Artturi Lehkonen made a comeback that left Denver in turmoil and Montreal Canadiens fans with a bitter taste.
In his first appearance after a long absence, Lehkonen stood out by scoring a power play goal, reminding everyone of the extent of his talent.
Artturi Lehkonen scored the decisive power play goal in his return to the game, and Nathan MacKinnon recorded five assists, leading the Colorado Avalanche to a 6-3 victory over the Seattle Kraken on Tuesday night.
Lehkonen, who missed the first 12 games of the season due to injury, quickly returned to form with a crucial power play goal.
This situation serves as a reminder that every decision in the world of professional hockey has lasting consequences. For the Canadiens, the absence of Lehkonen is felt, while the Avalanche fully benefits from his offensive and defensive contribution.
When asked about his emotions by the Denver media, the Finn admitted that it felt good to finally be recognized as an offensive player – an opportunity he never really had in Montreal.
Lehkonen took on a new dimension in Colorado, where he became much more than just a support player, finding himself on the first power play unit.
His defensive talents, already admired and confirmed, are now combined with an offensive strike which has been unleashed since he was on fire like never before during the 2022 Stanley Cup series where he won the famous trophy.
Lehkonen is a master in his ability to stifle opposing attacks and create scoring chances, he has become a complete and essential forward for the Avalanche.
His name now resonates throughout the league, and his exceptional match yesterday is proof of that.
For the Canadiens, trading Lehkonen for Justin Barron and a second-round pick remains an incomprehensible choice.
Hughes, in his desire to optimize the defense and make Barron a potential pillar, gave up a player whose versatility and efficiency were major assets.
Barron, despite promise, is still struggling to establish himself as a regular defender, and his impact remains limited. Barron’s value on the trade market has plummeted, significantly limiting the CH’s options to strengthen the team.
Right now, when the Canadiens are sorely lacking a balanced and reliable forward, Lehkonen embodies the lost talent, a talent that Martin St-Louis could well dream of having under his command.
With his reasonable five-year contract at $4.5 million per season, Lehkonen would have been an accessible leader, both financially and strategically.
Hughes, caught in the shifting sands of Reconstruction, finds himself haunted by this choice of letting him go, a choice that, in retrospect, seems like a devastating mistake.
This transaction is now a bitter lesson for Kent Hughes. In hockey, every decision can have serious and lasting repercussions.
Lehkonen continues to chart his path to success, while the Canadian remains grappling with his regrets, the shadow of this exchange now hovering over the organization.
Kent Hughes will never forgive himself. What a big mistake. This transaction delayed the reconstruction like never before.
Jean-Charles Lajoie’s criticism of Kent Hughes intensifies as he takes a closer look at the aftermath of the Artturi Lehkonen trade.
According to him, Hughes showed a blatant lack of strategic vision by parting with one of the most complete players in the NHL for a pittance.
Indeed, since his arrival in Colorado, Lehkonen has established himself as a key piece of the team, capable of playing both on the power play and on the power play, and his decisive contributions in the playoffs make him an undeniable asset. .
Lajoie does not hesitate to remind fans that Lehkonen could have become an essential element in the reconstruction of Montreal, by bringing this experience and this offensive talent that the team desperately seeks today.
Lajoie goes on to highlight the financial aspect of this transaction, insisting that the contract Lehkonen could have signed with the Canadiens would have been far below what he is now earning in Colorado.
According to Lajoie, the CH would have had the opportunity to sign Lehkonen to a reasonable contract of $3.75 million per season if he had remained in Montreal, an amount that would not only have been affordable for the CH, but which would also have ensured long-term offensive stability.
“Lehkonen was going to become a restricted free agent, eligible for arbitration. If the Canadian had kept his services, the latter would have had difficulty extracting more than $3.75 million per season from CH, because he would not have had the chance to win the Stanley Cup as he did in Colorado by accumulating 14 points, including eight goals, in 20 games in the 2022 playoffs.”
Imagine. Less than 4 million.
The 4 million of shame.
This calculation, which Lajoie keeps reminding us, accentuates the feeling of frustration: Lehkonen, who could have been a cornerstone in the revival of the Habs, was exchanged for a defender whose progress remains uncertain.
Worse still, by giving up Lehkonen, Hughes let go of a player capable of carrying the team on his shoulders in critical situations, a rarity in the NHL.
According to Lajoie, the Lehkonen trade illustrates a glaring inconsistency in Hughes’ strategy. While the CH claims to be seeking to build a young and competitive team, this exchange demonstrates, in Lajoie’s eyes, a lack of rigor in long-term decisions. He questions the supporters:
“If you had the chance to go back, would you be willing to sacrifice Justin Barron and a second-round pick to bring Lehkonen back to Montreal? »
For Lajoie, the answer is clear. Lehkonen, in his prime and demonstrating an ability to perform under pressure, could have formed a formidable alliance with young Montreal talents like Suzuki and Caufield.
Instead, the CH finds itself in a paradoxical situation, where the quest for a two-pronged attacker remains a priority, even though Hughes let one of the best in this role leave.
As the Canadiens seek to establish their new identity under Hughes’ leadership, this exchange symbolizes, for Lajoie, a painful lesson.
Although rebuilding often requires bold decisions, he reminds us that these decisions must be made with a clear vision and a deep understanding of the talents present.
Lehkonen, who has become a key player in Colorado, is not just a success story for the Avalanche, but a stinging reminder for Montreal of what they let go.
Lajoie’s conclusion is scathing: he recognizes Hughes’ efforts to reshape the team, but in the case of Lehkonen, he believes that the CH made a major mistake, a choice that could haunt the franchise for years to come.
For him, this chapter should encourage Hughes and the CH to evaluate their future decisions with increased caution, because each trade, each decision has the potential to rewrite the history of a team — for better or for worse.
Lately, with Hughes, it’s been for the worst…
