter has a field day at their expense and Paul let's them know that they aren't the same person, contrary to popular belief.

Answer 12

1. He's in a position to have his opinion heard. He has strong convictions on this matter and chose to use his status to air them. I'd rather see former players be passionate about the game then to not give a damn.

2. Well of course. He now is Paul's biggest cheerleader and a proud father. He'd love to see his son hoist the Cup.

3. No, I don't. I was surprised that they moved Shattenkirk given his strong rookie campaign but they needed to shake things up as they were spiraling in the standings. They've gone 1-8-1 this month and dropped three of their last four to finish the month of January.

4. I think the organization respects his opinions but if has no bearing on their decision-making. They believe in the moves they've made.

5. I don't believe there will be any affect whatsoever.

Answer 13

the avalanche will win...they are going to take the subsequent 2 in colorado then take there 4th in both the fifth pastime in minnesota or the sixth back in colorado...the series wont bypass to 7 video games.