cross16

It's really hard to pick a favorite right now because i'm not sure i'm seeing one team stand out. Everyone has their ups and downs so far in the playoffs and no one has been consistent. NHL wanted parity and they sure have it. For me I can't call Edmonton a favorite because of their goaltending. Skinner has been downright bad in these playoffs and I don't think you can win a cup with bad goaltending. Doesn't help that i don't think McDavid is 100% either. I think Vegas takes them out.

Maloney mentions a timeline here

outlines the rules. but the two situations are different. In the NCAA the 4 year rules exists to allow a player to pursue education. In terms of the KHL there is no transfer agreement to agree to an established set of rules and in addition to that there is also a written understanding that the leagues honor each others contracts. So if a Russian player continues to sign KHL contracts there is a possibility and nhl team could never get the chance to sign him. that’s why the rights are held indefinitely. That’s isn’t the case for NCAA where a drafted team will always get an exclusive negotiating window. You may not with a KHL player.

honestly I don’t think it is. Treliving is under contract to the organization until that time and he is the one who chose to leave under those circumstances. I’d view it the same as a non disclosure agreement he also said that at this point Bettman and the NHL have not given Bowman and Quinville permission to speak to teams. Puts cold water in the flames interwar in Bowman

Ya I’m not a conspiracy guy on this stuff.

Really sucks Chicago won. That franchise does not deserve this.

Yup +1. One of the more silly debates that still seems to need to be a thing.

I think if Michkov falls at all it wont' be skill it will be contract. He's under contract with SKA until 2026. So your taking someone in the top 10, maybe top 5, who you likely won't see for at least 3 years AND then you have to be very confident you can get him to pass on KHL money to come to North America and make 3 mill a year. That's going to be your debate when it comes to Michkov IMO. I don't know enough to have an opinion but any NHL team with interest has to have confidence with his contract situation.

They can spin it this way but I don't think anyone in the know believes that is what happened. Even at the press conference there were times both Bean and Maloney would slip up a bit and speak as if Treliving made this call on his own. I don't believe there was anything mutual about this split. I also don't' think the order mattered (BT vs Sutter). I think BT is gone for more reasons than just Sutter. The gap in between the two is because hockey ops has to build an air tight case to take to ownership to get the approval to let him go.

Anyone with an NHL contract has to be on an ELC yes. Possible it's less than 3 years but that would depend on how old they are when they sign the contract. I'd argue if you are giving someone 23-24 a 2 year ELC they likely don't have much NHL potential. You are likely referring to AHL deals or try outs. Something that players with NHL potential don't usually sign. Players would hate it actually, it will cost them money. Under age 26 a buyout is only 1/3 of the contract. So the players misses out on 2/3 of the money they are owed with no guarantees they can make it back (especially if it's not working)

Not really possible. contract limit is 50 and your NHL team will take up almost half of that. Also included are any players that sign but get assigned to CHL. Plus there is the added risk of almost all entry level contracts are 3 years. So at some point your going to walk yourself your into a corner with the contract limit. I think the smarter approach is branching into all Leagues and the international system. Letting prospects develop overseas and bring them over when they are a little older.

horrible option on multiple fronts. I’d be thoroughly disappointed if they went that way. ethics aside the guy wasn’t a good GM. Include the Beach situation? absolutely should be a non starter.

this is my recollection as well.

I think Beck is worth a contract. Can see a path where they pass but it be a bit disappointing if they do. I would be surprised if Huckins is signed though. Cole Jordan and Cam Whynot are also in that bunch too.

Flames might need lottery luck to land one of these guys, but latest top of the draft from McKenzie https://www.tsn.ca/plenty-of-intrigue-after-bedard-in-mckenzie-s-lottery-edition-ranking-1.1956585 1. Bedard (C) 2. Fantilli (C) 3. Smith (C) 4. Carlsson (C) 5. Michkov (RW) 6. Dvorsky (C) 7. Leonard (RW) 8. Benson (LW) 9. Perreault (LW) 10. Reinbacher (D) 11. Barlow (LW) 12. Wood (RW)

Something I find interesting and perhaps worth mentioning, Craig Conroy is on the management team for Team USA.

I think it's fair to have differing opinions for sure but I don't think all narratives are fair. I'm actually not upset about any of this. I just think this narrative that Sutter took the fall for lazy players and that they should have just sucked it up isn't fair. Just as I would say that the narrative that Sutter is the reason the flames had a bad year also isn't fair. At the end of the day I think this is as simple as the coach was just not the right fit for these players and the organization moving forward. I don't see the need or value in pointing fingers or creating narratives past that personally. And all just add that i'm not sure anyone sees this as a cure all. Plenty of things the Flames need to be concerned with in order to get better next year.

Going to play at the Worlds for Team USA

I don't think the sentiment that the players quit on the coach or didn't accept his challenge is fair at all. I think there were a number of things that went wrong last year but I think one thing you could count on with the group was they were going to work and work hard. A lot of teams in their situation would have folded down the stretch but they didn't, they kept battling. They'd get down in games and come back, even late in the year. Even players having crap years, like Huberdeau, I don't think were ever giving up or short changing the team/coach in terms of their effort. Obviously you have the Kadri thing but that's isolated, the rest of the team was pushing IMO. I think it's completely unfair to paint this as a team that was afraid of hard coach or woudln't accept hard feedback, because they sure didn't play like one. I think this is as simple as many of the players just felt that in order for them to succeed they needed a new boss and were prepared to leave to find that. Which is what I bet that 90% of the average person would do to. And just to be clear I'm not suggesting that means this team is fine. I don't think this team is talented enough to compete as a contender, i'm just saying that iMO this was a hard working team last year.

I’m not a fan of ownership here but I have zero concerns about their involvement at that level. No reason to believe that is the case.

I personally don’t think it would have changed anything. I think Sutter was a small part of Tkachuk decision but not enough that it would have swayed him.

I actually like Boudreau a fair bit as a coach but don't think he should be considered by the Flames. I just think too highly of Mitch Love. I can get behind giving Andrew Brunette a look as I thought he did a nice job in Florida but I think the Flames are sitting on someone who could be pretty special in Love. Not saying it's for sure going to work but you have to give it a try IMO. Don't go after a coach like Boudreau and cost yourselves that chance.

Think it's worth pointing out, this just isn't a player - coach thing. From all reports, and everything I've heard, Sutter alienated people up and down the organization. Management, trainers, coaches AND players all had not very good things to say about the atmosphere around the team last year. This wasn't just simply the players not liking their coach so the organization made a move. it went deeper than that.

we are saying the same thing All I'm saying is that all of this should be done by the time the draft starts. GM's impact on a draft is more around trades/moving around to get the players they want and less impacting who is actually picked because their influence/opinion is already worked into the draft.

to be fair, Torts is a rare breed