2011-2012 NHL Thread

[Kin]

Personally, I wouldn't consider #5 and a roster player not named Gardiner or Kessel a step back let alone two. Even if I had to sweeten the pot with a mid-level prospect, it's a deal I make - instantly.   

A good rule of thumb is that if it's a deal you'd make instantly it's a deal the other team would make not at all.

 

[maplesyrup]

A good rule of thumb is that if it's a deal you'd make instantly it's a deal the other team would make not at all.

True enough. A deal I'd likely be hesitant to make is Gardiner + 5 for Duchene. Now, maybe the Avs sweeten the pot somehow for me...

Edit: It would have to be real sweet. 

 

[TML fan]

Just saw the Weber on Zetterberg mugging. The NHL has never looked as bush league as it does right now. Wow.

 

[bustaheims]

Personally, I wouldn't consider #5 and a roster player not named Gardiner or Kessel a step back let alone two. Even if I had to sweeten the pot with a mid-level prospect, it's a deal I make - instantly.

Edit: Though I suppose busta, if you think the price would be significantly higher than that, I'd agree.   

Well, I don't think one bad season will have diminished what Colorado would ask for him all that much. I think Gardiner and the Leafs' 1st would be the essential components of what they would want, with some other smaller pieces filtered in on either side to try to come to some sort of agreement.

 

[maplesyrup]

Just saw the Weber on Zetterberg mugging. The NHL has never looked as bush league as it does right now. Wow.

It was rather WWEish.

 

[Tigger]

I guess I don't get it, trading Gardiner and the Leafs 1st seems like too much to me, wouldn't you rather have Gardiner and, for argument, Galchenyuk than Duchene alone?

 

[maplesyrup]

I guess I don't get it, trading Gardiner and the Leafs 1st seems like too much to me, wouldn't you rather have Gardiner and, for argument, Galchenyuk than Duchene alone?

Absolutely. I'd want the pick + Gardiner than Duchene alone.

 

[Kin]

I guess I don't get it, trading Gardiner and the Leafs 1st seems like too much to me, wouldn't you rather have Gardiner and, for argument, Galchenyuk than Duchene alone?

How much do you know about Galchenyuk?

 

[maplesyrup]

How much do you know about Galchenyuk?

That's just it. Like I said, I wouldn't feel comfortable making that deal but if it happened, I don't think I'd be going out on a huge limb by saying Duchene is likely to be the best player in that deal. 

 

[Tigger]

I guess I don't get it, trading Gardiner and the Leafs 1st seems like too much to me, wouldn't you rather have Gardiner and, for argument, Galchenyuk than Duchene alone?

How much do you know about Galchenyuk?

I saw him play a few times last year, he was pretty good, skated well and played some d. Past that, some of the usual stuff, read about his surgery and that many thought he'd be challenging Yakupov for the first selection if it weren't for that.

 

[Kin]

I saw him play a few times last year, he was pretty good, skated well and played some d. Past that, some of the usual stuff, read about his surgery and that many thought he'd be challenging Yakupov for the first selection if it weren't for that.

Fair enough. For someone like me, who hasn't seen him at all, it's not really a question I can answer. If the Leafs think that the prospect that they'd draft at #5 is 80 or 90% of Matt Duchene then you'd probably balk at tossing in Gardiner to get the real deal.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I am posting this solely for quotes of Mike Gillis being ripped, even if it is by drama-queen himself:

While recapping the trade that made Hodgson a member of the Buffalo Sabres, Vancouver General Manager Mike Gillis essentially said last week he was glad to be rid of the center.

"I spent more time on Cody's issues than every other player combined on our team the last three years," Gillis said.

Roberts was flabbergasted.

"I listened to Mike Gillis the other day," Roberts said by phone over the weekend, "and my impression was, 'Are you kidding me?'

...

"I talked to Cody after this came out with Gillis," Roberts said. "I know he's on vacation, and I said, 'Hey, I know you went through a lot of stress. How are you feeling about some of those comments?' He said, 'Gary, I've dealt with a lot of stuff there in the last three years, and I'm just going to take the high road.'

"For me, I'd like to be the guy that looks at Mike Gillis and says, 'You're a moron.' It doesn't really do anybody any good other than the fact that Mike Gillis looks like, as they say on TSN, a dud."

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/sabres-nhl/article834441.ece

 

[ontariojames]

Really? We're still on this? Alright.

If we are talking about who you would rather have right now and not considering who would be better to build with for the future then how is Stamkos being 22 as opposed to 25 an advantage?

Because it's part of what makes him attractive as a player whose contract you have. The world doesn't end tomorrow or in a month so it's not a legitimate way to look at two hockey players in a comparative sense.

Minus Letang, the Pens defense isn't anything special offensively, and in 29 games without Letang Malkin was on pace for 113 points.

It's still better than what Stamkos had to work with and because we're bridging a pretty small gap in terms of point totals it matters quite a bit.

Teams also play more defensively when they have the lead,

Teams do but for a player like Malkin, who's all offense and basically nothing else it's not like when his team goes up a goal he becomes Bob Gainey. A good offensive player has better counter attacking opportunities when his opponent is down a goal because they're pressing.

I'm not sure how much of a difference this makes, if it made a big difference I would think Stamkos would've had a better year then he did last year playing on a very good Tampa team. However, we do know Malkin has the potential to be a 113-120 point player.

Stamkos was 20 last year. He had a pretty astounding season for a 20 year old. He certainly had a better year than Malkin did at the same age.

As far as linemates are concerned, I was generous towards Stamkos in saying they were similar. James Neal was a 50 point player prior to playing with Malkin this year, I don't think it's a coincidence that he all of a sudden turns into a ppg player while playing with Malkin all year while Malkin's having a monster year. Stamkos plays with St Louis, who has been a fantastic player on his own without Stamkos.

Well, someone who's got access to better linemate data than I have can correct me on this if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure St. Louis didn't spend the whole season on Stamkos' wing. I'm pretty sure he played quite a bit with Lecavalier too.

Either way, I don't doubt that James Neal's environment contributed heavily to his point totals. I just think the same is true for Malkin.

Lastly, as far as Stamkos being a better goal scorer goes, Malkin was on pace for 54 had he not missed 7 games, only six less than Stamkos. And Malkin doesn't play with a very good playmaker like St.Louis. And it doesn't appear to be a one year fluke, Malkin had a lot more shots on goal this year than in any of his previous seasons, so he appears to have changed his game to be more of a shooter and goal scorer the same way Crosby did.

I'm glad you mentioned this. Remember earlier about how I said that the quality of Pittsburgh's team, offensively and defensively, played a role in the offensive opportunities that Malkin had? This is a good example.

If Stamkos had shot the puck with the same frequency that Malkin did and, assuming his pretty astonishing shooting percentage had stayed the same, he'd have scored somewhere in the vicinity of 74 goals.

So, yeah, I'm pretty comfortable sticking with Stamkos as the significantly better goal scorer.

(the one playoff he had was mediocre, 6 goals and 13 points in 18 games is disappointing by  his regular season standards)

See, this right here is sort of the perfect microcosm of the difference between us. You're absolutely right if the one thing and one thing only to consider is point totals. If that is the entirety of the discussion I have no leg to stand on. Malkin, using that criteria, was not just better than Stamkos this year, he was 12 better. He was on pace to be 22 better.

Personally, I'm just not inclined to see things that way. I'll personally go with the better goal scorer who can play a physical game. That said, I respect and acknowledge that you see things differently. Different strokes and all that.

Edit: Not that it matters much but the more and more I look into this the more I'm inclined to go with Giroux over either of them.

I apologize for taking so long to come back here and respond to this. I disagree with the counterpoints you made, but instead of dragging this out for another 10 pages I will accept your offer to agree to disagree.

My main problem with the media personalities picking Stamkos was there reaction to the guy who picked Malkin as if the obvious choice was Stamkos and he was stupid for picking Malkin.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Interview with NHL COO John Collins, discussing NHL playoff ratings, the Winter Classic, and more...

On NHL/playoff exposure...

The 2012 Stanley Cup Playoffs marked the first time in NHL history that the entire postseason was televised nationally in the U.S. Between NBC, the NBC Sports Network, CNBC and NHL Network, every game of every series was given exposure.

"What a novel idea: Put every game on national television," quipped John Collins, COO of the NHL and a driving force behind its television inroads.

Today, the NHL can boast that 60 million fans tuned in around North America for Round 1 of the playoffs; the Washington Capitals and New York Rangers had a larger audience for Game 2 of their semifinal than there was for any Game 7 in the first round...the Los Angeles Kings and St. Louis Blues are establishing benchmarks on CNBC despite a Game 2 blowout.

On marketing...

We spent a lot of time looking at how we were going to make the business better and ultimately, when we got to the new agreement, what we needed from our partner. From a brand standpoint, and from the ability to convert casual sports fans and get them into hockey, we looked at the Stanley Cup Playoffs as the crown jewel of that brand strategy.

...the casual sports fan...hadn't rejected hockey. The biggest reason they weren't watching was that they just didn't intersect with it. Once they found it, or were presented with it, they found a lot of things that they liked.

...When we...exposed them to programs like "24/7"... they became fans.

On ratings...

I think we're getting to a point where we can stop referring to our success from a television standpoint as only being driven by the Original Six. We had record ratings last year in the Stanley Cup Final that included a Canadian team, so I think that put to myth that we needed two big U.S. markets to drive a rating.

This idea of non-traditional hockey markets ? the beauty of being able to see every game on a national basis is that you see the passion that exists in Nashville and St. Louis and in Phoenix, where the whiteout is back. That can capture the sports fan's imagination as much as an Original Six team can with its tradition.

On the 2013 Winter Classic...

We've got 110,000 tickets and 80 suites, and tons of demand. We'll probably have 200,000 tickets for various events with the Red Wings at Comerica. And it's big because it's Detroit and Toronto.

he demand from sponsors is huge ? at least twice as big as any previous Winter Classic. The demand from the clubs is off the charts. Everyone's calling the Detroit box office and the Toronto box office. So we're trying to figure out how many tickets the teams need or can use, and how many we can get into the general marketplace.

For the story, go to: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/nhl-coo-john-collins-talks-stanley-cup-tv-163707006.html;_ylt=An.r.PbPgsOOMNnSRnFMdAl7vLYF

 

[Manson]

A little bit of Huet news:

Cristobal Huet has been stuck in the Swiss League because of his bloated contract, but his $5.625 million annual cap hit comes off the books this summer. The Edmonton Journal?s Jim Matheson reports that Huet is ?dying to get back to the NHL.? He?s played well enough overseas to do so and he?s apparently more than willing to be a No. 2 goalie at $750,000 a season, which is quite an affordable number. So Matheson writes, ?The Kings, who say they want a veteran backup if they?re moving Jonathan Bernier this summer, might do well to consider Huet.?

 

[hockeyfan1]

Todd Richards now the full head coach of the Blue Jackets.  Given the reins under the term "interim" in the second half of the season, after the firing of Scott Arniel.  For more, click here:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/05/14/blue_jackets_report_todd_richards_head_coach/

 

[hockeyfan1]

Juste pour rire, parte deux...

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/playoff-hockey-hugs-ovechkin-hockey-bird-everybody-loves-185806998.html;_ylt=AlOeZglFq_y6AeOFlaJzz6J7vLYF

 

[hockeyfan1]

It was 31 years ago, that a fellow named Wayne Gretzky, led both the NHL and the World Hockey Championships in scoring.

Thirty-one years later, Evegeni Malkin accomplishes the same feat.

Source: SLAM! Sports/Canoe

 

[Madferret]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Sutter & deBoer both fired / let go last season?

 

[maplesyrup]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Sutter & deBoer both fired / let go last season?

Yup but obviously, they were let go from different positions. Sutter the modern day Pat Quinn? Decent enough coach who should stay away from management?