toby91_ca

Pretty sure Eberle ($6M cap hit) for Strome ($2.5M cap hit) was to be able to afford McDavid and Draisaitl contracts

The worst part was "on the first year of a $17+ million contract" - FIRST YEAR! Its not like they locked up a player long term for big dollars and then got bitten towards the end of the contract.....he literally just signed the deal.

What is it that you are pointing out? Pope is doing okay in college, but he is 23, 24 later this year. Looking at the rest of the top 10 scorers, there is only 1 guy drafted in the 1st round of NHL draft (he's 20 years old). The rest of the top 10, there is two more 20 year olds, one 21 year old, four 22 year olds and one more 23 year old. Of that group, there is one 5th rounder, two 6th rounders and five undrafted players. It isn't exactly a premier prospect group. De Haas is even lower on my list.

The reality is, there are a lot of players in junior that are very skilled a high scoring players in the context of the rest of the group they are playing with, but they aren't skilled enough to move on to the NHL and be good scorers. Those guys can go 1 of two ways, 1) adapt their game and see if they can make it in a different role (e.g. Maltby) or 2) don't end up pursuing the NHL. I laugh every time I hear about Maltby scoring 50 goals in junior though....to put it in perspective, here are some data points - from that same year, same league (16 teams): - 27 players scored at least 45 goals or 90 points - Maltby had 50 goals and 91 points - Darren McCarty had 55 goals and 127 points - 2 others were Corey Stillman and Andrew Brunette, who each went on to play over 1,000 games in the NHL and score more than 700pts - 7 of those players combined to average 19 goals and 43 points over their entire NHL careers - 16 - never played a shift in the NHL, which included the leading scorer who had 146 points

I'm on the fence with this a bit (i.e. in for name only). Not that it happens a lot, I just question whether it should. This is an all star game...to showcase your "stars", who do the kids want to see, etc. (it is for the kids after all). You won't to put your stars in that game (names). On the other hand, if a no name is having an outstanding year, you want to recognize him. The other view people take is looking at body of work from last half of the season before and first half of current season (i.e. time since last game....otherwise you are always just basing it off the first half of any season). Crosby didn't make it one year and ended up top 5 or higher in scoring at the end of the year. If you look at this year, Crosby is having a down year statistically, but it's it's down compared to his standards. When you compare to the rest of the league, he's still 13th in scoring. I think Kessel is 9th or 10th and Malkin is 14th. Kind of weird that all 3 aren't there...but the format is way different with 3 on 3 now and you'll always have guys that you really think shoudl be all stars but aren't there and then you have the few head scratchers (every team must be represented picks).

I get the point, but there are very few players that have consistently put up 100+ points. There are only 18 players in the 100+ year history of the league that have scored 100 points 5 times or more. I think Toews career high is 76....every other year below 70.

You're absolutely right, most of the best players in the league are normally the younger guys, but that's not because they are younger, it's because they are the better talents.....those best players won't be around at 19 and 20 years old.....that's my main point....if a guy is in juniors at that age, he's probably not that great. Doesn't mean he won't progress, but that's just my assumption at that point in time.

I actually wasn't nitpicking at all here....difference between 19.6 years old and 18 years old is massive. Go look at a bunch of players that played in junior for 3 or years and check their production difference from 18 to 19 years old. I'd be you'll see a lot increase production 50+ % in that one year and the difference we are talking about is closer to 2 years than it is to 1. I've seen it, over and over and over again. The quick and easy example is Mantha...at 18 he scored 89 points in 67 games, at 19, he scored 120 points in 57 games.....increased his production by 59%. I'm not saying it's always like this, but it's quite ordinary. It's hard to do this by looking at the good NHL players because most of them never play in junior by the time they are 19. The best of the best are in the NHL a year earlier, the good players may stay back a year in junior, but for the most part, it's rare to play in junior 2 years after draft age for guys that ultimately become NHL stars.

My main point is that I ignore stats for the most part of older players in juniors because it really doesn't mean much. If a player at that age isn't putting up big numbers than it's a problem for sure. I get that he's a defensemen, but if he wasn't high in the scoring list for Dmen, this thread wouldn't exist, so that's why I focus on discounting the stats in the context of this thread. I haven't seen him play in junior to judge otherwise anyway. So, just to provide more statistical age evidence, I did go through ever roster and of the 710 players that have played at least 1 game, he's older than 620 (or 87%) of them. The 87% is actually probably low in reality though because of the small group of players that are older than him, there is a good chunk of them that haven't played many games (literally some with 1 game) due to age restrictions. I don't have this year's stats, but assuming similar to last year....at start of season, average age for player in WHL was 17.98 years. He started the season at 19.6 years. Most sole point was that he's playing against younger guys, which is normally a big deal at that age level, so I wouldn't place too much weight on his production in terms of future projections.

What are you talking about? Are you at all familiar with the WHL or CHL in general? You make it seem like he's a young guy playing against older players for the most part. It's actually the exact opposite. Firstly, he'll be 20 in a month, so suggesting he's a 19 year is accurate, but misleading. Secondly, suggesting he's playing against 20 and 21 year olds is completely false. There is not a single 21 year old in the league, because the age cut of is 20. Not only that, each team is limited to only three 20 year olds. 15 year olds can play in the league (for up to 5 games anyway). He's a guy that will be 20 next month and playing against mostly 17 and 18 year olds. Average age in the league is right around 18. I always discount performance in junior from guys who are 19 and 20 years olds.

I'm not sure what you mean by suggesting that 84 wins from other teams is somehow an argument to use for HOF. During those 84 wins, I'd argue he was an average goalie in the league, some might argue below average, but it doesn't really matter. My biggest argument for Osgood making the HOF is that he has 400+ wins, I don't think there is much more to support an argument. Most detractors would argue he accumulated those wins on stacked teams....I guess that's where you are using the 20% thing, but not sure how that holds much water. Here's how I look at all the wins he accumulated with Detroit and why I don't see him as a HOFer: During Osgood's tenure = DET winning percentage with Osgood in net = 0.654, winning percentage with him out of the net = 0.666. Some may argue that he played against the better competition and back up got easier teams, etc. But he was the back up a lot of times as well and there is enough of a sample size to suggest those numbers show the guy in net wasn't a big reason for the wins.

I guess the in arena announcers are providing the wrong info then. They've only sold out 2 games this year, 1 other at 92% capacity and then nothing even close (80% and below...couple in the 50's%)

I don't think this is accurate. You are suggesting they draw 6,000+, which, including standing room is over 100% capacity. The actual stats show their attendance has been declining in each of the last 4 years. The arena capacity is 5,800 and they were drawing 5,300 three years ago, down to 5150 two years ago, 5,000 last year and 4,500 this season (77% capacity).

It's not really that negative, just realism. Why do we care more about this guy than any other guy that didn't make it in the NHL so went to play out their career in the minors?

Not that simple. I believe the player would have to first change their nationality....not an easy process and unlikely to take place in a couple months. Should that happen, the other criteria would be that they couldn't have represented their former country in international competition within the last 3 years.

Some might argue, yes, if they are close to the playoffs, he should get consideration. However, will they be close to the playoffs? It currently doesn't look like it unless things turnaround in a hurry. Current stats show 2 (out of the other 30 teams) have less wins in regulation so far, only 4 have a lower win% and only 5 have a lower point% (I think a lot call this win%, which is total points earned / total available points....but my win% is simply total wins / total games played). Short story....they are currently one of the worst teams in the league (not just East). Might be worse if they were in a different division. Is it Blashill's fault? Who knows. I'm not going to pretend I know all the inner workings and how all the decisions are made, but I do think it's too easy to blame the coach. I'm not sure why anyone would expect much of the team at this point anyway, they are in a transition period that everyone knew was coming. I honestly think they were more lucky for 20 years that being a superior managed team. They had a lot of great players that stuck around for a long time as they were all young at the same time. Does anyone really think PIT's management is somehow much better...they currently hold the longest playoff streak (active). Or is it more due to luck in the draft by getting Crosby and Malkin (and others)....they simply plug parts around them as other guys get more expensive....but what happens when Crosby and Malkin are gone? They'll be in trouble.

Reallly? If people were hanging their hopes on Witkowski then it was over before it even began

Actually, I see the opposite...reality is that overall talent is up (across the board, including coaching and techniques). Defensive play and goaltending is way better now, it's much harder to score. In today's game, Yzerman puts up no where near 120pts.

Stumbled on this today: Link to Article Picks for Wings was Abby, which makes sense, but they also list several worthy candidates (all of which we've been skewering Holland for lately). Others from across the league that jumped out at me: - Bolland - 5 years left at $5.5M per season. What? I must have forgot about this deal, but why was he ever signed to this much? It's not like others that have simply declined and are no longer worth the money, this is a case where he was never close to worth this much and there is still 5 years go. - Parise - 8 years left at $7.538M per season. This is my pick for the worst contract. He's a good player, but it's the length and the cap hit that make this awful. He's 33, not definitely not worth the money now and there's 8 years to go where he's not going to get any better. - Bonino - 4 years at $4.1M. I must have missed this during the summer. He's obviously cashed in on winning 2 cups in a row, playing some important minutes, but $4.1M doesn't make sense. - Andrew MacDonald - 4 years at $5M. Huh? - Phaneuf - 4 years at $7M. This is nothing knew (especially living in Toronto, I used to hear about his contract all the time). There was a time he was expected to be a huge deal (there was talk of Crosby and Ovechkin was they broke in, but there was a lot of talk about Phaneuf as the #3 and not far behind back then....with evidence as well....times have changed).

Cricket is the 2nd most popular sport worldwide.

He's still getting paid $1.5M for another 12 years, but I don't there is anything that hits the cap.

Yeah, he's not an option, but the contract he signed with Buffalo is up there with the worst in history.

Lucic is pretty useful though....big body, puts up 20+ goals, 50+ points. Can be a bonehead at times and while I don't think he's worth the $6M, I don't think it's terrible. While cap situation didn't come into play on any of these, Edm doesn't currently have cap concerns.

That's true, but one player doesn't take you from the basement to a contender in hockey, one player can only do so much. One great player can certainly make the difference on a certain teams, but it's absolutely something to think about in terms of whether the team will be successful that he's joining (the difference he'd make to that team would be a consideration in there). You also have to consider means of moving to a certain team...is it via trade or via free agency? Either has it's challenges, but the bigger probably being via trade. If I'm traded, what is the team giving up to get me? If a team wants a bona fide superstar, they are going to have to give up a lot...so while they add, they also subtract, perhaps it's through prospects and picks, so doesn't hurt in the very short term, but short term isn't a good way to go about things. With free agency, there is also downside by taking up dollars that can be spent around you, but not a lot of thought goes into that I'd guess.

Hard to say, for me personally, I'm not going to go buy a ticket for a game I know nothing about. If it's something I know a little about, I probably know the star players and it's them that I will go buy tickets to see. Basically, that's the reason Gretzky was brought to LA.