1. #17581
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,831
    Quote Originally Posted by marcelos11 View Post
    in that case if i send you 100 dollars can you be busy for the rest of the series?
    I did not watch game 3 but I will watch game 4 because I am heartless and cruel

  2. #17582
    The Lightbringer Asera's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    This side of an imaginary line in the sand
    Posts
    3,741
    Red Wings fans! Now is your chance!

    http://www.squishable.com/pc/squish_...shable+Octopus
    red panda red panda red panda!

  3. #17583
    Quote Originally Posted by Rennadrel View Post
    Horton is a guy I could see Nonis going after in the summer. Him and Clarkson are two additions that would make the Leafs dangerous. I think Grabovski's time in Toronto is at an end and we need to get better scoring depth and grit in our top 6. If your top 6 consists of Lupul, Kessel, Kadri, JVR, Horton, Clarkson as well as Bozak or Colborne in that mix if injuries occur, that's a versatile top 6. Clarkson has lots of grit and it's something we need from a centre who will go to the boards and open up space for guys like Kessel and Lupul, Horton would bring a lot of intensity to our top 6 as well.
    I agree that something needs to be done about Grabovski, but to buy him out is a bitter pill to swallow. I'd rather keep him than overpay for Clarkson who is realistically a 60 point guy at absolute best. The UFA market for centers is not what I would call deep.. at all. The sad reality is they're probably going to have to trade a couple prospects to get some decent top-6 players up front. No way they can resign Bozak, Kadri, Gunnarsson, Franson and Fraser and still have enough left over to re-upp Kessel and Reimer after next season.

    If I'm not mistaken, you have to use your amnesty buyouts before the start of next season, right? In which case, you have to wonder who they go for. The two likeliest candidates if I'm Nonis are Liles and Grabovski, but that is a team just throwing away 10-20M (it's 1/3-2/3 iirc). If any team can afford it, it's Toronto, but I'm not sure how the new owners would respond to that happening a year after they take over.

    On the bright side, next season is the last season we pay Darcy Tucker... 6 years after he played his last game for us.

    Can they unload Komisarek... for anything? Whatever happened to trading a player for future considerations? Or like a conditional 7th round pick, wherein if Komisarek plays 41 or more games in the NHL, it becomes a 6th round pick.

    What I'm trying to say is Nonis is in a really unenviable position this summer.

  4. #17584
    Titan
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    14,143
    I think this is the last year we pay Connolly, so that is a lot off our cap at 4.75 a year. Liles has an absurd contract for his production. If there are two guys who get bough out, it's him and Grabovski. Someone might take a hit and trade a crap pick for Komi though.

  5. #17585
    Ya, Connolly is off the books.. I don't think it makes sense to buy out Komisarek at 4.5 for one more year - that's not really a huge hit, especially if we can maybe unload him for next to nothing.

    But we have 5 people due substantial raises. The guys in my previous post are making 6.35M this season. I expect them combined to be worth ~15-18. Bozak will be looking for first line center money, unless his agents are smart enough to maybe get a longer deal for a couple million less (like 6 years @ 3.25-3.75 or something). Kadri will be looking for long-term at probably above-average salary. If the Leafs are smart, they try to get him to either a 3/12 or something similar to Bozak where they sign him longer term to lock him up well into his first UFA availability at a little bit less. He had a couple slumps this year, but I think he's a damn good player - he's physical and he's got soft hands. Not afraid to mix it up.

    As for the D, Gunnarsson is probably going to be getting 3.5-4 a year, Franson will probably be looking for something similar, but may end up with only 3 or so. Fraser isn't a big concern for me - will probably only look for a 2-3 year deal in the 2.5 range, I would guess.

    If they can buy out Liles and Grabo, and trade Komisarek, they'd still have like 12-14M by my guesses. If I had to guess, if they get rid of Grabovski, they will likely also try to trade Kulemin for a 3rd rounder or something. That guy needs to go - he had potential, but he sometimes looks like he doesn't even care to be playing.

  6. #17586
    Titan
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    14,143
    Estimated cap before extensions is around 19 million. Getting rid of Grabs at 5.5 million and Liles at 3.875 clears 9 million and change off the cap. Unloading Komi at 4.5 would give us a lot of spending flexibility.
    Last edited by Rennadrel; 2013-05-21 at 06:49 PM.

  7. #17587
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeoni View Post
    So how do guys get the octopus' into the building to throw onto the ice? I heard they usually kick you out for doing it, just wondering if they sit there with an octopus under their jersey till they toss it on.
    I know in Nashville they have mainly gotten the Catfish in by putting them in plastic bags and strapping them down their legs. I would assume something similar is probably done in Detroit.

  8. #17588
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    Quote Originally Posted by marcelos11 View Post
    a good correct call does not wave out 4 non calls, including one leading to a goal.
    Please explain how you could possibly call that the correct call? Do I need to link every goal scored this year by a player who was in the blue paint? He only barely touched Howard because he was checked into him by Kindl.

    And Franzen was NOT illegally checked in my opinion, he turned towards the boards and braced for impact as the hit was being delivered. He made it look so much more like a boarding than it actually was by the way he crumpled to the ice and laid there, (he didn't miss a shift btw).

    It's quite obvious what happened here, ref thought that they might have missed the call because of Franzen's embellishment, it's that simple.

  9. #17589
    Scarab Lord AceofHarts's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Stommped View Post
    Please explain how you could possibly call that the correct call? Do I need to link every goal scored this year by a player who was in the blue paint? He only barely touched Howard because he was checked into him by Kindl.

    And Franzen was NOT illegally checked in my opinion, he turned towards the boards and braced for impact as the hit was being delivered. He made it look so much more like a boarding than it actually was by the way he crumpled to the ice and laid there, (he didn't miss a shift btw).

    It's quite obvious what happened here, ref thought that they might have missed the call because of Franzen's embellishment, it's that simple.
    no, Shaw was in the blue paint before he was even touched, he impeded Howards ability to even attempt to stop the goal. according to the rulebook that is interference. and guess what, Holmstrom saw FAR MORE waved off for FAR LESS in his day.
    as for the Franzen one, it doesnt matter if he braced. the fact of the matter is, if you see numbers, your not supposed to follow through, Detroit has been penalized for it before for far less ugly hits. even announcers and analysts thought it was boarding. even some of the posters on here thought it was boarding.
    but hey, two borderline calls. you won 1, you lost 1.

  10. #17590
    The Lightbringer
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    3,566
    Quote Originally Posted by marcelos11 View Post
    he impeded Howards ability to even attempt to stop the goal.
    There's no evidence of this whatsoever.

    And

    41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently in the boards.

    That's why it matters that he braced for the hit. He was not defenseless, he knew the hit was coming seconds before it came. This idea that he was hit from behind and it was in the area where most boarding penalties are called so it's automatically boarding is asinine. No where in the entire description of the rule does it mention the player's position relative to the checker, his numbers, his back, anything of the sort.

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26329

  11. #17591
    Scarab Lord AceofHarts's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Stommped View Post
    There's no evidence of this whatsoever.

    And

    41.1 Boarding – A boarding penalty shall be imposed on any player or goalkeeper who checks or pushes a defenseless opponent in such a manner that causes the opponent to hit or impact the boards violently in the boards.

    That's why it matters that he braced for the hit. He was not defenseless, he knew the hit was coming seconds before it came. This idea that he was hit from behind and it was in the area where most boarding penalties are called so it's automatically boarding is asinine. No where in the entire description of the rule does it mention the player's position relative to the checker, his numbers, his back, anything of the sort.

    http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26329
    how is Franzen supposed to defend himself? hes got his back turned to the play.
    9 times out of 10 thats called a penalty anywhere in the league.

    as for Shaw impeding Howard.


    at 48 seconds you can see that Shaw is CLEARLY in the crease, and making ZERO move to get out of the way and because of the position of his feet and Howards stick, Howard cant even so much as MOVE HIS STICK to make a play.

    THAT IS INTERFERENCE.

    hell, even in the still you can see that Shaw is in the crease.

  12. #17592
    Elemental Lord Reg's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    8,264
    I'm with Stommped on this one. Howard didn't even attempt to move his blocker/stick until the puck was already in. The only contact Shaw had with Howard's stick (or his body at all) is when Howard slapped him with it. If anything, Colaiacovo is keeping Shaw in the crease. But alas, the rule gives Referee judgement on whether a player “establishes a significant position within the crease”.

  13. #17593
    Scarab Lord AceofHarts's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg View Post
    I'm with Stommped on this one. Howard didn't even attempt to move his blocker/stick until the puck was already in. The only contact Shaw had with Howard's stick (or his body at all) is when Howard slapped him with it. If anything, Colaiacovo is keeping Shaw in the crease. But alas, the rule gives Referee judgement on whether a player “establishes a significant position within the crease”.
    funny thing is, according to the rule, you DONT Have to make contact. you just have to impede the goalies ability to do his job.

  14. #17594
    Elemental Lord Reg's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    8,264
    Quote Originally Posted by marcelos11 View Post
    funny thing is, according to the rule, you DONT Have to make contact. you just have to impede the goalies ability to do his job.
    He didn't. Howard had to proper angle without a skate deflection. There was nothing he could of done and you can tell that because the puck was past him before he even moved. He wasn't "impeded".

  15. #17595
    Scarab Lord AceofHarts's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg View Post
    He didn't. Howard had to proper angle without a skate deflection. There was nothing he could of done and you can tell that because the puck was past him before he even moved. He wasn't "impeded".
    no, he couldnt. he couldnt so much as move his stick. look at the replay. look where howards stick is. look where shaws feet are.
    howard had zero chance to so much as move his stick, let alone his entire body, because SHAW IS IN THE WAY INSIDE OF THE CREASE.

  16. #17596
    Elemental Lord Reg's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    8,264
    Quote Originally Posted by marcelos11 View Post
    no, he couldnt. he couldnt so much as move his stick. look at the replay. look where howards stick is. look where shaws feet are.
    howard had zero chance to so much as move his stick, let alone his entire body, because SHAW IS IN THE WAY INSIDE OF THE CREASE.
    Look at it from every angle, not just the overhead. The puck was in the net before Howard even made a move to his right. If Howard had moved, he would have hit Shaw, yet he didn't. You really need to learn to look at things objectively.

  17. #17597
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta
    Posts
    2,815
    Could have gone either way, I think because of the previous hit on Franzen that they may have think they missed had an influence. The thing I don't get (any maybe it's an NHL rule that is going over my head) is if it's goalie interference...then why isn't there a penalty? Unless (probably) there is a rule that states if a goalie is interfered with and a goal is scored, the goal is disallowed and no penalty assessed? I'd have to brush up on my NHL rulebook reading skills.

  18. #17598
    Scarab Lord AceofHarts's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,587
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeoni View Post
    Could have gone either way, I think because of the previous hit on Franzen that they may have think they missed had an influence. The thing I don't get (any maybe it's an NHL rule that is going over my head) is if it's goalie interference...then why isn't there a penalty? Unless (probably) there is a rule that states if a goalie is interfered with and a goal is scored, the goal is disallowed and no penalty assessed? I'd have to brush up on my NHL rulebook reading skills.
    it can be goalie interference without a penalty. detroit has seen that call numerous times with homer in front of the net.

  19. #17599
    The Insane draynay's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    18,831
    Rangers powerplay, time for a bathroom break, I'm sure I won't miss anything

  20. #17600
    Elemental Lord Reg's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    8,264
    Quote Originally Posted by draynay View Post
    Rangers powerplay, time for a bathroom break, I'm sure I won't miss anything
    You might miss the Bruins scoring.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •