Gaylord Q Tinkledink
Registered User
- Apr 29, 2018
- 29,978
- 31,723
Is production fell off a massive cliff. He was good for 2 months and that's it
Was it even 2 months ?
Is production fell off a massive cliff. He was good for 2 months and that's it
Oilers give zero f***s about keeping the flames happy.I wonder if the nhl unilaterally made the decision or if the oilers agreed to it. Oilers have to be happy with the trade result, a 3rd is low value and it keeps a trading partner happy. Doesn’t seem like a hill to die on.
the weirdest thing for me is they actually bothered to come up with new conditions for the Leafs and Carolina's pick for the play in round, and just didn't even bother to do that here. Why not just say something like if he scores 2 goals for Edmonton now Calgary gets the pick?
I was talking about the conditions on the Campbell trade for the Leafs. Originally it was if Campbell wins 6 games and the Leafs make the playoffs, the 3rd round pick changes to a 2nd. Now it's if the Leafs win against Columbus and Campbell wins 2 games. Carolina's pick in their trade for Vatanen also had the condition updated for the play in round. That seems pretty reasonable, since it's nobody's fault the season ended so abruptly. I just don't understand why the league just decided Neal was close enough and therefore the conditions were met, rather than doing the same thingWhat new conditions? That pick had a top 10 condition that was unaffected by the new format, and as far as I'm aware still has the same conditions. The only way it's top 10 and we keep it is if it's 1st overall.
I was talking about the conditions on the Campbell trade for the Leafs. Originally it was if Campbell wins 6 games and the Leafs make the playoffs, the 3rd round pick changes to a 2nd. Now it's if the Leafs win against Columbus and Campbell wins 2 games. Carolina's pick in their trade for Vatanen also had the condition updated for the play in round. That seems pretty reasonable, since it's nobody's fault the season ended so abruptly. I just don't understand why the league just decided Neal was close enough and therefore the conditions were met, rather than doing the same thing
I cannot wait to hear how they explain this.
It's weird they would do this. Doesn't it set a precedent of pro-rating stats performance bonuses?
If they say that... Then bravo - honesty for once.how about "karma" for all those 1st overall picks?
Since teams with picks conditional on making the playoffs aren't giving their picks due to making the play-in round, why not just wait for Edmonton's series to conclude. If Neal gets 2 goals in those games, then it wouldn't be a head scratcher as to why the pick was given over.
The precedent would only be for seasons ended early by a pandemic, not a common one.this is just so stupid as a ruling and sets a bad precedent. In what world does it make sense for a team to give up a conditional pick for conditions that weren't met?
What they should of just done to please everyone is give calgary or edmonton a compensatory pick.I don't think we should have it, but I'll take it I guess. I do think Neal would have made it, but he didn't, so we should not have the pick. At best I was thinking the league might make Edmonton give us a 4th instead to try to split the middle, but what can you do. NHL is gonna NHL
Though imagine if this picks ends up a superstar randomly though lol.
What they should of just done to please everyone is give calgary or edmonton a compensatory pick.
The other 29 teams had no problem with New Jersey keeping their pick after completely breaking the rules when signing kovalchuk.The other 29 teams would never approve.