Toggle sidebar

Landeskog Practicing w/Team

LTCPain75 said:
milehighsticking.com

When can Gabriel Landeskog return to the Colorado Avalanche lineup?

Can Colorado Avalanche captain Gabriel Landeskog return this season?
milehighsticking.com milehighsticking.com
Click to expand...
I’ve seen the question asked many times. Can he return this season if his health would allow it? Now that the trade deadline is well in the past, the answer is no. The reason, simply, is that the salary cap situation would not allow it. Landeskog holds a $7 million cap hit, while the Avalanche only have $836,500 in cap space. It just simply isn’t possible for his return before the playoffs. For the Avalanche fans who were unsure about this—and I don’t blame you—I’m sorry to burst your bubble.
Click to expand...
Well that's just straight up false. Manson is now out for the rest of the regular season. You put him and Wood to LTIR (since Wood is apparently also playing through injury) and boom, there's your capspace to activate Landy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeoRox89, Foppa2118, CobraAcesS and 7 others
If Wood has chronic back pain, he might be eligible for LTIR. He’s a healthy scratch now though. Manson out 3-4 weeks is pretty much rest of the regular season, so he can go on LTIR
 
MarkT said:
Necas at 10 is another reason to trade the guys I listed.



This is exactly why you more Girard. He is worth more. Another team will look at him as #2 or #3, he's only 26, and he has another year at only $5m. Meanwhile, we can give Malinski his role, and eventually Behrens or Gulyayev (both small guys who can move the puck). We already see that on our team, he's somewhere between #3 and #5 and we don't need him on the power play. If we move Girard, our defensive next year could look like this:

Toews - Makar
Lindgren - Manson
Middleton/Behrens - Malinski

That looks good to me. And if we lose Lindgren, then we need Manson even more, and if we move Manson, who exactly are our RDs? Makar, Malinski and...? Moving Manson likely means we need to sign someone else, which kind of removes the reason to move him (cap relief). Also, look at the upcoming UFAs - there are a lot LDs than RDs, so if we move Girard/Manson and need to sign someone to less money to replace them, there are a lot more options at LD.
Click to expand...
Will they though? The Avs chose Girard over Byram I would imagine in large part because I don't believe they could get the value back that they wanted in moving him. I don't believe many teams will give up a ton of value for a small guy. But plenty of teams cream their pants for a dman who can bring any ounce of physicality to their team regardless if they can actually play hockey or not. See Ben Chiarot. It'd probably cost more the replace Manson, but I just don't think the juice is worth the squeeze in moving Girard.
 
a mangy Meowth said:
Let's not use up Landy's knee in regular season games
Click to expand...
Also in one of those interviews, they were talking about how pumped Landy is gonna be in his 1st game with the adrenaline rush and everything, to which Landy himself said he feels sorry for the d-man that’s gonna get in his way. Let’s use that in the 1st game vs Dallas and maybe instead of that d-man it’s Jamie Benn
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: BrickNHL, cccoltsicehockey, Avs91 and 1 other person
forsbergavs32 said:
I’d rather get Lando a couple games to end the regular season up here than risk him on a conditioning stint against AHL goons.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry... I'm just having a very hard time imagining Gabe Landeskog pulling on an AHL jersey. Gabe's a true professional and will know when he's ready to play responsibly and Bednar is going to practice the hell out of him as he gets closer.

I just don't see any reason to send Landeskog to Loveland.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LTCPain75, CobraAcesS, Foppa2118 and 1 other person
expatriatedtexan said:
I'm sorry... I'm just having a very hard time imagining Gabe Landeskog pulling on an AHL jersey. Gabe's a true professional and will know when he's ready to play responsibly and Bednar is going to practice the hell out of him as he gets closer.

I just don't see any reason to send Landeskog to Loveland.
Click to expand...

I personally don’t think they would do that, but I’ve seen a conditioning stint thrown around and I don’t think it’s a wise idea. 2-3 games before playoffs on the California swing to give him a bit of a refresher.
 
  • Like
Reactions: expatriatedtexan
MarkT said:
Necas at 10 is another reason to trade the guys I listed.



This is exactly why you more Girard. He is worth more. Another team will look at him as #2 or #3, he's only 26, and he has another year at only $5m. Meanwhile, we can give Malinski his role, and eventually Behrens or Gulyayev (both small guys who can move the puck). We already see that on our team, he's somewhere between #3 and #5 and we don't need him on the power play. If we move Girard, our defensive next year could look like this:

Toews - Makar
Lindgren - Manson
Middleton/Behrens - Malinski

That looks good to me. And if we lose Lindgren, then we need Manson even more, and if we move Manson, who exactly are our RDs? Makar, Malinski and...? Moving Manson likely means we need to sign someone else, which kind of removes the reason to move him (cap relief). Also, look at the upcoming UFAs - there are a lot LDs than RDs, so if we move Girard/Manson and need to sign someone to less money to replace them, there are a lot more options at LD.
Click to expand...
Girard is worth more because he's the better player. A team in its last contending years shouldn't be trading away talented players in their prime like him.

You drop bottom 6 forwards like Colton and Wood as well as aging and injury prone guys like Manson well before you consider moving Girard. Unless of course you have a direct replacement lined up ready to step in right away like when Makar replaced Barrie. Gulyayev and Behrens haven't shown anything in the NHL yet to suggest that they could step into that role now though.

Also that D group doesn't look that great.
 
I know Forsberg missed an entire year in 2001-02 and came back for the playoffs and was the best player in the playoffs, but Forsberg seems like one of a kind in that regard. That guy would regularly come back after missing a long period of time with a 5 point game. I hope Landeskog is like that and can come back after three years and quickly look like he hasn't missed a beat. Maybe it's foolish to be skeptical. Seems like the organization is going to let Landeskog determine how this goes, so if he's comfortable stepping right back into the NHL playoffs they will probably let him. But worrying about him playing in the regular season can't be a thing... it's not like the playoffs are going to be any easier or less physical. If they have a chance to let him shake off any rust in the regular season it seems like a good idea, but I wouldn't second guess it if Landeskog and the team think otherwise.
 
forsbergavs32 said:
I’d rather get Lando a couple games to end the regular season up here than risk him on a conditioning stint against AHL goons.
Click to expand...
Looks at schedule, sees the Ducks as the last game. AHL team it is!

In all reality, if you could LTIR wood and Manson, the last home game against Vancouver is the game I would like to see him in.

You get to choose the matchups a bit more and it’s a friendly crowd for the first game back.

Rest him against the Kings and then play him against the ducks as well in the last road game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: forsbergavs32
Drury_Sakic said:
In all reality, if you could LTIR wood and Manson, the last home game against Vancouver is the game I would like to see him in.
Click to expand...
I doubt they’d even need to LTIR anyone? Wouldn’t Landys cap number be his total salary divided by 82 games (computed for one game)? It’s probably not much at all to overcome for throwing him in there a few games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
adding hide avatars option

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom