2024 2025 Around the League Part 2

[Pokecheque]

Close one, but I think I agree.

Some people say Perry is a good guy, but I'm not sure I'm buying it. I think people might just say that because it's the expectation to say that about a vet like Perry.

He looks more like a guy who goes home and tortures animals in his free time.

Opening the gate for no reason tonight as Schenn was about to get hit was dirty af. His back went right into the pointed corner. He's got a lengthy history of just mean spirited dirty shit like that trying to hurt people.

Oh no, Perry isn't a good guy, but Bin is still worse.

 

[Foppa2118]

Is this bad?

This is the AHL. Home of reckless players with poor judgement and impulse control.

Some of them roided up juice heads.

I don't think he meant for that to happen, he just saw the ref in his way, got pissed, and shoved him harder than he should have, without thinking about it. Then realized after it was too late that he f***ed up.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

To me, it looks like he was thinking "forecheck, be physical" and saw somebody in his way out of the corner of his eye. He was looking the other way the whole time. That kind of shove wouldn't even register to a hockey player ready for contact, but the ref isn't expecting it so he gets Wile E. Coyoted into the boards. You can see the player realizing he f***ed up while the ref is still in the air.

Still though, Beckman needs to pay more attention, and the suspension is perfectly justified even if it was an accident.

I'm going to really ruffle some feathers with my take... but

Damn refs need to get the f*** out the way. They are constantly blocking pucks and people. Four on-ice officials is way too many. They're hogging the damn ice and still can't call the game for shit.

I'm sorry, this video, looks like the ref is in the dudes' blind spot. He's watching the play and the moment he turns he head and sees the ref is the moment of the collision. 10 games is bullshit for what truly looks like a freak accident. Why the f*** is the ref maintaining position on the dot instead of moving back towards the side boards and away from the players and out of the play? It's on the refs to recognize and be responsible for their position on the ice at all times.

[edit... I hope the official is okay, but I also hope he never touches the ice as an official again. He possibly ruined a kids career. Talk about a officials taking the game into their own hands.]

 

[Pokecheque]

I'm going to really ruffle some feathers with my take... but

Damn refs need to get the f*** out the way. They are constantly blocking pucks and people. Four on-ice officials is way too many. Their hogging the damn ice and still can't call the game for shit.

I'm sorry, this video, looks like the ref is in the dudes' blind spot. He's watching the play and the moment he turns he head and sees the ref is the moment of the collision. 10 games is bullshit for what truly looks like a freak accident. Why the f*** is the ref maintaining position on the dot instead of moving back towards the side boards and away from the players and out of the play? It's on the refs to recognize and be responsible for their position on the ice at all times.

I agree we should go back to a one-ref system. Almost always one ref defers to the other one anyway and a lot of times it's the ref who isn't anywhere near the action making the call.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

I agree we should go back to a one-ref system. Almost always one ref defers to the other one anyway and a lot of times it's the ref who isn't anywhere near the action making the call.

If they could get the player and puck tracking tech to call off-sides, we could put one "linesman" in a penalty box.... he only steps on the ice to break shit up. You take one ref and place them in the upper bowl somewhere. Allow them to call penalties down to the on-ice ref. That way you've only got two officials on the ice during gameplay to deal with and one official readily available to step on when needed.

It would be a radical change, but with the players getting bigger and faster every freaking year, the number of bodies on the ice is starting to become a factor.

 

[Bill Peckerskull]

I agree we should go back to a one-ref system. Almost always one ref defers to the other one anyway and a lot of times it's the ref who isn't anywhere near the action making the call.

If they're gonna have 4 officials on the ice, they might as well let all 4 of them call the game as refs. Seems stupid not to with all the shit the other 2 miss every game.

Imagine having 7 on the field officials for Football, but only 3 can call a penalty. The other 4 just make sure no one is offside, spot the ball, and blow the whistle when the play is over... Or having 4 umpires on a baseball field, but only the one behind the plate can call balls, strikes, out/safe. HR, etc. The others just call foul/fair balls.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

If they're gonna have 4 officials on the ice, they might as well let all 4 of them call the game as refs. Seems stupid not to with all the shit the other 2 miss every game.

Imagine having 7 on the field officials for Football, but only 3 can call a penalty. The other 4 just make sure no one is offside, spot the ball, and blow the whistle when the play is over... Or having 4 umpires on a baseball field, but only the one behind the plate can call balls, strikes, out/safe. HR, etc. The others just call foul/fair balls.

They should have tried that before adding the second ref. They should have just made both linesmen refs as well. Can't remember when we went to the two ref system vs when we eliminated the redline and two-line passing penalties, but that elimination really lessened the load on the linesmen which should allow them to be making calls when they see shit. We all know the refs will talk with the linesmen during huddles. So, their view is being taking into consideration at points, they should make it official.

 

[Pokecheque]

If they're gonna have 4 officials on the ice, they might as well let all 4 of them call the game as refs. Seems stupid not to with all the shit the other 2 miss every game.

Imagine having 7 on the field officials for Football, but only 3 can call a penalty. The other 4 just make sure no one is offside, spot the ball, and blow the whistle when the play is over... Or having 4 umpires on a baseball field, but only the one behind the plate can call balls, strikes, out/safe. HR, etc. The others just call foul/fair balls.

Ohhhhhhhh no no no. Absolutely not. Then we'd have three guys just standing there doing nothing afraid to show up the fourth, just intensifying the problem with the current setup.

Doubling the guys who call penalties has not made things better, it's made them worse, because refs are beholden to all these idiotic unwritten rules, like "game management" and deferring to whoever the hell the lead official is on that night. So no, four guys with the red/orange stripes on their sleeves would create way more problems than it would solve.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

Ohhhhhhhh no no no. Absolutely not. Then we'd have three guys just standing there doing nothing afraid to show up the fourth, just intensifying the problem with the current setup.

Doubling the guys who call penalties has not made things better, it's made them worse, because refs are beholden to all these idiotic unwritten rules, like "game management" and deferring to whoever the hell the lead official is on that night. So no, four guys with the red/orange stripes on their sleeves would create way more problems than it would solve.

But the things you are mentioning isn't something the refs just started doing. It was coached to them this way by the NHL. Specifically Stephen Walkom.

I would assume that with a complete refresh of the NHL on-ice officials, it would also include new, hopefully saner, directives. Like senority only applies within the union for their promotions and such.... it does not exist on-ice. The NHL's Director of Officiating is the one who sets the tone and enforces standards. With the NHL's blessing, he can do pretty much whatever he wants. If he wants to really concentrate on stick infractions, he'll put out memos and training videos the officials. He'll ding them for not following his policies. He'll reward them for doing so. Just like a boss with employees at any other job in the world.

However, considering how the NHL has historically operated I fully understand your hesitation that they would do the full job.

 

[Pokecheque]

But the things you are mentioning isn't something the refs just started doing. It was coached to them this way by the NHL. Specifically Stephen Walkom.

I would assume that with a complete refresh of the NHL on-ice officials, it would also include new, hopefully saner, directives. Like senority only applies within the union for their promotions and such.... it does not exist on-ice. The NHL's Director of Officiating is the one who sets the tone and enforces standards. With the NHL's blessing, he can do pretty much whatever he wants. If he wants to really concentrate on stick infractions, he'll put out memos and training videos the officials. He'll ding them for not following his policies. He'll reward them for doing so. Just like a boss with employees at any other job in the world.

However, considering how the NHL has historically operated I fully understand your hesitation that they would do the full job.

See, you're applying cool and clear logic to the league's highest offices and they're just simply not capable of that level of thought. Most DEFINITELY not so long as that meathead in a suit Colon Campbell is still there.

 

[Foppa2118]

I agree we should go back to a one-ref system. Almost always one ref defers to the other one anyway and a lot of times it's the ref who isn't anywhere near the action making the call.

I prefer the one ref system too. They're able to have a better handle on the game, and base their calls on that, while calling things even more often.

This allowed them to do their game management better, and award teams power plays when they know they missed something, and the same with letting things go, when they called something that wasn't a penalty.

When it's two refs, the game management is just as inconsistent as the rest of their calls. One guy calls things one way, the other another way, and they don't try to make up for each others screwups.

The NHL won't do it though, because they won't be able to see all the tiny hooks to the hands that they somehow have eagle eyes to see, which are more important to them than head trauma, or making sure one team doesn't have an advantage on the bad/non calls.

 

[LOFIN]

Laviolette is basically asking to be fired by Drury before the season ends. Rangers burned one year of their top prospects ELC for the coach to sit him in the pressbox, when the team has absolutely nothing to play for.

 

[Foppa2118]

Laviolette is basically asking to be fired by Drury before the season ends. Rangers burned one year of their top prospects ELC for the coach to sit him in the pressbox, when the team has absolutely nothing to play for.

Haven't followed this so I don't know, but maybe burning the first year was part of the deal, like it is for others?

 

[LOFIN]

Haven't followed this so I don't know, but maybe burning the first year was part of the deal, like it is for others?

What do you mean "part of the deal"? It was automatically burned by signing him. And the reason to sign him was to bring him to play. If that wasn't the plan, they would've waited until the summer. So if the coach is not playing him, it's just terrible asset management and makes Drury look like a jackass. Unless the player is like "you either sign me now or you're going to have to wait even longer, because I will go back to school/junior next year", which I doubt anyone says.

 

[Foppa2118]

What do you mean "part of the deal"? It was automatically burned by signing him. And the reason to sign him was to bring him to play. If that wasn't the plan, they would've waited until the summer. So if the coach is not playing him, it's just terrible asset management and makes Drury look like a jackass. Unless the player is like "you either sign me now or you're going to have to wait even longer, because I will go back to school/junior next year", which I doubt anyone says.

Again, I haven't followed this to know if it applies to him, but often when teams sign prospects, especially out of college, in order to agree on a deal, burning the first year at the end of the season is part of it anyway.

 

[LOFIN]

Again, I haven't followed this to know if it applies to him, but often when teams sign prospects, especially out of college, in order to agree on a deal, burning the first year at the end of the season is part of it anyway.

I don't really understand what you mean. Burning a year of the contract is not a choice made by the player or the team. It's automatic. The ELC may slide if certain criteria is met, most importantly the fact that a player is 18-19 years old when signing the ELC and doesn't turn 20 before the 31st of December in the year they signed.

Rantanen for an example, signed when he was 18 years old, then he only played in 9 NHL games (10 is the limit) before being sent down to San Antonio. This way, his ELC slided (sled, what is English?), and he still had 3 years with the Avs on his ELC before signing his first SPC in 2019.

Perreault, Demidov, Leonard etc, none of these players are slide eligible (too old). The first year of their ELC is burned off automatically upon signing, regardless if they play or not. So it would make sense to actually play them, especially in a situation where it matters f*** all if Perreault (or any other prospect in his position) looks lost out there because the team has nothing to play for.

I guess you can make the argument that teams want to burn off that year as well, because while the effective ELC is now two full seasons, the first "real" contract the player signs might be cheaper because they have proven less in the league. Regardless, the point I made above stands. There is literally nothing to be gained for sitting him in the pressbox.

 

[LOFIN]

Actually f*** it, disregard mostly all of what I said about the rules, because once again the NHL is a f***ing mess with their different rules for Canadian junior, college, and European prospects:

College players and teams have the option to sign “future contracts” which will take effect at the commencement of the next league year or a “current contract” that is effective immediately. A current contract will use up, or “burn,” the first year of the player’s entry-level deal, even if the player plays in just a single game that season.

So you were right. The main point still stands: there is no reason to sit him.

 

[Foppa2118]

I don't really understand what you mean. Burning a year of the contract is not a choice made by the player or the team. It's automatic. The ELC may slide if certain criteria is met, most importantly the fact that a player is 18-19 years old when signing the ELC and doesn't turn 20 before the 31st of December in the year they signed.

Rantanen for an example, signed when he was 18 years old, then he only played in 9 NHL games (10 is the limit) before being sent down to San Antonio. This way, his ELC slided (sled, what is English?), and he still had 3 years with the Avs on his ELC before signing his first SPC in 2019.

Perreault, Demidov, Leonard etc, none of these players are slide eligible (too old). The first year of their ELC is burned off automatically upon signing, regardless if they play or not. So it would make sense to actually play them, especially in a situation where it matters f*** all if Perreault (or any other prospect in his position) looks lost out there because the team has nothing to play for.

I guess you can make the argument that teams want to burn off that year as well, because while the effective ELC is now two full seasons, the first "real" contract the player signs might be cheaper because they have proven less in the league. Regardless, the point I made above stands. There is literally nothing to be gained for sitting him in the pressbox.

Playing them at the end of the year and burning the year is the choice I'm referring to. In order to agree on a deal. We've seen this multiple times over the years.

As opposed to waiting to sign and having more term on the ELC, which could lead to a different deal, or perhaps threatening to stay in college and go UFA.

Brock Boesser is an example.

Signed in late March of 16-17, as a #23 pick after his NCAA sophomore year (both just like Perreault), when Vancouver was the 29th place team not making the playoffs, just to burn the first year.

 

[expatriatedtexan]

Again, I haven't followed this to know if it applies to him, but often when teams sign prospects, especially out of college, in order to agree on a deal, burning the first year at the end of the season is part of it anyway.

The Avs are in the part of the life cycle of a core where they don't (or shouldn't) give two hoots about burning years on ELCs. We all know it's important to have good cheap players, but if they can play we need to get them here as soon as possible. Burning a year definintely helps playerse but seriously, if it also gets them here and in the lineup sooner, so be it. Cost of doing business at this point in the cycle.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

I'm somewhat puzzled by the Helle MVP talk.

It's been proven that in this league for anyone else than a forward to win it you need to have an all time great season or the forwards need to have a down year. Somehow this time around that doesn't matter as much, which to be fair is what I would prefer.

 

[dahrougem2]

I'm somewhat puzzled by the Helle MVP talk.

It's been proven that in this league for anyone else than a forward to win it you need to have an all time great season or the forwards need to have a down year. Somehow this time around that doesn't matter as much, which to be fair is what I would prefer.

Hellebuyck will not sniff MVP

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Hellebuyck will not sniff MVP

I doubt it too. Goalies and Dmen need to have iconic seasons to win for the most part, forwards not that much.

 

[GeoRox89]

I'm somewhat puzzled by the Helle MVP talk.

It's been proven that in this league for anyone else than a forward to win it you need to have an all time great season or the forwards need to have a down year. Somehow this time around that doesn't matter as much, which to be fair is what I would prefer.

There seems to be some endlessly bizarre (to me anyways) argument that because Kuch didn’t win last year when having a better season it’s harder to give it to him this year. Hate how much that discounts Mack’s season last year. Kuch or Drai would be perfectly fine choices so I’m rather baffled. This is not Price winning when somehow Jamie Benn won an Art Ross

 

[John Mandalorian]

If they're gonna have 4 officials on the ice, they might as well let all 4 of them call the game as refs. Seems stupid not to with all the shit the other 2 miss every game.

Imagine having 7 on the field officials for Football, but only 3 can call a penalty. The other 4 just make sure no one is offside, spot the ball, and blow the whistle when the play is over... Or having 4 umpires on a baseball field, but only the one behind the plate can call balls, strikes, out/safe. HR, etc. The others just call foul/fair balls.

Yeah. Moreover, it hurts the integrity of the product. Imagine a league of Tim Peels and Joe Wests being even more emboldened by having more power.

 

[RoyIsALegend]

Draisaitl is the easy choice for the Hart, IMO.