2017 Sens Off-Season

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

Depends on whether I am Ottawa or Colorado.

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive. He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

To be fair, smith is very serviceable and it's questionable whether Lando will actually produce more then 20 goals. It's been talked about how his play has declined. Is there a huge gap between what smith brings and what smith Lando brings? Not much if you ask me.

I'd be much much more interested in Duchesne than Lando

Edited

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

3rd liner? Lol

Ev wrote:3rd liner? Lol

Landeskog is definitely a 3rd liner on a decent team.  Not a great skater who is not much of a scorer.

I want him just so we can play some Star Wars themed music when Lando scores.

Oglethorpe wrote:

Ev wrote:3rd liner? Lol

Landeskog is definitely a 3rd liner on a decent team.  Not a great skater who is not much of a scorer.

He will score more goals than Smith and will double his assist totals. Is he worth *that much* more? Hard to say. But comparing him to Smith is a little strange.

Oglethorpe wrote:

Ev wrote:3rd liner? Lol

Landeskog is definitely a 3rd liner on a decent team.  Not a great skater who is not much of a scorer.

I couldn't disagree more and I really don't think there's any evidence to your claim. Last year was his only poor year, playing on a dumpster fire team. And he still had a 20 goal pace. He's been at 20+ goals over 82 games in every season he's been in the league. He's not a dynamic offensive player but he is, without question, a 2nd liner at the minimum. I'm really not sure why you think he's a third liner. He's a lock for 50-60 points every year on a non-dumpster fire squad. He's physical, excellent defensively, and is a strong leader. I think he would be a huge add for the Sens. He would fit Boucher's system very well and would give us that big power forward we've been missing.

Exactly why I doubt we get him. We'd probably have to give up more than Dorion would be willing to part with.

Cap'n Clutch wrote:I want him just so we can play some Star Wars themed music when Lando scores.

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

What. The. Diddle.

So, as it stands right now Ottawa is going in relying on Hoff, Turris, Stone and I think a rejuvenated Brassard (or a Brassard that now knows what to expect in Ottawa) and Ryan - who I think can rebound (fingers crossed). A lot hinges on MacArthur and Pageau/Smith regaining some of their slightly lost offensive mojo.

Defence looks good and deep, with a few options during the course of a grinding year - like sitting Claesson once in a while to have him re-focus, ditto Oduya, ditto Boro etc. We can have a nice revolving door of players on the back end until someone claims the spot.

Hoffman - Turris - Stone
MacArthur - Brassard - Ryan
Smith - Pageau - Burrows
Dzingel - Thompson - Pyatt
*they might try to get a veteran who can be the 13th forward on a PTO, unless they want White up with the team as the 13th, but I doubt they do.

Claesson - Karlsson
Phaneuf - Ceci
Oduya/Boro - Wideman
Oduya/Boro/Claesson as the 7th D depending

Anderson
Condon


You know what, I'm pretty happy with this lineup. Injuries will tax us, but that's the way of the league.

PTFlea wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

What.  The.  Diddle.

Lando is not the player you think he is.  He is a shell of the player he was in his first 2 seasons.

Oglethorpe wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

What.  The.  Diddle.

Lando is not the player you think he is.  He is a shell of the player he was in his first 2 seasons.

His second season was worse than his next three. You're vastly underrating him. He's not a superstar, but is a 2nd liner at the worst. You trade Smith for him without hesitation.

I don't know how much you can blame Lando's lack of improved production on playing with Colorado when he's given great C's to play with. If anything he hasn't shown he can get it done. I'd worry more about his numbers regressing playing with Brassard.

Oglethorpe wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

What.  The.  Diddle.

Lando is not the player you think he is.  He is a shell of the player he was in his first 2 seasons.

The Colorado Avalanche are defective - for whatever reason. I'd say Lando is closer to Mark Stone than he is Zack Smith. I'm not enamoured with him, but I'd LOVE to have him as 2nd line LW. Like...what a perfect addition to the 2nd line.

Ev wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

PTFlea wrote:

Oglethorpe wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

DefenceWinsChampionships wrote:Do you?

To Col: Smith, Wideman, Englund
To Ott: Landeskog

I'd do that.  I don't think Colorado does that.  That's a top 6 forward for a bottom 6 F, and two bottom pairing D.

Landeskog is no better than Smith, just more expensive.  He is a 3rd liner with intangibles and can't play centre.

What.  The.  Diddle.

Lando is not the player you think he is.  He is a shell of the player he was in his first 2 seasons.

His second season was worse than his next three. You're vastly underrating him. He's not a superstar, but is a 2nd liner at the worst. You trade Smith for him without hesitation.

I'd also trade smith for him but at what additional cost? I believe there could be better players available at the cost it is rumoured To be