Around the NHL 2023-2024

[Xerloris]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807195027879174595

f***ing hilarious if true.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

With 3 years left on his deal, Vegas is reportedly shopping Pietrangelo. I never thought he would play the entire contract for Vegas which makes the entire NMC a moot point.

It’s most definitely not a moot point. It gives him a ton of leverage to choose where he ends up. Vegas can’t use the threat of waivers to force him to go to place he doesn’t want to go. It’s the entire point of a NMC from a players perspective.

 

[Spektre]

It’s most definitely not a moot point. It gives him a ton of leverage to choose where he ends up. Vegas can’t use the threat of waivers to force him to go to place he doesn’t want to go. It’s the entire point of a NMC from a players perspective.

It is a moot point from the perspective of having a NMC prohibits a player from being traded. Yes, he may have some leverage. Yes, he can't be sent to the minors. All the talk from Pietro's perspective was that he wanted the NMC for peace of mind, to know that he could be in the same location for the duration of the contract. That is the moot point.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

It is a moot point from the perspective of having a NMC prohibits a player from being traded. Yes, he may have some leverage. Yes, he can't be sent to the minors. All the talk from Pietro's perspective was that he wanted the NMC for peace of mind, to know that he could be in the same location for the duration of the contract. That is the moot point.

What part of the player having total control over where he goes makes this a moot point?

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't think Parayko's deal is bad, but man Slavin's contract how bad our big 3 defensive contracts are. And yes, I do know Slavin is giving a massive discount, but that's what a discount looks like for giving an 8 year deal.

 

[Reality Czech]

It’s most definitely not a moot point. It gives him a ton of leverage to choose where he ends up. Vegas can’t use the threat of waivers to force him to go to place he doesn’t want to go. It’s the entire point of a NMC from a players perspective.

And the reason why some teams would prefer not to give them out. How satisfying would it be to see Petro run out of town?

 

[Blueston]

I don't think Parayko's deal is bad, but man Slavin's contract how bad our big 3 defensive contracts are. And yes, I do know Slavin is giving a massive discount, but that's what a discount looks like for giving an 8 year deal.

Slavin contract is way under value. Lots of lesser players getting as much or more.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Slavin contract is way under value. Lots of lesser players getting as much or more.

I agree, I do hope that this is how teams start viewing 8 year deals. If you want an 8 year deal, you need an actual yearly discount. I know that won't be the case, but that would be my hope. It's definitely a situation similar to Bergeron in Boston with his discouted deals where he just wants to stay on the team and allow them to continue to contend.

 

[Spektre]

What part of the player having total control over where he goes makes this a moot point?

I think you're missing the point.

From Pietro's perspective at the beginning of the contract = staying in Vegas for 7 years.

If he's traded, he won't stay in Vegas for 7 years... = moot point

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I think you're missing the point.

From Pietro's perspective at the beginning of the contract = staying in Vegas for 7 years.

If he's traded, he won't stay in Vegas for 7 years... = moot point

No, I’m not remotely missing the point. The NMC is a huge factor. He has total control over where he ends up. Which you keep conveniently avoiding.

 

[Spektre]

No, I’m not remotely missing the point. The NMC is a huge factor. He has total control over where he ends up. Which you keep conveniently avoiding.

I think you are arguing your point for the sake of argument lol

His NMC was supposed to control him from being moved!!! Does that make sense? How does he have control if he winds up being traded when that's the point of having a NMC???

 

[BlueDream]

I think you are arguing your point for the sake of argument lol

His NMC was supposed to control him from being moved!!! Does that make sense? How does he have control if he winds up being traded when that's the point of having a NMC???

How do you not understand this? Vegas CAN’T trade him against his rights since he has a NMC. He has to accept a move. He can reject literally any trade they present to him.

He has full leverage here. This is not rocket science.

 

[Majorityof1]

I think you are arguing your point for the sake of argument lol

His NMC was supposed to control him from being moved!!! Does that make sense? How does he have control if he winds up being traded when that's the point of having a NMC???

And if he doesn't want to be moved, he won 't be. He has to agree to any trade.

You are straw-manning "the point of having an NMC". The point was they cannot use the minors as a tool to leverage a trade he doesn't want. The point would never be, he wants to preemptivey block all trades, even ones hed want.

If he wants to be traded somewhere he can waive, if he doesn't, the NMC protects him. That doesn't make it moot. It means Pietro may choose to leverage it to get traded someplace ge wants to go.

Also, the whole thing may be moot as he may not, probably won't, be traded. It's a rumor that he is being shopped. There were lots of rumors Krug and Parayko were being shopped last year. They are still here

 

[Spektre]

And if he doesn't want to be moved, he won 't be. He has to agree to any trade.

You are straw-manning "the point of having an NMC". The point was they cannot use the minors as a tool to leverage a trade he doesn't want. The point would never be, he wants to preemptivey block all trades, even ones hed want.

If he wants to be traded somewhere he can waive, if he doesn't, the NMC protects him. That doesn't make it moot. It means Pietro may choose to leverage it to get traded someplace ge wants to go.

Also, the whole thing may be moot as he may not, probably won't, be traded. It's a rumor that he is being shopped. There were lots of rumors Krug and Parayko were being shopped last year. They are still here

How do you not understand this? Vegas CAN’T trade him against his rights since he has a NMC. He has to accept a move. He can reject literally any trade they present to him.

He has full leverage here. This is not rocket science.

I think you 2 start drinking early lol

You can say all day long that he "can" block any trade etc.. but while this is technically true.. "if" he winds up getting traded,, that derails the entire theory, point, argument, etc.. that Pietro lobbied for so hard in having the NMC in the first place.

You're also fine to say he won't be traded to any team that he doesn't accept a trade to.

Who cares?

A trade is a trade.

Pietro's argument, or side when he refused to sign with the Blues, was a NMC guaranteed he would be with the same club and live at the same location for the duration of the contract.

This is the entire crux of the situation. You want to sweep that under the rug of semantics I guess, but it doesn't make any sense.


One last time and I hope we can all follow along in class lol

Pietro demanded a NMC for the sake of staying in one place for the duration of his contract.
If he's traded, that demand becomes a moot point.

 

[Blueston]

I think you 2 start drinking early lol

You can say all day long that he "can" block any trade etc.. but while this is technically true.. "if" he winds up getting traded,, that derails the entire theory, point, argument, etc.. that Pietro lobbied for so hard in having the NMC in the first place.

You're also fine to say he won't be traded to any team that he doesn't accept a trade to.

Who cares?

A trade is a trade.

Pietro's argument, or side when he refused to sign with the Blues, was a NMC guaranteed he would be with the same club and live at the same location for the duration of the contract.

This is the entire crux of the situation. You want to sweep that under the rug of semantics I guess, but it doesn't make any sense.


One last time and I hope we can all follow along in class lol

Pietro demanded a NMC for the sake of staying in one place for the duration of his contract.
If he's traded, that demand becomes a moot point.

It’s almost as if the whole nmc story from Petro camp was bs all along. Who knew? Oh wait, many of us did.

 

[stl76]

One little likely false rumor that Vegas is shopping Pietrangelo and everyone is at each other’s necks again.



EDIT:
Tanev to Toronto for SIX YEARS. Holy crap that’s like 3-4 years too long. Wow, good for him.

 

[Majorityof1]

I think you 2 start drinking early lol

You can say all day long that he "can" block any trade etc.. but while this is technically true.. "if" he winds up getting traded,, that derails the entire theory, point, argument, etc.. that Pietro lobbied for so hard in having the NMC in the first place.

You're also fine to say he won't be traded to any team that he doesn't accept a trade to.

Who cares?

A trade is a trade.

Pietro's argument, or side when he refused to sign with the Blues, was a NMC guaranteed he would be with the same club and live at the same location for the duration of the contract.

This is the entire crux of the situation. You want to sweep that under the rug of semantics I guess, but it doesn't make any sense.


One last time and I hope we can all follow along in class lol

Pietro demanded a NMC for the sake of staying in one place for the duration of his contract.
If he's traded, that demand becomes a moot point.

No, Pietro demanded an NMC to protect himself from being sent to the minors, or threatened to force a trade somewhere he doesn't want to go. Why would he protect himself from a trade he wants?

He may have wanted to stay in Vegas for 7 years but things change. He still has control of where he goes. I honestly don't see how this isn't obvious.

"Who cares? A trade is a trade" This is the single dumbest statement in the history of HF. Congrats. Are you seriously saying a player shouldn't care if they get traded to Montreal (non-playoff team, with high taxes, in Canada and cold weather) vs Florida (cup winner. No state taxes, usa and warm weather)? These are exactly the same? A trades a trade, right? Jesus, the willfull ignorance to prove an old point is off the charts.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Montour to Seattle.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Montour to Seattle.

I don’t think Francis has a vision for what he wants to do and their PO victory over the Avs is causing Seattle to be delusional into thinking they have a similar blueprint to Vegas.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Damn.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807787143139369422

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807787357631881466

Nashville making moves?

 

[stl76]

Sounds like Pesce to NJ is happening:

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807779610928591029

 

[Louie the Blue]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807787143139369422

https://x.com/i/web/status/1807787357631881466

Nashville making moves?

Signing those 2 + extending Saros is just putting lipstick on a pig.

They need to retool or rebuild.

 

[Blueston]

Signing those 2 + extending Saros is just putting lipstick on a pig.

They need to retool or rebuild.

They are. They have been adding picks and have been drafting pretty well. But they have elite 1D and elite g so they want to go for it before they fall off too much.

 

[Louie the Blue]

They are. They have been adding picks and have been drafting pretty well. But they have elite 1D and elite g so they want to go for it before they fall off too much.

With how their roster is structured as well as the West, I do not a see a world where they can seriously contend to win the conference.

And I think extending Saros is a huge mistake.