GDT: Free agency madness, brought to you by the letter G

[OttawaSenators11]

This is starting to look very no bueno for both our guys

Yeah everyone is coming out denying it they have yet to do so but still doesn't mean much yet just doesn't look great.

 

[Deku]

I'm really hoping Calgary decides to blow it up and we could snag Tanev or maybe Andersson. But with Sutter as coach and their division being pretty weak I could still see them grinding their way to a playoff spot with some defensive hockey. Kinda like Columbus making the playoffs in 2019 after losing Panarin and others

 

[Adele Dazeem]

This is starting to look very no bueno for both our guys

In suspensions…maybe

Yeah everyone is coming out denying it they have yet to do so but still doesn't mean much yet just doesn't look great.

Don't make assumptions before we have hard facts. Staying silent is a perfectly reasonable response to very serious accusations. They could just as easily have said we did nothing wrong and are ready to comply - and still be guilty of the crime. As long as names aren't listed by credible sources it is defamatory and inflammatory to speak about this.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Getting Andersson would be surreal.

If... and I mean if, there is a slither of a chance to get him... and we were in on Chychrun, every single ounce of energy and redirection should go straight to Andersson.

Don't think people know just how good he is. Modern day Keith, imo.

Tanev would be just as good(obviously shorterm), and more likely to be traded considering his age and retool of the team.

Could get away with trading JBD/Thomson+ Ostapchuk/Boucher

 

[Icelevel]

Don't make assumptions before we have hard facts. Staying silent is a perfectly reasonable response to very serious accusations. They could just as easily have said we did nothing wrong and are ready to comply - and still be guilty of the crime. As long as names aren't listed by credible sources it is defamatory and inflammatory to speak about this.

Like they discussed on 1200 today with Eric Macramalla, if they’re innocent they should be quick to make a statement. Only helps.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

Like they discussed on 1200 today with Eric Macramalla, if they’re innocent they should be quick to make a statement. Only helps.

Disagree. Statements are just statements. They only make those who are quick to make judgements feel good about themselves. Evidence trumps any blanket statements made. Only the players who have valid alibis of not being present in London are off the hook as far as I'm (or anyone should be) concerned.

 

[R2010]

Don't make assumptions before we have hard facts. Staying silent is a perfectly reasonable response to very serious accusations. They could just as easily have said we did nothing wrong and are ready to comply - and still be guilty of the crime. As long as names aren't listed by credible sources it is defamatory and inflammatory to speak about this.

Not really. Defamation has a specific meaning and unless someone comes up making allegations then it doesn't apply. Commenting on news reporting isn't defamation.

Defamation, libel and slander: What are my rights to free expression?

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication”, but this right is not absolute. What are defamation, libel and slander, and what defences can you take in court?

www.cjfe.org

 

[Icelevel]

Disagree. Statements are just statements. They only make those who are quick to make judgements feel good about themselves. Evidence trumps any blanket statements made. Only the players who have valid alibis of not being present in London are off the hook as far as I'm (or anyone should be) concerned.

So what is the harm in making a statement of innocence if they were in fact innocent? I know if it were me listed as one of the players I’d be on that right away letting people know I’d never take part in that kind of shit etc.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

So what is the harm in making a statement of innocence if they were in fact innocent? I know if it were me listed as one of the players I’d be on that right away letting people know I’d never take part in that kind of shit etc.

There is no harm or benefit, that's my point. Even if you are innocent and you somehow feel less burden on yourself; the fact remains that everyone else will still not believe you, or at least still have some doubt until they know for sure. So by coming out in public and saying you're innocent means very little when you're not ruled out. Also, for the players who have claimed innocence (and who then turn out to be guilty) they're not going to fret lying about it when they're facing much more serious charges...

 

[Gil Gunderson]

There is no harm or benefit, that's my point. Even if you are innocent and you somehow feel less burden on yourself; the fact remains that everyone else will still not believe you, or at least still have some doubt until they know for sure. So by coming out in public and saying you're innocent means very little when you're not ruled out. Also, for the players who have claimed innocence (and who then turn out to be guilty) they're not going to fret lying about it when they're facing much more serious charges...

Oh there is a huge benefit. No innocent person would want people accusing him of such an heinous act. A statement doesn’t mean he didn’t do it, but at least people wouldn’t automatically assume he’s one of them after remaining silent and disabling his IG comments. I can’t believe anyone sincerely believes staying silent isn’t doing any harm to his image (if he’s innocent).

Anyone who’s truly innocent wouldn’t want their family, friends, and fans to think they did it for a second.

 

[Wondercarrot]

There is no harm or benefit, that's my point. Even if you are innocent and you somehow feel less burden on yourself; the fact remains that everyone else will still not believe you, or at least still have some doubt until they know for sure. So by coming out in public and saying you're innocent means very little when you're not ruled out. Also, for the players who have claimed innocence (and who then turn out to be guilty) they're not going to fret lying about it when they're facing much more serious charges...

Ah yes, the famous “don’t get out in front of it approach” mixed with “the court of public opinion for a public figure is meaningless!”

 

[JackieDaytona]

Lawyers would tell you not to say anything until you are forced to. There is what is prudent to do in terms of public opinion and what is prudent in terms of the law. They should not be vilified for listening to their lawyers.

Ah yes, the famous “don’t get out in front of it approach” mixed with “the court of public opinion for a public figure is meaningless!”

It’s famous for a reason. Doesn’t stop people from racing to the gallows though.

 

[OttawaSenators11]

Some of the players that came out with statements share the same agent as Batherson as well.

Now this doesn't mean guilty at all obviously.

I really hope Drake and Alex didn't do shit

 

[Gil Gunderson]

Lawyers would tell you not to say anything until you are forced to. There is what is prudent to do in terms of public opinion and what is prudent in terms of the law. They should not be vilified for listening to their lawyers.

I’m not sure how much I buy it. Does Batherson have some extra-cautious lawyer that others don’t? If that was me I’d have huge issues with my lawyer for allowing my name to be dragged through the mud like that as an innocent person.

The only explanation that might make sense (and it’s quite a reach) is that only one of Batherson/Formenton were there and the team doesn’t want one to put out a statement because it’ll make the other one look guilty by default since they’re on the same NHL team. Quite a reach though.

 

[Icelevel]

Lawyers would tell you not to say anything until you are forced to. There is what is prudent to do in terms of public opinion and what is prudent in terms of the law. They should not be vilified for listening to their lawyers.


It’s famous for a reason. Doesn’t stop people from racing to the gallows though.

Eric Macramella is a lawyer. He’s the one that suggested it on the radio today.

 

[SenatorsLegionary]

I'm a big Matthew Tkachuk fan but I think Gaudreau drove the bus on that line.

We need a Debrincat type way more than we need another Tkachuk type.

I also feel like Gaudreau was the major driving force of that line and Lindholm is a fantastic player as well whose contributions cannot be overlooked when it comes to the line's success. There's no guarantee that Tkachuk has the same level of chemistry with new linemates on a different team so the possibility is real that he never produces as well as he did last year.

Even as it stands now, last year is a bit of an outlier compared to the rest of his career. It may very well be that he took the next step in his development and took his game to a higher level or it can also easily be a case of three players being familiar with each other over the last few years just clicking and firing on all cylinders. Prior to last season, Tkachuk scored at about 0.30 G/PG and at about 0.80 PPG, with most of his seasons coming in at about 0.30-0.35 G/PG and 0.70-0.90 PPG. Last season, he put up 0.51 G/PG and 1.27 PPG which both significantly surpassed his career averages and scoring rates in a typical season. Any team acquiring him is definitely taking on some risk if they are paying for and expecting similar production to last season.

That being said, as much as we can say that Tkachuk benefited from Gaudreau, I guess a similar argument can be made that Debrincat benefited from playing with Kane. One of the main differences IMO is that Debrincat has an elite shot and has a spot on the left side of the PP where he is lethal (similar to Norris on the right side). As long as we can effectively tee him up with cross ice/seam passes on the PP, and I fully believe we have players with the vision and talent to do so since we do it already with Norris, Cat will score his goals and is a safer bet to be a 35 goal + 35 assist player on a fairly consistent basis.

 

[TheDebater]

Starting to think that "too good to be true" contract Batherson signed is going to be just that, and if he was involved, I do not see any scenario where the team does not cut ties with him.

 

[Ice-Tray]

One thing that strikes me about this particular legal situation is that it may possibly be that ‘legally speaking’ the level of consent changed during the evening for the young lady, while at the same time it may also be possible that it was reasonable ‘legally speaking’ for the young men involved to have not known that it changed.

I have a feeling that this is where this particular case may hang.

It’s also worth noting that of the 8 young men present, the lawyer of 7 seems to indicate that there is a sub group of them that did not participate in the sexual activity and came and left on variable timelines.

It looks like the London police are looking into it again ( per the Athletic article) after HC has reopened the investigation. The article posted by SOA doesn’t paint a pretty picture of the way HC handled things, though this is from the players’ lawyers perspective.

Another confusing tidbit read from the above article is that apparently HC reached a settlement with the alleged victim without actually knowing the identity of any of the ‘John Doe’s’. How is that even possible?

More info is sure to follow…

 

[Loach]

Are you also going to account for being paid American dollars in Canada? Property tax? Levies? School quality? Consumption tax, Luxury tax, sin tax, insurance cost, advertising deals? Population density? Commute time?

This is not feasible. Some places are nicer to live than others. It's a fact of life. Better off accepting it than trying to rule a way out of it.

Shhh

 

[maclean]

I’m not sure how much I buy it. Does Batherson have some extra-cautious lawyer that others don’t? If that was me I’d have huge issues with my lawyer for allowing my name to be dragged through the mud like that as an innocent person.

The only explanation that might make sense (and it’s quite a reach) is that only one of Batherson/Formenton were there and the team doesn’t want one to put out a statement because it’ll make the other one look guilty by default since they’re on the same NHL team. Quite a reach though.

I mean it's a plausible explanation, less of a reach than a lot of the speculation you see going around

 

[Bevans]

As long as names aren't listed by credible sources it is defamatory and inflammatory to speak about this.

In what world are the statements you quoted defamatory?

 

[Tuna99]

There is no harm or benefit, that's my point. Even if you are innocent and you somehow feel less burden on yourself; the fact remains that everyone else will still not believe you, or at least still have some doubt until they know for sure. So by coming out in public and saying you're innocent means very little when you're not ruled out. Also, for the players who have claimed innocence (and who then turn out to be guilty) they're not going to fret lying about it when they're facing much more serious charges...

So what are saying is that nobody believes anything ever so why even try?

 

[JD1]

One thing that strikes me about this particular legal situation is that it may possibly be that ‘legally speaking’ the level of consent changed during the evening for the young lady, while at the same time it may also be possible that it was reasonable ‘legally speaking’ for the young men involved to have not known that it changed.

I have a feeling that this is where this particular case may hang.

It’s also worth noting that of the 8 young men present, the lawyer of 7 seems to indicate that there is a sub group of them that did not participate in the sexual activity and came and left on variable timelines.

It looks like the London police are looking into it again ( per the Athletic article) after HC has reopened the investigation. The article posted by SOA doesn’t paint a pretty picture of the way HC handled things, though this is from the players’ lawyers perspective.

Another confusing tidbit read from the above article is that apparently HC reached a settlement with the alleged victim without actually knowing the identity of any of the ‘John Doe’s’. How is that even possible?

More info is sure to follow…

Wait now. Unless I am not correctly remembering what I read yesterday, didn't HC refer the matter to the London police at 7 pm the day they heard of the allegations? That seems appropriate.

 

[senswon]

 

[5ive4Fighting]

I’m not sure how much I buy it. Does Batherson have some extra-cautious lawyer that others don’t? If that was me I’d have huge issues with my lawyer for allowing my name to be dragged through the mud like that as an innocent person.

The only explanation that might make sense (and it’s quite a reach) is that only one of Batherson/Formenton were there and the team doesn’t want one to put out a statement because it’ll make the other one look guilty by default since they’re on the same NHL team. Quite a reach though.

I think it’s a reasonable bet at this point that they were present and involved. Given that, there is literally no upside to doing anything other than following their lawyers‘ advice, which would certainly be to remain quiet. On the evidence as I understand it right now, it seems unlikely that sweeping charges will follow, and even less likely that sweeping convictions would result. I think the harder question will be what to do about 8 men behaving cruelly and dishonourably, both as individuals and as representatives of the game and the team. If their actions weren’t criminal, but “merely“ exploitative and indifferent, are there consequences? Either way, this will likely haunt them for some time. Is that fair? I think it’s hard to say right now.