2022 Offseason

[jjgallow]

6 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

The question has to be asked .  Is Jake Virtanen somebody you'd take a look at?

He was found not guilty.. but the stigma is likely still there ..

But he's a talented kid.. wouid likely fit well into a Sutter system.. and you'd probabaly get him even on a PTO 

 

Easy answer, I think Edmonton should absolutely look at this signing.

 

 

lol but seriously, he's not good enough.  He was, but this all happened in key development years and his play just dropped right off the map.  Not NHL material at this point.

 

The more philosophical question you ask, well, that's a harder one.   We shouldn't pretend that we are above it, we have taken far greater risks with Doug G.   But different talent level.

 

Unfortunately it becomes very very very tricky.   These kids should be trained on this early.  Not saying they aren't already, but still.

 

I personally think he did do it.     But I literally have no idea and therein lies the problem.   I mean she came into the hotel room with him, it is hardly a clear case either way.   Do some guys get framed / blackmailed by opportunists?

 

100% yes.

 

I don't have an easy answer to this but imho I do feel the accusations were credible, he did do it, and also is no longer good enough for the NHL.    But scenarios can arise where there really is just no way of knowing, and this becomes very difficult.

 

I think kids should be told to avoid these scenarios at All costs especially if they intend to be in the spotlight.    And you know, it's also illegal to have a camera on you but some of these cases make a pretty good arguement for having one as insurance if you really are going to have a fling.

[phoenix66]

54 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Who fired their agent?  Klingberg?

yep.

[travel_dude]

The thing about this time of year is that we only hear reported signings and trades when they actually happen.  So called insiders have all gone on vacation.  Nothing on any of the remaining names out there or the teams that are well over the cap.  I get that they need not solved anything in July, but the summer ends pretty quick. 

 

We do know that BT tends to make his biggest moves in the summer, though.  That's the only real scary part.  There isn't a good reason to trade a top 4 D or a top 6 F, but we also never saw the Dougie trade coming.    

[phoenix66]

2 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

The thing about this time of year is that we only hear reported signings and trades when they actually happen.  So called insiders have all gone on vacation.  Nothing on any of the remaining names out there or the teams that are well over the cap.  I get that they need not solved anything in July, but the summer ends pretty quick. 

 

We do know that BT tends to make his biggest moves in the summer, though.  That's the only real scary part.  There isn't a good reason to trade a top 4 D or a top 6 F, but we also never saw the Dougie trade coming.    

id say right now 2 more numbers need to drop..mange and kyllington .. then all the unknowns are gone 

[travel_dude]

14 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

The more philosophical question you ask, well, that's a harder one.   We shouldn't pretend that we are above it, we have taken far greater risks with Doug G.   But different talent level.

 

 

Long long time ago in a galaxy far away.  I tend to think that we look at the locker room as a place where we can't afford to let in any bad apples or country club part time members.  I don't know how serious (if at all) we were about signing Kane.  Would he have helped us score more goals?  Probably.  Would he have PO's some players?  Possibly.  Do we need that kind of distraction?  Probably not.  He kept his nose clean long enough to get a new deal.  If he wasn't scoring a bunch of tap in goals, would he have gotten along or would he be like Puljujarvi?

 

DeAngelo was backed up by Torts, so there is sometimes things that happen with players that may be unfounded.  Or they have proven they are no longer the Richard people saw before.

[travel_dude]

4 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

id say right now 2 more numbers need to drop..mange and kyllington .. then all the unknowns are gone 

 

Unknowns for total salary, yes.  Final roster, obviously not.

[phoenix66]

12 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Unknowns for total salary, yes.  Final roster, obviously not.

thats what i mean ..once we know numbers a lot more options open up 

[tmac70]

3 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

Lot's of criminals are found not guilty.

The disturbing thing is there was enough grounds to charge him.

Innocent and not guilty don't mean the same thing.

 

Anyway, beyond the obvious, he isn't exactly a player that showed he was a awesome player.

 

So than your saying because they wished to invesitgagte it further and found no grounds that he is still guilty. You do  I can be charged at any time or sue anyone if I think have done me harm. In cases such as this there is more backlash by not allowing it to proceed forward than there is to.   Its a tough situation for both sides as this has been damaging to both parties, especially Virtanan. We don't know what went on behind close doors but if the courts have done the research and the jury found insufficent evidance to charge him , it doesn't matter, public opinion is he is always guity.  So in reality there truely isn't second chances or forgiveness in the world. If someone says you did your tarnished for life. 

[tmac70]

4 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Absolutely not. Should not even be discussed by the organization IMO. 

Why? Its ok for McTavish to still be in the NHL for DUI  hit and run murder but not ok for this, Wheres the standard? 

[sak22]

45 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Why? Its ok for McTavish to still be in the NHL for DUI  hit and run murder but not ok for this, Wheres the standard? 

Different era for sure, drunk driving alone isn't viewed the same today as it was in the '80's.  People didn't care about it back then, people do now.  But the track record the guy had beforehand wasn't the best, unproductive, lazy, out of shape, bad teammate, this guy had a really good draft year that made him a top 10 pick 9 years ago and has shown nothing since.  His NHL production is almost on par with Lance Bouma, but the bigger question I always have is why people think every top 10 pick that had failed elsewhere is going to flourish here, why don't we talk  Griffin Reinhart out of retirement while we're at it.  Virtanen is almost 26 and sucks, should be end of discussion.  

[travel_dude]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

So than your saying because they wished to invesitgagte it further and found no grounds that he is still guilty. You do  I can be charged at any time or sue anyone if I think have done me harm. In cases such as this there is more backlash by not allowing it to proceed forward than there is to.   Its a tough situation for both sides as this has been damaging to both parties, especially Virtanan. We don't know what went on behind close doors but if the courts have done the research and the jury found insufficent evidance to charge him , it doesn't matter, public opinion is he is always guity.  So in reality there truely isn't second chances or forgiveness in the world. If someone says you did your tarnished for life. 

 

I do very much hate the assumption that a person is guilty until proven so.  What I was saying is that he was charged and went to court.  It wasn't dismissed by the crown.  The legal standard for conviction is no reasonable doubt.  The judge clearly laid that out in his instructions.  In a he said, she said situation, there is no proof unless there is a witness.  I for one would not want to make a decision deciding someones future or a victim's fate.  

 

From what I read, the defense suggested that she was not being truthful because he said there were gaps in her story.  He also implied that since she didn't go to the police right away, that it was consented.  

 

I encourage you to read the facts of the case, from both sides.  There is a presentation of her testimony and his side of it in news articles.  I'm not saying he is guilty, but the outcome doesn't prove anything other than reasonable doubt.  

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, tmac70 said:

Why? Its ok for McTavish to still be in the NHL for DUI  hit and run murder but not ok for this, Wheres the standard? 

 

Where did I say it was ok?

 

And just so we're clear on something even if there wasn't this incident out there I would give you the same answer. Jake Virtanen is not very good at hockey and the Flames should not sign him. 

The only thing that changes for me here is if they disagreed with me and chose to sign I would be very disappointed in them as an organization. Whereas before I would just stay "well that's a dumb signing" and move on. 

[tmac70]

2 hours ago, travel_dude said:

 

I do very much hate the assumption that a person is guilty until proven so.  What I was saying is that he was charged and went to court.  It wasn't dismissed by the crown.  The legal standard for conviction is no reasonable doubt.  The judge clearly laid that out in his instructions.  In a he said, she said situation, there is no proof unless there is a witness.  I for one would not want to make a decision deciding someones future or a victim's fate.  

 

From what I read, the defense suggested that she was not being truthful because he said there were gaps in her story.  He also implied that since she didn't go to the police right away, that it was consented.  

 

I encourage you to read the facts of the case, from both sides.  There is a presentation of her testimony and his side of it in news articles.  I'm not saying he is guilty, but the outcome doesn't prove anything other than reasonable doubt.  

 

Ok resonable doudt works both ways. For the record this crap sickens me but there has to responsibilty on both sides. I am not advocating for him or her but I would say there is reason to believe they intially had the same idea.  These cases procced forward regardless.. Could you imagine the public back lash if she went to the RCMP and they said Meh we don't believe you. Your in a no win situation from the courts and the law, it has to be brought forth unless there is witnesses to prove other wise. For the record I have no desire for the player. The experiance was obviously troubling enough for her to come forward. Nobody ever wins in these, regardless of the outcome. 

[tmac70]

3 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Where did I say it was ok?

 

And just so we're clear on something even if there wasn't this incident out there I would give you the same answer. Jake Virtanen is not very good at hockey and the Flames should not sign him. 

The only thing that changes for me here is if they disagreed with me and chose to sign I would be very disappointed in them as an organization. Whereas before I would just stay "well that's a dumb signing" and move on. 

My apoligies, I took your referance in line with the rest of the post as a judgement of the law suit not the player himself. I agree with no interest in the player. 

[travel_dude]

41 minutes ago, tmac70 said:

Ok resonable doudt works both ways. For the record this crap sickens me but there has to responsibilty on both sides. I am not advocating for him or her but I would say there is reason to believe they intially had the same idea.  These cases procced forward regardless.. Could you imagine the public back lash if she went to the RCMP and they said Meh we don't believe you. Your in a no win situation from the courts and the law, it has to be brought forth unless there is witnesses to prove other wise. For the record I have no desire for the player. The experiance was obviously troubling enough for her to come forward. Nobody ever wins in these, regardless of the outcome. 

 

Reasonable doubt benefits the accused more than the victim.  Lots of criminals walking the streets due to a tecnicality or because the jury was inclined to believe one side over another.  Poor example but was OJ guilty or innocent?  Anyway, I won't harp on the player's character.  He's not enough of a player to be worth signing.  Would make just as much sense to have Janko.  

 

The thing about this that is a PR nightmanre is that Hockey Canada and Sport Canada are in the middle of justifying why they felt they did the right thing.  Vancouver terminated his contract over the alleged incident.  Us signing him would have major major repercussions.  

[MP5029]

14 hours ago, jjgallow said:

 

Easy answer, I think Edmonton should absolutely look at this signing.

 

 

lol but seriously, he's not good enough.  He was, but this all happened in key development years and his play just dropped right off the map.  Not NHL material at this point.

 

The more philosophical question you ask, well, that's a harder one.   We shouldn't pretend that we are above it, we have taken far greater risks with Doug G.   But different talent level.

 

Unfortunately it becomes very very very tricky.   These kids should be trained on this early.  Not saying they aren't already, but still.

 

I personally think he did do it.     But I literally have no idea and therein lies the problem.   I mean she came into the hotel room with him, it is hardly a clear case either way.   Do some guys get framed / blackmailed by opportunists?

 

100% yes.

 

I don't have an easy answer to this but imho I do feel the accusations were credible, he did do it, and also is no longer good enough for the NHL.    But scenarios can arise where there really is just no way of knowing, and this becomes very difficult.

 

I think kids should be told to avoid these scenarios at All costs especially if they intend to be in the spotlight.    And you know, it's also illegal to have a camera on you but some of these cases make a pretty good arguement for having one as insurance if you really are going to have a fling.

Actually it’s not illegal…Well In Canada it’s not illegal to have a camera on you.

 

it’s illegal to share, sell, or distribute in any way with the other persons consent.

 

 

[conundrumed]

All of the things coming to light now are about the toxic culture of junior players. By most accounts that I've read, Virtanen is right up there with Scottie Upshall and Shane O'Brien for scumbaginess.

So let's keep him the hell out of our offseason thread.

I get that everyone deserves a 2nd chance, but if you've ever tried to watch Upshall & O'Brien's total cringe vblog, you can sense the completely toxic jock idiocy.

They still talk about notches, hits, whatever the pos's call it, like women are pieces of meat.

Go watch some of their first episodes if you enjoy being disgusted. You'll see Bizdisaster, who has only progressed by not being like them (anymore).

There are a lot of internet accountings of Virtanen being in that mold. Too many to all be lies.

Now I can defend all of these guys with one thing. This is learned behaviour. Dan Carcillo's hazing happened right here in Sarnia. 19-20yr olds are teaching impressionable 15-16yos to act this way. I have a handful of ex-jr friends. I've heard some completely ridiculous hazing stories.

Anyway, I have a lot to say, but not in this thread. There's a ton of blame to go around, and not just the kids.

 

[robrob74]

18 hours ago, tmac70 said:

So than your saying because they wished to invesitgagte it further and found no grounds that he is still guilty. You do  I can be charged at any time or sue anyone if I think have done me harm. In cases such as this there is more backlash by not allowing it to proceed forward than there is to.   Its a tough situation for both sides as this has been damaging to both parties, especially Virtanan. We don't know what went on behind close doors but if the courts have done the research and the jury found insufficent evidance to charge him , it doesn't matter, public opinion is he is always guity.  So in reality there truely isn't second chances or forgiveness in the world. If someone says you did your tarnished for life. 

 

the problem with that case, I read one article on the reason for the outcome, is it pins Virtanen's testimony against hers. Their stories didn't line up Together. The judge told the jury beforehand that they could only give Virtanen a guilty verdict if there was no reasonable doubt. So even if the jury thought Virtanen was guilty they couldn't give that verdict if there was an ounce of reasonable doubt.
 

So whose testimony do you believe when there are only two witnesses? The defendant or the plaintiff? 
 

there's probably a bit of wrongdoing in it. the incident happened when he was an 18 year old hockey god. Not saying he did it, but he's been one of those players that are entitled to get what they want. 
 

I have no clue what happened, but women tend to get the raw end of the deal in these situations. 

 

[robrob74]

14 hours ago, tmac70 said:

Ok resonable doudt works both ways. For the record this crap sickens me but there has to responsibilty on both sides. I am not advocating for him or her but I would say there is reason to believe they intially had the same idea.  These cases procced forward regardless.. Could you imagine the public back lash if she went to the RCMP and they said Meh we don't believe you. Your in a no win situation from the courts and the law, it has to be brought forth unless there is witnesses to prove other wise. For the record I have no desire for the player. The experiance was obviously troubling enough for her to come forward. Nobody ever wins in these, regardless of the outcome. 

 

ok, 

 

this is a hypothetical situation.

 

girl thinks it's fun to go to hotel room, might be "into it" but then something happens that makes her not want it anymore. He continues to push for it. She's still at fault?

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, robrob74 said:

 

ok, 

 

this is a hypothetical situation.

 

girl thinks it's fun to go to hotel room, might be "into it" but then something happens that makes her not want it anymore. He continues to push for it. She's still at fault?

 

You make some points that a few of us have brought up and added some others.  Don't take this the wrong way, but spending time talking about a player the NHL teams will not even look at seems pointless.  It's a PR nightmare waiting to happen.  There is so much negative stuff about young players and treatment of women, whether it's factual or implied.  No team is going to bring in that toxic history willingly.  Not even in the same realm as Kane.  At least Kane has hockey play to go with his numerous instances of poor judgement and questionable morals.  And I would have a big problem with Kane on our team.    

[cross16]

Wow. Swing and a miss for Klingberg in FA.

 

This also puts Anaheim over the cap floor so I'd be very surprised to see Lucic moved at this point. That was one of the last places I could see him going. 

 

 

 

[travel_dude]

5 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Wow. Swing and a miss for Klingberg in FA.

 

This also puts Anaheim over the cap floor so I'd be very surprised to see Lucic moved at this point. That was one of the last places I could see him going. 

 

 

 

 

If you can figure out what ANA is doing, please let me know.  I still think that Lucic takes the onus off their star players having to fight.  

[robrob74]

9 minutes ago, cross16 said:

Wow. Swing and a miss for Klingberg in FA.

 

This also puts Anaheim over the cap floor so I'd be very surprised to see Lucic moved at this point. That was one of the last places I could see him going. 

 

 

 

i heard on the radio when news about firing the agent that he was expecting $8M per

[cross16]

24 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

If you can figure out what ANA is doing, please let me know.  I still think that Lucic takes the onus off their star players having to fight.  

 

I think this is a great move for Anaheim. Get's them above the cap floor, let's them protect Dyrsdale and they can flip Klingberg for assets at the deadline. 

[sak22]

15 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

If you can figure out what ANA is doing, please let me know.  I still think that Lucic takes the onus off their star players having to fight.  

Worth noting that their stars fought Jay Beagle who hadn't fought in almost a decade.  If Lucic is on that team how exactly does he prevent it?  He needs to be on the ice at that time and do you really want Lucic playing with Zegras and Terry regularly?  He isn't jumping off the bench and taking a 10 gamer, there was 5 minutes left and it was the last time they played in the season, and possibly the last season Beagle plays, he should not need to fear any retribution in that moment.  Always worth remembering is Lucic was on the ice for both Savard/Cooke and Horton/Rome.