GoJetsGo55
Registered User
If that's what you want to believe, then absolutely buddy.
LOL and the switch to passive aggressive happen like clockwork.
If that's what you want to believe, then absolutely buddy.
Well it is pretty obvious that if Chevy had an offer that interested him, Trouba would have been traded already.
This is a very complex situation and it sucks that Winnipeg has a player of Trouba's caliber that wants out. But this happens to teams all the time across all major sports. In a lot of cases we don't know about a trade request until after, or if at all. In this case the request had been made months ago, and the player and agent decided to go public as a negotiating tactic after giving Chevy what they felt was a reasonable amount of time to broker a deal.
Chevy has a premium asset that is currently at peak value. However, the interest is running and the value is declining. The big question is going to be how long is he going to be paying the interest and watch the value of his asset decline before he cashes it in.
Is the latitude of southern Ontario approximately 700 km south of Winnipeg?
If that's what you want to believe, then absolutely buddy.
I am always a tad confused when people spew this notion of "commitment" but then champion their GM if and when he trades a "committed" player out of town and they like the return
when is a commitment actually honoured and once you break, can you ever really stand behind those words
From my point of view, Winnipeg basically need help all over. Even at center, not overly sold on Little/Perrault as 2-3 centers on a contender. Scheleife is great, but is he the next Backes or the next Toews if you get what I mean? And like, its really really really tough in this league to go from being on the outside looking in to becoming a contender. The great teams has so many advantages to start with, being able to give kids a good environment etc that Winnipeg and the likes never have been able to do. Like there is a reason for why that franchise never even have had an OK season in this league.
Please explain how he can play elsewhere in the NHL right now? He can play in Europe...sure. But the only way he can leave the Jets organization right now (for another NHL team) is if the Jets trade his rights....or he signs an offer sheet which the Jets don't match (and then they receive compensation...much like trading him).
Because that's how spots work.
Athletes are assets. They are bought and sold like a commodity.
As fans, we see the human side of things but the age old saying rings true.....it's a business.
His whole point is that he doesn't have a contract with the Jets which means that he can go play for any other league. What he fails to understand is that any player in the NHL can do that. All they need to do is "retire" a la Kovalchuk.
I am always a tad confused when people spew this notion of "commitment" but then champion their GM if and when he trades a "committed" player out of town and they like the return
when is a commitment actually honoured and once you break, can you ever really stand behind those words
Hmm, what exactly is -- not -- a position of need for Winnipeg?
This is somewhat how I would rank them:
Between the pipes -- 30
LD- 25-30? Enström is getting older and is past his prime, Morrisey is ok as a youngster, but that left side is just weak...
RD- 20-25? Mobility must be a huge concern given the speed we are seeing in this league right now. If the LDs could make up for it, it would be one thing, but the balance is far from great at this point.
LW- Kind of meaningless to rank considering the potential is great, and no need for upgrades. OTOH, Connor looks a little weak for the NHL so far, a bit of a tweaner, even if he improves, is he really a good fit behind Laine and Ehlers?
C- 8-14?
RW- 25-30? //Wheeler can make fantastic plays, but not much of a factor overall. Or like, very good player, but not great. After him the RW depth chart must be the weakest in the league or among the weakest at least.
The Farm
There are a good number of B-C tier prospects on the farm (not looking at the kids in the NHL), but I just don't know. It doesn't feel like they will get any immediate substantial help from the farm the coming years, or am I missing someone? All the while, Winnipeg is currently build on a core that is getting up there in age. Wheeler, Enström, Buff and co. As kids come in, these guys will get worse. Or what do you think? Do you think I am mis-rating any area of Winnipeg's roster or farm?
From my point of view, Winnipeg basically need help all over. Even at center, not overly sold on Little/Perrault as 2-3 centers on a contender. Scheleife is great, but is he the next Backes or the next Toews if you get what I mean? And like, its really really really tough in this league to go from being on the outside looking in to becoming a contender. The great teams has so many advantages to start with, being able to give kids a good environment etc that Winnipeg and the likes never have been able to do. Like there is a reason for why that franchise never even have had an OK season in this league.
I agree, both clauses restrict movement. When was the last time an RFA signed an offer sheet and changed teams? RFA is really just window dressing.The NHLPA sacrificed RFA rights in exchange for UFA rights. RFA's have few rights and the only real way out for an elite RFA is the path Trouba is taking.
He is a Free Agent who can sign with whichever team he pleases....that is correct.
However...the Jets can match that offer and then he's still with the Jets organization.
The Jets can choose to not match and receive compensation.
All of that is because he is currently under the Winnipeg Jets umbrella.
Also, if you remove the right to compensation, teams can lose players for nothing....that makes little sense to me.
If that's what you want to believe, then absolutely buddy.
You're 100% right, RFA status is a complete paper tiger and players are getting bent over. Like I said it's overkill. One or the other would be fine, but as it is now it basically only keeps GM's from completely lowballing league wide.
None of that means that he has any sort of committment, legally, morally, whatever. It means they have the right to restrict his movement against his will or be compensated for it.
And depends. Take out compensation but leave right of first refusal, team keeps the player that they drafted and want but at a fair price dictated by the open market.
Take out RFR but leave compensation and teams don't lose players for nothing and second contracts stay artificially depressed.
Having both is letting the teams have their cake and eat it too, RFA's are "free" in name only.
But this is really a whole different discussion, I just take issue with the whole "he owes us/ committment/ let him rot" character assassination. Sure it sucks for your team now but I imagine there were a lot of similar reactions when players started fighting for any sort of Free agent rights.
His whole point is that he doesn't have a contract with the Jets which means that he can go play for any other league. What he fails to understand is that any player in the NHL can do that. All they need to do is "retire" a la Kovalchuk.
Hey tell me again how many points he has this season? Time on ice? Anything? I thought he was able to just put stickers on his jets helmet and walk into the rangers locker room and play?
absolutely right
its a business
trouba owes nothing to winnipeg that chevy didnt and wont "owe" any player he trades away who WAS committed to winnipeg
it HAS to be both ways, not one or the other
Would Trouba even have to fake retire like Kovy did if he wanted to play for a year in the KHL? I thought Kovy only had to because he was under contract at the time.
Would Trouba even have to fake retire like Kovy did if he wanted to play for a year in the KHL? I thought Kovy only had to because he was under contract at the time.
Ah, of course. I thought he was arguing that the Jets didn't own his NHL ass.
You're 100% right, RFA status is a complete paper tiger and players are getting bent over. Like I said it's overkill. One or the other would be fine, but as it is now it basically only keeps GM's from completely lowballing league wide.
None of that means that he has any sort of committment, legally, morally, whatever. It means they have the right to restrict his movement against his will or be compensated for it.
And depends. Take out compensation but leave right of first refusal, team keeps the player that they drafted and want but at a fair price dictated by the open market.
Take out RFR but leave compensation and teams don't lose players for nothing and second contracts stay artificially depressed.
Having both is letting the teams have their cake and eat it too, RFA's are "free" in name only.
But this is really a whole different discussion, I just take issue with the whole "he owes us/ committment/ let him rot" character assassination. Sure it sucks for your team now but I imagine there were a lot of similar reactions when players started fighting for any sort of Free agent rights.
I find the image of that happening absolutely hilarious for pretty much no reason. I hope I'm not alone.
If Winnipeg caves to Trouba's demand of playing where he wants, this does not bode well for any team in any sport. There is a reason why CBA's exist. There is a reason why contracts exist. You cannot allow players to circumvent the system otherwise this will create major problems for all franchises. I am sure the Jets organization has the support of the NHL and all the other owners who wouldn't want to see a stream of young punks digging their heals in every time they want to go home to play. You want to play in the big leagues, you'd better be prepared to play to the best of your abilities in the market that selected you until such time that you are free to go elsewhere. It is that simple.
Put yourself in his shoes. He may really hate it in Winnepeg and be miserable. The Jets don't own him, and he doesn't owe them anything.