Rumor: Avs Proposals/Rumors/Free Agents 18-19 part XXIV|Planning for MacK Leaving

[Avalanche]

"Landy isn't a leader."

No babe posts pleaae

 

[AllAboutAvs]

I get what you're saying, but it is all kinda the same thing... IMO just putting a delineation on it to avoid labeling him as a low hockey IQ player.

To me if that was the case he would be making mistakes every game because the low IQ would show up continuously unless you are lucky those games and just happen to be in the right place all the time. That can happen some games but not as often as this. He has a lot of very good games and then one or two plays over a three game stretch he just glides around looking at the puck instead of going where he should go. To me that is just lack of focus not IQ or it would happen a lot more often like most games.

You'll probably not agree with this as well but IMO Barrie is a great example of a player with great offensive IQ and low defensive IQ. Most games he makes one or two very bad defensive plays that ends up as a goal against or the goalie needs to bail him out.

With one guy it happens most games, the other has mostly very good games and then it slips...that indicates low IQ vs focus to me.

Again I don't think we'll ever agree on this lol.

 

[DanglesFromDuchene]

We should trade Landy for the Toronto Maple Leafs captain so we can be a top-5 team too

 

[The Abusement Park]

He can say whatever cliche he wants, he has 2 Stanley Cup rings. Landy doesn't even have a playoff series win.

Ok let me know when one player single handily wins a team a playoff series nonetheless a cup. Then we can talk.

 

[chet1926]

Ok let me know when one player single handily wins a team a playoff series nonetheless a cup. Then we can talk.

You're right no single player has won a cup on their own. But the fact that he was the captain of 2 cup winning teams does earn him the right to say whatever cliche he wants to say. Because he has backed those words up.

When you are using cliches like Landy does and you've never won anything, they are meaningless words unless it changes what is going on, on the ice. But his cliches just lead to the same uninspired losing hockey.

 

[The Abusement Park]

You're right no single player has won a cup on their own. But the fact that he was the captain of 2 cup winning teams does earn him the right to say whatever cliche he wants to say. Because he has backed those words up.

When you are using cliches like Landy does and you've never won anything, they are meaningless words unless it changes what is going on, on the ice. But his cliches just lead to the same uninspired losing hockey.

I could care less what he says to the media. What he say in the locker room and what he does off the ice is what matters and none of know what goes on in the locker room. So to say that he’s bad captain because he uses hockey cliches is ridiculous. His play on the ice and the fact he wanted to be part of the turnaround after the 16/17 season shows to me that he’s a good leader. Is he perfect hell no, but neither is any captain out there.

 

[AegonLeConqueror]

Yep they were, coaching change had nothing to do with them getting better. You don't get better by firing a guy who has won 3 Cups in recent memory.

Their leadership core IMO is what changed the season. Toews and Kane mainly were sick of losing and are willing a weak on paper team. Might not make it but they were expected to be way worse than us and they are currently tied with us.

Toews and Kane didn’t magically decide they were sick of losing and then turn on some switch to generate a winning formula for he team. They were always sick of losing and continued to lose until management decided coaching and player personnel needed improvement. To insinuate that Landeskog somehow doesn’t mind losing and that’s why he isn’t willing his team to victory is just absurd.

 

[GoNordiquesGo]

Yep they were, coaching change had nothing to do with them getting better. You don't get better by firing a guy who has won 3 Cups in recent memory.

Their leadership core IMO is what changed the season. Toews and Kane mainly were sick of losing and are willing a weak on paper team. Might not make it but they were expected to be way worse than us and they are currently tied with us.

Well if that is what happened, it took them a year and a half to decide to be sick of losing and become good leaders to they are terrible!!!

 

[chet1926]

I could care less what he says to the media. What he say in the locker room and what he does off the ice is what matters and none of know what goes on in the locker room. So to say that he’s bad captain because he uses hockey cliches is ridiculous. His play on the ice and the fact he wanted to be part of the turnaround after the 16/17 season shows to me that he’s a good leader. Is he perfect hell no, but neither is any captain out there.

I don't disagree with you. He has made some choices that show he wants to be part of the solution.

But we've been getting the same shit results every year he has been captain. At what point do we get to question if his leadership/style of leadership is right for the team. Appearance is one thing results are another. On the surface Landy looks great, but his team results are trash.

 

[The Abusement Park]

I don't disagree with you. He has made some choices that show he wants to be part of the solution.

But we've been getting the same **** results every year he has been captain. At what point do we get to question if his leadership/style of leadership is right for the team. Appearance is one thing results are another. On the surface Landy looks great, but his team results are trash.

I mean roster construction, drafting, and development are all far ahead of leadership for reasons why the team has been so inconsistent over the last 15 years.

 

[Pokecheque]

Oh look...another "Landy isn't a good captain" argument.

 

[Barklez]

Come on let's be real Landy is the definition of company man. Every loss it the same old same old, cliche responses. Never said he didn't answer questions after a loss, just said that he gives standard we didn't play well enough to win answers.

I'm not worried about Landeskog's stats, you're right, statistically he has done well this year. But I could give two ****s about his stats. I care about wins and losses. And here we are at the end of another Landeskog captained year where we miss the playoffs. Because let's be real playoffs are going to be dumb luck at this point if we happen to qualify.

Do you really think a team captained by Crosby or Toews for example would have gone through a basically 2 month losing streak? Absolutely not, something would have been said and done by those guys to right the ship. Instead we have company man Landy, who looks pretty, is good role model on how to conduct yourself off ice, puts on a good face and can say the right things, but then nothing changes on ice.

I just don't understand the majority of this fan base. Aren't you guys sick and tired of watching the same losing season play out every single year with the same leadership core guys. For me it's getting tiresome watching the same core guys lose every year. At some point, something has to give. Eventually you have to point the finger at the players. Maybe Landy is a good leader, on paper it doesn't look that way since all we do is miss the playoffs, but maybe it's his leadership style that doesn't fit well here. I don't know. All I know is that in his time as captain we have yet to even win one playoff series. Not a single one.

That's 9 wins we may or may not have had without him, 9/31.

Chicago had their 2 month losing streak just before we did.

We all want better results, we just don't agree that Landy being captain is what's holding us back.

 

[Foppa Frossa]

It's like the five stages of grief of a non-contending hockey team

1) Our coach is terrible
2) Our captain doesn't have leadership
3) Our GM is trash
4) Lineup decisions are horrendous
5) Acceptance.

 

[Barklez]

This isn't the NBA.

They wouldn't stand for this!

 

[AllAboutAvs]

So if I'm understanding that properly all teams that haven't done much for the last while should change their captain...Barkov, Weber, Giroux, Ovechkin (before last year), Getzlaf, Oh and McDavid, etc...

Got it!!!!! What a bunch of losers!!!! Trade them all.

 

[mapletreemarty]

Weren’t the Blackhawks literally one of the worst teams in the league at one point this year? And it wasn’t until a coaching change and some trades did the team turn it around?

6-6-3 at the time of the coaching change... that's not that atrocious.

 

[Freudian]

Yep they were, coaching change had nothing to do with them getting better. You don't get better by firing a guy who has won 3 Cups in recent memory.

Their leadership core IMO is what changed the season. Toews and Kane mainly were sick of losing and are willing a weak on paper team. Might not make it but they were expected to be way worse than us and they are currently tied with us.

So leadership awesomeness has led to Chicago having 74 points this season. Leadership failure has led to Colorado having 74 point this season.

Clear as mud.

 

[ABasin]

It's like the five stages of grief of a non-contending hockey team

1) Our coach is terrible
2) Our captain doesn't have leadership
3) Our GM is trash
4) Lineup decisions are horrendous
5) Acceptance.

1) The goaltending was horrible for 1/3rd of the season
2) Acceptance

 

[Ceremony]

I wish they'd just give Zads a big 'ol leash and tell him to just go. Those games when he wants to be in charge and is carrying the puck with authority he looks brilliant. When he tries to play it safe he looks bad.

Nikita Zadorov Discussion Part III

 

[SoundwaveIsCharisma]

Nikita Zadorov Discussion Part III

 

[Bubba Thudd]

Big Z is only 23!

 

[cgf]

Is it leash or is it noticing how he is playing and the staff feeding him minutes?

Probably a bit of both...especially in those games when it feels like he's out there every other shift...but he's played at a higher level when consistently given a bigger role vs when he's asked to carry the third pairing in more limited minutes. Not saying playing him 30min a night will turn him into a norris candidate, but there's a strong enough correlation there with his play trailing his usage in the top 4 role vs 3rd pairing anchor discussion.

...So Zads-EJ shutdown pairing, Girard-Barrie ice-tilting pairing, and whatever bums are healthy & on hand for the remaining 14 minutes a night. Boom.

Personally, I don't think Z has a real high hockey IQ. There are insane physical tools there, but he can't keep his head in the game consistently and doesn't always know how to make correct reads. When he is on his game and it is all clicking, he looks like the version people envision of him. When it isn't clicking, he looks like a disaster. That said, even when he is playing bad, he can stabilize a bottom pairing well enough.

I don't necessarily disagree, but when he's consistently playing a bigger role it seems to be easier for him to keep his head int he game...granted you're also adding risk with him being out there for more shifts in which he might space out. But the net benefits seems to consistently outweigh the costs when Zads is put in a legit top 4 role.

 

[cgf]

multi-quote fail

 

[chet1926]

So leadership awesomeness has led to Chicago having 74 points this season. Leadership failure has led to Colorado having 74 point this season.

Clear as mud.

3 championships in recent history, to no series wins in recent history. Colorado expected to do well and make playoffs this year, Chicago was supposed to be fighting for a top draft pick for a rebuilding year. Same points this year, totally different expectations coming into the year. That's why one is ok and the other is just another failure.

 

[henchman21]

Probably a bit of both...especially in those games when it feels like he's out there every other shift...but he's played at a higher level when consistently given a bigger role vs when he's asked to carry the third pairing in more limited minutes. Not saying playing him 30min a night will turn him into a norris candidate, but there's a strong enough correlation there with his play trailing his usage in the top 4 role vs 3rd pairing anchor discussion.

...So Zads-EJ shutdown pairing, Girard-Barrie ice-tilting pairing, and whatever bums are healthy & on hand for the remaining 14 minutes a night. Boom.


I don't necessarily disagree, but when he's consistently playing a bigger role it seems to be easier for him to keep his head int he game...granted you're also adding risk with him being out there for more shifts in which he might space out. But the net benefits seems to consistently outweigh the costs when Zads is put in a legit top 4 role.

I'd run those pairings too, but Z's inconsistency isn't ever going to give a coach enough confidence to roll with that all the time and that will keep him down the lineup until the team needs him more. Coaches are naturally conservative and would rather know what they are getting game to game and shift to shift at the expense of a bit more talent. That is why you see the Coles and Calverts of the world consistently overplayed. Coaches know what they are getting.