This is a Bad Hockey Team 2017-18

[Off Sides]

Teams don't need to be torn apart by the cap, the GMs do it.

For example the Leafs, did they really need to sign Marleau for that much? Not that he is doing poorly, but they could not find any player who may have even been a slightly lesser player to sign cheaper or could not find a trade for that role? They needed Matt Martin at the contract?

It's similar for the Rangers, they carried Glass at ~1.5M cap hit for nearly three seasons when if a team were efficient they'd have two 4th liners signed for that same cap space who would contribute just as much if not more. They had to have Dan Boyle?

 

[haveandare]

Teams have the same essential cores but the rest of the roster is in constant turmoil. Compare the Rangers now to the 14-15 Rangers. It's been two and a half years.

No, a team with one player that becomes garbage with "minor tweaks" should absolutely ****ing not be making a run. They shouldn't even sniff the Cup. They shouldn't even dream about the Cup. LA being a dynasty when they were a **** regular season team the entire time is exactly the problem.

I think the contenders this year are probably Tampa, Boston, and Pittsburgh. That's it. Some dead team walking will crawl out of the West and lose in 6 boring games in the fifth consecutive sleep-aid Stanley Cup Finals.

I'll be watching regular season baseball.

When were the depth pieces on teams not in turmoil? And who cares that they are? Why is that bad?

It seems to me like you want a league where teams don't change often at all, 6 or 7 elite teams compete among themselves for the cup every year while everyone else sucks and there is zero probability of an unlikely run or a Cinderella team winning.

That's certainly your right to want whatever you'd like most, but that sounds like a horrible, horrible league to me. Why would you want to never be surprised? Why would you want the same few teams to be the only competitive teams by design? We have that now by accident and it's a problem that needs to be fixed, not something that needs to be embraced and further entrenched.

I'd rather bang my head against the wall than watch baseball for any amount of time, so we may just have a difference in taste.

 

[haveandare]

Teams don't need to be torn apart by the cap, the GMs do it.

For example the Leafs, did they really need to sign Marleau for that much? Not that he is doing poorly, but they could not find any player who may have even been a slightly lesser player to sign cheaper or could not find a trade for that role? They needed Matt Martin at the contract?

It's similar for the Rangers, they carried Glass at ~1.5M cap hit for nearly three seasons when if a team were efficient they'd have two 4th liners signed for that same cap space who would contribute just as much if not more. They had to have Dan Boyle?

Exactly. The poor, poor Oilers for example. Who forced them to sign Drai to a huge deal based on a single season of good production riding shotgun to McDavid? Who forced them to take on Lucic's stupid contract? The cap isn't the problem, it's GMs being stupid. Same thing with NYR losing Stralman to overpay Girardi and Staal.

 

[Machinehead]

When were the depth pieces on teams not in turmoil? And who cares that they are? Why is that bad?

It seems to me like you want a league where teams don't change often at all, 6 or 7 elite teams compete among themselves for the cup every year while everyone else sucks and there is zero probability of an unlikely run or a Cinderella team winning.

That's certainly your right to want whatever you'd like most, but that sounds like a horrible, horrible league to me. Why would you want to never be surprised? Why would you want the same few teams to be the only competitive teams by design? We have that now by accident and it's a problem that needs to be fixed, not something that needs to be embraced and further entrenched.

I'd rather bang my head against the wall than watch baseball for any amount of time, so we may just have a difference in taste.

See, this is my point about Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh.

Everyone always says "oh the NHL needs to have parity or we'll have 6 or 7 elite teams and nobody else!"

We have 3 or 4 elite teams and nobody else in the NHL right now, except those 3 or 4 teams don't even have stacked lineups like the upper echelon in other leagues.

It's still three fish doing all of the eating just like everyone fears, except now it's in a tank instead of in the ocean.

 

[Machinehead]

I can deal with the Cavs and Warriors every year because they're historically good.

I can deal with the Patriots every year because they're literally the best team of all-time.

I can deal with the Astros, Yankees, and Dodgers dominating baseball next year because their lineups are historically good.

The Penguins, Blackhawks, and Kings are dominating the NHL just like those other leagues are getting dominated, but they're just not that good, and it isn't fun to watch.

 

[haveandare]

See, this is my point about Chicago, LA, and Pittsburgh.

Everyone always says "oh the NHL needs to have parity or we'll have 6 or 7 elite teams and nobody else!"

We have 3 or 4 elite teams and nobody else in the NHL right now, except those 3 or 4 teams don't even have stacked lineups like the upper echelon in other leagues.

It's still three fish doing all of the eating just like everyone fears, except now it's in a tank instead of in the ocean.

By what measure was LA elite last year? By what measure is were they superior to say, Nashville?

 

[Machinehead]

By what measure was LA elite last year? By what measure is were they superior to say, Nashville?

2 Cups to 0

That's the only thing that matters at the end of the day.

Everyone claims the NHL is competitive but the Cup population is not competitive.

 

[haveandare]

2 Cups to 0

That's the only thing that matters at the end of the day.

Everyone claims the NHL is competitive but the Cup population is not competitive.

A team isn't elite today based on what they did years ago. Elite teams don't miss the playoffs in a league where more than half the teams make it. LA is absolutely not elite as of today, nor is Chicago who didn't win a single playoff game last year.

 

[Machinehead]

A team isn't elite today based on what they did years ago. Elite teams don't miss the playoffs in a league where more than half the teams make it. LA is absolutely not elite as of today, nor is Chicago who didn't win a single playoff game last year.

LA is a borderline dynasty that missed the playoffs. If that doesn't convince you this league is a gong show then nothing will.

 

[haveandare]

LA is a borderline dynasty that missed the playoffs. If that doesn't convince you this league is a gong show then nothing will.

It convinces me that we have vastly different ideas of how to measure the quality of a franchise. I don't care what a franchise did 4 and 6 years ago when it comes to measuring them today, nor do I think a team winning cups 4 and 6 years ago and then falling apart years after is a sign of a problem with the league. They were a borderline dynasty in 2015 - it's 2018 now and they're an average franchise.

 

[Machinehead]

It convinces me that we have vastly different ideas of how to measure the quality of a franchise. I don't care what a franchise did 4 and 6 years ago when it comes to measuring them today, nor do I think a team winning cups 4 and 6 years ago and then falling apart years after is a sign of a problem with the league. They were a borderline dynasty in 2015 - it's 2018 now and they're an average franchise.

The point is, team talent is watered down, and if you like parity that's your prerogative, but you can't even fall back on parity given what's happened the last ten years.

Without parity, and without stacked teams, what entertainment is the NHL providing?

 

[haveandare]

The point is, team talent is watered down, and if you like parity that's your prerogative, but you can't even fall back on parity given what's happened the last ten years.

Without parity, and without stacked teams, what entertainment is the NHL providing?

The entertainment of watching professional hockey? I don't really understand why you think they need to have some sort of arbitrary and artificial "perfect" amount of parity or competition to enjoy the sport.

They have a hard cap, otherwise what do they do to enforce parity or competition? Good teams are good because they either draft luckily or they make shrewd trades or both. Bad teams are bad because they draft poorly or they make stupid trades or both. I don't think the league should be doing anything more than having the cap to arrange things to your liking or anybody else's.

Do you think Nashville fans weren't entertained last year? Vegas fans aren't entertained this year? It's a sports league, someone has to lose for someone to win, everyone can't get what they want all the time, but there are plenty of place with lots of happy fans for good reason.

 

[Machinehead]

The entertainment of watching professional hockey? I don't really understand why you think they need to have some sort of arbitrary and artificial "perfect" amount of parity or competition to enjoy the sport.

They have a hard cap, otherwise what do they do to enforce parity or competition? Good teams are good because they either draft luckily or they make shrewd trades or both. Bad teams are bad because they draft poorly or they make stupid trades or both. I don't think the league should be doing anything more than having the cap to arrange things to your liking or anybody else's.

Do you think Nashville fans weren't entertained last year? Vegas fans aren't entertained this year? It's a sports league, someone has to lose for someone to win, everyone can't get what they want all the time, but there are plenty of place with lots of happy fans for good reason.

It's just soured me on the league watching Pittsburgh get outshot every night and turtle their way to the Cup, and now an expansion team is dominating the league.

As much as I'm trying to force myself to feel good for Vegas, I just don't like the idea that anyone can win. I miss the idea of stacked champions.

 

[Machinehead]

Look at our lineup in 1994. Absolutely overflowing. Video game stacked.

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think that team would just absolutely swallow the 2017 Pens in a series.

So when a game Canucks side took us all the way, it was captivating for the neutral fan.

The NHL has a paradox right now where as sick as I am of the same three teams, somebody else doing it would feel more overdue than special.

 

[DundeeRanger]

I like the unpredictability in the league but agree that there are no dynasty teams just now and arguably talent is diluted across a number of teams. I find the NFL a bit tedious because its a case of "Who will the Pats play this year?" .

Totally agree that its GMs that ruin teams through poor decisions. The Stralman one always dumbfounded me. As much as I think AV goes and has been poor for us this year, he is also a victim of Gortons mistakes too.

 

[Machinehead]

People bring up the Oilers dropping the ball with McDavid, but what the Senators do with Karlsson is so much worse.

His expected +/- is minus-0.2. His actual +/- is minus-24.

Definition of getting absolutely shat on by your own team.

 

[Idlerlee]

I can deal with the Astros, Yankees, and Dodgers dominating baseball next year because their lineups are historically good.

The Penguins, Blackhawks, and Kings are dominating the NHL just like those other leagues are getting dominated, but they're just not that good, and it isn't fun to watch.

There's what, 2 markets for baseball in the whole world of any note? Japan and USA? The rest of the world more or less couldn't care less about baseball except for a few people here and there.

Considering that there's millions outside of the us following the NHL, I wouldnt be especially worried about attractiveness. Very few people just have one sport they follow. I watch football (actual football, not american football), skiing, handball, etc. all the time. My interest varies between seasons and time, but im always interested.

This honestly sounds a lot like a you problem, not a league problem.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

There's what, 2 markets for baseball in the whole world of any note? Japan and USA? The rest of the world more or less couldn't care less about baseball except for a few people here and there.

Considering that there's millions outside of the us following the NHL, I wouldnt be especially worried about attractiveness. Very few people just have one sport they follow. I watch football (actual football, not american football), skiing, handball, etc. all the time. My interest varies between seasons and time, but im always interested.

This honestly sounds a lot like a you problem, not a league problem.

Baseball is very popular in more than 2 places. Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Mexico, Puerto Rico, South Korea, Cuba.

 

[mandiblesofdoom]

I like the unpredictability in the league but agree that there are no dynasty teams just now and arguably talent is diluted across a number of teams. I find the NFL a bit tedious because its a case of "Who will the Pats play this year?" .

Totally agree that its GMs that ruin teams through poor decisions. The Stralman one always dumbfounded me. As much as I think AV goes and has been poor for us this year, he is also a victim of Gortons mistakes too.

Sather was GM then, no? And I always wondered what input AV had into that decision.

Regardless, that one really messed us up.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Same thing with NYR losing Stralman to overpay Girardi and Staal.

I'll always say that jettisoning Stralman was an idiotic decision predicated on saving money for Boyle. It was one of 3 major moves that started to completely drain how vested I was in the product.

 

[haveandare]

People bring up the Oilers dropping the ball with McDavid, but what the Senators do with Karlsson is so much worse.

His expected +/- is minus-0.2. His actual +/- is minus-24.

Definition of getting absolutely shat on by your own team.

Yeah it'll be real interesting to see what he does because I think he'd have to be sort of nuts to stay there.

 

[DundeeRanger]

Sather was GM then, no? And I always wondered what input AV had into that decision.

Regardless, that one really messed us up.

My bad . It was Sather . Horrible decision though

 

[Ori]

Glen Sather had no issues to move Torts years ago, but not sure what he see in AV. Maybe it`s not his job as President to evaluate the current coach?

 

[True Blue]

My bad . It was Sather . Horrible decision though

Much of where the Rangers are today can be laid at Sather's feet.

 

[Ori]

Maybe @True Blue some bad decision or deals that did not work out, but we have been a playoffs team for the last 7 years?
And won the president trophy in 2014 including silver in the Stanley cup final.
I`m start wondering if we only kept Torts - we would have that cup already.. ..maybe even win it twice and it`s a bad feeling.