[Discussion] Arizona/OEL

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, HuisHamIsThis? said:

Any weight on this? Doesn’t seem like a credible source but wondering if this is even possible?

 

I don't care how valid/invalid the source is perceived to be - it's something that is fair to raise - and probably should continue to be.

 

It was a selectively applied - retroactive penalty (based on a weak principal generally rejected in law) - to a contract the league approved at the time, that was not in contravention of the existing CBA - a 3 year penalty that applies in 2019 to 2022,  to a contract signed a decade earlier  in 2009, by a GM that is not here, the benefits of which were felt before 2013/14...

 

No, it's not a contract, it's a penalty - but nevertheless, it has two such problematic 'foundations' - it has not been applied to all the teams that signed these contracts, and it is ex post facto, / retroactively created consequences that were not recognized or prohibited at the time of the deal. 

Does the league get penalized for it's incompetence / enabling those contracts/approving them?  No, they impose penalties though, and execute the enforcement inconsistently/incompetently.

 

Being able to transfer what is not a contract but a penalty - is not enough imo - the league owes Vancouver 3.035 million of cap relief - what they were penalized this past season - to be conditionally reimbursed - in the coming or following season - Vancouver's elective.

 

 

[EddieVedder]

2 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Brock's also been playing hurt for a larger portion of the last couple of seasons.  Can't wait to see what he can do with a full camp and off-season to train.

Why are there so many excuses for Brock?  Every player plays with injuries.  We overinflated a player who was given gifties in his first year by the Sedins.   With Boesers obvious lack of footspeed, constant turnovers and inability to hold onto the puck its in our best interest to get as much for him as possible while we still can .  If we can get a top 2 dman for him or use him to get Ekblad I'll drive him to the airport myself.

[khay]

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

It seems like a very difficult deal to work out - maybe as difficult as they come.  With more variables to a trade than virtually any I can remember.

 

Not surprised it's eating a lot of time - and wouldn't be surprised if the Coyotes struggle to get something done in the end.

 

Not exactly an enviable position to launch your tenure as a GM, either.   Hjarlmarsson tells you to have sex with yourself.  Ekman-larsson taking a fairly understandably rigid stance in limiting where he's willing to go, something he has earned / a fundamental part of the deal he just signed....

 

Easy to get so wound into it that it seems 'inevitable' - and yet, important to step back, maintain your boundaries and not concede to something you really don't have to do.

Screw the Coyotes.  The only element in this that really raises sympathy - is Ekman-larsson being the kind of player and character that you make accomodations for.  It's a bit surreal to think of him on a left side with Edler and Hughes - just not the kind of thing you entertain as a possibility/reality - and yet, there it is - not only possible, but a possibility in which you hold a lot of leverage... In spite of how off course this really is in relation to a common sense path forward, it is very difficult not to imagine a couple pairings anchored by Edler and Ekman-larsson....when you add Myers and Hughes (the givens) and possibly even a Tanev to that mix....that's a blueline that can hold their own in a realistic shot against any team...

It's almost better having the slow cook effect - where you get to take a few days of reflection and it's still potentially in the works.   I can only imagine what it must be like to be in the room with GMJB's chart on the wall and hacking away at all the variables....fun stuff.    And as loopy as these threads can get, nevertheless a lot of diverse, interesting input in here to help a person refine their own take on this situation.

 

Cheers.  I am literally sipping champagne lol.

 

 

Did you write the bolded or was it auto correction? Because if it's latter, that's pretty damn smart auto correction. If former, well, it reads weird.

 

===

 

Edler, OEL, Hughes, Tanev, and Myers on the same defence corps measures up against any defence in this league. The top 4 teams in the West were us, Vegas, Dallas, and Colorado. That defence corps measures up favorably against Dallas and Vegas and don't even have to mention Colorado unless they sign AP. If Vegas signs AP, then it's even more important that we get this deal done and re-sign Tanev.

 

===

 

People think loading up on LD is a problem but in the playoffs, it's not a problem. It's a blessing. Defence pairings always get mixed up when a player goes down for an injury or after a penalty kill or even in the overtime in the playoffs where the bench gets shortened. If we get OEL, I see Hughes as playing a free role like Brent Burns. Green should deploy him on the right and left side as needed. If we need more offence and we are pressuring the opposition, deploy QH on the right side with OEL on the left side. If we are up by 1 and defending, then send out OEL with Myers or Edler with Tanev out more often. 

 

A chance like this won't present itself in say 2 years when Edler (and maybe Tanev) aren't as good as they are now. In 2 years, Edler will be 36/37 and surely won't be eating up 20+ minutes. 

 

Honestly, I'll be disappointed if we don't pull this move off somehow. Re-signing Tanev is also imperative in my opinion, more so than re-signing Toffoli.

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

2 hours ago, oldnews said:

Cheers.  I am literally sipping champagne lol.

An old fashioned made with spiced rum for me. 

 

Looking forward to the week!

[Devron]

6 minutes ago, EddieVedder said:

Why are there so many excuses for Brock?  Every player plays with injuries.  We overinflated a player who was given gifties in his first year by the Sedins.   With Boesers obvious lack of footspeed, constant turnovers and inability to hold onto the puck its in our best interest to get as much for him as possible while we still can .  If we can get a top 2 dman for him or use him to get Ekblad I'll drive him to the airport myself.

Your take on Boeser sucks.  

 

Boeser rarely played with the Sedins in his first year mostly with Horvat.

 

Also Pearl Jam sucks 

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

[Moose Nuckle]

3 hours ago, canuck73_3 said:

Jake has that same problem imo and he’s not good enough to be a full tim top 6 player, Brock is and has improved his puck protection and play making over the last few seasons. 

Yes he has good games when I see him throwing the odd hit. I would keep both because they both keep improving. 

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

8 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Your take on Boeser sucks.  

 

Boeser rarely played with the Sedins in his first year mostly with Horvat.

 

Also Pearl Jam sucks 

[Noseforthenet]

5 minutes ago, Roger Neilsons Towel said:

I have to interject. It's not too far. Pearl Jam was never any good and I'm tired of people pretending they ever were.

[Noseforthenet]

18 minutes ago, Devron44 said:

Your take on Boeser sucks.  

 

Boeser rarely played with the Sedins in his first year mostly with Horvat.

 

Also Pearl Jam sucks 

You can't argue with someone who likes Pearl Jam. They can't be reasoned with by sound logic. TBH, the only thing that's getting to me about Boeser is he's passing too much. He needs to be much more greedy with his shooting. He's a potential 40 goal scorer and he's not shooting the puck. In fact, he basically stopped since Petey showed up.

[Roger Neilsons Towel]

3 minutes ago, Noseforthenet said:

I have to interject. It's not too far. Pearl Jam was never any good and I'm tired of people pretending they ever were.

[Wilbur]

36 minutes ago, oldnews said:

 

I don't care how valid/invalid the source is perceived to be - it's something that is fair to raise - and probably should continue to be.

 

It was a selectively applied - retroactive penalty (based on a weak principal generally rejected in law) - to a contract the league approved at the time, that was not in contravention of the existing CBA - a 3 year penalty that applies in 2019 to 2022,  to a contract signed a decade earlier  in 2009, by a GM that is not here, the benefits of which were felt before 2013/14...

 

No, it's not a contract, it's a penalty - but nevertheless, it has two such problematic 'foundations' - it has not been applied to all the teams that signed these contracts, and it is ex post facto, / retroactively created consequences that were not recognized or prohibited at the time of the deal. 

Does the league get penalized for it's incompetence / enabling those contracts/approving them?  No, they impose penalties though, and execute the enforcement inconsistently/incompetently.

 

Being able to transfer what is not a contract but a penalty - is not enough imo - the league owes Vancouver 3.035 million of cap relief - what they were penalized this past season - to be conditionally reimbursed - in the coming or following season - Vancouver's elective.

 

 

While I agree with your sentiment, I don't see the NHL doing this as it would open a can of worms across the league with other dead cap space situations.  It's much easier to let the Canuck sit with this for a couple more years and be done with it.  Unfair of course, but the easiest path for the league to take.

[Wilbur]

10 minutes ago, Noseforthenet said:

I have to interject. It's not too far. Pearl Jam was never any good and I'm tired of people pretending they ever were.

 

I don't necessarily feel strongly either way with regards to Pearl Jam...I just felt this was apt 

[shazzam]

Just now, Wilbur said:

While I agree with your sentiment, I don't see the NHL doing this as it would open a can of worms across the league with other dead cap space situations.  It's much easier to let the Canuck sit with this for a couple more years and be done with it.  Unfair of course, but the easiest path for the league to take.

Seems to be on the same level as the Hossa, Pronger, Datsyuk trades. Although, I believe they shouldn't be allowed.

[Wilbur]

Just now, shazzam said:

Seems to be on the same level as the Hossa, Pronger, Datsyuk trades. Although, I believe they shouldn't be allowed.

Those contracts were still active at the time.  Luongo's is no longer active.

[Devron]

2 minutes ago, Noseforthenet said:

You can't argue with someone who likes Pearl Jam. They can't be reasoned with by sound logic. TBH, the only thing that's getting to me about Boeser is he's passing too much. He needs to be much more greedy with his shooting. He's a potential 40 goal scorer and he's not shooting the puck. In fact, he basically stopped since Petey showed up.

I agree. It’s like the Leon effect (can never remember to spell his last name) in Edmonton. He was trying to hard to be like McDavid the first couple seasons.
 

Boeser needs to learn to not play in Peteys shadow. He needs to be the best Brock Boeser he can be. That’s my take on that, that the injuries and player development is never the same between players. They all seem to have their own pace. Its completely normal for a player to have a breakout rookie season and kinda stay at the same level or even dip down a bit. Look at lots of great players around the league. Look at Mackinnon. Should the have “drove him to the airport” a couple season ago? Crazy right. 
 

Boeser will learn to be himself of the ice again it’s only a matter of time and we’ll see him hit another level. 23years old for crying out loud and has a PPG average that would place him on the top line of most teams in the league and he’s only going to get better. Crazy the people on here talking like he’s in decline. 

[ilduce39]

As a pro-JB guy, given the circumstances, I’d be pretty bummed if we gave up Boeser to nab OEL.  
 

I’m still fine moving on from Brock for a young, quality top-2 (or even 3) RHD... but this isn’t the case.. and I doubt Arizona is looking to take his contract on either.  
 

Likely the big sticking point is that the shine is well off Juolevi and both he and Rathbone are still significant gambles to pan out as top 4.  Then we don’t have a 1st in the upcoming draft and you can see why the Coyotes are running around trying to expand their options.  
 

Sounds like the Bruins just aren’t interested in playing ball.  

 

Not going to count my chickens before they hatch but it’s hard not to see this turning out well for us.

[Herberts Vasiljevs]

10 minutes ago, ilduce39 said:

As a pro-JB guy, given the circumstances, I’d be pretty bummed if we gave up Boeser to nab OEL.  

Well it's not going to happen so don't stress yourself out over it. 

[Gaudette Celly]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

No, it's not a contract, it's a penalty

Albeit, not arbitrary like what the Yotes got for illegally testing draft-age players.  It was (purportedly) based on a formula, same as a buyout or retained salary.  Can teams then start trading buyout and retention amortizations?  League would probably cringe at all the permutations and potential mess.

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]