2020 Around the League: Offseason Mode

[F A N]

West continues to get weaker. Seguin and Bishop out for 5 months ........

Won't affect the "Canadian Division"

 

[rypper]

Dallas still has Khudobin in net though, he's a good fallback option.

 

[Ryp37]

Islanders with another great blue line contract

could have tried to buy some UFA years but not much to complain about there

 

[iloovRMB]

Again, if you're choosing to equate the Hockey Diversity Alliance and their statement as the face of the mob looking to cancel Mitchell Miller, I respectfully disagree. I'd have dug in further but Vadim's comment is apt...

There's quite a difference between an unhinged group of fans who are outraged at every whim (the accusation against everyone who tweeted for Miller to be released) and a group focused on promoting diversity finding the potential racially charged motives of this incident to be troubling. The fact that you find these words:

"We will not support, partner with or accept support from any organization that has engaged in, promoted or failed to appropriately respond to racist conduct in their organization of any kind (including, without limitation, the proliferation of hate speech, discrimination in the provision of goods, services and facilities and other areas such as employment)."

as "holding a gun" to the Coyotes says more about you than it does about the situation lol. Again, if the Coyotes had conducted a proper, thorough investigation, and decided that there was no harm done or that Miller repented for his actions (ie. appropriately responded), they had every right to stand by their player. And no one would have said anything further if they had, because people tend to appeal to authority and would concede that there may be information the public is not privy to. The Coyotes decided their player did not have an appropriate response, and therefore, their course of action was to release him. Show me where the HDA (or literally anyone else) states anything along the lines of "release Mitchell Miller or else". The first part of your quote is just highlighting the incident and connecting it to the fact that the Coyotes haven't signed their pledge.

That you genuinely think it was this statement that made the Coyotes release their highest recent draft pick is just laughable. Maybe you should send an email to the Hockey Diversity Alliance to get you un-permabanned from HF.

Hey so I'm not going to have time to respond to this as fully as I'd like to but I will say that the statement put out by HDA was absolutely meant to hold a figurative gun to the Arizona Coyotes. If you got a letter like that from the department of HR (which the HDA is basically an extension of for the NHL) you would be rightfully terrified.

The problem with the HDA's statement is that "appropriately responded" is vague and nebulous and, to me, a moving target. Does "appropriately respond" mean respond in a way that would pacify an angry mob? That's impossible. Does "appropriately respond" mean kick the player off the team no matter what?

I thought that initially the Coyotes responded perfectly by interviewing Miller, learning about the situation, deciding there was something to salvage there, and stating that they were going to educate Miller and heavily involve him in their public anti-bullying campaigns. I found it quite presumptuous that the HDA would arbitrate against the appropriateness of that response with basically zero evidence or reasoning. The HDA hinged their condemnation of Miller on his lack of apology but it has been discovered that he DID write an apology letter and couldn't legally apologize in person because of a restraining order. It seems to me that the HDA went along with the online outrage culture and condemned Miller and the Coyotes without doing the necessary investigation and it makes a lot of sense that they'd do that because there's no evidence that the HDA has any capacity to properly investigate things like this. Until they can do proper investigations it's really irresponsible for them to be using their influence to take someone's career away, they shouldn't have that much power if they're going to use it that way with zero checks and balances or due process.

Don't feel the need to respond, I think we both got our messages across and we mostly agree on everything especially racism being unacceptable in the game of hockey. I don't think there's much of an appetite here to extend this discussion in this thread and I don't have much of an appetite to discuss this anymore anyway. There's too much crucial info that we don't have access to. Hope cooler heads can prevail and good people get second chances. If Miller truly isn't a good person then I hope he gets the help he needs.

 

[BB06]

Kinda off topic and I know politics are no Bueno but I found it funny that Tony DeAngelo got his twitter account deleted. Wonder what he must've done to have that happen

 

[BB06]

What do you guys think in regards to a Canadian division and NHL awards? I mean I wouldn't be surprised if Hughes was PPG playing bottom-Mid tier teams like that and maybe in the Norris conversation. I think you'd have to asterisk the award. Thoughts?

 

[Peen]

I still think that the world cup of hockey is the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

 

[StreetHawk]

Islanders with another great blue line contract

could have tried to buy some UFA years but not much to complain about there

He just turned 26 in september. So, he will 27 going on 28 when he hits UFA.

Is he going to be good enough on his next deal to garner a 7-8 year term? That would take him to 34/35 and really he'd turn 35/36 a couple of months later.

If the Isles could have done term now at 7/8 years, he would have been 32/33 going on 33/34 when it expires, so no real risk of having bad years on the contract.

For NHL teams, it is ideal for them to do ELC, then bridge, then max term. If you have a 20 year old come in and they hit RFA at 23, and you do a bridge for 2 years until 25, then you do 7/8 years after that, it gets you to 32/33. Which is all of the player's prime years. Then you have to decide how much you want to keep the player afterwards. Got to hold on term like STL did with Backes or they let him walk, which turned out the be the right decision.
Cause when you do term after ELC, the player finishes the 2nd contract at 28 or so, like Bo. So, if he gets max term afterwards, that takes him to 35/36. So long as you are accounting for the probability of decline after age 33 your actual salary should reflect it and should lower the cap hit accordingly.

 

[elitepete]

I still think that the world cup of hockey is the dumbest thing I've ever seen.

Is that the tournament they had in 2016?

 

[F A N]

He just turned 26 in september. So, he will 27 going on 28 when he hits UFA.

Is he going to be good enough on his next deal to garner a 7-8 year term? That would take him to 34/35 and really he'd turn 35/36 a couple of months later.

If the Isles could have done term now at 7/8 years, he would have been 32/33 going on 33/34 when it expires, so no real risk of having bad years on the contract.

For NHL teams, it is ideal for them to do ELC, then bridge, then max term. If you have a 20 year old come in and they hit RFA at 23, and you do a bridge for 2 years until 25, then you do 7/8 years after that, it gets you to 32/33. Which is all of the player's prime years. Then you have to decide how much you want to keep the player afterwards. Got to hold on term like STL did with Backes or they let him walk, which turned out the be the right decision.
Cause when you do term after ELC, the player finishes the 2nd contract at 28 or so, like Bo. So, if he gets max term afterwards, that takes him to 35/36. So long as you are accounting for the probability of decline after age 33 your actual salary should reflect it and should lower the cap hit accordingly.

I think ideal is player and situation dependent. Previously, the salary cap kept rising and the problem with a 2 year bridge for a player who may be worth the long term commitment is that the price may go way up. PK Subban would have been much cheaper to re-sign had he received max term off his ELC. Conversely, the problem with giving a player max (or close to max) term after ELC, besides the risk involved, is that many players aren't there yet in terms of being worth his cap hit in the first year(s) of his second contract. So you are paying more in the short term in hopes of long term savings. Florida went this route in signing guys to long term contracts off their ELCs and I think they have been burned more than it has worked out for them.

I personally do not have a problem with playing it save and bridging players if the team and player can't agree then why not have the player prove himself. Culturally though, a bridge contract is seen as a "show me" contract and many players who think they deserve a long term commitment may take it as a bit of a slight.

 

[rypper]

I kind of want to buy a bunch of the reverse retro jerseys. Some of them are great and some are so bad they're good. (Of what the sneak previews have shown so far.)

If the Islanders go with captain fishsticks I'm definitely getting one.

 

[vancityluongo]

If the Islanders go with captain fishsticks I'm definitely getting one.

Lou Lam strikes again.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Of all the surprises in the jerseys released today - I am most shocked the Ducks brought back that flying Mighty Wing jersey. That is a brutally awful logo. Should have just busted out the circa D2 jerseys and watched the money roll in.

 

[Zombotron]

Those jerseys are so fricking expensive on eBay

 

[canuckking1]

Rumoured 60 game season. I’m hoping for a little less somewhere around 48-52.

 

[StreetHawk]

Rumoured 60 game season. I’m hoping for a little less somewhere around 48-52.

60 seems too long given the start date of wary Jan. That’s like 4 extra weeks. Are they planning on going until a couple of days before the olympics is about to start?

When would the draft and ED be as you want it to be a big deal for Seattle coming in. Don’t want to go head to head with the olympics or have it overshadowed because you are bumping up so close to it that networks are talking about medal hopefuls from the local area.

 

[Catamarca Livin]

Why do fans want less games? I would be happy with 40 but happier with 60. We have one job as hockey fans and that is to watch games. More games means less days without games. Game days are better than non game days.

 

[rypper]

60 games over what kind of time frame? Our defense is going to disintegrate if the season is a tight schedule.

 

[rypper]

Of all the surprises in the jerseys released today - I am most shocked the Ducks brought back that flying Mighty Wing jersey. That is a brutally awful logo. Should have just busted out the circa D2 jerseys and watched the money roll in.

Personally I think that's one of the best ones just because they actually went out and did something wildly different. It's so bad, it's good.

 

[Peen]

i wonder if draisaitl and mcdavid will ever turn into good defensive players

 

[StreetHawk]

Why do fans want less games? I would be happy with 40 but happier with 60. We have one job as hockey fans and that is to watch games. More games means less days without games. Game days are better than non game days.

When do you expect the season to end if they play 60 games beginning on Jan 1? Need to play in May if you are doing 2.2 days per game. So cup would be awarded in mid July.

 

[valkynax]

Seems like Hoffman still holding out for his big contract eh...

 

[vanuck]

i wonder if draisaitl and mcdavid will ever turn into good defensive players

They might become passable at it one day, and honestly that might be enough given their prowess at the other end of the rink. If they give up X amount of goals in their own end, but can always generate more than X in terms of offence, they'll win the goal share battle regardless.

But on bad teams, you'll always have people pointing out the defensive flaws of star players because of strange reasons. The supporting cast is never there, and there's only ever one person to point the finger at (the GM).

 

[I am toxic]

They might become passable at it one day, and honestly that might be enough given their prowess at the other end of the rink. If they give up X amount of goals in their own end, but can always generate more than X in terms of offence, they'll win the goal share battle regardless.

But on bad teams, you'll always have people pointing out the defensive flaws of star players because of strange reasons. The supporting cast is never there, and there's only ever one person to point the finger at (the GM).

That goaltending tho . . .

 

[Reverend Mayhem]

Based on McDavid's personality I doubt he never becomes at least good defensively. Crosby sucked at faceoffs when he entered the league, now he's one of the better guys. These are just how guys like that operate. They hate being bad at stuff and eventually they get good at it.