Rumor: Rumors and Proposals Thread | Reseason Training Camp Opens July 13th?

Status
Not open for further replies.

CycloneSweep

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
51,134
42,769
AA was on the ice yesterday and had been in Ontario practicing for some time. The writer doesn't have much to base it on being AA.
I think the alleged the player tested positive a while ago. So it could be anyone if they have passed the tests and are now fine
 
  • Like
Reactions: KYams17

Samus44

Enjoy the ride.
Aug 5, 2010
9,317
2,088
Its worse than that. They abolished the rule BEFORE the Oilers had to give up the picks and grandfathered in the penalty just the same.

Yet managed to give Lou and the Devils their 1st round pick back for weaseling out of the Kovalchuk contract. They also allowed LA out of the brutal Richards contract. The game is great but the league is a joke. Let's not even get started on reffing and DoPS. It's always been clear to me the American teams get the benefit of the doubt every time, hence Dallas got the bye. Lets just hope the fact this debate involves Calgary confuses them on who to f*** over.
 

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
28,014
9,298
British Columbia
Yet managed to give Lou and the Devils their 1st round pick back for weaseling out of the Kovalchuk contract. They also allowed LA out of the brutal Richards contract. The game is great but the league is a joke. Let's not even get started on reffing and DoPS. It's always been clear to me the American teams get the benefit of the doubt every time, hence Dallas got the bye. Lets just hope the fact this debate involves Calgary confuses them on who to f*** over.

Dallas getting the bye actually annoys the hell out of me. It switching from divisions to conferences to decide who qualifies doesn’t make any sense considering that’s not the format that’s in use. The fact Dallas was on a 6 game losing streak, and were behind us in the standings just twists the knife further
 

Faelko

Registered User
Aug 11, 2002
12,025
5,313
this is a league that made the Oilers give up a 2nd and 3rd for Chia and McLellan...then promptly abolished those idiotic rules

nothing surprises me with them


I was just arguing about this the other day with someone. Did any other team have to give up a pick for hiring fired management/coaches? I can’t think of another example but there has to be one doesn’t there?
 

Faelko

Registered User
Aug 11, 2002
12,025
5,313
Dallas getting the bye actually annoys the hell out of me. It switching from divisions to conferences to decide who qualifies doesn’t make any sense considering that’s not the format that’s in use. The fact Dallas was on a 6 game losing streak, and were behind us in the standings just twists the knife further

I was told it was just sour grapes because I was an Oilers fan. It made all the divisional play pointless during the season to skip right to a conference winning percentage.

god I hate the morons that run this league...
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
28,660
18,181
I was just arguing about this the other day with someone. Did any other team have to give up a pick for hiring fired management/coaches? I can’t think of another example but there has to be one doesn’t there?
Yeah a bunch of teams. Leafs for Babcock, Sabre’s for Bylsma, Jersey for Hynes. It happened a bunch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Faelko

bone

5-14-6-1
Jun 24, 2003
9,033
7,838
Edmonton
Visit site
I was just arguing about this the other day with someone. Did any other team have to give up a pick for hiring fired management/coaches? I can’t think of another example but there has to be one doesn’t there?

I didn't think there was. The Oilers hires exposed that clause, which is why it was promptly voted out as it didn't meet the intent (preventing teams from scooping active coaches). However, since the rule was in place at the time the hires occurred they were enforced. I think it was ultimately the right decision, just stupid that the clause was so poorly written to allow that to happen.
___
Correction, there were a couple others as well, but all in the same year as the clause was only in place a short time. What's weird to me is that I thought Babcock's contract expired, not that he was fired. So I don't know why Detroit would have got compensation.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
28,660
18,181
I didn't think there was. The Oilers hires exposed that clause, which is why it was promptly voted out as it didn't meet the intent (preventing teams from scooping active coaches). However, since the rule was in place at the time the hires occurred they were enforced. I think it was ultimately the right decision, just stupid that the clause was so poorly written to allow that to happen.
___
Correction, there were a couple others as well, but all in the same year as the clause was only in place a short time. What's weird to me is that I thought Babcock's contract expired, not that he was fired. So I don't know why Detroit would have got compensation.
The rule was intended so if you developed a coach over so many years and he was poached to be a head coach you would get some compensation. Good rule in spirit but when they started including fired coaches and guys who expired is when it got out of control. They could have just re worded it properly and it would have been fine but nhl will nhl.
 

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
28,014
9,298
British Columbia
I was told it was just sour grapes because I was an Oilers fan. It made all the divisional play pointless during the season to skip right to a conference winning percentage.

god I hate the morons that run this league...

Exactly. It should have been 2 from each division, and then the other 8 are a “wildcard”. Just like how the league actually runs. The fact they came up with entirely new standings, that only screwed us, is just so NHL...

The rule was intended so if you developed a coach over so many years and he was poached to be a head coach you would get some compensation. Good rule in spirit but when they started including fired coaches and guys who expired is when it got out of control. They could have just re worded it properly and it would have been fine but nhl will nhl.

Ya, that was the worst part of it. They did it in a way other than what the fans were calling for, and when the fans complained that it doesn’t work, they went “we told you it doesn’t work”, and scrapped it entirely. To this day, I still really like the idea of it if they would have done it properly.

It would have been fair to pay a pick for Holland, since he was still employed by the Wings, but it was ridiculous that we had to give one for Chia.
 

Dazed and Confused

Ludicrous speed, GO!
Aug 10, 2007
6,416
3,006
Berlin, Germany
not that I know of

Columbus and Torts, I believe.

But yeah, if the condition had just been Neal getting to 21, I'd at least hear the argument for prorating his totals. However considering the fact that Lucic was right there in getting to within 10 of Neal, you can't in good faith say the Flames where 100% getting that pick. Especially when Neal was coming back from a bummed ankle, and Lucic had a few goals down the stretch.
 

Smartguy

Registered User
May 3, 2010
4,000
3,247
Edmonton
Dallas getting the bye actually annoys the hell out of me. It switching from divisions to conferences to decide who qualifies doesn’t make any sense considering that’s not the format that’s in use. The fact Dallas was on a 6 game losing streak, and were behind us in the standings just twists the knife further
Why is anyone concerned about us not getting the bye? The play in games are going to be way more intense than the other Bye games and those teams are going to be way better off starting the playoffs for it.

If we can’t beat Chicago in a best of 5 we don’t deserve to play in the playoffs, they are a much weaker team then us who sold off there better goalie. The only thing they have going for them is experience, but newsflash, this is not like anything they’ve played through before either.

Also if we lose we have a shot at first pick, or a higher pick then we would have gotten, which is better than having to play one of those winning play in teams in the first round fresh off a battle just to get in.
 

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
38,026
18,965
I was just arguing about this the other day with someone. Did any other team have to give up a pick for hiring fired management/coaches? I can’t think of another example but there has to be one doesn’t there?
The league made Columbus pay it for Torts after they got rid of the rule, just to be fair lol. But we were the only ones. What bugs me about it is that league could have ruled in our favor based on the "spirit of the rule", which has been cited in other cases
 
  • Like
Reactions: Faelko

Mr Positive

Cap Crunch Incoming
Nov 20, 2013
38,026
18,965
Lol Canucks trying to move Boeser
Based on that main boards thread I dont blame them. Both him and Petterson are good but overrated.

It's also a nice offseason to have cap space.

The timing of the rumour is bad though. We are nowhere near trading time. Boeser is about to fight for the cup with Vancouver. Idk maybe they leaked this to light a fire under him
 
  • Like
Reactions: KYams17

Cloned

Begging for Bega
Aug 25, 2003
81,237
70,672
So since the NHL ruled that the qualifiers are officially considered the postseason, the pick that VAN traded to TB for JT Miller (which TB traded to NJ for Blake Coleman) could end up being 1st overall if VAN loses in the qualifier and win the lottery.

I'd like to see this happen, please. Maybe it'd be the first trade in NHL history that causes two GMs of two different teams to get fired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad