Blackhawks sued (again) by teammate of Kyle Beach for sexual assault

[HTFN]

You are ALSO picking apart what is a competitive advantage and what isn't. Both of us agree that what happened to Beach was wrong and not reporting it was also wrong.

Because I am a Blackhawks fan, I need to "shut the absolute f*** up"

You have argued semantics in here all the same. We just happened to be on opposite sides. We both agree on the basics. Quit being so self righteous.

Arguing either way about 1st round picks when someone got sexually assaulted is wrong for both of us then. And we both should shut the f*** up.

Nope, sorry, and this is exactly why y'all keep coming out of threads feeling like victims. I didn't say shut up and say nothing no matter what, I said if your goal is to come in here and argue about why the decision was fair or that people need to just deal with it when the majority of people felt it wasn't the moment it was issued, and then want to pretend that people are jealous because Bedard instead of having anything remotely resembling principles you should absolutely shut the f*** up instead of putting that into the world.

If that's not you, great. But right now by page 20 that's most of the conversation I'm seeing.

 

[x Tame Impala]

There are some times where it's okay to say nothing instead of litigating the nitty gritty points of something that makes you look like a jerk. It's okay to just... not fight a "war for your fans" that makes it easy to wonder why it's more important that you feel good than that people be punished for awful behavior.

These threads aren't full of people saying "I can't believe anybody supports the Hawks anymore" because we all get it. It's hard and not fair to just be asked/forced to drop ties.

Doesn't mean people have to come in picking apart what a competitive advantage means instead of just shutting the absolute f*** up, because the history is already written and not changing (nobody's taking Bedard away tomorrow) and recognizing that it could have been worse. It's a jerk move.

The fact that you think this is about me instead of victims of real crimes is telling, because you also seem to think it's about you and the other fans. Step into the real world and realize this is a game for sport and entertainment and other shit matters more. I bet you think I also wanted a more severe punishment because I "hate the Blackhawks" instead of not giving a particular shit about them and wanting the NHL to do better by sexual assault victims and a lot more to discourage coverups.

Absolutely ridiculous you think myself or any Hawks fan posting in this thread cares more about how much other posters in the Internet like our team more than what happened to these two players.

There’s a mountainous gap between how angry and hurt we are this happened and how much we care about you losers whining about the punishment. This is appalling to us. I didn’t cry when both of my grandparents died recently, but I couldn’t stop the tears watching Beach’s interview. It was heartbreaking that that poor guy felt so alone and betrayed. Absolutely disgusting. I want McDononaugh fed to the dogs. I never want Q or Bowman in the league again in any capacity.

You’re just a fool on the Internet acting high and mighty, as if you care more than any of us. Get over yourself.

Let's start with five first round picks starting from the time the article came out (so Korchinski, Nazar, Rinzel, Bedard, and Moore). Same amount the Blues had to give up in the 90s (along with Scott Stevens because of tampering) and the same as what I'd be demanding if my Blues did something like this, to go along with jettisoning every person responsible from the team, from the players to the owner, giving a blank check to the victims, and forfeiting any Cup we would've won in that time period; I have zero tolerance for sexual assault because my sister and one of my friends had to go through it.

If you don't think literal sexual assault of two of your younger playeres deserves to be punished with more than what you got, I don't know what to tell you.

I just think at the end of the day the picks don’t justify the pain caused to Beach. It’s not an on ice issue. It was a criminal act and shameful coverup. Agree to disagree I supposed but again, no Hawks fan is jumping up and down because we got to keep a f***ing draft pick you clown

 

[iCanada]

The fact that an organization disrespecting a NTC has worse consequences than covering up sexual assault is insane.

Take away another first round pick from Ottawa.

Give Calgary a 3rd from Edmonton.

And suspend Kadri.

NHL wheel of Justice.

 

[TLEH]

Let's start with five first round picks starting from the time the article came out (so Korchinski, Nazar, Rinzel, Bedard, and Moore). Same amount the Blues had to give up in the 90s (along with Scott Stevens because of tampering) and the same as what I'd be demanding if my Blues did something like this, to go along with jettisoning every person responsible from the team, from the players to the owner, giving a blank check to the victims, and forfeiting any Cup we would've won in that time period; I have zero tolerance for sexual assault because my sister and one of my friends had to go through it.

If you don't think literal sexual assault of two of your younger playeres deserves to be punished with more than what you got, I don't know what to tell you.

I hadn't ever heard of that Scott Stevens tampering because I wasn't born yet, but I read about it and it wasn't 5 first round picks.

It was the choice of 1 first round pick in the next 5 years and within those 5 years, the ability to swap draft slots in the first round.

Semantics but just wanted to clarify.

 

[HTFN]

Absolutely ridiculous you think myself or any Hawks fan posting in this thread cares more about how much other posters in the Internet like our team more than what happened to these two players.

There’s a mountainous gap between how angry and hurt we are this happened and how much we care about you losers whining about the punishment. This is appalling to us. I didn’t cry when both of my grandparents died recently, but I couldn’t stop the tears watching Beach’s interview. It was heartbreaking that that poor guy felt so alone and betrayed. Absolutely disgusting. I want McDononaugh fed to the dogs. I never want Q or Bowman in the league again in any capacity.

You’re just a fool on the Internet acting high and mighty, as if you care more than any of us. Get over yourself.


I just think at the end of the day the picks don’t justify the pain caused to Beach. It’s not an on ice issue. It was a criminal act and shameful coverup. Agree to disagree I supposed but again, no Hawks fan is jumping up and down because we got to keep a f***ing draft pick you clown

So you can say all that and then also, in the same breath, say a 2 million dollar fine was "good enough" and really taught the organization a lesson about what happened?

Can we talk for a second about what measurable impacts the Blackhawks have made since to address this outside of saying they would in a town hall format? I care precisely enough and I'm not willing to make excuses for it.

Every Hawks fan coming in here specifically to post about how they already got Bedard, how other people are just jealous and lashing out is doing exactly that. It's a f***ing victory lap over a tragedy and deserves ridicule every single time. The picks don't correspond to Beach's recompense, they correspond to the incentive to do the right thing if winning is in the way.

 

[Memento]

I just think at the end of the day the picks don’t justify the pain caused to Beach. It’s not an on ice issue. It was a criminal act and shameful coverup. Agree to disagree I supposed but again, no Hawks fan is jumping up and down because we got to keep a f***ing draft pick you clown

No, the picks don't even come close to justifing the pain caused to Kyle Beach, John Doe, and the teen boy Aldrich assaulted. But it was an on-ice issue, as well as a criminal act and shameful cover-up. Aldrich's name is on the Cup. Whether you like it or not, his name is emblazoned on Lord Stanley's most coveted trophy. He was a part of that team, so it is on-ice. The fact that Hawks management hid it in a Stanley Cup run makes it an on-ice incident, and they were perfectly fine with burying it for years.

If it was the Blues in this exact situation, I'd demand that Snuggerud, Dvorsky, Stenberg, Lindstein, and our (high) pick this year get forfeited. Hell, I probably wouldn't be able to support them until everyone involved - from the players up to ownership - was gone, until the victims got an absolute blank check for their suffering.

I am not saying this merely out of spite for your team - although I admit that it does play a role. I am saying this because I am fully against sexual assault, no matter the victim or perpetrator, because I believe that a tiny fine - that has already been paid for in sales - is a pittance compared to what other teams have gotten for what I consider to be far lesser crimes.

I hadn't ever heard of that Scott Stevens tampering because I wasn't born yet, but I read about it and it wasn't 5 first round picks.

It was the choice of 1 first round pick in the next 5 years and within those 5 years, the ability to swap draft slots in the first round.

Semantics but just wanted to clarify.

Not to mention that we lost Stevens anyway.

Fair enough. I just wanted to say that there is precedence to what I'm saying, losing five draft picks.

 

[HTFN]

No, the picks don't even come close to justifing the pain caused to Kyle Beach, John Doe, and the teen boy Aldrich assaulted. But it was an on-ice issue, as well as a criminal act and shameful cover-up. Aldrich's name is on the Cup. Whether you like it or not, his name is emblazoned on Lord Stanley's most coveted trophy. He was a part of that team, so it is on-ice. The fact that Hawks management hid it in a Stanley Cup run makes it an on-ice incident, and they were perfectly fine with burying it for years.

If it was the Blues in this exact situation, I'd demand that Snuggerud, Dvorsky, Stenberg, Lindstein, and our (high) pick this year get forfeited. Hell, I probably wouldn't be able to support them until everyone involved - from the players up to ownership - was gone, until the victims got an absolute blank check for their suffering.

I am not saying this merely out of spite for your team - although I admit that it does play a role. I am saying this because I am fully against sexual assault, no matter the victim or perpetrator, because I believe that a tiny fine - that has already been paid for in sales - is a pittance compared to what other teams have gotten for what I consider to be far lesser crimes.


Not to mention that we lost Stevens anyway.

Fair enough. I just wanted to say that there is precedence to what I'm saying, losing five draft picks.

Some people will immediately call this grandstanding of some sort but I agree. There are times where we have to take a moment, take inventory, and realize that humanity is more important than the ecstasy of sport, and it's hard to take pleasure in that competition when we know it's not being conducted correctly.

I've dropped teams like hot rocks like Penn State, stopped watching Packers games after Rodgers went all anti-vax, have an admittedly hard time with Ovechkin being a Russian national in the Ukraine thing but hope it's a grey area, have a profound distaste for teams and players unwilling to do a rudimentary Pride demonstration, etc. because some things just matter more than what sports team you root for. The latest conflict in the Middle East has seriously changed my ability to view some entertainers.

I'll make some mildly tolerant excuses for personal politics until they start getting suppressive but beyond that, and especially when it gets into criminal territory, shit just matters more than how "fair" your sports team was treated.

 

[DavidpauseReinbacher]

Sorry who’s crying?

Certainly not Beach and the victims are calling out for compensatory draft picks to be stripped. Weird that yourself and the public outrage are, especially again considering no violation of the CBA took place, and if we are to go down such road where criminal charges result in that sort of punishment the kangaroo court the NHL would turn into would be worse than you could imagine.

Again, since the whataboutisms are flying like tactical nukes overhead since the senators got dinged up for actual violations, are the leafs going to lose picks for the pedo ring?


This has been disproven again and again, and only shows you haven’t read the report. There was no recommendation letter. It was a boiler plate style employee eval which went unsigned by Q, again which should lead to questions of what their knowledge of the event would be to allow such a bizarre response.

They will dock em picks its what theg deserve.

 

[Hanji]

So the argument is that by the Blackhawks avoiding distraction, and avoiding the disadvantage of being distracted, that gave them a competitive advantage over another team that was equally focused and not distracted?

Assuming other teams would act differently in the same situation (not covering up a crime to prevent a distraction), yes, the Hawks gave themselves a competitive advantage.

 

[HanSolo]

What goalpost shift? Other than nobody cared UNTIL the Hawks were to pick Bedard. So the goalpost moving would be coming from the likes of you.

The goalpost shifting is taking the negative attention away from the Hawks to put it on the criticizing fans. I don't think I need to explain it again. People thought the 2 million was a joke when it came down. People stopped talking about it when the story got quiet, which is exactly what Hawks fans wanted. We didn't make it our day job to petition for different forms of supplemental discipline. So when the possibility and eventuality of Chicago getting Bedard became apparent, it struck people as bullshit that an organization that got away just outside of scot free for truly reprehensible misconduct is the team that ends up with a coveted prize in a profitable and talented generational prospect.

Shifting the goalposts to try to generate some kind of hypocrisy because people stayed quiet and moved on with their lives doesn't change a damn thing.

 

[Lord Flashheart]

And much of the same, people are allowed to make jokes about this all in the false sense of superior morality. Great job mods. Bunch of hypocrites all of you.

People are allowed to make jokes and satirical comments about Blackhawks cover up of sexual assault. There's nothing hypocritical about it.

 

[Romang67]

Fair enough. I just wanted to say that there is precedence to what I'm saying, losing five draft picks.

That's not precedence to losing five draft picks as punishment from the league. The five draft picks were compensation for signing Stevens from the Capitals.

The punishment was one lost first round pick and one draft pick swap, with the Blues' having the option to defer the draft pick swap to a later year once.

 

[Hanji]

What would make you happy to see Hawks fans saying in here that we haven't all already said? Not a one of us is saying anything along the lines of "Wow thank god we didn't lose draft picks because of this".

"Humble"??? What the hell are you even talking about. You're just taking your chance to be self-righteous and outraged on the internet


And much of the same, people are allowed to make jokes about this all in the false sense of superior morality. Great job mods. Bunch of hypocrites all of you.

FYI, these jokes are form of satirical ridicule. The Hawks deserve ridicule for such heinous and monstrous actions.

If you think otherwise, well, I can't help you.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I just think at the end of the day the picks don’t justify the pain caused to Beach.

They don’t, but provides some justice against the team for covering it up,

 

[Memento]

That's not precedence to losing five draft picks as punishment from the league. The five draft picks were compensation for signing Stevens from the Capitals.

The punishment was one lost first round pick and one draft pick swap, with the Blues' having the option to defer the draft pick swap to a later year once.

We still were forced to give Stevens to the Devils after the tampering charges came to light. So yes, we lost five draft picks for nothing over the entire Stevens fiasco.

Like I mentioned in my first post in this thread, the Blues fully deserved their punishment for tampering. And if you don't think that the Hawks deserve less for doing so much worse, I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that.

 

[TLEH]

We still were forced to give Stevens to the Devils after the tampering charges came to light. So yes, we lost five draft picks for nothing over the entire Stevens fiasco.

Like I mentioned in my first post in this thread, the Blues fully deserved their punishment for tampering. And if you don't think that the Hawks deserve less for doing so much worse, I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that.

Im still confused how they lost 5 draft picks.

 

[Romang67]

We still were forced to give Stevens to the Devils after the tampering charges came to light. So yes, we lost five draft picks for nothing over the entire Stevens fiasco.

Like I mentioned in my first post in this thread, the Blues fully deserved their punishment for tampering. And if you don't think that the Hawks deserve less for doing so much worse, I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that.

You lost five draft picks as compensation for the offer sheet. That wasn't punishment for tampering, that was just the agreed upon compensation for an offer sheet of that size.

You were forced to trade Stevens for Shanahan because you didn't have the necessary draft picks to fulfill the obligations of the offer sheet he signed.

The punishment was one lost first round draft pick and one draft pick swap, plus a big fine.

 

[Memento]

Im still confused how they lost 5 draft picks.

Five first round draft picks for compensation to the Capitals for signing Stevens to an offer sheet. Forced to give up Stevens to the Devils a year after that when the tampering charges came to light. And then, like @Romang67 pointed out to me, a first round pick was docked, and the Blues were forced to swap firsts with the Devils.

And Lou Lamoriello was a damn hypocrite.

HOCKEY; Devils Get $1.4 Million and Draft Pick in Tampering Case (Published 1999)

You lost five draft picks as compensation for the offer sheet. That wasn't punishment for tampering, that was just the agreed upon compensation for an offer sheet of that size.

You were forced to trade Stevens for Shanahan because you didn't have the necessary draft picks to fulfill the obligations of the offer sheet he signed.

The punishment was one lost first round draft pick and one draft pick swap, plus a big fine.

An offer sheet that was later nixed and given to the Devils, along with Stevens. We still lost five first round draft picks because of that offer sheet.

But that is beside my point. There is presidence, and if we got docked this much for tampering, it is an insult that the Hawks got so much less for actual criminal action that affected the on-ice performance.

 

[Romang67]

Five first round draft picks for compensation to the Capitals for signing Stevens to an offer sheet. Forced to give up Stevens to the Devils a year after that when the tampering charges came to light. And then, like @Romang67 pointed out to me, a first round pick was docked, and the Blues were forced to swap firsts with the Devils.

And Lou Lamoriello was a damn hypocrite.

HOCKEY; Devils Get $1.4 Million and Draft Pick in Tampering Case (Published 1999)


An offer sheet that was later nixed and given to the Devils, along with Stevens. We still lost five first round draft picks because of that offer sheet.

But that is beside my point. There is presidence, and if we got docked this much for tampering, it is an insult that the Hawks got so much less for actual criminal action that affected the on-ice performance.

Man, that whole situation is so dumb I actually have to write it out. Thank you for bringing this to light.

First the Blues signed Stevens to a massive offer sheet. One that had the astounding compensation of 5 1st round picks back then.

A year later, they signed Brendan Shanahan to a smaller, but still substantial offer sheet, from the Devils. The issue here was that they didn't have the draft picks to actually compensate the Devils when they didn't match the offer sheet. They tried to agree on a post hoc trade with the Devils, and offered Curtis Joseph and Rod Brind'Amour, plus a couple of (obviously non first round since they didn't have any in the near future) draft picks. The Devils demanded Scott Stevens. An arbitrator was brought in, and sided with the Devils. At this point, the punishment for having signed Shanahan to an offer sheet without having the picks was essentially to have to trade Shanahan for Stevens. The first round picks still belonged to the Capitals.

3 years later, Stevens became an RFA AGAIN, and signed an offer sheet with the Blues AGAIN. However, this time, the Devils matched the offer sheet, so they kept Stevens. After this, Lou demanded the NHL look into the Blues' affairs, and it was proven that they had agreed to the contract before the FA period started. This is the tampering that resulted in the Blues losing a draft pick (actually having to give it to the Devils) and having to pick swap another. Plus the massive fine.

The issue with this comparison is that there isn't precedence for the 5 1st rounders. The precedence for losing draft picks would probably be 2-ish.

My personal issue with losing draft picks as punishment (in general, applies to the CBA related things as well as here) remains that it's just an uneven punishment. It's too dependent on how attractive a FA destination the team is, and it's too dependent on how good the team is when a crime or misdeed comes to light.

 

[HTFN]

Five first round draft picks for compensation to the Capitals for signing Stevens to an offer sheet. Forced to give up Stevens to the Devils a year after that when the tampering charges came to light. And then, like @Romang67 pointed out to me, a first round pick was docked, and the Blues were forced to swap firsts with the Devils.

And Lou Lamoriello was a damn hypocrite.

HOCKEY; Devils Get $1.4 Million and Draft Pick in Tampering Case (Published 1999)


An offer sheet that was later nixed and given to the Devils, along with Stevens. We still lost five first round draft picks because of that offer sheet.

But that is beside my point. There is presidence, and if we got docked this much for tampering, it is an insult that the Hawks got so much less for actual criminal action that affected the on-ice performance.

Let me see if I understand this right:

It's not that the NHL officially fined the Blues 5 draft picks, it's that after the offer sheet was called tampering and Stevens awarded to the Devils they still insisted that the payment of the contract's picks come from the Blues, which is sort of similar?

EDIT: no I guess I have that wrong, it's two separate deals where the Blues did all sorts of weird shit in the process. I... don't know how I'd rule it frankly but I don't think it's as cut and dry as being fined 5 picks for doing one thing. It's more like a snowball of idiot sequences.

 

[Memento]

My personal issue with losing draft picks as punishment (in general, applies to the CBA related things as well as here) remains that it's just an uneven punishment. It's too dependent on how attractive a FA destination the team is, and it's too dependent on how good the team is when a crime or misdeed comes to light.

My personal issue is that the Blues - and recently the Senators - have been punished with loss of first round draft picks for lesser crimes than what the Blackhawks had done, and that the Blackhawks had the equivalent of - like I mentioned in my first post - a naughty toddler getting a thirty-second timeout for misbehaving and right afterward, getting a cookie, ice cream, and a brand new toy.

Can you understand how frustrating that may seem to fans of other teams?

 

[hawksrule]

My personal issue is that the Blues - and recently the Senators - have been punished with loss of first round draft picks for lesser crimes than what the Blackhawks had done, and that the Blackhawks had the equivalent of - like I mentioned in my first post - a naughty toddler getting a thirty-second timeout for misbehaving and right afterward, getting a cookie, ice cream, and a brand new toy.

Can you understand how frustrating that may seem to fans of other teams?

I understand that. But one has to do with attempts to gain an on ice advantage, and one has nothing to do with that. The NHL drew a line there. Maybe they shouldn’t have, but that’s what they’ve done.

 

[MilkofthePoppy]

It is scary that Brad Aldridge could act so brazenly. I hope this individual finds justice.

 

[Memento]

I understand that. But one has to do with attempts to gain an on ice advantage, and one has nothing to do with that. The NHL drew a line there. Maybe they shouldn’t have, but that’s what they’ve done.

Is not Brad Aldrich's name on the Stanley Cup? Did he not have a day with the Cup?

It is an on-ice advantage. Why else cover it up for years and years?

 

[ClydeLee]

Is not Brad Aldrich's name on the Stanley Cup? Did he not have a day with the Cup?

It is an on-ice advantage. Why else cover it up for years and years?

I keep asking, why are so many weirdos here thinking Quenneville is right. That it's a on ice advantage. It's so nonsensical

It's a video coach.. . Even if it was an assistant coach or something higher. It's not a competitive advantage. Just fire or suspsend the guy and release a NDA will not talk about it at the time. There's no distraction or complications here.