Rich

You use this bolded part in many of your posts on wrestling. Maybe it is just me, but I don't find it much fun to have discussion with people who constantly tell me how good or how knowledgeable they are at something. It is usually apparent by their words whether they are or not and I can make that judgement for myself. I don't need people constantly telling me how good they are.

Boston was foolish with the three picks in which they passed on him.

I wish that one person never said that last place has an 80% chance of not getting the 1st overall pick. It seems to really confuse people a lot. Let me put it this way. I offer you one of 14 lottery tickets for $1 Million dollars. I pull out the first one and say this one has a 20% chance of winning BUT an 80% chance of losing, do you want it? Your response is. Oh no, 80% of not winning is not really good at all, give me a different one. I say okay, here is the next one. Well, it turns out that one has a 13.5% chance of winning AND an 86.5% chance of losing. Now since odds mean nothing, you really don't care which one you get ... right?

Odds mean probability. Not guarantees. Unless you have 100% odds, there is a chance you won't get something. But if you have higher odds than someone else, it means you have a higher chance than them It is mathematics and it can't really be argued. You should go work in Vegas. They love how odds mean nothing. Edit: Also, it is nothing like a lotto max ticket. In Lotto Max, every single ticket has the exact same odds of winning. Not true in the NHL draft lottery. Every team has different odds of winning.

No, really. The lower you finish in the standings, the better your odds of getting a better draft pick. That is mathematically indisputable. Your odds may still be better of not getting the first overall vs getting it, but the odds of not getting it are higher the better you finish.

The 1991/92, 1994/95, and and 2004/05 seasons would disagree. It is never as easy as saying they won't hold up a season for one issue. It is ALL issues combined. That is how negotiations work. One side gives up something for something else. I would say having the ability to go to an independent arbitrator is pretty important to the PA, otherwise they are completely at the mercy of Bettman. So take your pick of what they gave up in negotiations to get that put in.

It is never that easy in CBA discussions. I'm willing to bet the discussion goes something like this ... You don't want players to have arbitrator rights on suspensions? Great give us back 60% of HRR. Or better yet, bump it up to 65%. Don't want to do that, then we are keeping arbitration rights.

I didn't say it wasn't bush. The league has absolutely nothing to do with this decision. The league suspended which was the right decision. Some guy who has nothing to do with the league overturned it. The league had no choice. It is like the league got sued and lost. Does that decision reflect on the league? It was the decision of the court.

Cleaned up some more posts in here. Please try to be respectful and keep on topic. If yours was deleted and you never got a PM then it was deleted because content it referenced or quoted was deleted and it had to be removed for the thread to have continuity.

Not to people who really understand that an independent arbitrator means he has nothing to do with the NHL.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/371bff4cb5a045b1a22feba451730f4e/linesman-hit-wideman-out-season-concussion When is the officials CBA up next? Would they take any action before then? Can't believe that suspension was reduced

What would be your plan to get better reffing immediately next season? Agree we need better reffing. I think that means long term investment in salary(how much does a CFL ref make?) and training.

http://nhllotterysimulator.com/ Last team not to be in the playoffs (14th last) has a 1% chance.

Please continue any discussion on wrestling here.

Please continue any discussion on random news items here.

Thread is locked thanks to Brandon and TUP.

Thread is locked thanks to Brandon and TUP.

Before the last contract he signed? Yes.

4 years NHL experience and you get arbitration rights.

Scheifele's first year was only 4 games so I don't believe that year counts. That means each of them have 3 years in the NHL. I believe they both signed under 21 years old, so that means they don't have the 4 years needed for arbitration. One more year each and they will be eligible for arbitration. So next contract.

As I understand it, the SPC is pretty much the cookie cutter template that all contracts are based on. It defines player obligations, practice requirements, etc.... You fill in the blanks with salary, one-way / two-way, NMC, NTC, etc. All contracts must be based on the SPC, including ELC.

No. I believe SPC is Standard Player Contract.

I'd be thrilled if they could lock him up to that, but I find it unlikely with the agent that Trouba has (Kurt Overhardt). He represented Brandon Dubinsky and Ryan Johansen when they held out as RFAs. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/columbus-blue-jackets-ryan-johansen-dispute-shining-spotlight-on-agent-kurt-overhardt/

If you aren't bridging, I think the only way he signs for under $5M is if your term is only 5ish years. I'd rather go 8 and have a more reasonable contract in his late 20s. Been watching him live since he was a rookie and he has made huge strides every year. Probably has one of the better wrist shots in the league. He has a legit shot at becoming a true #1 centre and star in the league.