foshizzle
Registered User
- Feb 1, 2007
- 5,661
- 5,095
So if I'm reading this correctly ...
0 goals for a forward all season = One of the best bottom six forwards in the league.
You’re right, you’re not reading it correctly.
So if I'm reading this correctly ...
0 goals for a forward all season = One of the best bottom six forwards in the league.
So will the zipper off my jeansThis site is gonna explode if we actually do get Karlsson.
Haha of course, the Edmonton hate on the mains is something else.He'll also instantly become "finished, done, cooked, etc" lol. Like clockwork
It's not 3M any more.Eh 3m of cap space isn't nothing.
Explain then.You’re right, you’re not reading it correctly.
"Yeah, we had a couple of maintenance days going on, and kept some people off the ice - make sure ahh...they're getting the right amount of rest...we'll see." <smirks at the camera> - Coach Jay WoodcroftI am not in favor of a Karlsson trade if Vinnie D and/or Kane are involved ... just speculating because they, along with the Scarecrow, sat today - coach referring to "maintenance days." Those two make up almost all our grit. They're the kind of players we need in the playoffs. Hoping it really was a maintenance day for the two ... Jesse "scarecrow" Puljujarvi can be fired into the sun for all I care.
That's what I feel too. This can be a win win for both teams if done right. Grier's first big trade too that will save the ownership probably at least 24 million - yes it will cost, but not as MUCH.I, sincerely, still believe a price can be achieved between the 2 teams and I think Karlsson will be an Oiler at the end of that.
It makes a lot of sense for both teams
Did he have a big smirk on his faceFirst period over. Sharks stink but Karlsson looks masterful on the PP. Super composed, roams all over the ice, so f***ing skilled. He looks like he did on the Sens but not as fast, but still a great skater.
They didn’t score but that PP was all about Karlsson, Vegas was focused on him even when he didn’t have the puck.
Did he have a big smirk on his face
Yes it is.It's not 3M any more.
It’s not 3M if he goes to a team not on LTIR though right?Yes it is.
Correct me if I'm wrong but because we are over the cap from LTIR, our cap doesn't factor in percentage of season that has gone by.
Example. If we weren't and LTIR team, and we acquired a 6m player 2/3 into the season, they would only hit our cap as 2m. But since we are an LTIR team, we just look firmly at players AAV for the 82.5 cap hit. So acquiring that player would hit us at 6m.
But it also works the other way around. Losing JP means we get 3m off our cap worries.
Again please correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like that's how our cap situation works
Damn son.. 5 14 6 1 packing a big wrenchSo will the zipper off my jeans
we are also expert lip readersI for one am glad we’ve managed to evolve our body language reading skills from players on the bench to coaches in press conferences.
Whew, that rules out tomorroW then....Any day that ends in Y could be a cliff hanger.
That's why the idea of people willing to give up multiple 1sts and prospects turns my stomach. Karlsson could turn back into dogshit like he was the past two years. San Jose would have had to offer multiple 1sts to take his contract with 50% retention last year. This idea that he's suddenly 25 year old Karlsson again is bonkersSharks are retaining 2.72m for another two years after this on Burns contract. That's 34% of his 8m cap hit, giving the Hurricanes a 5.28m cap hit for Burns. If they did 34% on Karlsson, that brings him down to 7.59m for the Oilers. So it's not like the Sharks aren't willing to retain because they are doing it for multiple years with Burns....not to mention the return the Sharks got for Burns was very very sad.
How do we know this isn't just Kane's throwaway account?My sense is the oilers could do something tomorrow. It could be a trade, or it might not be. They could send some guys down, but they also might not. They also might not do anything at all. Then again, things can change quickly. Sometimes they don't though.
How do we know this isn't just Kane's throwaway account?
If he’s needed for the trade it will be for cap space, he has almost nil trade value, so it’s $3m off the cap either way.What if he's needed for the trade?
My sources say it's possible. Good chance it's true. Also a good chance it's notIt might be, it might also not be. My sense is that things are fluid and stagnant so could change or not change