Around the NHL 2023-24 - offseason part II

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Goptor

Registered User
Jun 30, 2016
2,641
3,192
I actually have the math as coming out to a cap hit of ~$12.4 million for that scenario.
View attachment 904378

I did create an even more deferred version where he gets $4.6 million per year and gets $6.5 million per year starting in 2040 for 16 years. In that case his cap hit is $9.15 million.

Obviously the value of the contract is less, which is the reason for the decreased cap hit, but we have seen players in other sports take big deferred payments when they likely didn’t have to.

It would be better for the league and NHLPA to just cut this off right now. If a player truly wants deferred money then have them take the option with interest, the CBA says that deferred money scenario must be counted fully against the cap as earned in the year played, even though it will be paid in later years with interest.

Isn't that how the NFL does it?

backload contracts and then release the players, then take a dead cap hit at the end. Should just give Carolina the #3.2m cap hit in year 9.
 

MasterofGrond

No, I'm not serious.
Sponsor
Feb 13, 2009
17,181
11,728
Rochester, NY
I actually have the math as coming out to a cap hit of ~$12.4 million for that scenario.
View attachment 904378

I did create an even more deferred version where he gets $4.6 million per year and gets $6.5 million per year starting in 2040 for 16 years. In that case his cap hit is $9.15 million.

Obviously the value of the contract is less, which is the reason for the decreased cap hit, but we have seen players in other sports take big deferred payments when they likely didn’t have to.

It would be better for the league and NHLPA to just cut this off right now. If a player truly wants deferred money then have them take the option with interest, the CBA says that deferred money scenario must be counted fully against the cap as earned in the year played, even though it will be paid in later years with interest.
Absolutely correct. My sleepy brain did not parse the correct years for deferrals.
 

BahlDeep

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jun 29, 2008
16,752
6,889
Montreal
Leafs fan here…. I resonate with what you are saying… There is a lot of hypocrisy in alcohol laws and even in people who complain about drunk driving. As someone who has drank my fair share in school I also realize the hypocrisy in my take on this but I’d rather be a hypocrite on this and correct rather than continue to be wrong to not be a hypocrite, I guess.

We live in a society that glorifies alcohol. We live in a society where alcohol is a very significant part of society. We also live in a society where driving is a very significant part of society. To think there would be no overlap is very stupid. Even the laws confess that they do not want to even try to eliminate drinking and driving. There is a reason the BAC limit is 0.08! No it’s not because certain medications have alcohol so it can’t be 0 – none of those medications make your BAC limit the equivalent to having had a few beers.

The laws openly confess that they want people who have begun the process to become inebriated to make a decision on whether they are inebriated enough to drive. How f***ing stupid do you have to be to think this is a good idea? As if alcohol helps you make good judgements on your sobriety? Maybe it doesn’t hinder your judgement but there’s 10s of millions of people who are swaying in front of the bartender and telling everyone else they are still sober. Like it is some sort of challenge. I’ve done that myself. Effectively we are asking drunk people to make an arbitrary assessment. We do not tell people how many drinks they can have in drivers ed before they are drunk based on their height and weight. The average person doesn’t go on google to determine how much they can drink and be able to drive.

But you propose – hey the drinking limit should be 0 + only whatever amount accounts for prescription drugs/non-intentional miniscule consumption of alcohol and no more for you to be able to drive – and what do you get? A bunch of drug addicted morons saying that is impractical and they don’t want to give up their compulsive desire to have a drink at a get together before going on a drive. These are the same people I’m sure who will come here and bitch about drunk driving.

There is a degree of hypocrisy to partake and encourage the activities of both driving and drinking on a large scale as well as encourage the idea that people after drinking must have the right to make an assessment on their soberiety before driving and then also turn around and start whining when the inevitable happens. This driver is a real piece of shit person – I don’t see American society banning alcohol but maybe we can have a limit of 0.03 or 0.02 and give extremely tough penalties for drunk driving – oh but then the economy will crash if too many people are restricted from driving and the auto industry will suffer. It’s contradictions and hypocrisies everywhere. As a society we have utterly failed any workable solution on a large scale because we can’t put the liquor down.

Edit: To try and make this a little positive, after this I have decided to make the intention to never drink again in my life. I would encourage anyone past the age of 25 to actually think about how their life over the course of and after the next 5 years will be better with alcohol in it as opposed to without it. Nothing will change the sadness of this story or the reality of it but maybe we can try to influence positive change moving forward. If you don’t feel like you can have fun without a drug you are limiting your human experience and should consider addressing the root cause. There is only damage to your health that will occur from drinking any amount of alcohol in life.

I made this decision at 30 years old.

Alcohol has its benefits especially in a social environment. But the cons VASTLY outweighs the pros.

How many stupid things have we done countless time while being under the influence?

Just not worth it.
 

Guadana

Registered User
Mar 7, 2012
8,349
22,375
St Petersburg
The technology exists for automobiles to disable themselves if the driver has any detectable alcohol in their system. We could approach the problem that way. As you noted, it’s politically a very difficult proposition.
I really don't understand why it's not automaticall yet. Companies are making a lot if stuff that they are blocking by subscription but this technology still isn't everywhere.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
The technology exists for automobiles to disable themselves if the driver has any detectable alcohol in their system. We could approach the problem that way. As you noted, it’s politically a very difficult proposition.

I really don't understand why it's not automaticall yet. Companies are making a lot if stuff that they are blocking by subscription but this technology still isn't everywhere.

Personally not a fan of making the majority be inconvenienced because of the minority who f*** up. I'd rather see much much harsher penalties for people who get DUIs. More jail time, suspended licenses, higher fines. I know they do this some places but it should be federally mandated that someone who gets 1 DUI has to have 1 installed on their cars for the rest of their life makes a lot more sense and would be easier to pass.

Personally if they really ever mandated something like that for everyone I'd either be buying a used car that didn't have it or would be figuring out how to take that system out of the car/hack it soon as I got home since I've never driven drunk and never would. Used car prices would sky rocket too.
 
Last edited:

tailfins

Registered User
Sponsor
Apr 20, 2005
2,751
1,736
Personally not a fan of making the majority be inconvenienced because of the minority who f*** up. I'd rather see much much harsher penalties for people who get DUIs. More jail time, suspended licenses, higher fines. I know they do this some places but it should be federally mandated that someone who gets 1 DUI has to have 1 installed on their cars for the rest of their life makes a lot more sense and would be easier to pass.

Personally if they really ever mandated something like that for everyone I'd either be buying a used car that didn't have it or would be figuring out how to take that system out of the car/hack it soon as I got home since I've never driven drunk and never would. Used car prices would sky rocket too.
You do you.

Rules for passive systems are supposed to be published in Nov of this year.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
You do you.

Rules for passive systems are supposed to be published in Nov of this year.

I just bought a new car so I'm hopefully set for at least 15 years before worrying about it. More shit to fail in the car, as it is there's already too much new stuff in the car that makes it harder and harder to work on your own car. There will definitely be large amounts of people against this.

Found an article for anyone else interested...

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: My3Sons

My3Sons

Nobody told me there'd be days like these...
Sponsor

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
131,970
60,565
I know of a few people who have had the blow and go systems installed in their cars, which was mandated after I guess so many drunk driving charges. I don’t know if it’s 2 or 3 or even 4.

You should be losing it permanently even before that many.

Sad and pathetic story about the blow and go device. I knew someone who borrowed the car of someone with the blow and go installed on it. She used to do so many other drugs, but that device can only detect ALCOHOL, which she didn’t drink too much.

But it didn’t detect any of the crack/coke/meth she smoked/shot up, so she was able to get the car to start whenever the idiot (the guy who let her use it was a complete moron to begin with, aside from being a chronic and repeat drunken driver) let her use his car, it started right up and drove because she never had a blood alcohol content.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
What did you get?

Got a Subaru Forester, I really like it but I wish it had less bells and whistles, I hate all the stuff that "helps" you drive so I've shut everything off I can like the lane assist stuff that beeps if you even get slightly near a line.

I love driving but I like simple things in vehicles, just give me ac, a radio, power locks and windows and steering and I'm good to go lol

The only feature that helps you drive that I actually like is cruise control for the highway for long road trips.
 

Hockey Sports Fan

Registered Loser
Sponsor
Jun 30, 2010
10,854
4,486
Connecticut
Got a Subaru Forester, I really like it but I wish it had less bells and whistles, I hate all the stuff that "helps" you drive so I've shut everything off I can like the lane assist stuff that beeps if you even get slightly near a line.

I love driving but I like simple things in vehicles, just give me ac, a radio, power locks and windows and steering and I'm good to go lol

The only feature that helps you drive that I actually like is cruise control for the highway for long road trips.
if you REALLY want a trip, try using the "lane assist" on the highway while in cruise control. The Forester can automatically keep its distance from cars in front of it and it'll follow the lines, but if you take your hands off the wheel it'll beep at you cuz I guess it can tell when you are or aren't giving it steering inputs? Pretty trippy.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
if you REALLY want a trip, try using the "lane assist" on the highway while in cruise control. The Forester can automatically keep its distance from cars in front of it and it'll follow the lines, but if you take your hands off the wheel it'll beep at you cuz I guess it can tell when you are or aren't giving it steering inputs? Pretty trippy.

I've tried it and it will even turn the wheel for you as the road curves but I'm just not a fan of it especially because when you want to turn the wheel with it on it fights you a bit. I just don't like any of it, I enjoy driving the car myself.

On the main board I saw a lot of people talking about everything being automated driving wise but I don't see how that will ever be mandated any time soon that it will be fully automated. They'll still be people with older cars on the road and they'll have to be an option to control the car yourself as well. I don't even like getting into ubers because I like being in control of the car, I can't imagine just sitting there and not being able to steer the car myself either.

I've been to cities like Tokyo and London and I absolutely love their train systems. If we had systems like theirs I would definitely drive less but we don't and unfortunately we probably never will.

I've looked into Amtrak before to go down to Florida and other cities before and it's absolutely insane that I can drive faster than almost every train. Going to Orlando was something like 24-25 hours via train and the prices to get on the train are actually equal to or more expensive than just flying. I can get down there in 16-17 hours driving myself. It's just hard imagining our whole train system or high speed rail being introduced any time soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: My3Sons

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
30,080
12,418
Personally not a fan of making the majority be inconvenienced because of the minority who f*** up. I'd rather see much much harsher penalties for people who get DUIs. More jail time, suspended licenses, higher fines. I know they do this some places but it should be federally mandated that someone who gets 1 DUI has to have 1 installed on their cars for the rest of their life makes a lot more sense and would be easier to pass.

Personally if they really ever mandated something like that for everyone I'd either be buying a used car that didn't have it or would be figuring out how to take that system out of the car/hack it soon as I got home since I've never driven drunk and never would. Used car prices would sky rocket too.
But this does allow for people to drive drunk until they are caught. I'm sure this wasn't the first time this Higgins guy drove drunk.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
But this does allow for people to drive drunk until they are caught. I'm sure this wasn't the first time this Higgins guy drove drunk.

It wasn't, he had a prior DWI in 2005, where the charges were voluntarily dismissed due to the officer involved not showing up in court which is an absolute joke that charges that serious can be dropped like that instead of rescheduled.
 
Last edited:

My3Sons

Nobody told me there'd be days like these...
Sponsor
Got a Subaru Forester, I really like it but I wish it had less bells and whistles, I hate all the stuff that "helps" you drive so I've shut everything off I can like the lane assist stuff that beeps if you even get slightly near a line.

I love driving but I like simple things in vehicles, just give me ac, a radio, power locks and windows and steering and I'm good to go lol

The only feature that helps you drive that I actually like is cruise control for the highway for long road trips.
Subaru is an underrated car. There was a time the Forester could almost match the WRX in 0-60.
 

Billdo

Registered User
Oct 28, 2008
19,760
16,964
Ocean County
if you REALLY want a trip, try using the "lane assist" on the highway while in cruise control. The Forester can automatically keep its distance from cars in front of it and it'll follow the lines, but if you take your hands off the wheel it'll beep at you cuz I guess it can tell when you are or aren't giving it steering inputs? Pretty trippy.
I unequivocally LOATHE adaptive cruise control. Drove from NJ half way to Florida before I realized I could turn it off. The car, my mother in laws, would brake when a car was like 20 car lengths ahead of us if it was on. I hate some of these new features.
 

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
131,970
60,565
Feeling a little better today. More like myself.

But I'm still in no mood to watch any Johnny Gaudreau tribute or highlight videos. It's just too soon. I'll definitely watch some to honor and celebrate him, at least by the week camp opens.
 

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
131,970
60,565
I'm just gonna stick with my 2010 Rav4 for quite a while. I've had it since brand new. It's got almost 168k miles on it. I don't put a ton of miles on it per year, though I did early on.

I also have a 99 f250 which has closer to 300k. And yeah, I got that brand new too when I probably was too young to even be able to afford it. Yay for living with my grandparents into my 30s. That's how I had the money to buy this house in cash. That f250 lasted a long time for a gasser and not a diesel.

I put a new transmission in it with the help of my buddy back in like the fall of 2009. It had like 203k miles on it then.

I was working out in Pennsylvania and commuting for the last couple of years I lived in Jersey. That truck wound up going from like 120k to 240k miles or maybe even 230k miles in just 2.5 or 3 years. And then maybe 50k-something in the last 13 years.

I want something newer, but I don't need it. I could afford it for monthly payments, but only because I have a paid off house and only have to pay property tax and homeowners insurance, which is still less than a third of a one bedroom apartment.

And the fact that I know how to fix the vehicles myself is reason to keep me in them a little longer because I don't have high repair or maintenance bills. The mechanics are too expensive.
 

Guadana

Registered User
Mar 7, 2012
8,349
22,375
St Petersburg
Personally not a fan of making the majority be inconvenienced because of the minority who f*** up. I'd rather see much much harsher penalties for people who get DUIs. More jail time, suspended licenses, higher fines. I know they do this some places but it should be federally mandated that someone who gets 1 DUI has to have 1 installed on their cars for the rest of their life makes a lot more sense and would be easier to pass.

Personally if they really ever mandated something like that for everyone I'd either be buying a used car that didn't have it or would be figuring out how to take that system out of the car/hack it soon as I got home since I've never driven drunk and never would. Used car prices would sky rocket too.
I believe people from families of victims will not agree with you. Yeah, I understand that you want to be owner of your car but the problem is in people who will not be stopped by anything. Alcohol detectors are already using. So its nothing special really. I just can't delegate for every people most of things because people can't handle it. Of course balance should be somewhere, people still should have control, but balance is about balance, not about complete lack of control and restrictions.

Of course in my view. I'm not a driver. I live in the city with very good system of public transport on different levels. And I don't like tonns of cars who are making problems with traffic and ruin yards just by everywhere parking. Drivers see it in the different way so again - balance should be find by competent people who understand how to develop public system of transport.

BTW Subaru was one of the most entertaining car I sit as a passenger.
 

Billdo

Registered User
Oct 28, 2008
19,760
16,964
Ocean County
Personally if they really ever mandated something like that for everyone I'd either be buying a used car that didn't have it or would be figuring out how to take that system out of the car/hack it soon as I got home since I've never driven drunk and never would. Used car prices would sky rocket too.
I'd rather just go to mandatory jail time with no early release for DUIs. 30 days for the first. 6 months, for the second, and if there's a 3rd it's a year.
 

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
I believe people from families of victims will not agree with you. Yeah, I understand that you want to be owner of your car but the problem is in people who will not be stopped by anything. Alcohol detectors are already using. So its nothing special really. I just can't delegate for every people most of things because people can't handle it. Of course balance should be somewhere, people still should have control, but balance is about balance, not about complete lack of control and restrictions.

Of course in my view. I'm not a driver. I live in the city with very good system of public transport on different levels. And I don't like tonns of cars who are making problems with traffic and ruin yards just by everywhere parking. Drivers see it in the different way so again - balance should be find by competent people who understand how to develop public system of transport.

BTW Subaru was one of the most entertaining car I sit as a passenger.

My problem with it is I shouldn't be treated like an irresponsible criminal. The people who are ruin it for the rest of us.

I wish public transportation was better here but it's not. For Prudential as an example it would cost me more money and take longer to get to the arena than it would to drive. There's no benefit to it for me financially or time wise. If the games go long for shootouts too you'll always see people leaving early or running out the door to catch their trains because not all the lines run on a convenient basis.

Going to London and going to soccer games is amazing, the trains run so frequently and everyone walks to the stadiums. There's ton of police who organize everyone leaving. I can't do that for Red Bull Arena here either or I would.

Japan and especially Tokyo has my favorite train system in the world. It's so clean, everyone on board is so polite, it's even quite on the trains! Everything about the whole experience is amazing but we'll never have that here.

I'd rather just go to mandatory jail time with no early release for DUIs. 30 days for the first. 6 months, for the second, and if there's a 3rd it's a year.

I'd be fine with that too and those people should obviously have mandated breathalyzers to start those cars if they currently don't. I think it varies state to state on that one but I'm really not sure what the rules are with that.
 

britdevil

Tea with milk...
Feb 15, 2007
26,660
13,840
UK
Going to London and going to soccer games is amazing, the trains run so frequently and everyone walks to the stadiums. There's ton of police who organize everyone leaving.

Go out of London and it is a miserable nightmare here. Public transport in London is great, not so much outside of.

As for the police presence... Well, let's just say that football fans don't have the best reputation lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Satans Hockey

Satans Hockey

Registered User
Nov 17, 2010
7,724
8,540
Go out of London and it is a miserable nightmare here. Public transport in London is great, not so much outside of.

As for the police presence... Well, let's just say that football fans don't have the best reputation lol.

Where are you at over there? My next trip over I want to rent a car so I can see the rest of England besides London and was also thinking of driving to Wales and Scotland since I've never been there either. I'm also curious to see how weird it is to drive on the opposite sides of the road as we do.

In terms of the police I was more talking about how they help organize everyone leaving. Like when I went to Wembley they also had people with signs that say stop and go to lead to the train on that main road to keep the crowds separated enough that there's no crowd crush incidents. It's just very different compared to here where we are lucky if there's any cops even directing traffic outside the arenas.
 
Last edited:

britdevil

Tea with milk...
Feb 15, 2007
26,660
13,840
UK
Where are you at over there? My next trip over I want to rent a car so I can see the rest of England besides London and was also thinking of driving to Wales and Scotland since I've never been there either. I'm also curious to see how weird it is to drive on the opposite sides of the road as we do.

Southampton. Great city, but not in the slightest bit touristy. It's a working port (one of the busiest in Europe). Heavily bombed in WW2, so the city was quickly rebuilt post-war and has become a bit of a hodgepodge of building styles. We have ancient city walls which can be dated back to the Medieval period, but also some the ugliest (yet charming) brutalist buildings in the country. Close by is the "New Forest" named so because it's mostly man made (trees planted for shipbuilding wood). The city is famous for the home of ocean cruising (Cunard, Carnival), Titanic set sail from here and of the people who perished, most of the workers were from Southampton. Richard the Lion Heart set sail for the middle east before his crusades from here, taking communion in a wonderful medieval church here before he left. So wonderful that Hitler ordered that under no circumstance should it be hit by the blitz bombers.

It's a maritime city through and through. Under appreciated as being the home base for the invasion of Normandy. My Grandad used to tell amazing stories about charming American troops into giving him chocolate and cigarettes. He was bombed out of 6!! homes during the war and lost two older brothers.

We're sandwiched between Bournemouth (touristy asf, beaches, proper seaside resort) and Portsmouth (home of the Royal Navy). A bit further out you have seaside locations like Brighton to the east and Devon/Cornwall to the west (Pirates!!).

Wonderful area to live in with some stunning scenery. Beaches, forests, cities, good quality of living (but very expensive) and some really rich history that dates back thousands of years.

I would recommend it to anyone.

 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad