2017-2018 NHL Thread

[herman]

Holland for Cracknell.

https://www.nhl.com/canadiens/news/canadiens-acquire-adam-cracknell-from-the-rangers/c-293510628

Every time Peter Holland gets traded, I remember back to when someone suggested he was better than Kadri.

Pretty sure he's better than Cracknell.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I don't know if it's been mentioned much here, sorry if it has.

But the cap is preliminarily projected at 80 million next year based on revenue projections by Bettman and that's also including a reduction in escrow for players.

Mirtle had a pretty good article about it all last week I think.

Before re-signing RFA's and the inevitable Nylander contract, which could potentially be a bridge, they could have a lot of money to play with for next year before the Marner and Matthews extensions are needed.

 

[Coco-puffs]

I don't know if it's been mentioned much here, sorry if it has.

But the cap is preliminarily projected at 80 million next year based on revenue projections by Bettman and that's also including a reduction in escrow for players.

Mirtle had a pretty good article about it all last week I think.

Before re-signing RFA's and the inevitable Nylander contract, which could potentially be a bridge, they could have a lot of money to play with for next year before the Marner and Matthews extensions are needed.

Yeah, its a dicey situation.  As of right now we are looking at ANOTHER 5.5 million in rookie bonuses being subtracted from next years cap space.  And we'll only have Horton's contract to LTIR (ie, we can only go over the cap by up to 5.3 million).  So yes, you'll have some money to play with next year since Bozak, JvR, and Komarov all come off the books (assuming none are re-signed).  But if you go into LTIR again next year, you'll be carrying over another potential 4.5 million in Rookie Bonuses into the first year of Matthews + Marner + Nylander all being on their second contracts (and Gardiner needing another deal). 

Next year, the right play MIGHT be to try and dump Horton's contract and stay 4 million or so under the cap.  With all the youth we have at forward on the Marlies that look like they are ready, we may only have to spend a bit of money on the blueline.  That way all of the bonuses won't carry over into Marner/Matthews first year of their new contracts. 

 

[Kin]

Haha, yeah I see it. I'm wondering what Friedman's mandate is, vs. someone like Spector. I can't remember Friedman ever giving a personal opinion.

I get it. Spector is a hot-taker and generally obnoxious the way those guys are. I'm not talking about him vs. Friedman here. And I get that Friedman's thing is intentional, trying to be the Wojnarowski of the NBA and getting cozy with sources so he can tweet things at us 10 minutes earlier than we'd have heard them anyway.

There are lots of approaches to sportswriting, all of them with their good and bad aspects. I think though that none of us would hold guys like Spector or Simmons up as being all that good whereas Friedman is generally held up as a standard of his lane and after reading that from him I just genuinely don't have any idea what he thinks about any of it or feel illuminated on the subject at all.

"Sports columnists criticize players in Canada. Should they? Not my place to say. Players say it can get to them, but should it? Maybe they should try not to listen and focus on positives. That said, it's hard to, because they're human. "

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I don't know if it's been mentioned much here, sorry if it has.

But the cap is preliminarily projected at 80 million next year based on revenue projections by Bettman and that's also including a reduction in escrow for players.

Mirtle had a pretty good article about it all last week I think.

Before re-signing RFA's and the inevitable Nylander contract, which could potentially be a bridge, they could have a lot of money to play with for next year before the Marner and Matthews extensions are needed.

Yeah, its a dicey situation.  As of right now we are looking at ANOTHER 5.5 million in rookie bonuses being subtracted from next years cap space.  And we'll only have Horton's contract to LTIR (ie, we can only go over the cap by up to 5.3 million).  So yes, you'll have some money to play with next year since Bozak, JvR, and Komarov all come off the books (assuming none are re-signed).  But if you go into LTIR again next year, you'll be carrying over another potential 4.5 million in Rookie Bonuses into the first year of Matthews + Marner + Nylander all being on their second contracts (and Gardiner needing another deal). 

Next year, the right play MIGHT be to try and dump Horton's contract and stay 4 million or so under the cap.  With all the youth we have at forward on the Marlies that look like they are ready, we may only have to spend a bit of money on the blueline.  That way all of the bonuses won't carry over into Marner/Matthews first year of their new contracts. 

I played around with Cap Friendly's armchair GM tool, with Nylander on a 5 million a year bridge contract and Gauthier as the 4th line pivot, they are looking at having 21 million dollars in cap space.

That's a lot to leave on the table.

 

[herman]

"Sports columnists criticize players in Canada. Should they? Not my place to say. Players say it can get to them, but should it? Maybe they should try not to listen and focus on positives. That said, it's hard to, because they're human. "

This was a beautiful translation of his equivocation.

 

[Frank E]

"Sports columnists criticize players in Canada. Should they? Not my place to say. Players say it can get to them, but should it? Maybe they should try not to listen and focus on positives. That said, it's hard to, because they're human. "

This was a beautiful translation of his equivocation.

Should coaches be critical of players?  I don't know...on one hand, coaches have a job to do, and that's getting the most out of their players...but nobody likes to be criticized, and I can understand why some players might take it personally. 

 

[bustaheims]

I played around with Cap Friendly's armchair GM tool, with Nylander on a 5 million a year bridge contract and Gauthier as the 4th line pivot, they are looking at having 21 million dollars in cap space.

That's a lot to leave on the table.

Sure, but that's before factoring in ~$5M in rookie bonuses that could spill over (assuming you haven't traded Horton, at least). I also think the Leafs and Nylander look long-term rather than bridge - which probably put him closer to $6.5M per. So, that leaves about $15M in space to place with - which is not insignificant, and no one seems to suggesting the Leafs do nothing. Just that, maybe, they don't use all the space they have available so they don't have a 3rd season with a huge chunk of dead cap space from carryover bonuses. If they leave themselves ~$3.5M under the ceiling with all contracts includes (AKA, no going into LTIR space), they can still bring in some decent upgrades, while also easing their potential burden in 19/20.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

So, that leaves about $15M in space to place with

Seems like enough to give Tavares on a 1-year deal before he jumps back to the Islanders once they figure out where they're going to play.

 

[gilmourthegreat]

I liked Friedman's more measured take in his work in general, as that suits my preferred style of processing things like this (similar to McKenzie, and to slightly differing ways, Mirtle and co.). I also know a lot of fans gravitate to the more impassioned responses and opinions that grace certain publications, or that happen to have intermission soapboxes. There's definitely that differentiation here too.

I think there's a pretty healthy 3rd path that doesn't sacrifice "measurement" while still being capable of staking out a position on an issue.

Seriously, count up the sentences in that Friedman piece that seem explicitly designed to make people know that he isn't criticizing anyone or taking a position on any of it.

Agreed. Zach Lowe's nba coverage does this.

 

[disco]

For reference, here's the match that was thrown into the barrel of kindling and shredded newspapers doused in lighter fluid that has been Oilers' beat reporting the past couple of weeks:
https://twitter.com/SportsnetSpec/status/934478077488500736

Social media does tend to amplify the various mobs if you read every little thing written @ you. The relative anonymity of the keyboard and screen also seems to give people license to let too many of their inner thoughts out.

I liked Friedman's more measured take in his work in general, as that suits my preferred style of processing things like this (similar to McKenzie, and to slightly differing ways, Mirtle and co.). I also know a lot of fans gravitate to the more impassioned responses and opinions that grace certain publications, or that happen to have intermission soapboxes. There's definitely that differentiation here too.

If you want to see mental toughness, check out how gracefully most female sports reporters handle the abuse they endure on a regular basis.

The Spector quote. Some of them are, absolutely. They're still in development. It's more than the papers. Asked to do too much too soon can ruin their confidence. A core that is all young first-round picks NEEDS  to be allowed to grow. Edmonton messed that up. Will they do it again with McDavid, Draitseitl and Co... ? Time will tell.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/mikeFAIL/status/937182025290735616
#analysis

Also adequately describing what this fellow was doing on Twitter tonight:
https://twitter.com/THNKenCampbell/status/937178959971782656
#sexism

Edit: he has wussed out.
https://twitter.com/paulharbridge/status/937457739843997696

 

[L K]

Ken Campbell is digging a pretty solid grave there with his nonsense followup.  I'm really struggling to understand the conflict of interest that a colour commentator has on the game.  Someone later brought up that Matt Benning plays for the Oilers and is the son of Vancouver GM Jim Benning.  Campbell thought that a conflict existing there was ridiculous.  But Campbell being married to the assistant GM is a real issue.  Absurdity.

 

[herman]

Ken Campbell is digging a pretty solid grave there with his nonsense followup.  I'm really struggling to understand the conflict of interest that a colour commentator has on the game.  Someone later brought up that Matt Benning plays for the Oilers and is the son of Vancouver GM Jim Benning.  Campbell thought that a conflict existing there was ridiculous.  But Campbell being married to the assistant GM is a real issue.  Absurdity.

The comment to retweet/like ratio on that one says it all.

That Oilers vs Flames game was pretty hilarious too. Hockey gods giveth, hockey gods taketh. The Oilers go up 6-1 heading into the third and then nearly gave it all back until Brodie accidentally tips a rush pass into his own net, snuffing out the comeback.

 

[Kin]

What he said was stupid and everything but when we were talking about announcers here there were people who said that people on national broadcasts shouldn't be rooting for one team or another.

I don't agree with that but if you're going to say there's a horrible conflict of interest based on your perceived inflection of a play by play guy's voice then I think having a relative actually working for one of the teams is at least on par with that.

 

[herman]

I think my issue is that in a league rife with cronyism, backscratching, and nepotism, Cassie Campbell's assignment as an analyst for a game in which the Flames are playing is the hill he has chosen to make a stand on.

 

[Andy007]

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/oilers-owner-daryl-katz-buys-expensive-house-ever-sold-la-005203706.html

Good for him. After that terrible ordeal of having to pay just over a quarter of the cost of Rogers Arena (the majority paid out over the course of 35 years, to boot) it's good to see Katz find a comfortable place to get some rest...

 

[Kin]

I think my issue is that in a league rife with cronyism, backscratching, and nepotism, Cassie Campbell's assignment as an analyst for a game in which the Flames are playing is the hill he has chosen to make a stand on.

Right but there's a difference between "it's no big deal" and "Forget it Jake, this is Chinatown". If the case you're making is that this a league rife with cronyism, backscratching and nepotism and we're all largely inured to that and people who call games are basically cheerleaders for the product instead of journalists and to be a hockey fan at this point you've probably had to make your peace with that and as a result Cassie Campbell calling the Flames is no big deal than as I said, the objection here raised by Ken Campbell is very stupid. That is a right and good thing to say and, sure, one could even point out that there may be a degree of sexism behind this being the particular case to bring up.

But if the case being made is "I can't imagine where Ken Campbell gets the idea that people object to this sort of thing" then I think you can't extricate that from fans who say "He yelled slightly louder when Team A scored than when Team B scored. How can CBC employ such a HOMER!!!!!!!" feed into that. It's a stupid POV but it's not pulled out of the ether.

 

[herman]

But if the case being made is "I can't imagine where Ken Campbell gets the idea that people object to this sort of thing" then I think you can't extricate that from fans who say "He yelled slightly louder when Team A scored than when Team B scored. How can CBC employ such a HOMER!!!!!!!" feed into that. It's a stupid POV but it's not pulled out of the ether.

Nah, that's not my case here at all, though I can see where you're coming from, and it was something I hadn't considered.

My barometer for broadcasters is generally is there consistent stupidity?  Now even with stupidity, there are degrees, as you all well know, I'm a huge fan of irreverent stupidity. If you have to talked for about 3 hours, something dumb is going to come out once in awhile (no big deal). Homerism doesn't bother me at all, but parroting objectively incorrect tropes and narratives repeatedly grinds my gears a bit. For the most part, I'm only listening to the broadcasters to let me know who is handling the puck on the other team because I haven't memorized their numbers yet.

I really appreciate the broadcasters that share their experience and insight from the game to teach viewers what's going on, and if there is more to it than meets the eye (Mike Johnson, Ray Ferraro). I'm pretty okay with Romanuk too (got used to him during Spenglers and World Juniors) as he has a placid white noise quality that's easy to digest.

 

[Kin]

Nah, that's not my case here at all, though I can see where you're coming from, and it was something I hadn't considered.

My barometer for broadcasters is generally is there consistent stupidity?  Now even with stupidity, there are degrees, as you all well know, I'm a huge fan of irreverent stupidity. If you have to talked for about 3 hours, something dumb is going to come out once in awhile (no big deal). Homerism doesn't bother me at all, but parroting objectively incorrect tropes and narratives repeatedly grinds my gears a bit. For the most part, I'm only listening to the broadcasters to let me know who is handling the puck on the other team because I haven't memorized their numbers yet.

I think we mainly agree on Campbell-gate so instead I want to focus on this right here just because I think it's an interesting thing to consider. Over the last ten years we've seen a big shift in the game and the way it's played and I think something that we sort of have to accept is that a lot of what's leaving the game is some of the sizzle that sold the steak. I get being frustrated with old and out of date narratives that the data doesn't support but the truth is that Hal Gill being a great defensive defenseman because he's a giant monster who can clear the crease and blow up guys at the neutral zone is a compelling narrative. Anton Stralman being an effective defensive defenseman through smart positional play and general intelligence in cutting off shooting opportunities is a harder sell. Sure the former isn't as true but that's not always the point.

Ditto the Matt Martin/Seth Griffith 4th line spot difference. Fighting, and fighters' generally accepted utility in keeping star players safe while sacrificing themselves, was a compelling narrative(see every hockey movie ever made).

Changes being made in the game to accentuate safety and smarter possession based play has data and reason behind it but you gotta admit it can be a tough sell on a Tuesday Night Carolina vs. Buffalo extravaganza and, although it's become a product in and of itself, these broadcasts are still trying to sell us a product. That is a hard thing to do with a 52.4CF%.

So I get being occasionally frustrated with out of date narratives driving coverage, trust me and my hundreds of Don Cherry posts on that one, but keep in mind this is a watered down league trying to sell charisma-free stars and parity-based excitement. You gotta give broadcasters something to work with.