Speculation: Trade and Free Agency Talk - 2022-23 Edition - Postseason Success can't be a Myth!

[StateofCelly]

Alex Formenton needs to be signed in the next 90 minutes. Wouldn’t be a bad target for Guerin to get someone opposite Boldy

Like the player, but isn't there a lot of speculation regarding him and the Hockey Canada stuff? Be curious to see what type of stance GMs take on that until things are clear, or if someone takes a shot with fingers crossed it all plays out okay.

Edit: My apologies, tried to send on my phone and didn't go through and see its all been addressed.

 

[BagHead]

You're probably right. But then, weren't Guerin and Fleury both involved in some form of scandal as well?

Has that scandal been substantiated or was it proven Formenton actually played a part? (Not defending any scandals, just interested in knowing facts and what part Formenton played in it)

It's been fairly well documented that Guerin acted pretty quickly when he learned what was going on, by going to his superiors with it. His misstep was in telling the Skalde's not to speak about it before he reported it.
Fleury may or may not have been involved in the WJC scandal from 2003, and he hasn't said anything about it to the media. Who was involved in that assault isn't public knowledge.

I have no idea why Ottawa hasn't re-signed Formenton. It seems to me that either they believe (or know) he was a part of that SA, or they suspect he may have been and just want no part of it if there's even a slight chance. I don't know what the truth is, but his not being re-signed makes him look guilty, whether he is or isn't.

 

[AKL]

It's been fairly well documented that Guerin acted pretty quickly when he learned what was going on, by going to his superiors with it. His misstep was in telling the Skalde's not to speak about it before he reported it.
Fleury may or may not have been involved in the WJC scandal from 2003, and he hasn't said anything about it to the media. Who was involved in that assault isn't public knowledge.

I have no idea why Ottawa hasn't re-signed Formenton. It seems to me that either they believe (or know) he was a part of that SA, or they suspect he may have been and just want no part of it if there's even a slight chance. I don't know what the truth is, but his not being re-signed makes him look guilty, whether he is or isn't.

Yeah I'm not saying that Guerin or Fleury were guilty of any wrongdoing, just saying they were also involved in scandals. That's why I'm trying to figure out the extent of Formenton's involvement here.

If he was actually involved as part of the problem, then obviously there's a good reason for GM's to shy away. But the reason I don't like to get involved in these discussions usually is because too many people make up their minds before all the facts are known, so it's hard to tell what the facts actually are. Some people will parade around as if the accusation or speculation alone is enough to completely blackball a person from an industry.

So I'm trying to figure out his actual involvement before we decide he's a lost cause or not. But if all we know is that we don't actually know anything, I'm willing to take the chance on the player he is or could be. If Ottawa knows he did something, then that information should be brought to light.

I don't know if there's an active investigation by actual law enforcement or not, but the idea that A) he hasn't been re-signed B) therefore he looks guilty C) therefore he should be treated as guilty bugs me.

 

[Digitalbooya]

You're probably right. But then, weren't Guerin and Fleury both involved in some form of scandal as well?

Has that scandal been substantiated or was it proven Formenton actually played a part? (Not defending any scandals, just interested in knowing facts and what part Formenton played in it)

I believe it’s still under investigation currently.

 

[57special]

Formenton may, or may not, have been part of a group of 7 or 8 Junior and 2018 Team Canada WJC players that gang banged a drunken women at an event. Pretty distasteful, at best, and not something any team wants to be associated with. Rape and assault, at worst.

Certain team members, like Cale Makar, weren't even there, others who were there have been very strong in distancing themselves from the goings on, and others have had their lawyer/agents make CYA statements. There is a very long thread on the the NHL discussion page about it.

I have no idea if this is the reason that Formenton has not been signed. I have a pretty strong suspicion that GM's around the league know who was involved, and would not be in a hurry to sign such a person.

I don't see any relation or comparison at all to Guerin's actions in the Skalde case.

 

[AKL]

I don't see any relation or comparison at all to Guerin's actions in the Skalde case.

To say nothing else about the issue, the reason we're now able to dismiss Guerin's involvement in any scandal is because we were able to learn all the facts of the case, rather than pass judgment simply on the basis of being named in the scandal. That's my point.

 

[57special]

To say nothing else about the issue, the reason we're now able to dismiss Guerin's involvement in any scandal is because we were able to learn all the facts of the case, rather than pass judgment simply on the basis of being named in the scandal. That's my point.

Oh, it's a mess, alright. Let's put it this way, if I was a Team Canada WJC member at that time, I'd be extremely loud about how I wasn't involved- if i wasn't involved.

 

[BagHead]

Yeah I'm not saying that Guerin or Fleury were guilty of any wrongdoing, just saying they were also involved in scandals. That's why I'm trying to figure out the extent of Formenton's involvement here.

If he was actually involved as part of the problem, then obviously there's a good reason for GM's to shy away. But the reason I don't like to get involved in these discussions usually is because too many people make up their minds before all the facts are known, so it's hard to tell what the facts actually are. Some people will parade around as if the accusation or speculation alone is enough to completely blackball a person from an industry.

So I'm trying to figure out his actual involvement before we decide he's a lost cause or not. But if all we know is that we don't actually know anything, I'm willing to take the chance on the player he is or could be. If Ottawa knows he did something, then that information should be brought to light.

I don't know if there's an active investigation by actual law enforcement or not, but the idea that A) he hasn't been re-signed B) therefore he looks guilty C) therefore he should be treated as guilty bugs me.

Jury's still out on him, for me. I haven't talked much about him for the same reasons you mentioned, I don't want the kid's career to be ruined simply from public perception. I merely wanted to present what that perception is, and why it is that way, and that's why I was clear to say that I don't know what the truth is, or if he's even guilty at all.
I think you and I see eye-to-eye on this.

 

[Minnewildsota]

Not to get too political here but we're definitely in an interesting time.
Yes, the general rule has always been innocent until proven guilty, BUT with the general public "backlashing" against misconduct, or perceived misconduct, businesses are trying to get out in front of any of these potential wrongdoings.

The Information Age has certainly changed things, whereas, in the 80s per se, things such as this could be easily swept under the rug with a charitable "donation". Will be interesting to see how this situation, and situations like this, evolve in the coming years or decades.

 

[57special]

The belief of many OTT fans is that Formenton is one of the 8 involved, and that the NHL knows this due to their own investigation. They are waiting for the London Police investigation to wrap up before they go public, I think.

 

[AKL]

The belief of many OTT fans is that Formenton is one of the 8 involved, and that the NHL knows this due to their own investigation. They are waiting for the London Police investigation to wrap up before they go public, I think.

So I'd wonder when the shoe drops for the other 7 if they know who was in the room

 

[57special]

So I'd wonder when the shoe drops for the other 7 if they know who was in the room

When(if) the police investigation is finished, and made public. It's entirely possible that they will feel that there is not enough evidence to bring charges, but I don't know why they can't name the parties involved. I think there is a lot of pressure for names to be brought forth.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

When(if) the police investigation is finished, and made public. It's entirely possible that they will feel that there is not enough evidence to bring charges, but I don't know why they can't name the parties involved. I think there is a lot of pressure for names to be brought forth.

You don't know why the first half of this sentence makes the second half problematic?

 

[57special]

You don't know why the first half of this sentence makes the second half problematic?

I don’t see why not.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I don’t see why not.

Ok then.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Wasn't Sam Steel part of that?

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Wasn't Sam Steel part of that?

He was on the team, yes. He's also one of those that have made statements denying involvement saying that he's cooperating.

 

[BagHead]

When(if) the police investigation is finished, and made public. It's entirely possible that they will feel that there is not enough evidence to bring charges, but I don't know why they can't name the parties involved. I think there is a lot of pressure for names to be brought forth.

If there isn't enough evidence to prove guilt, it's possible that the evidence isn't strong because they're simply not guilty. You don't want to then name them publicly regardless, and ruin the lives of potentially innocent people. Public curiosity isn't reason enough to condemn people to the court of public opinion.

 

[57special]

Let's be very clear here. There is no doubt that 8 Canadian junior hockey players had sex(of some form or another) with a single women in a hotel room that night. Even if it was completely consensual(possible, but unlikely), it is not an action that any entity, whether it be Hockey Canada, a hockey team (let alone a NHL team), or any organization, government, or sponsor would want to be identified with.

At best, 8 men on one mildly drunken, consensual women in a hotel room...well you can read about some of the actions in the report. It includes the players insisting she shower afterwards- one assumes that because they wanted no semen or DNA samples to be left behind.

At worst, a heavily inebriated women was sexually assaulted in a hotel room by 8 players, after going there expecting to be with only one.

Screw those 8 players, IMO. Even if they don't go to jail, they don't deserve any protection from the court of public opinion. Clearly, Hockey Canada wouldn't have paid the women millions if they thought there was nothing amiss.

It could be that I am completely naive, and that 8 guys on one women is completely normal and acceptable to the rest of you. To me, it's not. I have heard of it happening, but only among hardcore Bikers(i.e Outlaws, Hell's Angels, etc). Usually lots of alcohol is involved, and some violence, implied or otherwise.

I am kind of surprised that so many are worried that the young men's identities will become public, and are so worried about protecting them. If it's not wrong, then why hide these facts?

 

[57special]

If there isn't enough evidence to prove guilt, it's possible that the evidence isn't strong because they're simply not guilty. You don't want to then name them publicly regardless, and ruin the lives of potentially innocent people. Public curiosity isn't reason enough to condemn people to the court of public opinion.

Who are you talking about? The 8 players? You do know that there is no doubt that the incident happened, and that 8 players junior hockey players were involved, right? Hockey Canada investigated, and ended up giving out millions of dollars in hush money. Do you think they would have done that on a whim?

The only question here is whether the sexual act((s)like a LOT of them) were consensual, or some form of sexual assault(rape). If it's the former, and everyone is cool with it(besides the woman, HC, the Canadian government, and multiple companies such as Tim Horton's and some big Banks, who have already distanced themselves), then what's the big deal? If that's considered normal, acceptable, sexual behavior then why hide?

 

[Minnewildsota]

Who are you talking about? The 8 players? You do know that there is no doubt that the incident happened, and that 8 players junior hockey players were involved, right? Hockey Canada investigated, and ended up giving out millions of dollars in hush money. Do you think they would have done that on a whim?

The only question here is whether the sexual act((s)like a LOT of them) were consensual, or some form of sexual assault(rape). If it's the former, and everyone is cool with it(besides the woman, HC, the Canadian government, and multiple companies such as Tim Horton's and some big Banks, who have already distanced themselves), then what's the big deal? If that's considered normal, acceptable, sexual behavior then why hide?

Not that I disagree with you, but there have been numerous incidents in which people will pay hush money just for the problem to go away. Specifically so the incident doesnt go to the court of public opinion.

 

[57special]

Not that I disagree with you, but there have been numerous incidents in which people will pay hush money just for the problem to go away. Specifically so the incident doesnt go to the court of public opinion.

Maybe you need to read up about this incident some. HC's own investigation determined that it happened. The only question is whether or not it was consensual( I suspect it started out that way, and morphed into something else), and who the players were. There were 8, but i believe the wording was something like, "some, but not necessarily all of whom were Canadian WJC players", so there might have been some other junior players from the London Knights, or another club.

I understand that things like the Duke Lacrosse case happen, but in that case you had overzealous and outright unscrupulous Sheriff's and Prosecutors trying to make political points with their constituents. In this case, it's been anything but that. The powers that be tried to make it go away, and almost succeeded, rather than manufacture a case.

Here is a bare bones summary of the incident, and of those who might(some players, such as Makar, weren't even at the event) possibly be involved. There are far more detailed reports available.https://www.yahoo.com/video/hockey-canada-scandal-statements-2018-world-junior-team-155429895.html#:~:text=In%20May%2C%20Hockey%20Canada%20settled,Foundation%20Gala%20in%20

 

[TaLoN]

Time to move on, this isn't trade or free agency talk anymore.

 

[BagHead]

Who are you talking about? The 8 players? You do know that there is no doubt that the incident happened, and that 8 players junior hockey players were involved, right? Hockey Canada investigated, and ended up giving out millions of dollars in hush money. Do you think they would have done that on a whim?

The only question here is whether the sexual act((s)like a LOT of them) were consensual, or some form of sexual assault(rape). If it's the former, and everyone is cool with it(besides the woman, HC, the Canadian government, and multiple companies such as Tim Horton's and some big Banks, who have already distanced themselves), then what's the big deal? If that's considered normal, acceptable, sexual behavior then why hide?

*edit* just saw TaLon's post. Sorry! I'll stop here.

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

So, then that’s a no to formenton. How about Garland?