Datsyerberger

So a 5'5" enforcer-goalie that mostly gets put into the net to fight the other team's tough guys. Still awesome.

A 5'5" power forward? Awesome.

We want fishsticks, we want fishsticks...

Didn't he go on to be a really anti-communist senator or something?

Does anyone else find it completely impossible to predict who the Wings/Holland will draft with almost any pick? Seems like one of the hardest teams in the NHL to figure out in this regard, though I suppose that's part of why they do so well.

Because they're all eligible for salary arbitration (which protects a player from offer sheets), and if these players are not signed by July 1st, it's likely that will be taken to arbitration (the arbitration award is not likely to be as high as what exposing such a player to offer sheets could drive their salary to). A team has the option to take a player to arbitration once per each player's career (a tool to protect a valuable player from offer sheets during their most valuable RFA period). A player can still choose to go to arbitration any time he comes up as RFA. This has been a public service announcement. Edit: more information from post below I was on my way out the door when I wrote that, so I'll offer a little more insight to the process here now that my brain isn't quite as numb as it was earlier. RFA: A drafted player may opt to become an unrestricted free agent either when they're 27 or when they've acquired 7 years of NHL experience (10 games or more played counts as a year of experience when determining free agency). Their rights can free up earlier if the NHL team in possession relinquishes them. Offer sheet: Any RFA may be given an offer sheet unless they're protected (either by the team or player) via arbitration. If (and only if) a player accepts the offer sheet, the team in possession of his rights has a chance to match. The match is binding, and so the player cannot be given another offer sheet. If the team in possession declines to match, then the offering team relinquishes draft picks based upon salary. If the team is not in possession of their own draft picks needed for the next draft, they cannot make the offer. They must have the picks for that draft and it must be their own picks, not ones in the same round acquired via trade. Additionally, a player may not be traded in the year in which they signed an offer sheet (whether they're on the new team or on the old team that matched). Here's the chart for offer sheet compensation for this year (based upon league average salary): $1,034,249 and below -- Nothing $1,034,250 to $1,567,043 -- 3rd round pick $1,567,044 to $3,134,088 -- 2nd round pick $3,134,089 to $4,701,131 -- 1st and 3rd $4,701,132 to $6,268,175 -- 1st, 2nd, 3rd $6,268,176 to $7,835,219 -- Two 1sts (sequential years), 2nd, 3rd $7,835,220 and above -- Four 1sts (sequential years) Arbitration: If a player signs a contract after age 20 (meaning they turned 20 before free agency IIRC) then they are eligible for arbitration any year afterwards in which they are an RFA. If they sign before 20, then they are eligible for arbitration for 4 years after they signed. However, an accrued NHL season (>=10 games) takes a year off of this period. If the player is eligible for arbitration, he may elect to go to arbitration any time he's RFA. Deadline for submission of arbitration is July 5th. If a team files for arbitration with a player, the rules are a bit different. The team may only do this once during that player's career. They cannot ask for a salary reduction greater than 15%, and any contract awarded during this period is binding. If it was the player that brought them to arbitration, and not the team, the team can opt to step away from the contract (and automatically do if they don't accept the contract within 48 hours of the verdict). So what effect does this have on Doughty, Weber, and Parise? All are eligible for salary arbitration. In the case of all three, the team is eligible to file. In the case of all three of these players, if they are not signed by July 1st it likely means that they want significant money and they were not able to work out a deal with the team. If this is the case, the teams in question will most likely take them to arbitration. Remember, any salary offered under a $7,835,220 cap hit is worth two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd at max. Even if those are likely valuable 1sts, it could be argued that is worth it to acquire any of these players. Seeing as their teams would not want to be forced into signing a contract that high (or lose the players for two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd), and that arbitration will likely not award any of them a salary that high, this greatly increases the chances of all three of these players going to arbitration via the team if they do not have a deal worked out by July 1st. I hope this provides additional insight into the process for some people.

I just can't label a jersey "worst" when it was killed before it was ever worn (thankfully). Also, every time I see that Bruins 3rd jersey I crack up, thanks to a photoshop I saw of it on HF that replaced the bear head with Pedobear.

The Cherry ones are great awful in the worst kind of way. And I dunno if I can agree with you about the Ducks one.. I mean it features a cartoon anthropomorphic duck in goalie gear bursting through ice and flying. On a serious pro sports team's jersey.

I believe the current way things work is new, yes. Regarding the others, Kesler, Backes, Bernier, and Hjalmarsson were all mid tier players at the time of theirs, Penner was K. Lowe being K. Lowe, and Vanek was carelessness (and they paid for it by having to match a massive contract, one they could've rejected for 4 1st rounders from Edmonton).

Jersey isn't going to move Kovalchuk, I think they're quite happy moving forward with him (or at least aren't ready to extract their foot from their mouth). Also, that's an awful deal for Kovalchuk. The Devils aren't going to move him (especially for spare parts and a pick) just because they had a wretched first half of a season with a terrible coach.

Since the lockout, only 6 players have accepted offer sheets (Kesler, Vanek, Penner, Backes, Bernier, Hjalmarsson), and only one didn't get matched (Penner). The last offer sheet to be accepted before that was our boy Feds way back in '98, and the last person to accept before that was Gratton in '97. No. In the old CBA, players could stay RFA 'til age 31.

Well hell, I know it's not happening. I was just answering a question about RFAs

No. Once they receive a verdict in arbitration, the team has a 48 period to accept the contract. If they don't, the team relinquishes all rights and the player becomes a UFA. However, if Weber receives a salary in arbitration that's too high for Nashville to want to keep and he's looking for that kind of money in FA, then holy crap, do not want (can't see that happening, though).

Absolutely sure, yes. It allows the team to have at least some time with the young players to get something going. This particularly helps out the crappy markets who may not be able to spend to the crap, thus suck, draft high... and without them getting some RFA time with the players, they'd see them bolt to better markets ASAP. Could be worse for the players; RFA used to last until age 31. I mean, if you want to take the "raw deal" part to the fullest extent it's a raw deal for the players that a team can draft them and then hang onto their rights until their mid 20s, instead of being able to compete in the free agent market ASAP. But that's what rights are all about, giving a team some exclusivity to drafted players for a certain amount of time.

Give your hands a break, then. It's healthy!

Wrong (salary arbitration).

If he's got the drive to go another year I have no problems taking him on as the 13/14th forward. Our forward situation is currently as follows: Datsyuk Zetterberg Franzen Filppula Cleary Bertuzzi Holmstrom Helm Abdelkader Hudler Eaves hopefully back, so that's 11, Emmerton and Mursak up, that's 12 and 13. If we go with 7 d-men that's room for a 14th forward, might as well take an experienced guy and good leader like Draper. If we trade Hudler and don't take back a forward he's our 13th guy and we have 8 d-man. Or we trade Hudler, add a scorer, he's #13/14 with Emmerton based on how Emmerton plays. Or we trade Hudler, add a banger/fighter/whatever, and put him or Drapes in depending on the situation. As long as he's cheap and isn't intended to be part of the main, healthy group, I'm fine with him being here. Not really going to be any other better options for a 13/14. Also, if the team is in one of those stints where injuries have forced a couple of the backup guys onto the squad, then a guy like Draper is sometimes more desirable than a slightly more skilled/young player in the same spot. Experienced, knows the drill, can help keep cohesiveness on the bench and in the room.

A really solid deal for the Isles at that price, but also good for Okposo. Means he'll be UFA when he comes off his contract and has an easy out if the Isles are still crap in 5 years, and more or less guarantees him good money for a handful of years to build on, insurance if his play turns around and he sucks, and a big payday his next contract if he gets better. Seems to be the right choice by both parties.

The only player to which this can refer is Weber (Since LA and NJ can spend to the cap). In that regard, no, I'm saying it won't happen... not because he wouldn't get offered a salary that high, but because he'll never get to a point where he's offered a salary that high--that is, he'll be brought to arbitration if he isn't signed before July 1st--and he won't get a salary as high as it would take for Nashville to get four 1st rounders (a roughly 7.83m cap hit). They'd match anything under that--two late round 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd from Detroit, for example, just isn't that valuable. Also keep in mind that Nashville has been facing rising revenues, an increasing internal cap, additional playoff success, and has an owner that might be willing to invest if he thinks the team is at a point where they can challenge for serious success. Internal budget isn't going to be a large factor in what Nashville does with Weber. Losing them would take a huge chunk out of everything they've built, which would hurt their finances much more in a long term look. Now, if we were talking a team that's in as dire straits as, say, Phoenix, and they were in a situation where they had a great player looking for more salary than they could afford? In that case, they'd probably consider trading his rights for slightly more than they could get via expected offer sheet compensation. However, this is never an ideal situation; such usually creates perpetual rebuild scenarios, such as what can be seen in Florida.

It's a good deal for us, but that doesn't mean it's a good deal for Philly. They're already loaded on the wings and adding $2.8 of questionable salary situation doesn't really do anything good for them, even with a pick. If Carle is available they can get deals more ideally situated to their roster/cap situation.

No. No. I'm not opposed to trading Flip if either some team overpays for him or some team is willing to send us a really good defenseman as part of the deal. Frankly, I don't see either happening.

In this case the NHL should really like my North/South scenario, since it moves all of the southern and struggling expansion markets into the same conference as the NHL's golden boy and his arch nemesis. One of the crappiest markets even gets to be in their shared division, joy of joys.

I think that in an ideal situation, Holland gets what he wants for the team (#3/4, #5 and backup d-men; Kindl ideal #6) via free agency or existing players (such as Salei as backup, Ericsson as backup or #5). Smith spends another year in GR as the #1 guy and gets to develop more. However, if Holland cannot fill holes to what he feels is an adequate extent, I think he'll look into bringing Smith up for the #4/5 roles, get him some playing time with Nick and the like. Such would seem to be the more acceptable option with a player of such high potential than trying to force some #6 guys into a #4 or 5 role, especially an offensive one since our only currently signed offensive d-men are Nick, Nik, and maybe Kindl (Stuart can complement an offensive d-man but isn't a guy you want running your PP).

I was on my way out the door when I wrote that, so I'll offer a little more insight to the process here now that my brain isn't quite as numb as it was earlier. RFA: A drafted player may opt to become an unrestricted free agent either when they're 27 or when they've acquired 7 years of NHL experience (10 games or more played counts as a year of experience when determining free agency). Their rights can free up earlier if the NHL team in possession relinquishes them. Offer sheet: Any RFA may be given an offer sheet unless they're protected (either by the team or player) via arbitration. If (and only if) a player accepts the offer sheet, the team in possession of his rights has a chance to match. The match is binding, and so the player cannot be given another offer sheet. If the team in possession declines to match, then the offering team relinquishes draft picks based upon salary. If the team is not in possession of their own draft picks needed for the next draft, they cannot make the offer. They must have the picks for that draft and it must be their own picks, not ones in the same round acquired via trade. Additionally, a player may not be traded in the year in which they signed an offer sheet (whether they're on the new team or on the old team that matched). Here's the chart for offer sheet compensation for this year (based upon league average salary): $1,034,249 and below -- Nothing $1,034,250 to $1,567,043 -- 3rd round pick $1,567,044 to $3,134,088 -- 2nd round pick $3,134,089 to $4,701,131 -- 1st and 3rd $4,701,132 to $6,268,175 -- 1st, 2nd, 3rd $6,268,176 to $7,835,219 -- Two 1sts (sequential years), 2nd, 3rd $7,835,220 and above -- Four 1sts (sequential years) Arbitration: If a player signs a contract after age 20 (meaning they turned 20 before free agency IIRC) then they are eligible for arbitration any year afterwards in which they are an RFA. If they sign before 20, then they are eligible for arbitration for 4 years after they signed. However, an accrued NHL season (>=10 games) takes a year off of this period. If the player is eligible for arbitration, he may elect to go to arbitration any time he's RFA. Deadline for submission of arbitration is July 5th. If a team files for arbitration with a player, the rules are a bit different. The team may only do this once during that player's career. They cannot ask for a salary reduction greater than 15%, and any contract awarded during this period is binding. If it was the player that brought them to arbitration, and not the team, the team can opt to step away from the contract (and automatically do if they don't accept the contract within 48 hours of the verdict). So what effect does this have on Doughty, Weber, and Parise? All are eligible for salary arbitration. In the case of all three, the team is eligible to file. In the case of all three of these players, if they are not signed by July 1st it likely means that they want significant money and they were not able to work out a deal with the team. If this is the case, the teams in question will most likely take them to arbitration. Remember, any salary offered under a $7,835,220 cap hit is worth two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd at max. Even if those are likely valuable 1sts, it could be argued that is worth it to acquire any of these players. Seeing as their teams would not want to be forced into signing a contract that high (or lose the players for two 1sts, a 2nd, and a 3rd), and that arbitration will likely not award any of them a salary that high, this greatly increases the chances of all three of these players going to arbitration via the team if they do not have a deal worked out by July 1st. I hope this provides additional insight into the process for some people. While I cannot speak for Konnan, I personally enjoy teaching others about the workings of the NHL and such things, to the extent of my own knowledge of course (I had to refresh a lot of this stuff this morning after some discussions in chat). Given the complexities of the NHL, the salary cap, restricted free agency, and so on it's easy even for pros to overlook some of the rules and scenarios. I'm sorry if the NHLs rules and options regarding free agency limits or denies your fantasies. In that case, your issue should be with them, not me.

I don't like that Campbell is looking more and more like one of the only upper end d-men available trade wise, but eh, that seems to be the case. Let's get some of the obvious ones out of the way: Weber: Not happening Doughty: Really not happening Burns: Nope, not here either Then a couple other popular ones Enstrom: Definitely not happening Bogosian: Not happening, and he's hardly proven himself to be upper echelon. Still, TNSE is going to hang onto all their best young pieces for a year to see where they're at internally Some decent players in FA, but it'd be a miracle not to get outbid on some of the ones we want. I suspect we can come out with one good one if Holland is loose enough with the money. So, aside from the less than ideal situation of Campbell, at best it seems we can wait for a guy like Liles, Leopold, Gilbert couple others like that to open up. Maybe Whitney if we're lucky, and I'd be asking for the definition of luck if that's the best trade asset available. Well, at least we're not looking at having to trade too much out.