Miscellaneous NHL Talk V9.0 - 2018/19 Regular Season

Status
Not open for further replies.

JojoTheWhale

CORN BOY
May 22, 2008
33,503
104,656
I would still bet on the Carolina side going forward.

They’re shooting the lowest percentage in the league, almost a full percent worse than 30th place. Meanwhile Calgary is 6th. You’re talking about a hilariously massive difference — 6.93% to 10.83%. They’re also getting significantly worse Goaltending.

Carolina also generates by far the most High Danger Chances/60 in the league, again to a hilarious degree. The difference between them and 2nd place Toronto is roughly the same as the gap between Toronto and 14th place Winnipeg.

Points are coming, basically.
 

David St Hubbins

Well, you're not as confused as he is.
Jan 24, 2016
2,010
3,357
Deskfront, facing WSW
If Berglund decided to not show up for work you can't hold the team liable to pay him. Or to restrict their use of the associated cap dollars. So that I dont have a problem with.

On the other hand, making him a UFA, who can then negotiate with whomever he wants, seems to set a path whereby a player can say "F you" to a team if they are unhappy by being drafted by them (see Lindros), traded to them (Berglund), or even after signing with them (change in management, direction, coaching, whatever). Now, you can't make the guy play, but I would hope they restrict his ability to negotiate/sign with other teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Captain Dave Poulin

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
81,930
139,659
Philadelphia, PA
If Berglund decided to not show up for work you can't hold the team liable to pay him. Or to restrict their use of the associated cap dollars. So that I dont have a problem with.

On the other hand, making him a UFA, who can then negotiate with whomever he wants, seems to set a path whereby a player can say "F you" to a team if they are unhappy by being drafted by them (see Lindros), traded to them (Berglund), or even after signing with them (change in management, direction, coaching, whatever). Now, you can't make the guy play, but I would hope they restrict his ability to negotiate/sign with other teams.

He can sign with another team but he’s talking a sizeable pay decrease that’s more in line with his current abilities.

Most players aren’t going to be willing to take a pay cut like that. It’s still a mutual decision so both the player & team have to be on the same page as well to set things in motion. If just one party is then it doesn’t matter as you need both.
 

David St Hubbins

Well, you're not as confused as he is.
Jan 24, 2016
2,010
3,357
Deskfront, facing WSW
He can sign with another team but he’s talking a sizeable pay decrease that’s more in line with his current abilities.

Most players aren’t going to be willing to take a pay cut like that. It’s still a mutual decision so both the player & team have to be on the same page as well to set things in motion. If just one party is then it doesn’t matter as you need both.

Thanks for the clarification. As for the policy:

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: LegionOfDoom91

TCTC

Registered User
Mar 25, 2013
13,085
9,565
Yeah, I don't think minus Giroux there's one player on our team that would get us Pietrangelo straight up. And I obviously wouldn't trade Giroux for Pietrangelo...
 

Tripod

I hate this team
Aug 12, 2008
78,798
86,142
Nova Scotia
The Blues have:

Tarasenko
Steen
Schwartz
Perron
Maroon
Fabbri

for top 9 wingers. Adding Simmonds to them seems odd unless it's to later trade him...or resign him and trade Maroon. I figure a contender will come calling after Simmonds instead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad