Around The NHL Discussion 2021-22 Part II

[Linkens Mastery]

I feel bad for Conor Timmins, went from a top team in Colorado to Arizona, and is now out for the rest of the season with a knee injury.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

I feel bad for Conor Timmins, went from a top team in Colorado to Arizona, and is now out for the rest of the season with a knee injury.

He’s had a pretty cursed career thus far. He missed a year and a half with concussion issues a few years back as well

 

[Linkens Mastery]

He’s had a pretty cursed career thus far. He missed a year and a half with concussion issues a few years back as well

All these things are happening to him and he's only 23. Can't be good for his confidence.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I already didn't much like Vegas, but after this trade I really hope things don't work out for them. I hope Seattle gets a Cup sooner than Vegas.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

One other thought:
All the teams that were rumored in on Eichel must have already agreed that he could have the artificial disk surgery he preferred. How many front offices shared Buffalo's stance? I'm curious if their opinion was more of an extreme outlier or not.

 

[Stealth JD]

I already didn't much like Vegas, but after this trade I really hope things don't work out for them. I hope Seattle gets a Cup sooner than Vegas.

May they both struggle to find success and ultimately fold. I personally don't care if the HRR increases, leading to higher salaries and higher ticket prices. I liked the league at 26 teams. 28 was fine too. I'm all for 6 teams going away forever, and never coming back. I'm fine with this league always being 4th fiddle or lower in the national perspective. So long as the games are streamed somewhere, and tickets are affordable for the fans who truly want to be at the games (I don't care for the hassle of it all anymore, personally) no need to extract every dollar of value from your paying audience.

 

[Majorityof1]

If Eichel returns healthy, even to like 75% of what he would be, then Vegas probably makes out ahead in the short term. Buffalo got quite a bit in return, but it'll be up to them to develop that talent they got (besides Tuch). Personally, I don't enjoy Buffalo being this bad, so I hope they can turn things around. But Vegas can eat shit for all I care lol They have zero loyalty to their players and it's actually kind of disgusting.

I disagree. Eichel has to be 100% of Eichel for this to work out. $10M is way too much to spend on a guy who is not an absolute game breaker as a forward. When you are making 12% of the salary cap, you can't just be great. You have to make everyone around you better too. 60 point guys (75% of 80) do not elevate their team like that.

As for loyalty to players, I don't buy it at all. We absolutely shit on Berglund. Ruined his career and mental health by trading him to Buffalo on a technicality because his agent was a day late filing his No trade list. Yet our fans don't care because it made us a better team. That trade gave us a cup. We as a collective fan base vilify Vegas for making trades to try to get better, while putting Army on a pedestal for some heinous moves.

There is nothing wrong with that. That's the career these guys chose. They are getting paid hundreds of thousands and most likely millions of dollars to play a game. They are able to do this because fans spend BILLIONS to watch. Fans spend billions because hope springs eternal that their GM can make a trade to improve their team and make them a contender. Look at all the trade forum proposals. They are mercenary as f*** and deluded as hell. Every fan base probably had at least one Eichel proposal that would have sent loyal players to Buffalo for a chance at a game breaker.

 

[Sidney Lumet]

Yes Buffalo Sabres just lost their supposed to be franchise stone player but Peyton Krebs and Alex Tuch are not a bad player. I like Don Granato's coaching talent and he and Sabres team showed us to entertaining stuffs so far. Yes they are competing perhaps the most difficult Division in the National Hockey League. Legitimate contender like a Panthers, very good/sometimes unlucky teams like a Maple Leafs, Bruins and Lightning are not easy task. If Buffalo stays the momentum and keep working hard, i am optimistic for them.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I feel bad for Conor Timmins, went from a top team in Colorado to Arizona, and is now out for the rest of the season with a knee injury.

Probably a blessing in disguise. He can plan his exit strategy while not becoming demoralized in the process.

 

[President Skroob]

I already didn't much like Vegas, but after this trade I really hope things don't work out for them. I hope Seattle gets a Cup sooner than Vegas.

How great would it be if they miss the playoffs and Eichel never plays for them this year.

 

[Stealth JD]

Yeah - i hope Vegas gives Buffalo the #11 pick in the draft, miss the playoffs, then get their depth gutted in the off-season as they try to make the salary cap work.

Vegas may willingly become the first club to dress 10 forwards on a nightly basis, simply to stay in cap compliance. An 18-man roster seems inevitable.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I disagree. Eichel has to be 100% of Eichel for this to work out. $10M is way too much to spend on a guy who is not an absolute game breaker as a forward. When you are making 12% of the salary cap, you can't just be great. You have to make everyone around you better too. 60 point guys (75% of 80) do not elevate their team like that.

As for loyalty to players, I don't buy it at all. We absolutely shit on Berglund. Ruined his career and mental health by trading him to Buffalo on a technicality because his agent was a day late filing his No trade list. Yet our fans don't care because it made us a better team. That trade gave us a cup. We as a collective fan base vilify Vegas for making trades to try to get better, while putting Army on a pedestal for some heinous moves.

There is nothing wrong with that. That's the career these guys chose. They are getting paid hundreds of thousands and most likely millions of dollars to play a game. They are able to do this because fans spend BILLIONS to watch. Fans spend billions because hope springs eternal that their GM can make a trade to improve their team and make them a contender. Look at all the trade forum proposals. They are mercenary as f*** and deluded as hell. Every fan base probably had at least one Eichel proposal that would have sent loyal players to Buffalo for a chance at a game breaker.

Your comments about Berglund seem to assign intent where I don't see any. Getting traded to Buffalo (which he could have blocked if he'd exercised his contract rights) didn't have to ruin his career or mental health. That's a pretty extreme response to a trade of that nature. Hundreds of players have survived similar moves, often thriving. Its disingenuous to make comments that imply Armstrong was sitting in a shadowy alcove saying, "If he dies...he dies."

 

[Ranksu]

Goal of the year? Jeesus.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Goal of the year? Jeesus.

McJeesus.

 

[Majorityof1]

Your comments about Berglund seem to assign intent where I don't see any. Getting traded to Buffalo (which he could have blocked if he'd exercised his contract rights) didn't have to ruin his career or mental health. That's a pretty extreme response to a trade of that nature. Hundreds of players have survived similar moves, often thriving. Its disingenuous to make comments that imply Armstrong was sitting in a shadowy alcove saying, "If he dies...he dies."

The intent wasn't to ruin his career or his mental health. It wasn't even to screw him over. It was to become a better team. But we did it by exploiting his mistake. He didn't get his no trade list in on time. That is on him and his agent. Army had every legal right to trade him wherever. However, the comment I was replying to was talking about loyalty to the player. Wouldn't loyalty dictate you give him a call and say "Hey you are late with your NTC. Can you get it in?"? Isn't that more loyal than waiting by the fax machine for the clock to hit midnight so you can send the trade papers to the NHL?

Whatever the intent, the end result of that was damage to Berglund's career and mental health. Don't act like Army didn't know he was getting a fast-one over and taking advantage of a mistake. If anyone complains about Vegas trading players that don't have any trade protection at all, then we were just as bad, and probably worse.

There is no objective argument that what Vegas has done is worse. You can't even argue that Vegas owed Tuch more loyalty than we owed Berglund. Tuch had 4 seasons with Vegas, 4 years of built up loyalty. Berglund had 10 with us. Yet we made the exact same type of trade to Buffalo for RoR. Blais had 4 years here, we traded him for Buchnevich. Sanford had 4 years, we traded him a month after he signed a new contract for a bag of pucks to Ottawa (another place to which nobody wants to be traded).

You can barely argue that they traded more players than we have. We've traded 12 guys who played for the Blues (only counting guys who suited up for St. Louis) since Vegas's expansion draft (Blias, Sanford, Allen, Fabbri, Edmundson, Schmaltz, Sobotka, Berglund, Thompson Stastny, Lehtera, Reaves). Vegas has traded a few more than that at 15, but they are also an expansion team trying to find their identity (Lepsiec, Tatar, Hunt, Haula, Lindberg, Miller, Eakin, Subban, Pirri, Stastny, Glass, Fleury, Holden, Reaves, Tuch). Is it the 3 more players that make them the piece of shit disloyal mercenaries? At 12 guys traded in 4 years you are a genius, 13 you are just a regular team, 14 you are a jerk and 15 you are a evil scumbag mercenary piece of shit? Good thing we didn't sell at the deadline last year.

I just don't get why Vegas is being villified for trading players when Army gets praised for it. I mean I do get it. It's bullshit fanboyism. Everything your team does is through rose colored glasses and everything your rivals do is through puke colored ones. That doesn't make it right. To me it makes it much more wrong.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

The intent wasn't to ruin his career or his mental health. It wasn't even to screw him over. It was to become a better team. But we did it by exploiting his mistake. He didn't get his no trade list in on time. That is on him and his agent. Army had every legal right to trade him wherever. However, the comment I was replying to was talking about loyalty to the player. Wouldn't loyalty dictate you give him a call and say "Hey you are late with your NTC. Can you get it in?"? Isn't that more loyal than waiting by the fax machine for the clock to hit midnight so you can send the trade papers to the NHL?

Whatever the intent, the end result of that was damage to Berglund's career and mental health. Don't act like Army didn't know he was getting a fast-one over and taking advantage of a mistake. If anyone complains about Vegas trading players that don't have any trade protection at all, then we were just as bad, and probably worse.

There is no objective argument that what Vegas has done is worse. You can't even argue that Vegas owed Tuch more loyalty than we owed Berglund. Tuch had 4 seasons with Vegas, 4 years of built up loyalty. Berglund had 10 with us. Yet we made the exact same type of trade to Buffalo for RoR. Blais had 4 years here, we traded him for Buchnevich. Sanford had 4 years, we traded him a month after he signed a new contract for a bag of pucks to Ottawa (another place to which nobody wants to be traded).

You can barely argue that they traded more players than we have. We've traded 12 guys who played for the Blues (only counting guys who suited up for St. Louis) since Vegas's expansion draft (Blias, Sanford, Allen, Fabbri, Edmundson, Schmaltz, Sobotka, Berglund, Thompson Stastny, Lehtera, Reaves). Vegas has traded a few more than that at 15, but they are also an expansion team trying to find their identity (Lepsiec, Tatar, Hunt, Haula, Lindberg, Miller, Eakin, Subban, Pirri, Stastny, Glass, Fleury, Holden, Reaves, Tuch). Is it the 3 more players that make them the piece of shit disloyal mercenaries? At 12 guys traded in 4 years you are a genius, 13 you are just a regular team, 14 you are a jerk and 15 you are a evil scumbag mercenary piece of shit? Good thing we didn't sell at the deadline last year.

I just don't get why Vegas is being villified for trading players when Army gets praised for it. I mean I do get it. It's bullshit fanboyism. Everything your team does is through rose colored glasses and everything your rivals do is through puke colored ones. That doesn't make it right. To me it makes it much more wrong.

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to have here. I've already stated the reasons I don't love what Vegas is doing, and I'm pretty sure we had the same exchange then. They've openly shopped players in a way that I view as disrespectful. I don't see examples like that anywhere in the list of trades Armstrong has made, nor do most front offices do that.

Acquiring Eichel is setting them up to have to trade another guy they probably signed as a free agent. I have to admit that Pietro insisting on the NMC is probably a lot more significant being on the Golden Knights than it would have been in St Louis.

I don't really see a problem with being biased toward my favorite team, but I think the ownership and management in Vegas is pretty openly acknowledged around the league as being more aggressive than anyone else in making moves. You left off the most egregious example, which was the firing of Gallant. He'd done nothing that warranted that, other than take them to the SCF the season prior. They were even still in a projected playoff spot at the time. The leadership simply wanted to change coaches because a guy they liked more became available. Its the owner's right to do that, but I don't have to respect operating that way.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

McJeesus.

Reminds me of Tom Lysiak.

 

[Majorityof1]

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to have here. I've already stated the reasons I don't love what Vegas is doing, and I'm pretty sure we had the same exchange then. They've openly shopped players in a way that I view as disrespectful. I don't see examples like that anywhere in the list of trades Armstrong has made, nor do most front offices do that.

Acquiring Eichel is setting them up to have to trade another guy they probably signed as a free agent. I have to admit that Pietro insisting on the NMC is probably a lot more significant being on the Golden Knights than it would have been in St Louis.

I don't really see a problem with being biased toward my favorite team, but I think the ownership and management in Vegas is pretty openly acknowledged around the league as being more aggressive than anyone else in making moves. You left off the most egregious example, which was the firing of Gallant. He'd done nothing that warranted that, other than take them to the SCF the season prior. They were even still in a projected playoff spot at the time. The leadership simply wanted to change coaches because a guy they liked more became available. Its the owner's right to do that, but I don't have to respect operating that way.

We have. But I wasn't arguing with you until you decided to respond to me. You don't use the ridiculous vitriol that many on here do, so I mostly don't have a problem with your stance. Also, this trade doesn't fit your objection, since it was a trade of opportunity, not one where they were openly shopping a player. Any way, I don't buy your argument that Vegas is more open about shopping players than anyone else, like, at all. Armstrong shopping guys has been an open rumour in the NHL. We knew he was shopping Tarasenko before it came out he demanded a trade. We knew when he was shopping Shattenkirk. We knew Oshie was likely toast before he was traded. NHL GMs shop guys, and people find out about it. Its not that big of a thing.

I don't know the particulars of the Gallant firing. It did seem like it was a weird move, but there could have been something behind the scenes we weren't privy to. Armstrong has fired a lot of coaches in his time though. He hired Yeo in that weird coach in waiting BS, and fired him less than 2 years after he got to be coach. Granted Yeo sucked and I was fine with it. But Armstrong is the one who made the mistake to hire him in the first place.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

We have. But I wasn't arguing with you until you decided to respond to me. You don't use the ridiculous vitriol that many on here do, so I mostly don't have a problem with your stance. Also, this trade doesn't fit your objection, since it was a trade of opportunity, not one where they were openly shopping a player. Any way, I don't buy your argument that Vegas is more open about shopping players than anyone else, like, at all. Armstrong shopping guys has been an open rumour in the NHL. We knew he was shopping Tarasenko before it came out he demanded a trade. We knew when he was shopping Shattenkirk. We knew Oshie was likely toast before he was traded. NHL GMs shop guys, and people find out about it. Its not that big of a thing.

I don't know the particulars of the Gallant firing. It did seem like it was a weird move, but there could have been something behind the scenes we weren't privy to. Armstrong has fired a lot of coaches in his time though. He hired Yeo in that weird coach in waiting BS, and fired him less than 2 years after he got to be coach. Granted Yeo sucked and I was fine with it. But Armstrong is the one who made the mistake to hire him in the first place.

You at least seem to agree that firing Gallant based purely on the performance of the team was dubious. To my view, it was pretty clear that it had a hell of a lot more to do with DeBoer being available and them coveting him. Gallant was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The treatment of MAF was also shoddy. Anyway, I really don't have any desire to try and convince you of anything. The facts are public information. If we interpret them differently, so be it. I think my opinions on this matter are not unusual at all though, if you canvas people that follow the league closely. I'm sure there are plenty of folks who can and have articulated them in a lot more detail. I saw a commentary on NHL Network just this week where they made allusions to free agents starting to take pause before signing with Vegas or insisting on NTCs. The panel seemed in agreement. (I don't remember offhand who was the source.)

 

[ezcreepin]

I disagree. Eichel has to be 100% of Eichel for this to work out. $10M is way too much to spend on a guy who is not an absolute game breaker as a forward. When you are making 12% of the salary cap, you can't just be great. You have to make everyone around you better too. 60 point guys (75% of 80) do not elevate their team like that.

As for loyalty to players, I don't buy it at all. We absolutely shit on Berglund. Ruined his career and mental health by trading him to Buffalo on a technicality because his agent was a day late filing his No trade list. Yet our fans don't care because it made us a better team. That trade gave us a cup. We as a collective fan base vilify Vegas for making trades to try to get better, while putting Army on a pedestal for some heinous moves.

There is nothing wrong with that. That's the career these guys chose. They are getting paid hundreds of thousands and most likely millions of dollars to play a game. They are able to do this because fans spend BILLIONS to watch. Fans spend billions because hope springs eternal that their GM can make a trade to improve their team and make them a contender. Look at all the trade forum proposals. They are mercenary as f*** and deluded as hell. Every fan base probably had at least one Eichel proposal that would have sent loyal players to Buffalo for a chance at a game breaker.

Eichel, even at 75% of his healthy self, is still a GOOD 70 point player. He plays a premium position at center, and he's still very young. 10 mil for Eichel is a little steep, but it definitely is not the worst contract to have in the NHL right now, not even close. As for player loyalty, the Golden Knights have been in the league for 5 years. Do you know how many players from that original team are still there? 7, 2 of which, Smith and/or Marchessault, may or may not be gone before the trade deadline (at least 1 will be gone). It's also not clear if McNabb will be able to resign next year. Now you can say they didn't keep these guys because they didn't fill a need or were looking at other options, sure. But trading Fleury? Bad look. Trading all 3 of your 1st round draft picks? I mean it goes against what you preached doing, but ok. Trading fan favorite Reaves? I didn't like it when the Blues did it, and I don't like it now but that's more subjective. Trading Schmidt a year after signing a 6 year contract? Gross. Trading Colin Miller a year after signing a 4 year deal? Gross. I mean say what you want, but there's a fine line between wanting to get better and trying to play NHL 22.

As far as no loyalty to Berglund? Dude spent 10 years in the organization before enough was enough. Also, he was the one who didn't get the list to the Blues in time. That shit is on you to provide, assuming you don't want to be traded to an awful team. And I'm sorry, but blaming the Blues because of the mental problems Berglund developed is rich. You're completely content for 10 years playing on a good team and happened to get traded to a bad team and now you have developed a mental illness? Sorry, but that's not on the Blues. Though it's not his fault he developed an illness and I'm glad he found help, it's still on him to find a way to handle it. Sometimes people are affected differently by trades, and he just happened to handle it badly.

 

[Itsnotatrap]

Goal of the year? Jeesus.

Yeah, I think that will hold up as the best of the year!

 

[Majorityof1]

Eichel, even at 75% of his healthy self, is still a GOOD 70 point player. He plays a premium position at center, and he's still very young. 10 mil for Eichel is a little steep, but it definitely is not the worst contract to have in the NHL right now, not even close. As for player loyalty, the Golden Knights have been in the league for 5 years. Do you know how many players from that original team are still there? 7, 2 of which, Smith and/or Marchessault, may or may not be gone before the trade deadline (at least 1 will be gone). It's also not clear if McNabb will be able to resign next year. Now you can say they didn't keep these guys because they didn't fill a need or were looking at other options, sure. But trading Fleury? Bad look. Trading all 3 of your 1st round draft picks? I mean it goes against what you preached doing, but ok. Trading fan favorite Reaves? I didn't like it when the Blues did it, and I don't like it now but that's more subjective. Trading Schmidt a year after signing a 6 year contract? Gross. Trading Colin Miller a year after signing a 4 year deal? Gross. I mean say what you want, but there's a fine line between wanting to get better and trying to play NHL 22.

As far as no loyalty to Berglund? Dude spent 10 years in the organization before enough was enough. Also, he was the one who didn't get the list to the Blues in time. That shit is on you to provide, assuming you don't want to be traded to an awful team. And I'm sorry, but blaming the Blues because of the mental problems Berglund developed is rich. You're completely content for 10 years playing on a good team and happened to get traded to a bad team and now you have developed a mental illness? Sorry, but that's not on the Blues. Though it's not his fault he developed an illness and I'm glad he found help, it's still on him to find a way to handle it. Sometimes people are affected differently by trades, and he just happened to handle it badly.

We have 4 players left from our 2016-2017 roster. 5 if you count Perron who left and came back. Other than that its Tarasenko (who we are shopping), Parayko, Barbashev, and Bortuzzo. Gone are Pietrangelo, Schwartz, Steen, Shattenkirk, Stastny, Berglund, Fabbri. Lehtera, Upshall, Brodziak, Edmundson, Bouwmeester, Paajarvi, Reaves, Jaskin, Yakupov, Gunnarson, Sanford, Hunt, Sobotka, Allen, Hutton, Butler, Copley, Lindbohm and Rattie. So we are again worse than Vegas.

Your post is the very epitome of what I was saying. I don't even know why I am arguing when you are making my point for me. "Trading fan favorite Reaves was terrible....just never mind that we did the same." "Vegas is terrible for trading away 3 first round picks...I'm going to go root for Tage Thompson, Dominik Bokk and Robbi Fabbri on the Blu....never mind." "Oh my god, poor Fleury, how could they trade him just because he couldn't get the job done...Screw Berglund, he had years and couldn't get it done." "Trading Colin Miller a year after signing? Gross....trading Sanford a month after signing...whatvevs, man." The double standard is palpable.

 

[CoMoBlues]

Goal of the year? Jeesus.

I think so. At least a GOY top candidate. Dude walked 3 guys and made an insane move most players couldn’t do in a shootout.

 

[Reality Czech]

McJeesus.

That was freakin' ridiculous. One on four, are you kidding me?

 

[Renard]

That was freakin' ridiculous. One on four, are you kidding me?

It looked like the two Rangers closest to the Blue line had started to flare out toward the points and that is when McDavid jumped into the zone with speed. So he was past them and they didnt get back in time to defend.

Its McDavid's speed that makes him great.