Mailbag
Avalanche Mailbag 2.0: Malinski’s Future, Girard’s Fit, Pending UFA Scott Wedgewood, & More
Here’s part two of the November Mailbag. Enjoy, and thanks as always to everyone who submitted a question.
READ MORE: Avalanche Mailbag 1.0: Fixing The Avalanche’s Center Depth
Question from Joe Cerwinske
Sam Malinski has become one of my favorite Avs, showing constant growth to the point he could be a 20+ minute a game d-man as early as this season. At this point, what do you think the team’s plan is for him? I would say he’s earned a long-term extension but I wonder if the front office can afford him as his value increases. As such – and because of our imbalance of right-shot defensemen – he would also seem to be a prime trade asset, with a great deal of value.
So, do you think the Avs will extend or trade him before the season is up, or do they let him get to UFA? And if the plan is to trade him, what sort of return – or what specific player targets – do you think he could yield?
Aarif’s Response
What was always difficult about assessing Malinski’s future with the team, at least to me, was how similar he is to Cale Makar. And how the Avs also have Samuel Girard and Devon Toews under contract, and you’d be paying too many guys a boatload of salary with little room for the added size element that Josh Manson brings. It’s very reminisicent of Bowen Byram
But things feel a little different this year, largely because of Malinski’s growth and the willingness for Manson to play on the left with Brent Burns, and do it well. Burns is here now, but will he be next year? If not, I see no issue with Colorado re-signing Malinski and rolling with Makar, Manson, and Malinski in some kind of order on the right side next season.
Say Malinski gets three years at $3.75 million. You’d probably have to trade Girard because you already have Manson at $3.95 and Toews at $7.25 with Makar a year away from possibly doubling his salary. I know trading Girard has sort of become a meme at this point, but if you’re signing Malinski, it’s probably to be a puckmover making less than Girard. And then it gives you an opportunity to rework the left side after Toews by possibly adding two more bigger bodies.
He’d have some value on the trade market, but it’s hard to say precisely how much. It’ll be determined by how the market shakes out over the next handful of months. If a handful of contenders are in dire need of a depth defenseman, then his value will rise. But I also don’t know if the Avs trade him for something that doesn’t help them right now. Basically, unless he’s part of a package for a bigger name player, I think they’ll be fine letting him walk as a UFA after using him as an own rental.
That’s the scenario I can see playing out if they don’t re-sign him.
Question from San Zimmerer
Is Jared Bednar overextending his top line yet again this early in the season? Could that be part of the reason the top players are ineffective if the game goes into overtime?
Question from Sasha Landprecht
Do you think the Avs will trade Samuel Girard? They have good depth on D right now.
Aarif’s Response
I’ve been stuck trying to guess if or when they’d trade Girard in the past, and I’ve always been wrong. Let’s give it another shot.
If Girard gets healthy and their main six defensemen start to click, I don’t think he’ll get traded, at least not before the offseason.
But if Girard comes back and struggles with Malinski, which then requires splitting up Burns and Manson, and then your entire bottom four starts to struggle? Then yes, I can see a change happening with either him or Malinski.
Question from Jonesy
The top line is humming, but do the Avs have enough depth scoring?
Aarif’s Response
I wrote about this in yesterday’s Mailbag, but the most significant question mark entering this season was center depth, and that remains the area they’re probably keeping an eye on.
The front office thought they were going to have Charlie Coyle this year. But when an opportunity arose to use his value to get rid of the Miles Wood contract, they jumped on it. They know they have a good thing with Jack Drury, but they also didn’t really want to trade Coyle. And even then, they were in on Jonathan Toews until the end.
They still want another center. I’m convinced of this. It’s just a matter of figuring out if that center is going to play on the third or fourth line.
Question from ourpetsheadsarefallingoff
Landeskog looks slow, but I checked his underlying fancy stats, and he’s still looking good in the Corsi Relativity 5-on-5. Are our eyes deceiving us? Is he propped up by teammates? Are we expecting 2022 Landy?
That is, of course, unless you’re doing a money-in for money-out deal and you end up trading a depth winger to acquire a center.
Question from Joe Murphy
Is Gabriel Landeskog still on this team come trade deadline?
Question from Jean Boijoly
Do you think that the Avs should sign Scott Wedgewood for next year to keep Ilya Nabokov in the AHL?
Aarif’s Response
I absolutely love this question because I’ve been thinking about this for weeks. It’s far too early to make that decision, but I’ll say two things.
First, the play of Wedgewood in the NHL and the play of Nabokov in the KHL will help determine this. As will the contract demands of Wedgewood if he has an incredible year and wants to stay.
Second, and more importantly, I don’t think the Avs want to end up in another situation like they had before the goalie trades last season. They trusted Alexandar Georgiev enough that they were fine riding a rookie backup in Justus Annunen who was figuring things out on the fly.
But what if this year was next year, and Mackenzie Blackwood started only one of the first 14 games? Would you be confident in your rookie goalie to hold the fort down? What if he doesn’t? And then Blackwood has a season mired with injuries? Then what?
The team can’t force Nabokov into the lineup unless they absolutely know he can play a tandem backup role and do it well. But they also can’t overpay Wedgewood if they were planning on a cap structure for 2026-27 that includes a backup in Nabokov making less than the $1.5 million Wedgewood makes now, let alone what he can ask for on an extension.
Why do the Avs look so complacent in OT, including our best players (Nathan MacKinnon and Cale Makar)?
Aarif’s Response
Honestly? I don’t get it. I wish I knew. I often joke that MacKinnon isn’t really interested in playing 3-on-3 because it won’t matter come playoff time. But it’s a joke, and I find it hard to believe that a competitor like him wouldn’t try.
It feels to me almost like their OT struggles are similar to their PP struggles. Because they have so much talent, they might feel like things should come easily, or that they need to make the perfect highlight-reel play. But those often come back to bite them. Simplifying things will help. As will changing up the combinations the coaching staff use.
Question from Ric