Blockbuster: Hamilton Ferland Fox for Hanifin Lindholm

[sak22]

8 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

I really hate this college rule where after 4 years, prospects can go UFA.  The NHL should force them to re-enter the NHL entry draft instead. 

 

Or, if a team submits a qualifying offer (aka the Rookie maximum), then the team automatically retains the player's rights until they are 27.

 

Next CBA I guess.

I think compensation picks are all that are needed.  Keep in mind there’s no rules for junior players to sign either.  I think in more cases it’s the player that suffers more than anything, which players who waited out for free agency have really turned into great NHL players?  Some decent ones, but for someone like Fox will his game benefit from another year in college?  Plus it’s a year lost of pro hockey and getting paid.  His loss imo.

[travel_dude]

44 minutes ago, sak22 said:

I think compensation picks are all that are needed.  Keep in mind there’s no rules for junior players to sign either.  I think in more cases it’s the player that suffers more than anything, which players who waited out for free agency have really turned into great NHL players?  Some decent ones, but for someone like Fox will his game benefit from another year in college?  Plus it’s a year lost of pro hockey and getting paid.  His loss imo.

 

That only applies to 1st rounders IIRC.

CAR gets nothing for Fox.

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, sak22 said:

I think compensation picks are all that are needed.  Keep in mind there’s no rules for junior players to sign either.  I think in more cases it’s the player that suffers more than anything, which players who waited out for free agency have really turned into great NHL players?  Some decent ones, but for someone like Fox will his game benefit from another year in college?  Plus it’s a year lost of pro hockey and getting paid.  His loss imo.

 

I'm pretty sure unsigned Junior players go back into the entry draft.  Right?

[cross16]

14 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

I'm pretty sure unsigned Junior players go back into the entry draft.  Right?

 

Not necessarily. Drafted players rights are held for 2 years but if they turn 21 the year of the draft they are no longer eligible and would be free agents. 

 

The rules are actually fairly similar for both avenues as in both cases you typically are going to be waiting 4 years until you are granted UFA status but it is the same for both sides, if you want to wait out a team for 4 years you'll get your UFA status. Key difference would be in the NCAA route you do while getting an education so I can see the incentive whereas the junior route you don't have that incentive and would need to find a place to play for a year or 2 once your 20. 

 

I don't think this is an NHL problem personally. I would do nothing about it. 

[Carty]

2 hours ago, MAC331 said:

So you are saying there may still be a chance. LOL

 

Doubt it...   He can just go and Fox himself...

[CheersMan]

2 hours ago, The_People1 said:

I really hate this college rule where after 4 years, prospects can go UFA.  The NHL should force them to re-enter the NHL entry draft instead. 

 

Or, if a team submits a qualifying offer (aka the Rookie maximum), then the team automatically retains the player's rights until they are 27.

 

Next CBA I guess.

A team should own the rights to their prospect until such time it is traded away....period.

A prospect being allowed to go UFA is ridiculous. And no re-entering the draft.

[sak22]

2 hours ago, CheersMan said:

A team should own the rights to their prospect until such time it is traded away....period.

A prospect being allowed to go UFA is ridiculous. And no re-entering the draft.

If that is a case, should it be mandatory for the team to sign a player?  Most of our drafted players who went unsigned were based off the teams decision.  Also why are players that are good enough to be drafted at 18 supposed to be prisoners to their team, but those not good enough at 18 free to choose when they do become a hot commodity.  Seems unfair to me, but again recent history hasn’t shown too great for the guys who do wait it out.

[Thebrewcrew]

As someone who’d have given an arm and a leg to have the talent an opportunity to be an NHLer and would have gladly played for anyone I have a hard time respecting the decision of college kids to hit UFA rather than sign with the team that drafted them and poured thousands into developing them. I understand it is their right though

 

I mean I hate to say it but at 18 I’d have gladly played for the Oilers even if I happened to be a college player. I guess i

just like  to see some loyalty, they drafted you, they believed in you, now go prove them right 

[conundrumed]

40 minutes ago, Thebrewcrew said:

As someone who’d have given an arm and a leg to have the talent an opportunity to be an NHLer and would have gladly played for anyone I have a hard time respecting the decision of college kids to hit UFA rather than sign with the team that drafted them and poured thousands into developing them. I understand it is their right though

 

I mean I hate to say it but at 18 I’d have gladly played for the Oilers even if I happened to be a college player. I guess i

just like  to see some loyalty, they drafted you, they believed in you, now go prove them right 

Also, if this applied to jr draftees, you end up with 100 Lindros situations. How would there be any parity in the league when players can simply opt out of the team that drafted them because it's not a very good team or close enough to home?

For the college guys that do this, I feel like it's deceitful. Just tell them at the pre-draft interview you'd prefer not to play there. Save everyone's time and trouble.

But they aren't doing that, they aren't being forthcoming. That's the part that bothers me and why I'll always hope that they fail.

 

[Horsman1]

1 hour ago, Thebrewcrew said:

As someone who’d have given an arm and a leg to have the talent an opportunity to be an NHLer and would have gladly played for anyone I have a hard time respecting the decision of college kids to hit UFA rather than sign with the team that drafted them and poured thousands into developing them. I understand it is their right though

 

I mean I hate to say it but at 18 I’d have gladly played for the Oilers even if I happened to be a college player. I guess i

just like  to see some loyalty, they drafted you, they believed in you, now go prove them right 

they drafted you because you were their best guess at the time.. You owe them no loyalty as they were hoping to use your raw talents to make money for themselves

 

[conundrumed]

16 minutes ago, Horsman1 said:

they drafted you because you were their best guess at the time.. You owe them no loyalty as they were hoping to use your raw talents to make money for themselves

 

You mean like in business, where they invest and hope it pays off?

So why would a business invest time and money into a product that has zero loyalty?

You're losing me here. The 70's are long gone.

[JTech780]

2 hours ago, Thebrewcrew said:

As someone who’d have given an arm and a leg to have the talent an opportunity to be an NHLer and would have gladly played for anyone I have a hard time respecting the decision of college kids to hit UFA rather than sign with the team that drafted them and poured thousands into developing them. I understand it is their right though

 

I mean I hate to say it but at 18 I’d have gladly played for the Oilers even if I happened to be a college player. I guess i

just like  to see some loyalty, they drafted you, they believed in you, now go prove them right 

 

Actually teams can't spend money on college players as that goes against NCAA rules. College players aren't allowed to receive any gifts of money. College players even have to pay their own way to come to development camps.

 

These players should be able to do what is best for their careers, just like NHL teams do what is best for their teams and decide to not sign players after drafting them.

 

I think the whole thing is blown out of proportion.

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, JTech780 said:

 

Actually teams can't spend money on college players as that goes against NCAA rules. College players aren't allowed to receive any gifts of money. College players even have to pay their own way to come to development camps.

 

These players should be able to do what is best for their careers, just like NHL teams do what is best for their teams and decide to not sign players after drafting them.

 

I think the whole thing is blown out of proportion.

 

Regardless, I don;t think he's actually declined to sign as of yet.

This year may not make sense because Carolina is deep.

 

[Cowtownguy]

I don't understand why anyone would delay their NHL career for an undergraduate degree. Make the cash by playing well, and get the degree later. Older students generally outperform younger students anyways. I would be interested in hearing what people think about this. Why would a player do this?

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I don't understand why anyone would delay their NHL career for an undergraduate degree. Make the cash by playing well, and get the degree later. Older students generally outperform younger students anyways. I would be interested in hearing what people think about this. Why would a player do this?

 

Because college girls.

[conundrumed]

39 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

Because college girls.

Mmmm, almost. Impressing college girls with a scholarship. Free $$$xpensive education, I'm playing competitive hockey, and beautiful, smart girls.

I'm 17-18, that's more than a little enticing.

 

Just something to think about with jr players. You have the same girlfriend in your jr town for 2-3 years. You get traded 7 hrs away.

Hard roads for kids.

[stubblejumper1]

4 hours ago, Cowtownguy said:

I don't understand why anyone would delay their NHL career for an undergraduate degree. Make the cash by playing well, and get the degree later. Older students generally outperform younger students anyways. I would be interested in hearing what people think about this. Why would a player do this?

 

I can understand staying in college over going to the minors.  Playing hockey while going to college would probably be a lot of fun.  King of the campus situation.  

 

Guys in the AHL don't make a pile of money and wouldn't ever be able to save up enough money to pay for an ivy league education (for example).   The bus travel probably sucks.  Most of the teams aren't located in tourist hot spots.  

 

I would be surprised if many players would choose college over a guaranteed NHL spot, but what team has ever offered that?  Entry level contracts are all two way.  

 

 

[Horsman1]

17 hours ago, conundrumed said:

You mean like in business, where they invest and hope it pays off?

So why would a business invest time and money into a product that has zero loyalty?

You're losing me here. The 70's are long gone.

damn

 

[Cowtownguy]

20 hours ago, conundrumed said:

You mean like in business, where they invest and hope it pays off?

So why would a business invest time and money into a product that has zero loyalty?

You're losing me here. The 70's are long gone.

But don't businesses require legal contracts to ensure that all parties abide by their agreement? Legal contracts demonstrate that both parties are wary of the other breaking the agreement somehow. So, cannot we assume that they have no loyalty? They have the law behind them; which is why we have civil and regulatory laws in the first place.

 

The days of firm handshakes to conclude deals is over. Like, the 1700s are over dude. 

 

 

[conundrumed]

6 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

But don't businesses require legal contracts to ensure that all parties abide by their agreement? Legal contracts demonstrate that both parties are wary of the other breaking the agreement somehow. So, cannot we assume that they have no loyalty? They have the law behind them; which is why we have civil and regulatory laws in the first place.

 

The days of firm handshakes to conclude deals is over. Like, the 1700s are over dude. 

 

 

Yes...but...does tracking, scouting and regimenting the athlete still not take resources? The player can still come to camps, and although they have to pay their own way, they can access some of the top coaching, trainers and players on earth.

So while I know nothing in terms of cash or gifts can trade hands, resources are still used to track the player. So there is still investment.

[stubblejumper1]

On 2019-03-27 at 7:06 PM, conundrumed said:

You mean like in business, where they invest and hope it pays off?

So why would a business invest time and money into a product that has zero loyalty?

You're losing me here. The 70's are long gone.

 

Looking at it from the other side, without a contract any investment the team makes is more like a donation.  As in business, if someone makes you an offer you don't like, you aren't obligated to accept it.  

 

Further, NHL teams aren't known for their loyalty.  Players are traded all the time, teams make lowball offers to RFAs all the time, contracts are bought out all the time, guys are burried in the minors, etc.  

 

[conundrumed]

3 minutes ago, stubblejumper1 said:

 

Looking at it from the other side, without a contract any investment the team makes is more like a donation.  As in business, if someone makes you an offer you don't like, you aren't obligated to accept it.  

 

Further, NHL teams aren't known for their loyalty.  Players are traded all the time, teams make lowball offers to RFAs all the time, contracts are bought out all the time, guys are burried in the minors, etc.  

 

What about my other point?

If you are targeting a handful of teams at draft, as a player, why not be forthcoming?

A team wastes a pick on you, so you can tuck it away as a, "last resort".

As I said earlier, the appearance is deceit.

[CheersMan]

31 minutes ago, conundrumed said:

What about my other point?

If you are targeting a handful of teams at draft, as a player, why not be forthcoming?

A team wastes a pick on you, so you can tuck it away as a, "last resort".

As I said earlier, the appearance is deceit.

These punk kids are sneaking in the back door, the door of their choosing and the NHL is allowing it.  Plus, teams are paying more for the brats than the honest kids coming in the front door. Meanwhile, the teams playing by the rules are being screwed out of player. The NHL owes these kids nothing other than an opportunity. You want an opportunity, come in the front door, not the back door.

[CheersMan]

On ‎2019‎-‎03‎-‎27 at 3:11 PM, sak22 said:

If that is a case, should it be mandatory for the team to sign a player?  Most of our drafted players who went unsigned were based off the teams decision.  Also why are players that are good enough to be drafted at 18 supposed to be prisoners to their team, but those not good enough at 18 free to choose when they do become a hot commodity.  Seems unfair to me, but again recent history hasn’t shown too great for the guys who do wait it out.

Sure, sign them all to a $1. When you make the team you get a raise.

[stubblejumper1]

What about my other point?

If you are targeting a handful of teams at draft, as a player, why not be forthcoming?

A team wastes a pick on you, so you can tuck it away as a, "last resort".

As I said earlier, the appearance is deceit

 

I see your point, but what's to say the team would listen?  It's an extreme example, but Quebec still drafted Lindros.  

 

Sports and the military are the only careers where your employer owns you.  Opting out of that system doesn't bother me.