Resetti

The new schedule matrix is confusing to me. So now you will play teams within your own division either 4 or 5 times, teams within your conference 3 times, and the other teams 2 times... and with wild cards in place, you may move through the playoffs (and conceivably win a banner) out of your own division? Are the Stanley Cup Finalists necessarily from the East and West conferences, or did they carry over the idea the division winners are re-seeded? You know, I'm cool with all of this as long as we at least get the classic division names back (although I heard that they will be 'sensible geographic names'). I'd be lying if I said I wasn't excited to see what the next couple seasons look like, but I'm just curious how it will actually shake out.

We're all entitled to our opinions, but I think if you compare Parise's contract value to Crosby's, it isn't even close. Now, I love what Parise brings to a team. He's a hard worker; he backchecks hard, he forechecks hard, he's valuable in all situations on the ice. Like a lot of players inking new contracts before the lockout, he took advantage of a longterm deal with a precipitous drop in his salary the last couple years ($2m and $1m respectively) to give his team some space. The difference is that he'll be 40 and 41 years old at the time those numbers kick in, and will probably consider retiring and coming off the books. He's not even close to a point-per-game player either. He was the hottest free agent on the market, and he isn't even putting up half the numbers Crosby is right now. Now of course there was a lot of speculation about Crosby's health after the concussion which would affect his market value, but his performance to date has somehow improved on his pre-injury numbers. That's significant when you consider that the "discount" clause in his contract (the exploit in the old CBA) doesn't even kick in until age 34 or 35. Unless you expect him to retire, or have a new provision to renegotiate the contract - and all in spite of what figures to be an expanding salary cap ceiling looking ahead - he's a bargain. But this is really getting sidetracked. The real point of this, to me, is to be wary of impending free agents who push for their full market value. There are definitely guys who warrant throwing a lot of money at, and I absolutely thought Parise fit the bill because of his excellent leadership qualities. But the things that set franchises back are big contracts to one-time-overachievers that never live up to their expectations. Handcuffing the organization to talent that doesn't pan out is an unforgivable mistake. It's much better to trade and explore burgeoning talent.

I think that it's inevitable that players switch to visors. I also think that grandfathering it in is the right way to go; players who aren't comfortable with it shoulder the responsibility for their increased risk, and players entering the league who will have already adjusted to it will wear them. There's no perfect form of protection -- the Marc Staal injury would have happened regardless to whether he had a visor, I think, with the crazy carom the puck took -- but there's no reason for players who have worn visors up until the NHL to toss them away when they hit the pros. Just bear in mind how steeped in tradition this league is. In 1968 there were few players who chose to wear helmets, and even after Bill Masterton died following an incident when his head hit the ice, adoption to helmets were slow. It wasn't until 11 years later that the rules changed. There's a macho culture in the NHL, and some players will refuse to switch. Grandfather it in, let them make their choice for themselves. I hate seeing a player squirming on the ground like what happened to Staal, and I'm sure every other player in the NHL feels the same way. That's why grandfathering it in is the best solution; the older players who aren't comfortable with it don't have to, anybody who's worried can adopt, and new players have to wear the shield.

Of course they're circumventing the cap, in the same way that teams have been doing for years. But there's a difference: those low cap hits kick in when he's 34 years old. Do you think he's going to be playing at that age? I do. His contract runs until he's 37, and unless he's banking on a new provision in future negotiations that lets him restructure his deal, he'll actually play out his contract. It is without question a discount. Zach Parise just grabbed $7.5 million a year for 13-years, which helped to set the market this last off-season. Do you think he's only $1.2 million a year away in value from Crosby?

Since the NHL salary cap works based on average annual salary, there's still no denying that Crosby's contract is a discount. Who cares what he's making the next three years? Imagine if he pushed for market value... Since players (naturally) try to earn as much money as they can when their contract is up, sometimes I think it's best to aim for the players still establishing themselves in the league. I'd rather have a low-risk investment that's easy to bury in the books if things go wrong than a high-price bust you're saddled with until the end of time (even on a former-star like Ovechkin). And for the record, paying in excess of $5 million a year for Filppula would be a mistake.

I figured it would be an underachieving team that would break up their streak. I didn't expect the score to be that lopsided though. Needless to say, that was an amazing run.

I think it would be a lot more reasonable to just remove the helmet before fighting. Penalize players that don't.

I honestly think that if you made a Top 10 of the NHL's most ridiculous dives, Ovechkin's embellishment on that hit would be high on the list. It was that embarrassing. I always thought that his performance would taper off with age, since nobody can play with that kind of physical reckless abandon for an entire career, but he's already a shadow of his former self. I hope that he can become that dynamic player again because I'd much rather watch him flying into the offensive zone like a train off its rails than to see the wreckage that he is right now.

I've never seen anything as ridiculous as Ovechkin's reaction to being tapped in the head. He falls to his knees, looks up at the rafters with his arms outstretched, glides forward 20 feet before collapsing into a pile. Amazing!

I really don't think Gagne is worth a 4th round pick. The Flyers are desperate to get anything going, but Gagne is a bit of a reach. His career has been a story of untapped potential, but the last several years he's been tapering off. I just don't think he's got enough in the tank to be a viable NHL player anymore.

When Clint Malarchuk had his throat gashed and spilled blood all over the ice, was it because Steve Tuttle swung his skate up on purpose? After all, how many times have players been tangled up in front of the net without the goalie almost being decapitated? Or when Larry Cahan and Ron Harris converged on Bill Masterton to take him out of the play, and he landed on his head and died, should we believe that it was an accident? After all, how often do players sandwich a guy without them dying? Are we supposed to believe that all hockey players from pee wee on up through juniors to the NHL know how to correctly finish this type of play without hurting someone, but these players didn't? Yes. They're called freak accidents. Things that happen all the time go wrong and end very differently. I understand that it's Matt Cooke and some people cannot separate his reputation from any injury that happens, but if you watch the play at full speed then you'd have to be nuts to think it was deliberate - or, more likely, just harbor a grudge and choose to grind your axe. He isn't that sneaky.

$30 million over 4 years for Doan? There are only two possible explanations for this offer: alcohol, or the GM was triple-dog-dared.

The whole Rick Nash situation is just weird to me. Blue Jackets GM Scott Howson has very little leverage because (1) there are only a handful of trade partners Nash will approve of, and (2) everyone knows Nash wants out of Columbus, but Howson still wants the moon and the stars for him. I can't imagine that a disgruntled Nash will stay in Columbus another season, but if they don't lower the asking price I can't imagine who makes this deal. Add to that the factor of time. The deeper into the offseason we get, and as the available salary cap space shrinks for teams (guys like Semin and Doan, whenever they sign, will eat up a decent amount of space for their respective club), Howson has even less flexibility. I'll definitely be interested to see how this plays out.

Well, if the salary cap is $70.2 million for 2012-13, that makes the salary cap floor $54.2 million. Winnipeg has to spend money. And even if they didn't, they could do better than the compensation of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick for their young star forward. If it proves true that Evander Kane doesn't want to commit to Winnipeg, things will get interesting with respect to trade partners, but they will have no shortage of interested GMs calling. I don't think there is any way that Winnipeg loses him to an offer sheet.

It's a moot point anyway; the Jets aren't moving Kane. They want to lock him long-term, and it's not hard to see why: he has a lot of potential. Whether he reaches it remains to be seen.

He's 20 years old, has only been in the league for three seasons, and plays for an awful team. The fact that he already has a thirty-goal season is very promising.

I love watching Evander Kane play, and the fact that he's producing as well as he has been at this age on a bad team is very promising (high potential, more so with better linemates), but there's no way any team is going to make him an offer sheet that Winnipeg won't match. A 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round draft pick isn't worth as much to the Jets as keeping Kane in Winnipeg long-term. It would take a pretty pricey trade proposal to pry him away because, for my money, Evander Kane is a young star in the making.

If he signs at a $6.9M cap hit over the next 13 years, I think it proves to be a bargain. Consider that the salary cap has moved from $39M in 2005-06 to $70M in 2012-13... projecting what the cap will be in five, nine, and thirteen years, that hit may look better and better with time. I don't like the term because you never know what could happen, but I think it'd be a bargain for Suter to sign for that salary in an off-season that has seen teams throw offers well above $100M. ETA: Unfortunately I think GMs are handcuffed by the fact that longterm contracts are what these prized FAs want, especially in a year the CBA is expiring and longterm deals may well be barred after this offseason. I think that Suter is an elite defenseman, and you make the exception if that's what it takes.

I would be totally fine with Suter to Detroit and Parise to Pittsburgh. Once those two free agents sign, it's going to be fun to watch the windfall as the other big name FAs - Carle, Semin, Doan, Nash - figure to see boosted stock and free agency catches fire. But maybe Parise parties too hard tomorrow with his family for the 4th of July and makes the emotional decision to sign with Minnesota (and I could only imagine the hangover pains that would follow).

I could be mistaken, so if someone with a crystal clear understanding of current CBA language can clarify, but isn't the "signing bonus" just a front-loaded contract so that it pays the player faster? Unlike in the NFL and NBA where it's on top of the contract, I thought the NHL didn't allow off-the-book payments: the salary is the salary, and the only "bonus" is when it pays. Which would mean that Detroit's offer is probably front-loaded, but still would "only" pay $90M over the life of the contract, not in addition to some bonus. And if my understanding is correct, that would still mean the ridiculous contract numbers thrown by Philadelphia and Minnesota are "better" in terms of dollars and cents.

I'll be honest: if Suter signs in Detroit for a $6.9 million cap hit, I would be very surprised. It would tell you that he cares a lot more about winning than just loading the bank. I've figured, as most everyone has, that Suter will eventually sign with the Red Wings, and I still believe that's the case... but that was also before I heard the tender was $90M over 13 years.

Some people act like this is fantasy hockey, and moving players from team to team is as simple as that. This may be Suter's and Parise's only shot at free agency and they're not only weighing where they will likely play the rest of their careers, but where they'll live and raise a family for the next decade or more. It's a huge decision that they are entitled to think through fully to make sure they'll be happy, both professionally and personally. It's definitely not their fault if fans expected to know by now, or fans took off work with the hope to crack a beer as soon as a decision was announced, and it's anything but "unprofessional" for them to take time to carefully consider each offer sheet and do their research. I want to know what happens as much as anybody, but that shouldn't be (and obviously isn't) a consideration at all for these players.

How would the Devils' faithful react to losing both Zach Parise and Martin Brodeur? He'd probably be pretty upset!

What nixed the Kovalchuk deal was adding years to the end of the contract at league minimum salary (or close to it) to lower the annual cap hit, when there was no reasonable expectation that the player would honor it (Kovalchuk playing at 42 for $1 million, for example). Long-term deals are still perfectly legal. If it's true that he'll keep making $8.7M per year, that's... well, a little strange. All the reports suggest that he's leaving a lot of money on the table to give Shero flexibility to bring in more talent.

I'm rooting for the Devils this series but it doesn't really matter who comes out of the East, I'm pulling for whoever comes out of the West.