Jump to content
dlbalr

2015-16 NHL Season Thread

Recommended Posts

dlbalr    673

Eventually I'm going to remember to start this before the puck drops to start the season...

LA's acquisition of Milan Lucic didn't get off to the best of starts. He received a match penalty for a dumb hit on Logan Couture yesterday. To make matters worse for the Kings, the one NHL'er they traded for Lucic was Martin Jones...who happened to be between the pipes for the Sharks in their 5-1 win.

Robin Lehner's not off to a great start in Buffalo. He left tonight's game with a leg injury. If he's out for a while, I'd expect Calgary to be shopping one of their three goalies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
KoRP    154

I'm going to miss Lucy giving the Habs PP opportunities ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dlbalr    673

The Mike Richards saga appears to be over. They've reached a settlement agreement that will pay Richards until 2031. The official amount per year wasn't disclosed but reports suggest it's $700,000. That much will count against the cap through 2031 as well as the cap recapture penalties for the next five years.

If I'm an LA fan, I'm pretty happy with this outcome. This costs less than a regular buyout would have over the next ten years (he had five years left, a buyout is 2x the term) and while they'll have $700k on the books for six years after that which isn't ideal, it's an amount that will be lower than the NHL minimum salary by that time. Not a bad result for a situation where some thought the Kings had no chance of actually succeeding had this grievance gone all the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meller93    122

The Mike Richards saga appears to be over. They've reached a settlement agreement that will pay Richards until 2031. The official amount per year wasn't disclosed but reports suggest it's $700,000. That much will count against the cap through 2031 as well as the cap recapture penalties for the next five years.

If I'm an LA fan, I'm pretty happy with this outcome. This costs less than a regular buyout would have over the next ten years (he had five years left, a buyout is 2x the term) and while they'll have $700k on the books for six years after that which isn't ideal, it's an amount that will be lower than the NHL minimum salary by that time. Not a bad result for a situation where some thought the Kings had no chance of actually succeeding had this grievance gone all the way.

As much as the situation is better for LA now, it's still brutal to be handicapped by 700k into the 2030's. It could be the difference between landing a big name at the trade deadline. To put this in perspective, I'm going to be 38 when he's off the books. I'm 22 now. Yikes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stogey24    253

As much as the situation is better for LA now, it's still brutal to be handicapped by 700k into the 2030's. It could be the difference between landing a big name at the trade deadline. To put this in perspective, I'm going to be 38 when he's off the books. I'm 22 now. Yikes.

It's a great deal for L.A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The four biggest by weight and height are Los Angeles, Winnipeg, Arizona and Colorado.

The four lightest by weight and height are Carolina, New Jersey, Pittsburgh and Toronto.

The usual issue with these things is that most teams have two or three players that create an imbalance of the whole list. This is the biggest Habs team in years but it doesn't seem like it due to the overall total after adding Byron and removing Kassian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    28

3 of 4 biggest teams missed playoffs and the 4th barely snuck in last year...Hmmm?

So we take from this that big can be more a negative than anything, I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    168

I think it is meaningless. Depends on the players not the size. Having said that the four lightest will probably all miss the playoffs this year.

3 of 4 biggest teams missed playoffs and the 4th barely snuck in last year...Hmmm?

So we take from this that big can be more a negative than anything, I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueKross    26

I think it is meaningless. Depends on the players not the size. Having said that the four lightest will probably all miss the playoffs this year.

I would state that if you are trying to make a straight line assessment from that chart, you probably will not be able to do it-- there are just a way too many variables. I am comfortable being in the middle of the pack. I am not disposed to saying that size means nothing, but that chart is limited. Unlike some of you; I do believe it is important. My concern this year would be, are we going to end up one of the smaller teams when we get into injuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    28

Habs haven't likely changed much in size ranking for years and has been zero link to more Hab injuries because team is average or smaller sized, has there?

Pleanec is bit smaller than average but never gets hurt; but there has been a link for d-men, with large NHL d-men having shorter careers than average to small ones.

So size does make a difference, just Larger is not always all it is cracked up to be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    144

3 of 4 biggest teams missed playoffs and the 4th barely snuck in last year...Hmmm?

So we take from this that big can be more a negative than anything, I agree.

4 of the 4 smallest teams also didn't make the playoffs.

The only thing you can infer from this is that you don't want to be the biggest OR the smallest, not much else.

(It's this year anyway, so it was probably different last year anyway)

I don't usually chime in on this topic but I don't think anyone has ever complained about the fact that the Habs are "average" size. Usually, they have in their minds that the Habs are one of the smallest teams out there and therefore have to get bigger. Whether this is actually true or not, usually not.

Interesting, though not surprising, that the four smallest teams are in the East and the four biggest teams are in the WEST if that's indeed how it breaks down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueKross    26

Interesting is that Mirtle puts age in, along with weight and height. I think he has got a point. I am sure it is a factor. What i am not sure is how it lines up with the other two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's honestly good in pointing out how height, weight, age, things hockey fans go crazy about, don't matter an iota. Skill matters. Size without skill is a skilless player. Youth without skill is useless. Age without existing skill is useless.

But you can't always have top end skill so we go wacky for having a big guy who can circumvent high end skill for just being big and mean, or a young superstar that doesn't have to have experience to play well in a defensive shell playoff series.

Examining hockey is all about finding ways to remove luck and circumstance and ensuring the best odds to win. The problem is we as human beings tend to focus on the visual first (he's young, he's big, he's small) before we focus on the repetitive (he carries the puck, he shoots a lot, he blocks shots) and even when we get there, we agonize over a game by game basis, before we have data to make proper analytical judgments.

In the end we're better off just picking a few favourites and running with it regardless of stats or facts. Because sports are silly, and we should always recognize that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    28

Sekac & Prust played well in their game last night. Sekac (18:39) even had time with Perry-Getzlaf, Prust had fight and assist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ducks are really weak on the left side. Way more than the Habs. That's a big reason why Sekac is getting those looks in the top six. He started the season with Perry but it was actually a third line (Boudreau was trying to spread his offence out by putting Perry with Rakell). Hagelin hasn't been working well on the top line with Getzlaf, at least not where they wanted it. So he put Getzlaf with Sekac and Perry. It's very possible he plays Maroon with Getzlaf and Perry next game because Bruce Boudreau is the biggest line mixer in the league. By far. It'll take Sekac really cementing himself as a star on the team (and right now he's frustrating the crap out of Ducks fans with having no skill near the net, despite the fact they love everything else he does to get to the point of shooting) for him to find a set line because Boudreau changes his shifts shift by shift. Ducks players are always getting confused as to who their new linemate is. Usually Sekac playing with Getzlaf and Perry would feel like a promotion. Next game he might play with them for four shifts before Maroon and Hegelin get looks again and it won't mean he's playing bad. It means Boudreau is rolling the dice. Heck he ended last nights game not with Perry and Getzlaf but with Horcoff and Stewart.

Don't be surprised to see the Ducks acquire Brad Marchand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlueKross    26

I am reading Pro Hockey talk, it appears L LeBlanc is headed for Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dlbalr    673

I am reading Pro Hockey talk, it appears L LeBlanc is headed for Russia.

Yep, it was reported a few days ago he was heading there which is why he and the Islanders agreed to a mutual termination of his contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JGC21    53

Yep, it was reported a few days ago he was heading there which is why he and the Islanders agreed to a mutual termination of his contract.

What happened to this guy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dlbalr    673

What happened to this guy?

He seems to have been at his peak when he spent that half season with Montreal where he didn't look too out of place. Leblanc started in Hamilton the next year, got buried in a 3rd line role (to mimic what his role with the Habs was likely to be), and struggled mightily. He wasn't much better in Anaheim who let him walk without a QO after last season. This year, he got hurt in camp which kept him on the roster until near the end of the preseason and I guess he's realized the NHL isn't in his future and is looking for a bigger payday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    168

He seems to have been at his peak when he spent that half season with Montreal where he didn't look too out of place. Leblanc started in Hamilton the next year, got buried in a 3rd line role (to mimic what his role with the Habs was likely to be), and struggled mightily. He wasn't much better in Anaheim who let him walk without a QO after last season. This year, he got hurt in camp which kept him on the roster until near the end of the preseason and I guess he's realized the NHL isn't in his future and is looking for a bigger payday.

he made a mistake leaving college. Should have gone to college to put on some size and improve his skating - even his college coach said he was making a mistake going - yes i know he had self-interest, but usually coaches aren't that vocal in saying a player would be better served staying in college. But those were the years gainey was rushing every draft pick into the NHL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
habs rule    392

he made a mistake leaving college. Should have gone to college to put on some size and improve his skating - even his college coach said he was making a mistake going - yes i know he had self-interest, but usually coaches aren't that vocal in saying a player would be better served staying in college. But those were the years gainey was rushing every draft pick into the NHL.

How could this possibly be Gainey's fault? Come on man, not everything that happened in the last 20 years was his fault. The kid did not make here or anywhere else. period. A bad draft choice is just that a bad draft choice. Looked good but did not have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    168

I'm not saying LeBlanc not making it was Gainey' s fault. Rushing him into the NHL was and encouraging an undersized kid (weight not height), who did not have speed out of college was a mistake.

Ribeiro, fatendrasse, LeBlanc. Trying to rush young players was a common theme. Max package would have been another. Remember max package himself said he'd rather stay in the ahl as a top line centre than be a 4th liner under martin.

How could this possibly be Gainey's fault? Come on man, not everything that happened in the last 20 years was his fault. The kid did not make here or anywhere else. period. A bad draft choice is just that a bad draft choice. Looked good but did not have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×