Steve Palumbo: Avs & Landeskog Heading Towards A Divorce - 3 Players Qualified

Foolishness to at least not offer term. There are 31 teams in the league who will gladly give him 6mil + and seven years without even thinking.

Landeskog is turning 29 in Nov. and plays a physical game. Sakic is smart to not offer long term. Landeskog is a good- not great player. There is a good chance a long term contract will be ugly halfway through while Colorado is still a contender.

Foolishness to at least not offer term. There are 31 teams in the league who will gladly give him 6mil + and seven years without even thinking.
- hockeyaddict89

And 20+ of those teams will regret it by year 4. Colorado is a young team with many years left in their competitive window. Landeskog is replaceable. Overpaying for replaceable players is how contending teams become less competitive.

Foolishness to at least not offer term. There are 31 teams in the league who will gladly give him 6mil + and seven years without even thinking.
- hockeyaddict89

He is sooo much what the Leafs need. BUT...Leafs cannot afford. So, make that 30 teams....

Foolishness to at least not offer term. There are 31 teams in the league who will gladly give him 6mil + and seven years without even thinking.
- hockeyaddict89

But but what about 5 years from now? Facking idiots on this site

Whatever is the case, it's clear that the captain is frustrated. It's like my dad used to sad, he's not mad... just disappointed. Landeskog has every right to feel slighted. And when he signs with St. Louis or the Islanders we're all going to feel both sad and disappointed.

Gimme a break.

Nothing personal, just business. You have a lot of "feeling" words, here. I guarantee that's not how Sakic approaches these negotiations.

But but what about 5 years from now? Facking idiots on this site
- Isles

One day I hope I can grow up to be as cool as you are. Though uncivilized, you are correct. In 5 years from now the contract could look worse, but in the meantime he would bring something. If they were looking to make another go of it this season and lacking other options, why not offer him term? Hall got 6 mil in Boston for four years. If they want to keep a cap hit down give him a few more and the cap isnt so bad.

One day I hope I can grow up to be as cool as you are. Though uncivilized, you are correct. In 5 years from now the contract could look worse, but in the meantime he would bring something. If they were looking to make another go of it this season and lacking other options, why not offer him term? Hall got 6 mil in Boston for four years. If they want to keep a cap hit down give him a few more and the cap isnt so bad.
- hockeyaddict89

What? I was agreeing with you. I was talking about the idiots who would complain about the last couple of years while totally ignoring what he would do in the first 4 or 5 years

What? I was agreeing with you. I was talking about the idiots who would complain about the last couple of years while totally ignoring what he would do in the first 4 or 5 years
- Isles

Then it appears I am the uncivilized one instead. Lol that went over my head when I read it. My bad!

Then it appears I am the uncivilized one instead. Lol that went over my head when I read it. My bad!
- hockeyaddict89

All good brother

Any thoughts on the more likely teams he would sign with?

Would really like to see him back with the Avs. At this point, it's all business and hockey players have to make hay while the sun shines. Not unlikely that he gets offered a huge overpayment somewhere else

Would really like to see him back with the Avs. At this point, it's all business and hockey players have to make hay while the sun shines. Not unlikely that he gets offered a huge overpayment somewhere else
- Avs101

At the end of the day I believe that's what happens

Yeah, I agree with you both. It's the sad reality of the NHL. Every team will inevitably sign a player or more to contracts they want to get out of before their deals expire. If Colirado doesn't think Landeskog is the best way to allocate dollars that gives them the best chance at winning over the next 4-5 years, then move on I guess, but seriously, retaining their captain given everything he provides AND his productivity should have been a no-brainer. Sometimes you just need to accept some risk and kick a problem down the road. For the Avs, or whichever team he lands with, how can the risk not be worth the reward?

Any thoughts on the more likely teams he would sign with?
- david22

VERY doubtful, but I think it would be a lot of fun to see him lead the Kraken going forward. I'd make him the instant captain. (Honestly, he should sign with Colirado or a contender for less money, though . . . And not even sure Francis has the appetite to commit the dollars and term it would take to land Landeskog)

Yeah, I agree with you both. It's the sad reality of the NHL. Every team will inevitably sign a player or more to contracts they want to get out of before their deals expire. If Colirado doesn't think Landeskog is the best way to allocate dollars that gives them the best chance at winning over the next 4-5 years, then move on I guess, but seriously, retaining their captain given everything he provides AND his productivity should have been a no-brainer. Sometimes you just need to accept some risk and kick a problem down the road. For the Avs, or whichever team he lands with, how can the risk not be worth the reward?
- Quillanrocks

Colorado is at the early stages of their competitive window. Signing a likely bad contract in a few years is stupid for them. A team like Vegas, Pittsburgh, Boston, Tampa, etc. can afford a bad long term contract to compete now. Sakic is being smart and the fans saying to disregard the team's long term are braindead.

Colorado is at the early stages of their competitive window. Signing a likely bad contract in a few years is stupid for them. A team like Vegas, Pittsburgh, Boston, Tampa, etc. can afford a bad long term contract to compete now. Sakic is being smart and the fans saying to disregard the team's long term are braindead.
- jfkst1

Wonder if anyone has told MacKinnon that they're just at the early stages of their competitive window. (?) That a hard line needs to be drawn to keep that window open longer.

In that premise, I am curious, too, if term is an issue for the Avs when MacKinnon looks for 12 million per season on an 8 year deal that takes him to age 35 (almost 36). (?) But they'll probably be in the right competitive window then!! lol

And yeah, yeah . . . Totally different players, I get it. But 12 million is 12 million! And mid-thirties is mid-thirties.

Wonder if anyone has told MacKinnon that they're just at the early stages of their competitive window. (?) That a hard line needs to be drawn to keep that window open longer.

In that premise, I am curious, too, if term is an issue for the Avs when MacKinnon looks for 12 million per season on an 8 year deal that takes him to age 35 (almost 36). (?) But they'll probably be in the right competitive window then!! lol

And yeah, yeah . . . Totally different players, I get it. But 12 million is 12 million! And mid-thirties is mid-thirties.
- Quillanrocks

So you know it's a false equivalency defeating the purpose of your entire argument. Well done.

I thought I’d heard they gave him a 7MM x 6 yr offer? If he wants more than that then see ya later.

So you know it's a false equivalency defeating the purpose of your entire argument. Well done.
- jfkst1

You know it's not necessary for you to finish every post in an abrasive manner just to get your point across, don't you? LOL Are you here to engage in discussion or just point out how stupid everyone's opinions are?

If you could try reading everything I said, including the line immediately following what you bolded, I'd be open to a response to my points. But, if I'm simply just braindead, well then maybe leave me be to enjoy my play time!

The points I implied were:

- that MacKinnon may think differently about the competitive necessity of keeping Landeskog in the fold, and that may give him pause to his own future with the club.

- that it begs the question what reservations both the player and the team may have in 1-2 years' time when his next deal can be made, superstar or not.

Any deal for any player that is almost a decade in length, and pays significant dollars, comes with risk. It says something to the player and to the team when a player of Landeskog's impact is not deemed worth that risk, IMO.

You know it's not necessary for you to finish every post in an abrasive manner to get your point across, don't you? Over hockey hypotheticals of all things!! LOL Are you here to engage in discussion or just point out how stupid everyone's opinions are?

If you could try reading everything I said, including the line immediately following what you bolded, I'd be open to a response to my points. But, if I'm simply just braindead, well then maybe leave me be to enjoy my play time!

The points I was implying were:

- that MacKinnon may think differently about the competitive necessity of keeping Landeskog in the fold, and that may give him pause to his own future with the club.

- that it begs the question what reservations both the player and the team may have in 1-2 years' time when his next deal can be made, superstar or not.

Any deal for any player that is almost a decade in length, and pays significant dollars, comes with risk.
- Quillanrocks

Why even bother? That clown is one of the biggest Dbags on this site.

Why even bother? That clown is one of the biggest Dbags on this site.
- Isles

That right? Well, thanks for the heads up. I think I'll just leave it here then.

So they couldn't beat Vegas last year, and this year so far we're going forward without Saad, Donskoi, Graves (maybe addition by subtraction), Landeskog, and Grubauer, and people are still calling this a cup threat? This team needed Landeskog whether the contract became an albatross halfway in or not. Most do anymore, it feels like that's the norm and then the GM doubles down on his stupid and pays a player not to play for him.

Yeah, I get he's more worth 5.5 or 6 a year for 5 years but 7x7 probably buys you a cup or two. You do that. You just do that, and Sakic hasn't? For as amazing a job he's done with trades and everything else, this is a big mistake and it won't be forgotten. I'd bet MacKinnon doesn't forget it when his deal comes up.

Why even bother? That clown is one of the biggest Dbags on this site.
- Isles

One of the hazardous that comes with being correct much more often than not.