- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,892
- 47,059
Pre-Game Talk: Week to Start Over (ARZ, ANH, @WPG)
- Thread starter tigervixxxen
- Start date
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
I was going to say... 'Any different than any other day?'
The one posted yesterday about the Avs not making the playoffs because one place lists them as the worst team in the NHL was gold. By no means are the Avs an elite team... it is just as absurd to say they are the worst team though.
Considering we're in a playoff spot as the worst team in the league; can you imagine how good we'd be if we learned to Corsi? We'd have already secured the cup.
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
Since they value the ELC so much it would've been nice to see Mikko called up to fill in (like when Greg played in Landy's spot for a game n a half back in november/december). We'd have gotten another look at him in the NHL before the summer, while being better suited to withstand this suspension. I get not wanting to jerk him around or send him back down after just three games if he thrived, but it still would've been nice; even if they told him right from the get go that it was just until Landy got back.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,892
- 47,059
That would mean though that they'd only have 1 more non-emergency call-up before the end of the season.
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
That's another logical reason why I get it not happening, just would've been nice if it did.
E: I didn't phrase that previous post well, I initially meant that to be more about how convenient the suspension being only 3 games was given that Mikko can play 3 more NHL games before burning his ELC. So that if they wanted to bring him up to see where he is/bolster the squad for these games, it wouldn't put the ELC (that Roykic value so much) at risk.
- Aug 25, 2006
- 9,386
- 7,512
One other thing I was wondering that could affect their decision not to bring him up. Maybe somebody can clarify this for me.
Bringing Rantanen up for those three games and then sending him back down to the AHL wouldn't burn a year of his ELC because that would make it 9 games which is the maximum he can have. But let's say he gets hurt in one of these three games. I understand the Avs cannot send him back down until he is healthy. So if he is still hurt on the 4th game then would it burn that ELC year? If yes then it might be another reason why they wouldn't call him up. Why take the chance to burn a year because he got hurt? Hope I made sense.
Bringing Rantanen up for those three games and then sending him back down to the AHL wouldn't burn a year of his ELC because that would make it 9 games which is the maximum he can have. But let's say he gets hurt in one of these three games. I understand the Avs cannot send him back down until he is healthy. So if he is still hurt on the 4th game then would it burn that ELC year? If yes then it might be another reason why they wouldn't call him up. Why take the chance to burn a year because he got hurt? Hope I made sense.
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
No, it's games played. That wouldn't change anything. On the 4th game it's the point of no return regardless what happens.
- Aug 25, 2006
- 9,386
- 7,512
I thought it included all games that the player is with the team which would include the games that he is hurt as well.
Thanks for the info.
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
How can our coach justify putting a defenseman in at forward when we're in a battle for the playoffs when we have Rantanen in the AHL. There would be nothing wrong with giving the kid 3 games. I knew all along it would never happen but still completely disagree with this decision.
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,892
- 47,059
Before pressing that button, let's see what happens if there is a shortage at forward.
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,892
- 47,059
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
Roy hates calling anyone up, there's almost no need to have an AHL team. Just farm the decent ones out to Europe.
UncleRisto
Not Great, Bob!
You say that as if Holden/Barrie at wing wasn't the best option available those couple of times.
5280
To the window!
I've been tooting Roykic's horn for the last bit, but this doesn't make too much sense to me, just from the fact that they could accomplish a lot of things bringing Rants up for the 3 games. He could get another glimpse of the show, would find out things he still needs to work on, can help the big club, etc. etc. Also what's the use of "going for it" if you don't really "go for it". I will admit I am a bit confused.
That being said this is still a roster that should win these games.
That being said this is still a roster that should win these games.
5280
To the window!
True that at least it is consistent but it is still a bit head scratching.
Does anyone know the amount of non-emergency call ups we have available? Maybe that has something to do with it.
Last edited:
Rantanen was never an option. They were never going to call him up for 3 games, knowing full well they would send him right back down again.
If they needed a forward, it would be Everberg or Rendulic.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
Still much better options than a defenseman. I already said I knew all along it wouldn't happen but it doesn't mean I agree with it.
I realize this is a hypothetical situation and we'll likely not have to worry about it anyway. It's just frustrating since we already know the answer to what would happen if we were in that situation.
cgf
FireBednarsSuccessor
*shrug* I'd rather have Rendo or EVB step in than PWF-Holden if it came to it. But I'm not surprised that they wouldn't call anyone up until they had at this point. We've got time between games to get someone up here if we have to.
tigervixxxen
Optimism=Delusional
Yeah if someone gets hurt its not like they don't have time until Wednesday. If a forward gets hurt then it would be an emergency recall, right because we have no extra forwards now?
I agree it would be an opportune time to at least try Rantanen (so would have been when Skille was on IR). But they don't want to yank him around for 3 games and Roy loves his ride or die mentality with the guys that are here. I get it but yeah I also agree with if they are truly "going for it" then they absolutely could use Rantanen, he's that good even if he's still a 19 year old rookie. He's special though.
I agree it would be an opportune time to at least try Rantanen (so would have been when Skille was on IR). But they don't want to yank him around for 3 games and Roy loves his ride or die mentality with the guys that are here. I get it but yeah I also agree with if they are truly "going for it" then they absolutely could use Rantanen, he's that good even if he's still a 19 year old rookie. He's special though.
