while the thought has crossed my mind, I don't see paying that price to solve a max 4 1/2 week (Bye week + All Star Break subtracted) problem for the team.Good thing the human rocket ship is back.
Would now be the time to trade a defenseman?
We have 4 very high quality defensemen and 4 3rd pairing guys. What could we realistically acquire for Ellis or Ekholm?
Not sure if this has been discussed anywhere here or not but that's a serious cast on his arm
Anyone watch the games against the Wild to see when and how it happened? Was it a slash? Or an awkward tumble into the boards? I'd like a Minnesota player to direct my anger toward, instead of it just being a fluke play.
It's possible this was an even earlier injury than last weekend and it was injured more/wasn't getting better so they decided to shut it down. Who knows?
don't count on it. he's been disappointing for the majority of the year.It would be nice if #92 would play up to his capabilities to cover the scoring loss while Forsberg is out.
Well it's not so good for my hockey pool.I'm about to write something that will upset people. If Forsberg misses some time and the injury is not threatening to his career, good. Keep some tread on the tires for the playoffs. The season is a meatgrinder and if he plays 75 games max, good.
rest is way overrated in hockey. you're talking about professional atheletes in great physical shape playing 3 games a week here for 20 minutes at a time.
I couldn't disagree more. The fewer games played the better as far as I'm concerned. It is a physical sport. Even NBA coaches realize the importance of resting players in a long season.rest is way overrated in hockey. you're talking about professional atheletes in great physical shape playing 3 games a week here for 20 minutes at a time.
It would be nice if #92 would play up to his capabilities to cover the scoring loss while Forsberg is out.