Miscellaneous NHL Discussion LXXXV: Halfway to Christmas

Status
Not open for further replies.

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
56,992
45,406
Sounds like Washington will go after Kesler. They can put Backstrom's $9.2m on LTIR.
 

ajgoal

Almost always never serious
Jun 29, 2015
9,895
28,670
Ellis’ entire pelvis/hips/groins/abs are messed up. He is not going to be playing this season, and if he does it’ll be one shift, then, ‘Whoops, blew out his lower pelvis again.’

On the bright side, once he’s Rathje’d there will be some cap space to play with.
That's not a bright side with this crew.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larry44

Larry44

#FlyersPerpetualMediocrity
Mar 1, 2002
12,172
7,726
Dang, is he worth maybe a shot? I don't know much about him but a former first rounder who maybe underachieved on an awful team? Or does he just suck?
I always thought he was a smart player. Not sure why he is a buyout.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
83,359
143,384
Philadelphia, PA


Backstory to the McDonagh trade

Big, if true


I generally side with players but to me Tampa Bay played within the rules. I just chalk this one up as it’s business.

Of course it would be nice if the league culture didn’t criticize players for doing what’s best for them before the team/organization & treated it like a true two-way street. But nonetheless that’s not really the case.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
83,359
143,384
Philadelphia, PA
I know the owners will never, ever go for it. But it's pretty much accepted that an NBA-style soft cap would be better, right?

For those that don't know, essentially you can go over by X amount to keep your own players.

cant-decide-gif-11.gif


I agree in spirit but as a fan of the Philadelphia Flyers that would just enable their stupid management style even more than it already does. :laugh:
 

renberg

Registered User
Dec 31, 2003
7,231
7,495
Lewes Delaware
forums.hfboards.com
I generally side with players but to me Tampa Bay played within the rules. I just chalk this one up as it’s business.

Of course it would be nice if the league culture didn’t criticize players for doing what’s best for them before the team/organization & treated it like a true two-way street. But nonetheless that’s not really the case.
Could Fletcher have played that game with Giroux?
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
56,992
45,406
Could Fletcher have played that game with Giroux?
Giroux had two months left on his contract, not four years. Also, if you waive Giroux and he is claimed, that means you get zero for him as an asset. Totally different situation than McDonagh.
 

Curufinwe

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
56,992
45,406
I generally side with players but to me Tampa Bay played within the rules. I just chalk this one up as it’s business.
I think it's weird McDonagh wasn't keen on Nashville. That's a pretty good situation as a team, and tax-wise.
 

LegionOfDoom91

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
83,359
143,384
Philadelphia, PA
Could Fletcher have played that game with Giroux?

i don’t really see how the two are relevant to each other. Giroux had a full NMC, he could block a trade to any teams he would want.

McDonagh had a partial NTC, he could only block so many teams in a trade. McDonagh also didn’t have a NMC so he couldn’t block being put on waivers.

The scenarios are different. Giroux was an expiring contract the Flyers were trying to get value for. McDonagh was a big contract Tampa Bay was looking to ditch. Tampa Bay didn’t care about the return for McDonagh. They just wanted to clear the contract. Which they were going to do with either putting him on waivers to be claimed by Columbus or the trade with Nashville.

Tampa Bay came back to McDonagh & told him that they have a deal lined up with Nashville & waiver claim lined up with Columbus. But he was going one way or another. McDonagh just reluctantly picked Nashville over Columbus as a lesser of two evils to him.
 

Rebels57

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Sep 28, 2014
78,106
125,552
i don’t really see how the two are relevant to each other. Giroux had a full NMC, he could block a trade to any teams he would want.

McDonagh had a partial NTC, he could only block so many teams in a trade. McDonagh also didn’t have a NMC so he couldn’t block being put on waivers.

The scenarios are different. Giroux was an expiring contract the Flyers were trying to get value for. McDonagh was a big contract Tampa Bay was looking to ditch. Tampa Bay didn’t care about the return for McDonagh. They just wanted to clear the contract. Which they were going to do with either putting him on waivers to be claimed by Columbus or the trade with Nashville.

Tampa Bay came back to McDonagh & told him that they have a deal lined up with Nashville & waiver claim lined up with Columbus. But he was going one way or another. McDonagh just reluctantly picked Nashville over Columbus as a lesser of two evils to him.

I guess this means the 5 teams that finished below Columbus, including the Flyers, all indicated to Tampa Bay that they would not be claiming him? Also, what is Columbus' incentive for telling Tampa Bay that they would claim him?
 

JojoTheWhale

"You should keep it." -- Striiker
May 22, 2008
35,811
110,704
I guess this means the 5 teams that finished below Columbus, including the Flyers, all indicated to Tampa Bay that they would not be claiming him? Also, what is Columbus' incentive for telling Tampa Bay that they would claim him?

Pure speculation here. I claim to have zero info, but this is how it could make sense.

Tampa called around about him. MTL, PHL, ARI, and SEA weren't interested. Columbus expressed interest with retention or a specifc salary back. Tampa refused and told them they were considering waiving him, but did not want to ruin the relationship and then have to keep him if he passes through unclaimed. They inform Columbus those 4 teams weren't interested. Columbus answers, thinking this means they're likely to get him without there being a tacit agreement.

Then Tampa decided to use this as leverage to get him to accept the Nashville deal.
 

TCTC

Registered User
Mar 25, 2013
13,361
9,778
I guess this means the 5 teams that finished below Columbus, including the Flyers, all indicated to Tampa Bay that they would not be claiming him? Also, what is Columbus' incentive for telling Tampa Bay that they would claim him?
I don't think they have much to gain by lying. If they claim him they have a disgruntled player and pissed off another GM they would probably like to make deals with in the future.
 

landsbergfan

Registered User
Jun 20, 2018
6,813
24,262
I generally side with players but to me Tampa Bay played within the rules. I just chalk this one up as it’s business.

Of course it would be nice if the league culture didn’t criticize players for doing what’s best for them before the team/organization & treated it like a true two-way street. But nonetheless that’s not really the case.
Yeah it is just the reality of the hard cap environment. As a player, you take this risk with the reward of a big contract. Both sides know that the last few years of the contract aren't going to be where the value is. I would imagine most of what McDonagh is upset about is that he feels he still contributes a good amount, but the moment it looks like he can't the contract becomes impossible to move without eating money/giving assets.

Many teams still wait too long
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Buffalo @ Eastern Michigan
    Buffalo @ Eastern Michigan
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $716.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Ohio @ Toledo
    Ohio @ Toledo
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $500.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad