-
Posts
10,799 -
Joined
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Everything posted by SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME
-
One assist tonight for Brassard. Brings him to 55 points (11g 44a) in 64 games.
-
No problem. Just figured I’d add a couple things to the discussion. As for Utica next season, I’d only say slim because I don’t expect him to be signed. If Lockwood does sign, I’d expect him to be in the AHL, and happy to play there and develop. He may be a rich kid, but he’s not an entitled rich kid. Lockwood works hard and will pay his dues. I just predict he will decide to finish out his college career first. He likely goes to the AHL regardless, whether it’s this year or next, and with Vancouver/Utica or another organization. Yeah, it’s going to be a bit stressful if he plays out his senior year next season and has the free agency option. I don’t know if he’d hold out, but it might be pretty tempting, especially if he thought he might get an offer from the Red Wings (Lockwood’s hometown of Bloomfield Hills is a rather tony suburb of Detroit—actually quite a few Red Wings, past and present, have their mansions in Bloomfield Hills), it would probably be a dream come true (although I don’t know for a fact that he actually likes the Red Wings—some guys aren’t fans of their local teams).
-
Yeah, and last game he did have one guy basically pick him up, skate him over, and slam him into the boards. There will always be concerns with guys this light, especially when opposing players decide to play outside the rules. But as far as the actual hockey goes, Madden has impressed me a lot this year by how well he does against bigger, stronger players, whether it’s faceoffs, puck battles, or getting to the net when there’s traffic. He also seems to have some of that “wiry” strength, and matches up better than expected with guys 40-50 pounds heavier, and seems to bounce right back up whenever he does get knocked down (or picked up and slammed). I do expect him to add mass and strength. How much is anyone’s guess. I’d expect he’s already a bit bigger than the 150 he’s listed at and the lineup chart measurements are from the start of the year. I don’t think he’ll ever not be a “small” player, but I think he’s one of those guys who can be effective, despite size mismatches.
-
He’s going to talk to Benning after the weekend and give his answer. EDIT: If I were to wager on it, I’d bet he’s returning for his senior year. Will’s parents are both U-M alums, and he’s been singing the Michigan fight song since he was a little kid. So completing his degree at Michigan probably means more to Lockwood than it does to most players. He’s also from Bloomfield Hills, one of the most affluent neighbourhoods in the entire state, so I don’t think Will is in any rush to sign a deal and start making money. If he believes there’s a good opportunity and it’s the best thing for his hockey career, he’ll sign now. If not, he’ll likely play out his senior year and decide his future after he graduates.
-
“They did it despite losing ace goalie Mikey DiPietro with a shot off the bottom of his mask in the opening minutes and the good news is the mid-season acquisition is fine and will be good to go when the playoffs start next Friday.” https://ottawacitizen.com/sports/hockey/67s-falls-to-petes-inch-closer-to-franchise-points-record-as-dipietro-leaves-game/wcm/92b14eb1-d8ab-4d65-bfcc-8fea91832c93/amp?__twitter_impression=true
-
A 150-pounder who just finished with 1 goal, 12/22 faceoffs, and +1 in tonight’s 2-1 win. While playing as a #1 centreman and facing a team with multiple ~200 pound upperclassmen lining up down the middle.
-
Jack Rathbone | #3 | D
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME replied to Tomato Pajamas's topic in Prospects / Farm Team
Jack with 1A, 2 SOG, and +2 in Harvard’s 3-1 win tonight.- 3,880 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Former development camp invite. PITB did a good feature: https://www.vancourier.com/pass-it-to-bulis/better-know-a-2018-canucks-camp-invitee-josh-teves-1.23352116
-
Contracts like Eriksson’s are said to be “buyout proof” because of their structure with guaranteed signing bonuses (this article does a decent job breaking down why), but they are not immovable. You can still make a retained salary transaction, retaining up to 50% of the contract (AAV and monies owed, including the remaining bonuses). Where signing bonuses make trades interesting is how the payouts are scheduled. Signing bonuses are paid out annually in a lump sum in July, before the season starts. Regular salary is paid every 15th and last day of the month, starting September 30th, and ending April 15th. So the timing of trades makes a huge difference on how much actual salary is left, and how much real money will be retained.
-
He lost that game 3-2. But he got the start the next game for the rematch against Oshawa, and shutout the Gens 4-0, earning his 4th shutout this season and 19th of his OHL career.
-
If they get the name wrong, what else might they get wrong?!?!?!?! I’m happy if he gets the free 10 games. I just still don’t quite understand why, based on the CBA. But I’ve said all along that I hope I’m wrong in questioning the interpretation everyone is basing the 11 games standard on (or at least the part where Hughes is considered “age 19”). But whatevs, he’s signed, he’s coming, and I’m psyched.
-
This one still makes me smile. Love that Tame Impala track too. So excited to see Q finally play here. Hope his foot is fine and he suits up next game.
-
-
Jack Rathbone | #3 | D
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME replied to Tomato Pajamas's topic in Prospects / Farm Team
Here are the relevant sections of Article 8.6:- 3,880 replies
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
I think it’s on BTN2Go (Big Ten Network), which is paid subscription. I don’t think there’s a free stream available.
-
I agree. Even though on paper, he doesn’t jump out. Point per game production as an overager offensive Dman isn’t all the special. It’s encouraging enough to consider a guy a fringe prospect, but not much more. What impresses me with Brassard is the skill level he shows on some plays. Really slick stuff. Some amazing passes; instinctive reads on when to pinch and when to attack low; a hard, accurate shot; and very good hands when he’s in close. This kid’s highlight reel is next level. Lots of showstopping goals. Rarely does he bank cheap points. Also, he has good size, plays physical, and has a real agitator side (opposing teams hate him—but from all accounts he’s a class act off the ice and a great teammate). Skating remains a weakness, but has improved. Overall, I just see flashes of skills that I believe will translate to higher levels. He just needs to work his ass off on his skating. The rest of the package has very good potential for the pros.
-
Somewhere in the middle of the first two. Around Gaudette money. $925k salary (with signing bonus) plus $850k performance bonuses.
-
Jack Rathbone | #3 | D
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME replied to Tomato Pajamas's topic in Prospects / Farm Team
Great weekend for Rathbone. Goal last game, and 2 assists tonight. I could easily see him taking over for Fox, as Harvard’s top Dman next season. Tonight, for example, he led the entire team in shot attempts (6), had two blocks (also team leading), and nearly added a goal on the wraparound. Seems to be playing with a lot of confidence right now. His heavy shot is giving goalies trouble and creating lots of rebound chances. And his aggressive offensive zone play makes him a constant threat, both from the point, and moving down, often circling below the goal line, before rotating back up top. 19 points is already an impressive freshman D total, and he still has plenty of time to add to his numbers, as Harvard closes out regular season play, and enters into the tournament stage.- 3,880 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
I’m sure all the NHL teams received a full package with all the expansion rules spelled out in great detail. Unfortunately, I’ve yet to see these details made public (at least when it comes to this stuff related to Hughes)
-
Ok, so I’m seeing a fair amount of confusion in here over the Quinn Hughes thing. And honestly, I don’t know the specific criteria the league uses for the expansion draft. Lately, most pundits are using Ryan Biech’s interpretation, which says Hughes will be considered an age 19 player, and will not use up a professional year, so long as he plays less than 11 games in the 2018-19 season. This would make him expansion exempt, so long as he plays less than 11 games this season. Here’s Biech’s interpretation: I like that Biech uses Article 13.4, because this fits with some of the more odd cases we saw from the last expansion draft. Players like Kyle Baun, who was considered to have played his first professional year in 2014-15, despite only playing 3 pro games. I am a little surprised that the standard for a professional year for 18 and 19 years olds is 11 games. Just because every single drop of ink spilled on the expansion draft rules last time around cited 10 games as the standard. But then again, they were all wrong (as the Baun example showed), and the standard is clearly not 10 games for players age 20 and over. But what about Quinn Hughes? For me, it comes down to his age. Many portions of the CBA would consider Hughes to be age 20, if he signs a contract in the calendar year he turns 20. This is how the age calculation works for “signing age” and for considerations like contract slide (and a bunch of other aspects of contracts). Ryan Biech says that Hughes will be age 19. But I’m still not sure I agree. If he’s basing the age off of the language in Article 13.4, then I’m not sure how he’s determining that Hughes will be age 19. Just because when you look at the age determinations in Article 13.4, you have the language in Note 2, which basically says age 18 is between Jan 1 and September 15, age 19 is calendar year, and age 20 is calendar year. Quinn Hughes is 19 years old and turning 20 during calendar 2019. Seems to me, he’d still be considered “age 20” based on Article 13.4. And if he’s “age 20,” then the first sentence of article 13.4 would apply, and “one (1) or more Professional Games shall constitute the first year.” So I’m not sure Article 13.4 really gives Quinn Hughes a free 10 games with the Canucks this season. I could easily be wrong. But I’m just not convinced (yet) that 11 games is the standard for a professional year that will applicable to Quinn Hughes. And I’m not really swayed by the various pundits who are parroting that it’s 11 games, because they are all just going off of what Ryan Biech is saying, and none of them really know. And Biech is just offering his interpretation of one section of the CBA. He freely admits, he doesn’t know if the NHL actually uses that section for their expansion rules. It’s just his best guess. Last time around, with the Vegas expansion, everyone said it was 10 NHL games for teenagers and 10 professional games for age 20 and older. They were wrong. The standard for age 20 or older was just one game. And if Article 13.4 is the section of the CBA being used, when it comes to expansion, then the standard for teenagers should have been 11 games. So they were wrong on that too. If 13.4 is the standard, then the requirement for a professional year should be 11 games for ages 18 and 19. And just 1 pro game for ages 20 and older. In the case of Quinn Hughes, the critical factor is whether the expansion rules consider him age 19 or age 20. Based on Article 13.4, I’m having a hard time thinking he’s age 19. Looks more like he’d be considered age 20. But again, I could easily be wrong. The fact is, I just don’t know. And Ryan Biech doesn’t really know either. The NHL has not made the rules public (when it comes to the specific details of how professional years and player ages are determined for expansion), so we’re all just trying our best to come up with an answer that fits with how things worked last time, and which players were eligible for, and exempt from, the Vegas expansion draft. I’d be very happy if Biech is right and I’m wrong. I hope the NHL considers Quinn Hughes to be an age 19 player when we sign him, and lets him play 10 games without burning a pro year. I’m just not seeing nearly enough evidence (yet) that this interpretation is actually correct.
-
Jack Rathbone | #3 | D
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME replied to Tomato Pajamas's topic in Prospects / Farm Team
Just embedding:- 3,880 replies
-
- Defenceman
- Left-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
OJ may take the crown on Insta, but Woo definitely wins on memes. I’d say it’s far from settled.
- 2,248 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Defenceman
- Right-shot
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
The trade was a great fit for him. Oshawa has such a deep D this year. So much so that Brassard actually saw his minutes and opportunity scaled back, compared to last season. This at a time in his junior career where, as an overager, he’d probably expected to see a ton of minutes and really pad his stats as he fights for a pro contract. Niagara, on the other hand, doesn’t have the same strength on their defence, especially when it comes to guys who can put up numbers. They have a potent forward group, but adding a point per game defenceman was something they needed. So really worked out. Oshawa got a healthy return, and they haven’t lost a step since moving Brassard and Studnicka, and are right there with Niagara in the standings.
-
Linus Karlsson | C
SID.IS.SID.ME.IS.ME replied to Rollieo Del Fuego's topic in Prospects / Farm Team
Thanks, @ForzaTikare. Was interested to hear your opinions on this. What you said fit with what I was thinking, I just didn’t have much personal viewings of Karlsson to base my opinion on. I hope that Karlsson will turn into a player for us. I’m encouraged by the comparison to Gaudette. And I think you’re right that Dahlén will need to succeed as a top-6 and PP player to find a role in the NHL. Probably the Canucks didn’t see a fit here with their group, as much as the fans hoped Dahlén and Pettersson would be linemates. I always had doubts as to whether they’d be a fit as NHLers, as I think the Canucks are looking for a different player type on EP’s wing. Maybe it will end up being the best for all parties involved. I just think I’d have preferred to have seen Dahlén stay and continue to develop (although I do question whether or not he was getting the best opportunity for this in Utica), and maybe pickup a prospect like Karlsson as part of the Gudbranson trade, or from moving some of our other surplus pieces at this TDL. -
Yeah, he’s a fun player to watch, with his energy level and drive, and willingness to engage physically. Great speed and a motor that doesn’t quit. Really aggressive checker and high battle level. Loves to hit and engages physically with all comers, regardless of size. He also has a lot of skill when the puck’s on his stick. He’s the kind of player that could thrive as a bottom-sixer in the pros. Can play a gritty game and provide some shifts that lift the team and set the tone. And has the skill to chip in some scoring, especially against the flow of play, like quick strikes, odd man rushes, and breakaways the other way after a turnover, and he has the hands to finish those chances. Lockwood is the kind of player that provides memorable moments in games. Scores some big goals. And provides shifts that can turn around the momentum in games. Pearson calls him a game changer, and I think that’s as good a descriptor as any. He’s very noticeable. He affects the game. The type of guy a coach looks to when he needs a big shift and an emotional lift for the rest of the players on the bench. I could easily see Lockwood becoming a fan favourite for us one day.