Jump to content

Mils

Member
  • Content Count

    1018
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Mils

  • Rank
    NHL Stanley Cup
  • Birthday 04/26/1984

Previous Fields

  • Favourite Habs
    Rocket

Contact Methods

  • MSN
    GMAIL: Mils0089

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    St. Louis, MO
  1. It's got to be a contract # issue, as mentioned by a few people above. Also, at this stage of free agency, there is probably at least half of the league that either doesn't want him because of his minimum salary requirements, his playing style, and cap room concerns (especially since the cap will likely drop significantly in 2010-11). Of the remaining teams that do want him, they have to worry about fit in the lineup and his injury. Then, on top of that, he probably has teams making decent offers, but are teams he just doesn't want to play for. The bottom line is that the market for him now may be the smallest it has been since July 1. Conceivably, the market could be as small as 2-4 teams. I don't know that, but it's very possible.
  2. This guy was the face of the Avalanche for 20 years. What a time it was. Skill, class, and loyalty... couldn't ask for more. *mile high salute*
  3. This is not a problem at all. The CBA was owner friendly from the start, so if they're finding loopholes, they are going to have to live with the consequences if the player they have to pay HUGE money to doesn't perform in those big salary years. The cap is figured on hockey related revenue, not profits, so if it bites the owners in the hindquarters, they have nobody to blame but themselves for signing such ridiculously long contracts with such huge figures in the prime years.
  4. Don't know much about Melançon, but I would not mind seeing Lemaire set some things straight around here. A "system guy" would be a positive step, in my opinion.
  5. That isn't true. Failing on one task doesn't make an entire project a failure. He still has Colorado (relocation), Columbus (expansion), Atlanta (expansion), Carolina (relocation), Nashville (expansion), and Anaheim (expansion) to hang his hat on as "non-traditional" markets. I can't remember if the new Senators, Sharks, Panthers, and Stars were on his watch. If so, add those to the list. And let us not forget he brought an expansion team to a place it never should have left: Minnesota, and they have sold out every game I believe.
  6. They are, and would fit best in the Central. Maybe put S. Ontario in the East, probably in the Northeast. Boston in the Atlantic New Jersey in the Southeast (A little strange, but not horribly far away from Raleigh.) Atlanta to the Central St. Louis to the Northwest (Again, a little strange, but the best choice of the Central teams) Colorado to the Pacific (It's the logical decision because it's geographically the closest team to Phoenix that isn't already in the pacific.)
  7. Putting a team back in Canada is a move in the right direction. How long do we have to wait to get 2 or 3 more moving back home?
  8. I agree with the end of that. I'm no scout, but I have cautious faith that Williams and Shattenkirk will be NHL defensemen, and if you add in Liles, Cumiskey, and the necessary assortment of veterans, I think we are much more in need of elite-level forwards than defensemen. Victor Hedman would still be a good pick, but of Tavares, Duchene, and Hedman, I think the Avalanche would benefit more from Duchene or Tavares. Of course, that may not be our decision to make.
  9. SHI**IEST CAR YET!! Forest Green 1996 Saturn SL2. 1.8 Litre engine, 4-speed automatic. 155,000 miles. So many mechanical problems, it has a vibration known as the "death roar." Kelly Blue Book: $900. Who wants to buy a car? :puke: Huzer: Where do you live in Colorado?!
  10. The Mawntreal is predominately the way people pronounce it in the states. I think, as somebody said earlier, that the spelling is why people prounce the O the way they do. If I said "Muntrial" to somebody, it would sound like I was trying to put on a canadian accent. The other Canadian city name that just gets butchered is Calgary. I don't know how Canadians pronouce it, but there are American broadcasters who say Cal-GARY, and it's never sounded right to me. Is it not suposed to be pronounced CAL-gry?
  11. I agree entirely. I didn't mention consideration, and to that end, belt and suspenders is usually not a bad idea, especially for the drafter. Contra proferentum.
  12. This is very true. haha. I have no clue about the civil law because the only state that practices it is Louisiana.
  13. I am studying law. I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. If you are having a legal dispute, you should hire a licensed attorney. (<< Sorry, that's a necessary caveat. Ethical thing.) But, from what I have learned and experienced, either one is a confidentiality agreement. (This is U.S. law, Canada may be different, but they are likely similar.) The terminology really is irrelevant, though. If you sign a confidentiality agreement (at a job for instance), then you are bound by the terms of that contract either way, whether or not the other party agrees to keep things confidential is a matter of the particular contract, and its terms. The title of it is semantics. If you want a more complete explanation of the process, let me know, I'm happy to help if I can. Hope that helps.
  14. All true. However, his contract is through 20-21. Suppose he has a healthy 15 year career. That only takes you out to 2015-16. Most goalies are lucky to play 15 years (Brodeur is in his 15th, not including the lockout), so this is being generous. At that point they still have 6 years left on his deal @ 4.5 mil a year. there's nothing they can do to get out from under that except trade him. Suppose they buy him out in the summer of 2016. 5 years left at $4.5. He gets 2/3rds of his remaining salary: 4.5*5=22.5; 22.5*2/3=$15. Then they pay that out over twice the remainder of the contract (10 years). The Islanders would be paying $1,500,000 per season, against the cap, until 2025-26 for a goaltender they signed to a contract in 2006. In my opinion, it would be much more worthwhile to sign him to a 5 year deal at 4.5, then run the risk that you might have to pay him the additional $1.5 for 5 years or so afterwards. (if he goes up to a Turco number, which he would be lucky to get anyway, then you only are paying an additional $1.2 million, instead of 10 years at an extra $1.5.) You end up saving a ton of money and you don't handcuff the organization like they have.
×
×
  • Create New...