Jump to content

Fanpuck33

Member
  • Posts

    12255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by Fanpuck33

  1. He didn't coach under Torts... He was just hired by Larsen this offseason. He never actually got behind the bench in Columbus. Was not enthused about the hire and am not the least bit upset about him being gone, but the fact he was hired at all says a lot about Brad Larsen. Jackets gonna suck.
  2. Reminds me a lot of Carey Price's career trajectory when they kept giving him the job Halak had earned. Worked out pretty well. Like Price, Caufield has an it factor about him. He was instantly their most dangerous player and will have to play his way out of a major role.
  3. Ouch. That's why the only name/number I've gotten on a jersey was a replica Columbus Chill jersey earlier this year, with number 33 and the name "Mad Cows".
  4. Ok, let's put it this way - he's not a 2nd line center on a team with playoff aspirations.
  5. I just don't see a 2nd liner when I look at Christian Dvorak. A solid two-way forward with an apparent ceiling of 45 points screams third liner to me. A #2 center has to at the very least put up 50 points consistently.
  6. Seriously? For a 25 year old player whose best season was on pace to barely crack 45 points? Is he some kind of defensive stalwart like Danault that I don't know about?
  7. I haven't missed that point at all. There doesn't have to be a qualifying offer made if the team who owns his rights next year works out a contract with him. If a team he is content playing for offers him a 3 year deal at a salary he and his agent feel is fair, he will more than likely take that deal. With the ever present risk of career ending/altering injuries in pro sports, very few athletes are willing to play on a series of one year deals, which is the only way he will be making 6 million on his next contract unless he puts up a season worthy of such a salary. Most players are going to take 12 million guaranteed over 3 years rather than hoping they will be able to get a 6 million deal every year. Sure, he might make 18 million in those same 3 years. He also might have a terrible season and end up making league minimum after the team doesn't qualify him, in which case it would take 6+ seasons to make back the 6 million he lost by not taking the longer deal.
  8. That is only true if Kotkianiemi is comfortable playing every season on a one year deal. Very few athletes are willing to go for an extended period playing on one year deals where there is more money now, but is gone completely with a bad injury or poor play that results in the team not tendering him a qualifying offer. It is far more likely that if he players relatively well, he signs for 2 or 3 years at the going rate for a player of his age and performance and instead of waiting for a qualifying offer every year.
  9. I don't understand the comparison. I don't recall hearing any rumblings of Aho being disgruntled in Carolina. He just didn't have a contract and the Habs came along and gave him a great deal. With Kotkianiemi, reports are saying he wanted out after the Final benching and was telling people close to him he had played his last game as a Hab. Bergevin had to be aware of this, so not getting a center this off-season is inexcusable.
  10. Only if he is content to play on a series of one year deals, which most pro athletes are not willing to do when given the option of a longer term deal that is fair. Especially in contact sports where you are always on hit away from being done. Or one bad season from making league minimum. It's like how NFLers almost never agree to be franchise tagged multiple times. They make more money per year that way, but the lack of years of guaranteed money influences them to take multi-year deals that net less money.
  11. Sure he can if he isn't given a qualifying offer next year. That's how restricted free agency works.
  12. Nobody is getting screwed if he has a bad season. He has a bad season, you don't tender him and you've lost a 1st and a 3rd. Not ideal, but hardly crippling. Is every team that gives up a 1st at the trade deadline screwed for a long time? He has a great season, he's getting a huge extension anyway. He has a mediocre season and he still probably gets a solid bridge deal rather than risking a series of 1 year deals. The part about the Canes not being a lock for a late 1st is the one thing I agree with. They lost their best D, a really good young D, and replaced them with Tony D'Angelo. There is your source of locker room issues. They also took a huge step back in goal. Not extending Nedeljkovic in favor of signing Fredrick Andersson for more money is perhaps the most baffling move of the off-season. But Montreal is screwed if they do not match. They don't have the center depth to absorb the loss of Kotkianiemi. NHL players know that offer sheet deals are player friendly; that's not going to cause any issues in the room.
  13. It does happen, but most pro athletes are not willing to bet on themselves by taking a series of 1 year deals when a long term contract is on the table, at least when it is not a lowball offer. Especially not in sports as physical as hockey. More often than not, players who do bet on themselves end up losing millions.
  14. Bergevin tried to take advantage of an owner who had just lost a quarter of his net worth a few months prior and ensured they wouldn't be able to buy into any UFA years. It was every bit as "icky" as this offer.
  15. It's only a 1 year offer because that is all they had to offer in order to put pressure on Montreal to match. With a one year deal, a signing bonus doesn't impact the deal in any significant way, so they were free to make it an amusing middle finger. It does not give any indication that it is not a serious offer. They want JK. They are not stupid enough to risk losing draft picks for a player they don't actually want.
  16. Of course revenge is part of it. I mean, announcing it in French and putting in a $20.00 signing bonus makes that plain as day. But they wouldn't risk making the offer if they weren't willing to risk overpaying for a year before signing him to a lesser bridge deal. There is zero chance they let Hamilton walk in order to do this. Frankly, that notion is preposterous. Of course not, but there is no doubt they will make a move to free up the space to match. If he doesn't have a breakout season, then they aren't on the hook long term and can trade him. If he does breakout, then they'd be giving him a big contract anyway. It is no more of a dick move than Bergevin offering Aho a huge signing bonus trying to take advantage of the Hurricanes owner after he lost a quarter billion dollars trying to save a failing football league. Most in hockey circles see EVERY offer sheet as a dick move. All the talk about being against some kind of GM-code. Yet nobody retaliated against Philly when they offered Kesler or Weber. Nobody went after Edmonton after they offered Vanek and signed Penner. Nobody went after San Jose for Hjarlmarsson or Calgary for O'Rielly. The only other time there was a vengeance offer was when St. Louis offered Bernier after they matched Vancouver's offer on Backes. Offer sheets end up just being business. There has never been open season on a team to get back at them for giving out an offer sheet.
  17. They wouldn't have done this JUST for revenge. They're not just going to let him walk if Montreal doesn't match. And what does this have to do with having to worry about offer sheets for the next 5 years?
  18. He didn't get disciplined for talking about the Logan Mailloux situation; he was disciplined for completely losing it and attacking the person saying the disgusting things. That discussion didn't get shut down just because of the topic - it got shut down because it turned into a bunch of mudslinging.
  19. Anyone interested in joining for the 2021 season?
  20. I thought I read a PHR article the other day and Anisimov was listed as one of the top available players. Or maybe not (https://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2021/08/poll-how-many-top-unsigned-free-agents-will-play-in-nhl-this-season.html). He was just mentioned as having the highest points per game in limited action. I must have imagined him being ranked higher than Bozak.
  21. I don't think anyone holds Bozak in especially high regard. I don't think anyone is even saying he is that good. It's just that Staal was ineffective last year, while Bozak was still serviceable.
×
×
  • Create New...