Toggle sidebar

Around the League XXXVI: Fire all the coaches

Status
Not open for further replies.
Giovi

Giovi

Registered User
Sponsor
Feb 1, 2009
2,468
3,384
AmericanDream said:
it is not a mutual termination, that seems to be the problem. if his contract was just terminated, why would he be on waivers right now? he is on unconditional waivers, if his contract was just terminated and anyone could sign him, wouldn't he not be on waivers period? they discussed this on NHL Network, so not sure where else to find the info.

can you show me where a player had his contract terminated in season and signed elsewhere immediately after? I don't recall seeing that ever...
Click to expand...
Jake Dotchin was put on unconditional waivers by TB this year and later signed with Anaheim.
 
Blackhawkswincup

Blackhawkswincup

RIP Fugu
Jun 24, 2007
187,417
20,889
Chicagoland
ChiHawks10 said:
So it's exactly how I thought it was. Contract terminated, as if it didn't exist. Free to sign a new contract with any NHL team, even this year. :thumbu:

I'd give him a couple mil to see if he can turn it around as a Hawk.
Click to expand...

We already have enough crap on team

No need to add a guy who has been mediocre bottom 6 talent in recent years and has fallen off completely this year

Also he wasn't happy under Housley on 4th line how do you think he will feel playing for JC on 4th line?

Also he should get nothing but league minimum 1 yr deal from next team that takes look at him
 
AmericanDream

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,133
26,483
Chicago Manitoba
ChiHawks10 said:
So it's exactly how I thought it was. Contract terminated, as if it didn't exist. Free to sign a new contract with any NHL team, even this year. :thumbu:

I'd give him a couple mil to see if he can turn it around as a Hawk.
Click to expand...
it makes absolutely zero sense why he would even go to waivers...if a team could offer him peanuts who the hell is going to sign him at his existing contract and claim that?? just so freaking odd...Dreger and Weekes said the very same thing on NHL Network - if no team claimed him he couldn't play this year -

I will stand corrected as I was wrong - didn't think this was possible as it starts a very slippery slope here with terminating guaranteed contracts...
 
Hawkaholic

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
31,638
11,000
London, Ont.
I think as long as Berglund played in the NHL this year before Dec 1st, he can still play.
It would make sense if he never reported and hadn't played a game in the NHL yet, that he wouldn't be allowed to play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChiHawks10
AmericanDream

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,133
26,483
Chicago Manitoba
Hawkaholic said:
I think as long as Berglund played in the NHL this year before Dec 1st, he can still play.
It would make sense if he never reported and hadn't played a game in the NHL yet, that he wouldn't be allowed to play.
Click to expand...
yeah I don't know anymore, Brian Gionta signed after the Olympics to play in the NHL as he had no contracts in place elsewhere but was allowed to play after Feb in the NHL...we will see who signs him/if anyone does...he might just go play in Sweden.
 
Hawkaholic

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
31,638
11,000
London, Ont.
Blackhawkswincup said:
That is nonsense

They had agreement and it expired. You cant demand a team continue to follow a NTC when it expires and if that is what Berglund demanded that says more then enough about how Berglund acts and why Sabres have done what they have done

Also if anyone should have grievance in situation its Blues and Sabres who paid generously for his pathetic and subpar play thru years
Click to expand...
Berglund still had a partial NTC at the time of the trade.
 
DisgruntledHawkFan

DisgruntledHawkFan

Blackhawk Down
Jun 19, 2004
57,355
27,911
South Side
AmericanDream said:
it makes absolutely zero sense why he would even go to waivers...if a team could offer him peanuts who the hell is going to sign him at his existing contract and claim that?? just so freaking odd...Dreger and Weekes said the very same thing on NHL Network - if no team claimed him he couldn't play this year -

I will stand corrected as I was wrong - didn't think this was possible as it starts a very slippery slope here with terminating guaranteed contracts...
Click to expand...
I’m almost certain there’s an established pattern that’s well documented. Team would be in big trouble if they hadn’t dotted all the i’s and crossed all the t’s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blackhawkswincup and Pez68
RayP

RayP

Tf
Jan 12, 2011
94,109
17,878
Blue Liner said:
I'm doing it for both yesterday. I'd strongly consider for Jones, straight up. I'd have to chew it and really dig in.
Click to expand...

I’d decline just because of our defensive prospects and getting Hughes on hours ELC for a few years.

Although Jones for 4 more years at 5.4M is a bargain.

It’s a tough decision but having Hughes that cheap for a few seasons is the deal breaker for me.
 
Blue Liner

Blue Liner

Registered User
Dec 12, 2009
10,332
3,608
Chicago
Even if you finish dead-last in the league you're still not guaranteed Hughes, and while he is likely going to be very good, there's a chance he's not. You're getting an already-known, Norris-caliber defenseman (at a bargain) and a very, very good defenseman who is still young and getting even better, instantly bolstering the biggest need the team has. Even if you remove Werenski and go Jones straight-up, that's really difficult for me to not think long and hard about. The defensive prospects are assets. You can never have too many good defensemen on your team/in your system.
 
AmericanDream

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,133
26,483
Chicago Manitoba
Blue Liner said:
Even if you finish dead-last in the league you're still not guaranteed Hughes, and while he is likely going to be very good, there's a chance he's not. You're getting an already-known, Norris-caliber defenseman (at a bargain) and a very, very good defenseman who is still young and getting even better, instantly bolstering the biggest need the team has. Even if you remove Werenski and go Jones straight-up, that's really difficult for me to not think long and hard about. The defensive prospects are assets. You can never have too many good defensemen on your team/in your system.
Click to expand...
JD said that we had the #1 pick, so that was already established in this potential offer...
 
RayP

RayP

Tf
Jan 12, 2011
94,109
17,878
DisgruntledHawkFan said:
You hope your first overall pick turns into a franchise defenseman. Jones is that. Werenski is just gravy. This team would instantly be back on track to be great.
Click to expand...

For both it’s a no brainer but I don’t think Columbus would even consider that.

Hughes for Jones straight up and I probably go with Hughes. Having him cost controlled + our defensive prospects cost controlled for a few seasons could open up another window for a Hossa type of signing to go on a 4-5 year Cup run even at the expense of not being able to resign all of your home grown talent.
 
DisgruntledHawkFan

DisgruntledHawkFan

Blackhawk Down
Jun 19, 2004
57,355
27,911
South Side
RayP said:
For both it’s a no brainer but I don’t think Columbus would even consider that.

Hughes for Jones straight up and I probably go with Hughes. Having him cost controlled + our defensive prospects cost controlled for a few seasons could open up another window for a Hossa type of signing to go on a 4-5 year Cup run even at the expense of not being able to resign all of your home grown talent.
Click to expand...
Columbus wouldn’t, but that’s not the question. I’d swap Hughes for Jones but I certainly can see why others wouldn’t.

Jones+Werenski is a package that lands McDavid if he wanted out of Edmonton for whatever reason.
 
AmericanDream

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,133
26,483
Chicago Manitoba
RayP said:
For both it’s a no brainer but I don’t think Columbus would even consider that.

Hughes for Jones straight up and I probably go with Hughes. Having him cost controlled + our defensive prospects cost controlled for a few seasons could open up another window for a Hossa type of signing to go on a 4-5 year Cup run even at the expense of not being able to resign all of your home grown talent.
Click to expand...
Jones is a potential Norris trophy candidate...he has so much upside here..I think I am with you though as Hughes at an ELC vs Jones and what we have coming on defense would make me stand put..
 
Hawkaholic

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
31,638
11,000
London, Ont.
Giovi said:
No, he didnt. He missed the deadline to file the teams he would not go to.
Click to expand...
From Freidmans 31 thoughts:

The forward was traded from St. Louis to Buffalo in the Ryan O’Reilly deal on July 1. The date is significant. Berglund had a full no-trade clause that ended the day before, June 30. He had the right to submit a partial no-trade beginning on Canada Day. For whatever reason, it was late.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom