Leaderboard

"Rebuild" means you don't trade young roster players, prospects, or draft picks for high-priced soon to be free agents. You do totally the opposite.

OEL will likely be traded at the TDL next year to a contender, then he'll be signed by the highest bidder in the off-season. I just can't see him staying in Arizona. Zero reason for Holland to give up assets for an upcoming UFA.

I'll save everyone else the trouble of reading the article: He forgot to include an off-season game plan in his off-season game plan article, instead choosing to sing the same "bad contracts" song we've heard 62 million times. Said "something something something shot differentials, something something something complete" a few times, and concluded with a projected roster where we apparently traded AA for OEL and signed a couple nobody forwards for the 4th line/press box. I had thought TSN had better standards.

Miss that show. If only he had kept it in his pants.

3:06 PM - 20 Apr 2016

An AA and a late first round pick for OEL would get Ken Holland hung up on, not get a conversation started.

31 NHL GMs would laugh you out of the room for that opinion.

We'd never be able to afford both. Besides, Ekman-Larsson will be a UFA as well next offseason. I wouldn't give up the assets it would take to trade for either for only one guaranteed season.

Jiri Slegr played one SCF game for the Wings in 2002 and got his name on the Cup. I wonder how he felt about that?

Murphy was a smart pick up for sure. He and Shanny were the final pieces, along with Vernon who mentored Osgood and got him ready for full time starter duty. Back when the Wings had patience with goalies. They spent a few seasons grooming Ozzie after they saw he wasn't quite ready and it payed off.

They're happy they didn't end up with the Arizona franchise back in Winnipeg i'm sure. lol And Quebec losing their franchise to Colorado when they were pretty well a solid goalie away from a Cup was bulls***. And of course, they relocate, get Roy, and win the Cup the same season. Pure kick in the nuts, although MTL never would have traded Roy to QC. But they could have traded for someone good enough to win it no problem.

And, that's how you shut down that Vegas offence. Great game by the Jets tonight, and they can play even better imo. Keep it up boys, three to go!!

The Jets are a tougher team physically, have as much scoring depth, better defence, and a Vezina finalist in net who looks calm and focused. Vegas beat LA and SJ, but the Jets are like a combination of both. The toughness of LA and the scoring power of SJ. We all know Fleury is due for a meltdown soon too. Jets in 6.

You're making s*** up. I've never proposed a trade as bad as you're suggesting. Your outlook on this team SUCKS. Your knowledge of hockey in general SUCKS. And your trade proposals are MUCH worse... I'm going to leave it at that. I was warned not to get sucked in. Unfortunately I didn't listen...

Except I wouldn't substitute Larkin for a 1st rounder. Larkin is a known, he's a top line or at worst, a 2nd line center. A 1st round pick is always a risk. Could bust, could boom, which is why a mid first rounder is worth less than Larkin. And why I wouldn't do that deal. Would I give up what Calgary gave up for him? Yes, I would. But either Larkin or 6th overall plus our two seconds? Too rich for my blood.

Yes, I am aware... What does that have to do with anything, other than further my point? We're rebuilding...

Because you can. Why wouldn't you? Yeah, it's probably much smarter to skip the negotiation process and just massively overpay right off the bat... I don't care if they're in the driver's seat, you still don't massively overpay. Teams can afford to overpay when they're a Cup contender. Teams that aren't, can't. Simple as that. You don't give up multiple assets including a 6th overall pick (in one of the best drafts in years), your best player (who is only 21 years old), and your top defense prospect, for one, albeit very good young defenseman, if you're a rebuilding team. I don't care if it's three "unknowns" for a known. You don't do it. It's dumb.

I haven't. I frequently joke that he should play in some Wings games, just to play behind this sorry ass defense that he's assembled over the years.

Great pickup for them. Scheifele-Stastny-Little is the kind of center depth that makes me nerd out. I love center depth. I think it's every bit as important as depth on the back end. Jets are stacked at C, W, D. It's nuts. Scheifele, Stastny, Little. Laine, Wheeler, Ehlers, Connor. Byfuglien, Trouba, Morrissey. Cheveldayoff's patience is finally paying off.

Terrible deal. Calgary makes out like bandits. Holland loses his job the following day.

No it wouldn't. Racism can be blamed for a lot of things. But not every negative thing that happens to someone who is not "privileged" is racism. It's too often used as a scapegoat to deflect away from personal responsibility or is too often used as a reason for bad things happening to someone that have nothing to do with race. And as long as something can be gained by it, it will continue to be used, or abused. If someone "believes" that they were discriminated against based on the fact that the person who offended them is not of the same race, that is also discrimination, because you are prejudging someone you don't know based on the fact that they are of a different group. Prejudgment and prejudice are synonymous.The idea that the problem is completely one sided is just simply not true. False claims do happen. And assuming that just because someone claims racism that it must be is just simply not the case every time. We are all human, we all make mistakes, the idea that someone can't misinterpret or misunderstand the actions of another and automatically conclude racism is wrong. Rushing to judgment is wrong. If you think that every person who claims discrimination really is a victim and that there aren't people who take advantage of it, then I don't know what to tell you. I have personally seen on may occasions people crying racism when they knew it wasn't simply to get something they wouldn't get otherwise. That's not victim blaming. it's reality. Last time I checked, prejudging, profiling, or stereotyping is wrong. And it should be wrong under any circumstances. We can't just believe every cry of racism as fact and punish the "offender" just because they were accused of it without proof. If that means I am "blaming the victim" then I guess the U.S. Constitution and Universal Declaration of Human Rights do too. No one is saying it doesn't happen, nor that it didn't happen in this case. I believe it did. Bold: Last time I checked, proof is required. Or should we just throw every guy in prison who was accused of something just because someone else said so? That would be a violation of the Civil Rights that so many victims of racism fought for. Again we have become so overly sensitive and easily offended as a culture that we are far too often rushing to judgment without requiring the burden of proof.(Person A was discriminated against so it must be true of Person B as well) If that's blaming the victim (to require proof) than yeah, I guess I'm guilty of that.

They can decide to put him on it, they just submit a request. But I'm pretty sure they'll have him play at least one game regardless. Can't see a $5 mill + healthy player being shafted like that.

See edit

No.