Sounds like we're getting screwed

[theProdigy223]

Lemieux better get his shit together quick. Even to be a 4th liner. On one hand we need him because he will hit, piss off the other team and will stand up to heavyweights like Wilson. On the other hand, he's got a bad rap with the officials. He needs to figure it out soon.

Lemieux is a really useful player, it has been a long time since we had a guy with his edge that was also halfway decent with the puck on his stick. You are right that officials have been on to him and he has not shown an ability or willingness to adapt. But at the same time if I recall correctly he also draws penalties at a high rate. Hopefully as he gets more playing time (this season is really his first full season) he'll learn where that line is to not become a liability.

 

[RangersFan]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/11/nhlpa-set-its-players-back-a-generation-with-latest-cba/

I stand by what I wrote. The new CBA is not good for the league or growth. And it does impact future fans. Not that any fan studies the CBA, of course not, but the results of the rules of engagement defined in the CBA negatively impact the league. It is too difficult to keep teams together and the rules in general are way too rigid. It's "parody" run a muck.

As for the Vegas conversation, this is not a choice between stack the rules so far against the expansion teams that they suck OR set them up with rules that allow them to build a great team on day one. There should be a middle ground. To have these teams come in with huge cap space AND give them the pick of very good players off other teams is too much. I totally disagree if you don't think having an expansion team go to the SCF in their first season makes the league look bad. I think it does, and I do think middle of the road fans of other teams will say really, that's a farce. It is a bad look for the league, and I think can cost the NHL middle of the road fans. Brooks calls out the huge advantage Seattle has in his article. 81.5 mill of cap space, and they'll get very good players off of other teams as well (or obtain picks to not take or take certain players). That is not good, and candidly these expansion teams get a HUGE edge.

Lastly, the fact that the players couldn't even get one compliance non-cap impacting buyout in the new CBA says it all. Flat cap for 4-6-8 years maybe, and there isn't even one chance to say okay if that's the case allow teams one shot to erase a mistake as we enter the flat cap era. Nope, the NHL will have none of that, and actually made it more punitive to do traditional buyouts. Again, no flexibility and way too rigid. This will impact the players without a doubt, because there will be little cap space available to sign players, it has to have a salary impact - unless you are Seattle that is...

 

[RangersFan]

Lemieux has a role as a solid 4th line guy, but he needs to learn how to play to the edge, but not continually cross it and hurt the team and himself. The BS he pulled in the final game, which got him suspended, was ridiculous. That is the kind of BS he needs to stop.

 

[theProdigy223]

https://nypost.com/2020/07/11/nhlpa-set-its-players-back-a-generation-with-latest-cba/

I stand by what I wrote. The new CBA is not good for the league or growth. And it does impact future fans. Not that any fan studies the CBA, of course not, but the results of the rules of engagement defined in the CBA negatively impact the league. It is too difficult to keep teams together and the rules in general are way too rigid. It's "parody" run a muck.

As for the Vegas conversation, this is not a choice between stack the rules so far against the expansion teams that they suck OR set them up with rules that allow them to build a great team on day one. There should be a middle ground. To have these teams come in with huge cap space AND give them the pick of very good players off other teams is too much. I totally disagree if you don't think having an expansion team go to the SCF in their first season makes the league look bad. I think it does, and I do think middle of the road fans of other teams will say really, that's a farce. It is a bad look for the league, and I think can cost the NHL middle of the road fans. Brooks calls out the huge advantage Seattle has in his article. 81.5 mill of cap space, and they'll get very good players off of other teams as well (or obtain picks to not take or take certain players). That is not good, and candidly these expansion teams get a HUGE edge.

Lastly, the fact that the players couldn't even get one compliance non-cap impacting buyout in the new CBA says it all. Flat cap for 4-6-8 years maybe, and there isn't even one chance to say okay if that's the case allow teams one shot to erase a mistake as we enter the flat cap era. Nope, the NHL will have none of that, and actually made it more punitive to do traditional buyouts. Again, no flexibility and way too rigid. This will impact the players without a doubt, because there will be little cap space available to sign players, it has to have a salary impact - unless you are Seattle that is...

Larry Brooks whines about the CBA every year, and was whining about this one long before he even knew what was in it. Now hes read it and I gotta say he had to dig pretty deep to come up with why it sucks.

Talk about moving goalposts. Post after post about how the CBA will fail to attract new fans, now it's the players who it is bad for. Nevermind the players got two of their biggest demands in (i) getting back to the Olympics - again, something that will do more to grow the game than any other single action the owners could have allowed, and (ii) removing conditional draft picks for signing extensions, which had to be explained to you why players wanted it removed. To top it off those players you claim it is a travesty for still voted overwhelmingly in favor. How odd!

It isnt a perfect CBA. None are. Teams wont be able to stay together as much as we would like (not that that makes or breaks the casual new fan who cares more about the McDavid's and Ovechkins than the promising new RFA that might need to be traded). TV rights are going to be renegotiated while this is going on and it doesnt seem like they put much faith in the new revenue that could generate. But we have hockey for 6 years including in the Olympics, and as an attorney in the sports media industry I can confidently say Larry's point of view on this is a minority one among all stakeholders - including players. You can keep working yourself up about this but the unfortunate reality is that the NHL had to negotiate a new CBA in the face of COVID when it is a complete unknown whether there will be any fans allowed next season or even when or if a season will be able to start in the fall.

 

[Greyvtrayn]

Just to go back to the mysterious RangersFan's point about expansion teams having early success is a farce, turns off casual fans and makes the league look bad...both the Carolina Panthers and Jacksonville Jaguars reached their respective conference championship games in their 2nd season of existence in the NFL. I'm sure if you go back even further in the professional sports leagues' histories you will find plenty of similar examples. Those were the two that I remembered specifically.
The NHL is far and away the lease popular of the 4 professional sports in the US for reasons I can't explain but, diving into the fine details of the just-negotiated CBA as a factor is a bit too (pardon the expression) inside-baseball.

 

[RangersFan]

I think it is bad for the players and bad for the growth of the game. That isn't moving the goalposts, that has always been my POV. I started by saying the owners always stream roll the players in the NHL, and the NHLPA continues to get shafted time and time again by the owners. Not sure how that is moving the goalposts, but okay.

And just because the players agreed to it doesn't mean it is good for them. That is not the bar to pass - they agree so that means it is good for them. The players agreed to it because they are weak in the NHL. It is how this rock hard no flexibility system comes into play in the first place. They tried to stay united the first time, and the NHL broke them. Since then it has been yes sir may I have another. They don't have the backbone to fight to improve the system/the game. So they take their "wins", like a more favorable escrow system, and move along. That doesn't mean it is good for the players though. It is not, and I do not think it is good for the games growth either.

Hey hockey fans, enjoy your current team while you have it, because there will be big changes every few years due to the no flexibility totalitarian system in the NHL.

 

[Greyvtrayn]

Well, clearly the NHL lost one fan with this CBA. We will miss you, guy! Maybe you'll come back one day with another user name when the NHL CBA is more to your liking!

 

[RangersFan]

You are so funny man. You like your echo chamber in here. The 6 regular posters enjoying their quiet board. If you notice the only time there is real back and forth action in here, outside of a few big days, is when I post and actually take a different POV. If that is too much for you to handle though, that's cool. It can be your 6 poster dead echo chamber if you prefer.

 

[RangersFan]

I'll tell you one thing, I would really think before I buy anyone out this off season. We are so close to being in a real solid spot cap wise, I'd hate to mess that up.

Look at what happens after next season.

We have 7,494,444 worth of cap penalties for the 20-21 season (Girardi, Spooner, Shatt). The cap penalty drops down to 2,544,444 for the 21-22 season (Girardi and Shatt), a savings of nearly 5 mill.

We also have 18,550,000 coming off the cap with the expiring deals of Hank (8.5 mill), Staal (5.7 mill), and Smith (4.350 mill).

Do the math and that is 23.5 mill off the cap after next season.

On the flip side, if we buy out Hank we save 3 mill next year, and have a cap penalty of 1.5 mill in 21-22. If we buy out Staal we save a little over 2.1 mill next year, and have a cap penalty of just under 1.1 mill in 21-22. If we buy out Smith we save just under 1.6 mill next year, and have a cap penalty of just under 800 K in 21-22.

Not huge savings, and then we dip into the following seasons cap, which is when we should be looking to finalize a SC team, and can use all the cap space we can get.

You can make the case if we can get solid value for Georgiev we should deal him and let Hank play out his final season. Maybe a package of Lias, Georgiev, and a D prospect for a legit # 2 C. We have a lot of good young talent in goal, and I don't know if it is smart to keep Georgiev to be our backup making 2 mill a year +/-. Go with Hank next season, and then a kid the following season after Hank is up. Unless Hank retires, or Georgiev has no value, both unlikely, that is the path I would take.

On D you can argue Staal is a good guy to keep on the 3rd pairing for one more season as the D transitions in Miller and Lindkvist in 21-22. Maybe you buyout Smith to save 1.6 mill, with only an 800 K penalty in 21-22, but I don't think I buyout Hank or Staal unless another bigger move is being made, and we need the cap space right then and there to afford it.

 

[Greyvtrayn]

You are so funny man. You like your echo chamber in here. The 6 regular posters enjoying their quiet board. If you notice the only time there is real back and forth action in here, outside of a few big days, is when I post and actually take a different POV. If that is too much for you to handle though, that's cool. It can be your 6 poster dead echo chamber if you prefer.

Ok man, take it easy. There is nothing wrong with a little lighthearted tom foolery. Just because we have different opinions on why the NHL is not a more popular sport in the US there is no need to get all pissy about it. You are pointing fingers at the CBA, I am pointing fingers in the dark elsewhere.
As for the buyouts...I am not sure which the right answer is but, the other thing you have to consider is what players are going unrestricted in the next two years that you would want to target for the #2c spot. They can tailor any potential buy outs accordingly depending on who they are looking at and when that player becomes attainable.

 

[panzerporter]

The NHL lost a generation of fans decades ago because they decided to change the game's rules destroying beauty and flow to showcase WWF style fights and cowardly headshots. Canadian fans and teams left hockey but Bettman was able to revive an almost dead sport. To suggest today that the NHL is in danger is ridiculous, interest in youth hockey has exploded with travel hockey and high schools adding hockey teams. A multitude of professional leagues have sprung up across the world but the NHL is recognized as the world's best league with more international players than ever.

 

[kreidertime]

Hockey is in great shape. Better than ever. Players and owners don't fight a lot. Players are getting paid more. The league has tremendous competitive balance. They are expanding too much IMO. They should get rid of a team like Florida. Useless to have them in the league. The reason some don't get how good the NHL is doing right now could be several reasons. You aren't in schools where kids clearly don't give a fuck about baseball. They like to play basketball but don't relate to those thugs unless it's school with students who are minorities. Kids follow football, hockey and soccer believe it or not. You wouldn't know hockey exists if you listened to WFAN. No talent bitch Maggie Gray should have been fired months ago. She cost the fans any Rangers or Knicks interviews. Hasbeens like Francesa and Mad Dog can't grasp in their pea brains this isn't 1990 where the same 500 assholes called up the station every day on baseball. Baseball is a dying sport. The only reason it does any ratings is because it competes against nobody when it is played. You think a ton of asswipes will be watching a regular season baseball game if the Rangers are playing a playoff game? Please. WFAN should have a show twice a week 12 to 3 talking strictly hockey with some fun personalities. They should actually do a soccer show Sunday morning from 9 to 12. I'm not a big soccer fan but wake up. It's a lot bigger in this country they the morons running WFAN want to admit. Michael Kay is a no talent, piece of shit. He wouldn't be getting any ratings if the dickheads running WFAN would wake up and start putting on hosts who would incorporate hockey and soccer into their talk shows. It's a new age and the media around here simply doesn't want to acknowledge. Baseball is a shit sport for many reasons.

 

[BigDaddyAl1973]

I have to say for the past 3 years I've been following the English Premier league and I love their setup..teams get promoted and regulated, there are various cup tournaments during the season plus top teams through out the European continent have their own league. Only sport I know where the fans are singing and chanting all throughout the game..its amazing.

 

[Greyvtrayn]

Well, here we go for the draft....my guess...Florida (because that worked out so well for me in the qualifying round).

 

[Greyvtrayn]

Oh my goodness!! Rangers! First pick!

 

[Ranger71]

We're not getting screwed!!

 

[Ranger71]

WOW!!!

 

[Greyvtrayn]

Two years in a row they have had increbible luck with the draft lottery.