Toggle sidebar

Around the League - 2024-2025 Part II

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
ToneDog said:
One would think they could have made $12.5m work. An offer of 11.5m is low balling him again. No idea what Sakic was thinking.
Click to expand...

I think they are thinking they don’t want to have to pay both Rantanen and Makar more than MacKinnon. But I don’t think MacKinnon even cared. It’s bizarre. Good on them for sticking to their principles. I think it probably closes their cup window for now but they have an organizational standard they want to uphold.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToneDog
The Canucks have two Elias Petterssons. Wonder if they get along.

1737861418814.png


1737861438341.png
 
  • Wow
Reactions: TheTotalPackage and OddyOh
francis246 said:
I think they are thinking they don’t want to have to pay both Rantanen and Makar more than MacKinnon. But I don’t think MacKinnon even cared. It’s bizarre. Good on them for sticking to their principles. I think it probably closes their cup window for now but they have an organizational standard they want to uphold.
Click to expand...

As an Avs fan, I would be none-too-pleased they closed this era of contention and traded Rantanen over "organizational standards." HNIC reported $11.75 million was their limit. So they ended their era over what, a maximum of $1.5 million in difference? $2 million? Ask Carolina how long they had to wait to get their hands on a Rantanen.

Anyway, if things don't work out with Marner I would really like to be in on the Rantanen sweepstakes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jojalu and Menzinger
Stephen said:
As an Avs fan, I would be none-too-pleased they closed this era of contention and traded Rantanen over "organizational standards." HNIC reported $11.75 million was their limit. So they ended their era over what, a maximum of $1.5 million in difference? $2 million? Ask Carolina how long they had to wait to get their hands on a Rantanen.

Anyway, if things don't work out with Marner I would really like to be in on the Rantanen sweepstakes.
Click to expand...

Some of these discussions get too caught up in folks prioritizing asset management and cap balance for the sake of balancing the cap and managing assets, rather than the ultimate point of being winning hockey team, especially in the postseason.

You can have brilliant cap management, and never win anything. Nobody gets an award at the end of the year because you had a good salary distribution amongst your team's core.
 
Menzinger said:
Some of these discussions get too caught up in folks prioritizing asset management and cap balance for the sake of balancing the cap and managing assets, rather than the ultimate point of being winning hockey team, especially in the postseason.

You can have brilliant cap management, and never win anything. Nobody gets an award at the end of the year because you had a good salary distribution amongst your team's core.
Click to expand...

Case in point, the Carolina Hurricanes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menzinger and Evilhomer
francis246 said:
I think they are thinking they don’t want to have to pay both Rantanen and Makar more than MacKinnon. But I don’t think MacKinnon even cared. It’s bizarre. Good on them for sticking to their principles. I think it probably closes their cup window for now but they have an organizational standard they want to uphold.
Click to expand...
It will be interesting to see what Rantanen signs though.

If he signs for like 14mil, can’t fault the Avs for saying goodbye. If he signs for 12-13mil, you have to wonder how far apart was the Avs’ offer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menzinger, ToneDog, TheShape and 1 other person
These are some of the rules I think the league should be changing:

Icing - make it a penalty same as puck over glass. Encourages possession hockey (more exciting) and more power plays equals more goals.

Icing - If the puck passes the goal line inside the trapezoid then icing is waved off - there's no reason the goalie can't play it to keep play active.

If a player is called for embellishment the player on the other team should have their penalty waved off - reduces diving and increases powers plays

Shootout - players have to stay between the hashmarks and maintain a forward speed of 15 mph.

Under 20 rule for CHL players abolished - teams should be able to determine where is best for a player they drafted to develop

Compensation by way of draft picks for fired executives getting hired on by new teams - rewards a team for firing an incompetent manager or coach they hired in the first place
 
TMLBlueandWhite said:
These are some of the rules I think the league should be changing:

Icing - make it a penalty same as puck over glass. Encourages possession hockey (more exciting) and more power plays equals more goals.

Icing - If the puck passes the goal line inside the trapezoid then icing is waved off - there's no reason the goalie can't play it to keep play active.

If a player is called for embellishment the player on the other team should have their penalty waved off - reduces diving and increases powers plays

Shootout - players have to stay between the hashmarks and maintain a forward speed of 15 mph.

Under 20 rule for CHL players abolished - teams should be able to determine where is best for a player they drafted to develop

Compensation by way of draft picks for fired executives getting hired on by new teams - rewards a team for firing an incompetent manager or coach they hired in the first place
Click to expand...
I'm the exact opposite of your first rule - they should make puck over the glass a defensive zone faceoff with no line change like icing, not a penalty.

I can vibe with that second icing rule in the trapezoid though.

For diving, two wrongs don't make a right. I'd rather see 4v4 for a couple of minutes

Shootout, no need to stamp out creativity

CHL rule, I could see a middle ground of like each team can have one "exceptional status" player up at a time, but CHL has very little incentive to chase away their best players and ticket draws

And they tried the pick compensation a few years back. Lasted like one and a half years and the Leafs were one of the few teams who got dinged, when we signed Babcock and Lou, lmao. Then they scrapped it lol. I don't hate the idea, but the picks were too high, imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gary Nylund and HolyCrap
uncleben said:
I'm the exact opposite of your first rule - they should make puck over the glass a defensive zone faceoff with no line change like icing, not a penalty.

I can vibe with that second icing rule in the trapezoid though.

For diving, two wrongs don't make a right. I'd rather see 4v4 for a couple of minutes

Shootout, no need to stamp out creativity

CHL rule, I could see a middle ground of like each team can have one "exceptional status" player up at a time, but CHL has very little incentive to chase away their best players and ticket draws

And they tried the pick compensation a few years back. Lasted like one and a half years and the Leafs were one of the few teams who got dinged, when we signed Babcock and Lou, lmao. Then they scrapped it lol. I don't hate the idea, but the picks were too high, imo.
Click to expand...

I feel like if they want to keep the game moving they should try and reduce icings as much as possible and making it a penalty would accomplish that. You would see a lot more high pressure situations where teams are hemmed in their own zone and those are usually the best minutes of a game.

For the embelleshment rule I just feel like the original penalty probably wouldn't have been called if the other player didn't dive. But that can be subjective I guess. I like four on four, and that increases scoring already, so a rule change there might be redundant anyway.

I think the shootout makes a mockery of the game in general, and we have already had seen them make rule changes to prevent players from being overly creative with spinoramas and such, so it wouldn't surprise me if they try and bring it back to the spirit in which it was intended.

I want them to get rid of the pick idea if they haven't already. Or do the Penguins not owe the Leafs a pick for Dubas?
 
Menzinger said:
Some of these discussions get too caught up in folks prioritizing asset management and cap balance for the sake of balancing the cap and managing assets, rather than the ultimate point of being winning hockey team, especially in the postseason.

You can have brilliant cap management, and never win anything. Nobody gets an award at the end of the year because you had a good salary distribution amongst your team's core.
Click to expand...

While good cap management and salary distribution doesn’t automatically result in winning, it is a prerequisite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToneDog and LeafEgo
uncleben said:
I'm the exact opposite of your first rule - they should make puck over the glass a defensive zone faceoff with no line change like icing, not a penalty.

I can vibe with that second icing rule in the trapezoid though.

For diving, two wrongs don't make a right. I'd rather see 4v4 for a couple of minutes

Shootout, no need to stamp out creativity

CHL rule, I could see a middle ground of like each team can have one "exceptional status" player up at a time, but CHL has very little incentive to chase away their best players and ticket draws

And they tried the pick compensation a few years back. Lasted like one and a half years and the Leafs were one of the few teams who got dinged, when we signed Babcock and Lou, lmao. Then they scrapped it lol. I don't hate the idea, but the picks were too high, imo.
Click to expand...

No penalty for icing, what's next a penalty for missing the net?

They should make punishment fit the crime.
2 minutes for slashing/boarding/elbowing and 2 minutes for puck over the glass? How is that fitting.
1 minute for over the glass, and no line change for either team.

Shoot-outs, could have a time limit, but otherwise it's fine.

CHL already has their own exceptional rule for young players, so the NHL having an exceptional rule is not creating a new function, just applying it to the pros.

Compensation picks, yeah maybe 4th. - 5th. for an executive under contract.
Let teams negotiate, maybe picks/prospects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uncleben
TMLBlueandWhite said:
These are some of the rules I think the league should be changing:

Icing - make it a penalty same as puck over glass. Encourages possession hockey (more exciting) and more power plays equals more goals.

Icing - If the puck passes the goal line inside the trapezoid then icing is waved off - there's no reason the goalie can't play it to keep play active.

If a player is called for embellishment the player on the other team should have their penalty waved off - reduces diving and increases powers plays

Shootout - players have to stay between the hashmarks and maintain a forward speed of 15 mph.

Under 20 rule for CHL players abolished - teams should be able to determine where is best for a player they drafted to develop

Compensation by way of draft picks for fired executives getting hired on by new teams - rewards a team for firing an incompetent manager or coach they hired in the first place
Click to expand...

It seems that we have very different views on what makes hockey exciting.

Fewer players on the ice makes it slower and less physical.

Puck possession isn’t exciting. Turnovers are exiting!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToneDog
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom