Around the NHL 2017/2018

[blue_gold_84]

Probably both, actually.

[JCon]

50 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

Reminds me where they came from....Atlanta

RCAF colours. 

 

When does this troll leave? 

[iHeart]

3 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Both Perreault and Myers will have teams lined up if the Jets make them available.

aren't they both in the middle of their contracts?

[The Unknown Poster]

3 minutes ago, iHeart said:

aren't they both in the middle of their contracts?

Perreault has three years left at $4.1 Million per.

Myers has one year left at $5.5 Million.

If the Jets dont plan to sign Myers (or he doesnt want to stay), he might be the obvious one to move out.  He's attractive for other teams because his actual cash salary is less (so a lower cap team with space might like him).  Jets could use that $5.5 in cap space to sign Trouba long term. 

[Goalie]

52 minutes ago, iHeart said:

aren't they both in the middle of their contracts?

Always teams out there who would jump at a 2d. Yeah hes 3 here but... Thats cuz Buff Trouba are better. On many teams myers is a 2 RHD.. On some he might be a 1. 

He'd get a nice return. 1st rd pick. Prob 15 to 20 overall. Plus.. 

Ladd got 22 and dano (good prospect) at the time. 

Myers gets more. 

Perreault? Edmonton could use a vet for sure... Myers Perreault to Edmonton for pick 10 and ?? Id do RNH retained. Get him around 5 million. Edmonton retains a bit. 

Solid deal. Helps both clubs really. 

 

 

[Goalie]

Personally i like the Moose Polar Bear Jersey and would love to see something unique as our 3rd Jersey. 

[The Unknown Poster]

I love Perreault but if they have to make tough decisions, him and Myers, as @Goalie wrote, could provide a lot of options for the Jets.  Lots of talk Jets want Max Domi as well.  Perhaps they'd be interested in both...

[blue_gold_84]

https://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-success-to-help-push-salary-cap-to-78-82m-next-season-1.1097245

Quote

LAS VEGAS — The addition of the Vegas Golden Knights not only provided each of the NHL’s 30 clubs with a $16 million expansion fee cheque, but the revenue they have pumped into the league will help deliver the largest salary cap increase since 2014.

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said Monday the current projection for the 2018-19 salary cap upper limit remains between $78 and $82 million.

Even if the NHL and NHL Players’ Association decide not to enact an inflator, that means the salary cap will rise at least $3 million from this season’s $75 million.

Teams could find themselves with upwards of $7 million to play with this summer.

 

[The Unknown Poster]

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

https://www.tsn.ca/golden-knights-success-to-help-push-salary-cap-to-78-82m-next-season-1.1097245

 

Much needed by the Jets.  But it also leads to all the whining over escrow.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Don't like salaries going up.

[The Unknown Poster]

8 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Don't like salaries going up.

Think of it more as Cap Space going up.  Salaries are linked to revenue.  50-50 (if I recall correctly).  So the players can only ever get 50% of the revenue.  Thats why there is escrow and players get hot about it.  But at the end of the year, they give back their portion over 50% of revenue.  If the players actual salary goes up, it means revenue did too and that means the teams all made more money.  Win Win.

Its good for the Jets who are now a cap team and need the space.  $7 million could sign two good players.  Its a long term deal for Laine or Trouba+. 

[Floyd]

What a ridiculous business model...  raise the salary cap permanently because of a one-time payment from an expansion team

 

[The Unknown Poster]

2 minutes ago, Floyd said:

What a ridiculous business model...  raise the salary cap permanently because of a one-time payment from an expansion team

 

Yeah but it doesnt matter.  If revenue drops next year, the players get their salaries clawed back.  Its the PA that chooses to trigger the cap escalator every year because they know players get really steamed over the escrow and it riles them up to want to fight the cap.  If they took the actual revenue and escrow from last year into account, the cap would be static or shrink.  That doesnt serve the interests of the PA though.

[blue_gold_84]

4 minutes ago, Floyd said:

What a ridiculous business model...  raise the salary cap permanently because of a one-time payment from an expansion team

Maybe read the article. It wasn't just the franchise payment.

In other NHL news:

Classy!

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, blue_gold_84 said:

Maybe read the article. It wasn't just the franchise payment.

In other NHL news:

Classy!

Bettman and the NHL is SO out to lunch on this its disgusting.  When Bettman retires, despite everything he has done, he risks his endearing legacy being that he had his head up his ass on this topic.

[Atomic]

I don't understand the intended goal or endgame of all these concussion alarmists.  Let's say Bettman acknowledges there is or could be a link between concussions and CTE, etc.

Then what?

[The Unknown Poster]

18 minutes ago, Atomic said:

I don't understand the intended goal or endgame of all these concussion alarmists.  Let's say Bettman acknowledges there is or could be a link between concussions and CTE, etc.

Then what?

There is little doubt about the link between CTE and brain injury.  Or that repeated brain injuries are bad.  Essentially, the NHL is taking the position that CTE is like Aliens, no one really knows.  They are doing that because of a lawsuit.  So, I can understand their legal position to a degree but to completely abandon ones moral obligation is really striking, to me anyway.

When other spots acknowledge this and the research becomes more clear and more NHL players are diagnosed with CTE and many more experience brain damage, Bettman and the NHL look like fools. 

They even deny knowing what CTE is.  As if...

I disagree with a lawsuit that tries to hold the NHL accountable for knowledge no one possessed.  For example, how can you blame the NHL for your damage from a career in the 70's and 80's?  The NFL lawsuit, which the NFL settled, if I recall was about the fact the NFL DID have knowledge and hid it from the players. 

However, if you're a current NHL player and you suffer brain damage later, I'd whole heartedly support that lawsuit because today the NHL appears to be willfully ignorant.

If you get hit in the brain repeatedly, you can suffer brain damage.  This is pretty obviously reasonable.

Sports worry about parents pulling kids out of contact sport.  I dont think that will happen in large numbers.

So, what SHOULD happen?  Sports should be actively involved in research into prevention and understanding of brain injuries.  The NHL doesnt seem to take it seriously.  They should be developing new technology for helmets.  They should be banning all hits to the head and severely disciplining players that do that.  Those things have zero impact on the quality of the game BUT protect the player's health.  To not do that, they're basically saying they WANT hits to the head, they WANT brain injuries.  What could possibly be lost by embracing brain health? (the answer, they're worried about losing a massive lawsuit).

Ill draw a comparison with wrestling because I know a bit about it and also, wrestling is sort of a major player in this.  Chris Nowinski was a pro wrestler who retired after suffering several concussions.  He wrote a book that examined concussions in sports and co-founded the Concussion Legacy Foundation.

WWE was an enemy of Nowinki at first.  Hunter now sits on their board.  WWE embracing concussion and brain health led to a change in that business (primarily in how wrestlers train and how WWE reacts to head injuries).  Its still a contact enterprise.  People still get hurt.  But to pretend brain health is a myth would be idiotic.  It sets you up for a future legal loss plus, its just morally stinky.

The NHL should be out in front being a leader, not willfully ignoring this as a legal defense strategy.

[Atomic]

I can understand that.  But the NHL is also doing things in line with what you suggest.  Head hits are illegal.  They could be enforced more rigidly, but they are illegal and we do see suspensions handed out for them.

The NHL doesn't manufacture helmets but their partners like Bauer and CCM do, and are constantly innovating and trying to build a better helmet.

Mouthguards and visors are now common in the NHL but it's actually the NHLPA who fought to not have them be mandatory.  Visors are only mandatory for new players, mouthguards are still optional.

I can see why Bettman is denying... he serves the owners.  He's not going to say something that is going to cost the league hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars.  He is in a tough spot.

In my opinion, at some point we all have to say "There's a chance you can get horribly injured, and there's a chance your brain could be negatively affected in a way that you could ruin your quality of life down the line.  And it's up to you whether to accept that risk or not.  But the game's not going anywhere."

[The Unknown Poster]

12 minutes ago, Atomic said:

I can understand that.  But the NHL is also doing things in line with what you suggest.  Head hits are illegal.  They could be enforced more rigidly, but they are illegal and we do see suspensions handed out for them.

The NHL doesn't manufacture helmets but their partners like Bauer and CCM do, and are constantly innovating and trying to build a better helmet.

Mouthguards and visors are now common in the NHL but it's actually the NHLPA who fought to not have them be mandatory.  Visors are only mandatory for new players, mouthguards are still optional.

I can see why Bettman is denying... he serves the owners.  He's not going to say something that is going to cost the league hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars.  He is in a tough spot.

In my opinion, at some point we all have to say "There's a chance you can get horribly injured, and there's a chance your brain could be negatively affected in a way that you could ruin your quality of life down the line.  And it's up to you whether to accept that risk or not.  But the game's not going anywhere."

The thing is, Bettman might think he's saving a lawsuit but he really isnt.  Facts are facts and his statements wont make a difference.  It's PR.  and he looks awful on that end.

His statement could be as simple as "Our main goal is always the health and wellness of our players, both past, current and future and we take all scientific and medical research to heart.  We strive to make our sport safer every day."  Boom.  End of discussion.  Instead, he gets pissy about "creating a fresh news cycle" and then just does that with a statement that makes him look like an idiot.

The NHL will go along for the CTE ride, its their choice whether they are drivers or dragged behind the car.

Regarding your last point, I dont think a single person has said otherwise.  There are players that have retired young due to the risk associated with concussions or been forced to retire.  Everyone knows you accept fair risk.  The issue is 1) if the league has information that specific things are damaging and willfully chooses not to share it with their athletes 2) knowing there is risk and choosing not to be pro-active.

If a player from the 70's wants to be paid, I'd argue against it all day long.  The NHL had no knowledge nor was there common knowledge they ignored.  But today?  Big difference.  And as far as older players go, they SHOULD have resources available to them by the NHL and PA, if not legally, then morally.

Edited May 29, 2018 by The Unknown Poster

[Atomic]

36 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Regarding your last point, I dont think a single person has said otherwise.

Depends on your interpretation.  Because when people talk about taking head hits out of the game... there is only one way to do that.  And that is removing contact entirely.

Even an 82-game suspension isn't going to prevent head hits... it's still going to happen occasionally.

[The Unknown Poster]

7 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Depends on your interpretation.  Because when people talk about taking head hits out of the game... there is only one way to do that.  And that is removing contact entirely.

Even an 82-game suspension isn't going to prevent head hits... it's still going to happen occasionally.

Splitting hairs.  Invariably, it will happen over time.  But they could do more to all but eliminate them.  I think we can agree on that.  Might be harder in football.  But in hockey, if there was never a hit to the head ever again, it would have zero negative impact on the game.

I'd ban fighting too.  I just dont think you can claim to take brain health seriously (which the NHL doesnt seem to claim anyway) and allow fighting.  I say that knowing that MMA generally has less concussions than other sports too and I have no issue with MMA.

[Floyd]

MMA has less concussions than other sports...??  Maybe less diagnosed concussions

everytime someone is dazed or knocked unconscious this classified as a conscussion..,

[The Unknown Poster]

8 minutes ago, Floyd said:

MMA has less concussions than other sports...??  Maybe less diagnosed concussions

everytime someone is dazed or knocked unconscious this classified as a conscussion..,

Poor choice of words.  less serious injuries.  I read an article about it but cant remember the details.  But fighters get more recovery time as well.  I think it fared better than boxing.

[Floyd]

4 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Maybe read the article. It wasn't just the franchise payment.

Did you read the article?

they talk about gate revenue but Vegas tix range from $25-125 With some premium at $200 per

if it goes up $7 million that’s just because of the expansion fee...

[blue_gold_84]

2 hours ago, Floyd said:

if it goes up $7 million that’s just because of the expansion fee...

Wrong. Read the article.

Quote

The addition of the Vegas Golden Knights not only provided each of the NHL’s 30 clubs with a $16 million expansion fee cheque, but the revenue they have pumped into the league will help deliver the largest salary cap increase since 2014...

Quote

League-wide revenue is approaching $5 billion per season. The success of not just the Vegas franchise, but also a 31st team in general, has helped.

“There’s a lot of revenue certainly generated by the Las Vegas franchise,” Daly said. “Certainly on their jersey sales and licensed merchandise, it’s off the charts. It continues to be off the charts. It’s an amazing story in every category.”

The Golden Knights literally cannot print merchandise fast enough, with suppliers working around the clock to produce more and more as lines at their retail store here snake into the desert sun outside.

Daly said the Golden Knights rank inside the Top 10 in the NHL in terms of per-game game revenue. In a gate revenue-driven league, that is an enormous boon.

Vegas packed 739,740 fans into T-Mobile Arena to see the NHL’s most unique game presentation over 41 regular season home dates. That is an average of 18,042 per game, or 103.9 per cent of the 17,500 listed capacity...

The $500M franchise fee is obviously important but the success of the Golden Knights on the ice has played a major role in the potential increase to the salary cap.