kliq

Not sure why ownership in Buffalo is surprised. They decided to have their GM tank, now that hey are feeling the ramifications of that they are deciding to blame the GM/coach. This is what tanking does, it puts you all the way to the bottom forcing you to claw your way out which on paper may seem easy, but in reality is very hard. Just look at Edmonton a decade later, if it wasnt for landing McDavid they would likely still be out of the playoffs.

I never said Toews was a "problem", the logic is if these teams have gotten better, what does Chicago need to do to surpass them again. IMO that means sign someone better, or sign a few better guys, but to do this you need cap-space and moving Toews opens up the most cap.

I feel like a lot of people are voting based on this logic which isnt want I was trying to assess. The point of the poll is do you think they should move Toews if there is a market for him. I think he is done this offseason. His salary drops to 1 mil this upcoming season and stays there for the duration of the contract. I see him leaving and going to Europe similar to Datsyuk with a team like Arizona taking the cap hit.

That's definitely a possibility, but even more a reason to see if there is interest out there. Remember, all you need is 1 team to be interested. I never thought in a million years that the Leafs would move Clarkson. LMAO! I actually was going to put that as an option, but I figured everyone would select it. I'm not completely writing them off, my logic is they are getting older and younger teams are getting better. I think they will be very good for years to come, but to be the best of the best, I think is unlikely unless they make changes. Ya probably not, but like I said in the quote above I think if you are Chicago you have to try. *EDIT* I just saw he has a NMC, he's not going anywhere. That's even better.

The story could easily be BS, but what Eichel says to the media does not indicate one thing or another.

This is amazing!!!!!!

Ok fair enough, I had a feeling which is why I wanted to ask before I responded. Who knows if it is true, I started the thread because truth or BS, it is news and this is a hockey discussion board. My gut tells me where there is smoke there is fire, especially with Bylsma being fired 1 day later. With hat being said, I don't put it past the media to write an article based on rumors or speculation.

See being in Canada I rarely watch the US feeds for hockey so my exposure to Emrick is very minimal, if I listened to him all the time though I could see his voice annoying me. I don't hate George like a lot of others do, but that is because I grew up watching him as a VJ on MM lol. Pierre, is someone who has been showing up on TSN, the score, and sportsnet for me in what seem like 20 years now. For me, he just comes across like a guy who is trying so hard to be "one of the boys". From the way he talks to the players, the way he announces etc.

I can't stand him, for me he is the most annoying TV sports personality of all time.

Please please please take the job! Anything to get that ****** off my TV! Is this a shot at me for starting the thread?

Plus AA when we trade him for D

Granted none of these guys are impact players at all, but who do you sign to the main roster? Who do you sign to play in GR? Drew Miller Ben Street Mitch Callahan Joe Vitale (I think still suffering from post concussion syndrome) Eddie Pasquale "The Other Dylan" Dylan Mcllrath

Datsyuk's team won the Cup http://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/19177827/pavel-datsyuk-adds-khl-title-stanley-cup-victories

Is this speculation? Or based on an interview?

This is awesome! Hopefully Nashville can get 2 more.

Do you know how this effects his contract? According to Cap Friendly, year 1 of his contract starts next season. This wouldn't make this current year "year 1" would it?

Same here, especially Street. He has played great for GR this year scoring 55 points which is second on the team. The only guy I am not sure about is Pasquale as I don't know what his ceiling is.

I feel like you aren't reading what I am writing. I never said Blashill deserves to keep his job, and I never said that I am satisfied with Blashill. What I said was that I would prefer to have Blashill over Gallant because I feel Blashill has more upside then Gallant. If I had my way, we would be bringing in none of the above but that was not the question you originally asked.

This I agree with.

You may be right, again I'm not defending him. If I am just choosing between him and Gallant, I choose Blashill (at least for next season).

You may not be wrong, but if I am being fair here are the pro's and con's Pro's When Healthy Jimmy is a very good goalie Is only under contract for two more years, can be used to help mentor a young goaltender Will Help them get to the cap floor Only under contract for 2 more years, so not a long term investment Con's Injury Prone Possibly better veteran choices out there (ie. Fleury,) Depending on who else they draft, cap hit could be an issue Overpaid for a injury prone goaltender

I would. Just like a rookie player, I think Blashill has room to grow and just because he isnt great today, doesnt mean he won't be tomorrow. Gallant on the other hand has been a coach for 6 seasons, and 5 of those 6 season were failures and he's been fired twice in 4 seasons. I would guess that he is less likely then Blashill to become a better coach then what he is today as I think Blashill has more room to grow. The fact that he was fired from Florida 1 year after taking them to the playoffs is a bit of a red flag as well. With that being said, please don't mistaken this as a pro Blashill post. There are many coaches I would take over him, Gallant is just not one of them. I want a young coach, or I want a coach with a track record, not a coach who has been around for a few years that has failed more then succeeded.

I still don't understand your point? So are you now saying it was dumb of holland to only give a NMC on the first two years opposed to all the years?

Not sure I understand your point? Are you saying it was dumb of holland to only give a NMC on the first year opposed to all the years? Sure we all would rather there not be one at all, but I fail to see how one year of a NMC is dumber the 5 years with a NMC? Or am I missing something?

Could be much worse, he could be playing for an American team that nobody gives a crap about. At least when your on a Canadian team you will get exposure. But ya, I'm sure the NHL wishes he played for a New York, Detroit, Chicago etc.