Here you are Kevin Hayes more money than Nathan mackinnon ... ya no.
Here you are Kevin Hayes more money than Nathan mackinnon ... ya no.
I definitely don’t think the boys in the locker room are talking inflation and UFA years. I understand the simplicity of the statement I made tho. The end of the day it’s a contract I’m glad the avalanche aren’t signingIs this really the level of understanding most nhl fans have regarding contracts?
It's mind blowing at times reading posts here.
I needed to check the Leafs board with all the Marner crap going on. Safe to say I wasn’t disappointed and this is why I love this place.
Now let’s just hope it doesn’t happen with Mikko
Is this really the level of understanding most nhl fans have regarding contracts?
It's mind blowing at times reading posts here.
Shero: I would bet you I don't know. And we say this every summer, too. I don't know. I really don't. I'd be just guessing, and I'm not a betting man, either. But I do know that if you're a team that has a cap situation ... I've been there, when I was in Pittsburgh, for a number of years. It's always in the back of your mind. You have to do your best to put yourself in the best possible situation. You're always thinking about that.
We all know what the CBA is. There is no gentleman's agreement. F--- that s---. When people say that, it's a lazy narrative, I'll tell you that. Really? Your ownership's competitive, GMs are competitive, and it's the buddy-buddy system? What the f--- is that? It doesn't mean something will or won't happen, but that's been the narrative for years, and I don't know why.
Can someone explain to me how/why these "unconditional waivers" even matter? Is it just the difference between a team being able to afford the slight chance that someone else would be dumb enough to take the contract off their hands or something?
Can someone explain to me how/why these "unconditional waivers" even matter? Is it just the difference between a team being able to afford the slight chance that someone else would be dumb enough to take the contract off their hands or something?
Basically they are the waiver designed specifically for buying out players. A couple differences between unconditional and regular waivers are the fee is only $125 to take over the contract instead of the tens of thousands fees, and where the unconditional part really comes in, there is no right of recall meaning no rights to the player if they are claimed and go through waivers again. IE can't claim on the 2nd round of waivers to pull into the minors.
It's the narrative because it's true. I like his take on the offer sheets, too, but GM's in the NHL are a bunch of ******* when it comes to offer sheets. Too terrified to do it.Love Shero's take on offer sheets
They don’t use it because it is designed to be ineffective, not because there is a gentleman's agreement like he says.It's the narrative because it's true. I like his take on the offer sheets, too, but GM's in the NHL are a bunch of ******* when it comes to offer sheets. Too terrified to do it.
Hell, a decade ago Brian Burke nearly ****ing fought Kevin Lowe for offer sheeting Dustin Penner lol.
Yes, but if the skate is off the ice, and still above/in the blue, it shouldn't be OS, IMO. Similar to the goal line in Football.Yay more challenges. The offsides challenge needs to be changed though, like does it really matter if someone’s skate is 1/14 of an inch offside?
It's the narrative because it's true. I like his take on the offer sheets, too, but GM's in the NHL are a bunch of ******* when it comes to offer sheets. Too terrified to do it.
Hell, a decade ago Brian Burke nearly ****ing fought Kevin Lowe for offer sheeting Dustin Penner lol.
What about if it is 1/2 inch or one inch offside? where do you draw the line? You have a rule or you don't. I think if they eliminate the skate in the air scenarios that will take care of the most problematic instances.Yay more challenges. The offsides challenge needs to be changed though, like does it really matter if someone’s skate is 1/14 of an inch offside?
What about if it is 1/2 inch or one inch offside? where do you draw the line? You have a rule or you don't. I think if they eliminate the skate in the air scenarios that will take care of the most problematic instances.
I know some people have said that if the offside player has no impact on the play then the goal should stand but again where do you draw the line? It becomes very subjective and we are putting more grey area in the hands of the refs which IMO is not a good thing at all. As I said have a rule or don't...no in-between.No I know. And I don’t think they should change the rule except for your foot doesn’t have to be on the line. But it’s just annoying that goals will get called back for 1/2 an inch that doesn’t effect the play at all.
I know some people have said that if the offside player has no impact on the play then the goal should stand but again where do you draw the line? It becomes very subjective and we are putting more grey area in the hands of the refs which IMO is not a good thing at all. As I said have a rule or don't...no in-between.
I know some people have said that if the offside player has no impact on the play then the goal should stand but again where do you draw the line? It becomes very subjective and we are putting more grey area in the hands of the refs which IMO is not a good thing at all. As I said have a rule or don't...no in-between.