Preseason is over.  Time to get to the real season and do it in style like only Jagr can.

 

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-222564-1-.htm#222564

4 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story-222564-1-.htm#222564

Foote is gold.

Just read a report over the weekend not sure if it was Tsn or Hockey news where Foote has dropped from his listing on the top draft picks for each team...

30 minutes ago, bb1 said:

Just read a report over the weekend not sure if it was Tsn or Hockey news where Foote has dropped from his listing on the top draft picks for each team...

But he's been drafted

Edited April 2, 20187 yr by FrostyWinnipeg

50 minutes ago, bb1 said:

Just read a report over the weekend not sure if it was Tsn or Hockey news where Foote has dropped from his listing on the top draft picks for each team...

Which Foote?

Interesting remark by Friedman on HNIC about NHLPA head Donal Fehr and how there are some who want an independent review of his leadership.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-agents-discuss-leadership-nhlpa-executive-director-donald-fehr/

Why on earth would the PA want to change leaders now, especially from someone has experienced as Fehr?  If they think they can negotiate an end to the Salary Cap, they are dreaming.  they should be thrilled if they can just maintain the current deal without anything demonstrably worse moving forward.  This is the same union that lost an entire year and negotiated a hard cap and a wage reduction. 

I think the big issue is escrow but I can't see how the PA avoids that.

10 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

Which Foote?

Cal Foote it was an article rating teams draft picks and how they have progressed since drafted....

10 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

But he's been drafted

Yea...it was rating teams picks and how they have progressed ☺

Sedins retiring at the end of the season.

https://www.tsn.ca/sedins-to-retire-at-season-s-end-1.1044434

oh well they have to end it sometime, that would leave how many members of the 2011 Stanley cup run left on the team?

44 minutes ago, Rich said:

Sedins retiring at the end of the season.

https://www.tsn.ca/sedins-to-retire-at-season-s-end-1.1044434

It's time. Good news for the organization.

1 hour ago, Rich said:

Sedins retiring at the end of the season.

https://www.tsn.ca/sedins-to-retire-at-season-s-end-1.1044434

Im a little bit surprised because at their age, one more year with an actual contender would be my wish if I were them.  But they are pretty devoted to Vancouver.

A pretty amazing story when you consider they only ever played together their entire career and retire together.

Daniel having a good year. Can just imagine they continue to play back home.

2 hours ago, iHeart said:

oh well they have to end it sometime, that would leave how many members of the 2011 Stanley cup run left on the team?

Edler and Tanev?  I can't think of too many others. Tanev was a rookie that year or close to it.  Total house-cleaning.  

Edited April 2, 20187 yr by kelownabomberfan

 

6 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

 

It's kinda funny because the numbers (aside from the 7-0-0) really aren't that impressive.

Oh well... just win baby!

Just wondering

do they call they Avalanche the "Nordiques/Avalanche"?

or the Coyotes the Jets/Coyotes?

or the Dallas Stars?

Probably won't be a team in Atlanta again so, they should probably  get over it.

 

Edited April 3, 20187 yr by Mark F

8 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Just wondering

do they call they Avalanche the "Nordiques/Avalanche"?

or the Coyotes the Jets/Coyotes?

or the Dallas Stars?

Probably won't be a team in Atlanta again so, they should probably  get over it.

 

I'm just guessing they brought up Thrashers as it was a Thrasher goalie who owned the record.

well the stars have been eliminated, and two teams remain to be out

 

Also become just the 80th team in NHL history to win 50 games. 

Edited April 4, 20187 yr by Goalie

10 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

 

This team is so ******* good

Looking at this goalie interference call in Nashville, originally I thought it was a good call (no goal) because the Preds player stuck his stick into the goalie and physically moved him, thus allowing the puck to spring free.  Watching it again, Im not so sure.  The stick was into the "leg" area (where the puck was) and was an attempt to dig at the puck.  The fact the goalie moved is because the puck was under his pad and that was the area the Preds player was "digging at".  He wasnt trying to shove the goalie out of the way.

So if the rule is "ANY contact = interference", okay but thats going to result in a lot of calls (and penalties).  If you use common sense (ie. deciding intent) thats a good goal.  Plus, is the ref not supposed to whistle the play dead when he loses sight of the puck?  Clearly he lost sight since it was UNDER the goalie.  So the ref let it go.  Why?  Because its a scrum with players digging at it.  Happens all the time, puck comes free, goal voila. 

Ref should have whistled the play dead.  Because he didn't and because there was no evidence of intentional interference, its a good goal.

4 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Looking at this goalie interference call in Nashville, originally I thought it was a good call (no goal) because the Preds player stuck his stick into the goalie and physically moved him, thus allowing the puck to spring free.  Watching it again, Im not so sure.  The stick was into the "leg" area (where the puck was) and was an attempt to dig at the puck.  The fact the goalie moved is because the puck was under his pad and that was the area the Preds player was "digging at".  He wasnt trying to shove the goalie out of the way.

So if the rule is "ANY contact = interference", okay but thats going to result in a lot of calls (and penalties).  If you use common sense (ie. deciding intent) thats a good goal.  Plus, is the ref not supposed to whistle the play dead when he loses sight of the puck?  Clearly he lost sight since it was UNDER the goalie.  So the ref let it go.  Why?  Because its a scrum with players digging at it.  Happens all the time, puck comes free, goal voila. 

Ref should have whistled the play dead.  Because he didn't and because there was no evidence of intentional interference, its a good goal.

I can't understand how that was interference (which is now called by the war room in Toronto) when the Neal homerun swing to Helle's head was not interference.  I'd like to cue up those two plays side by side and let non-hockey fans decide which one they thought should be called interference.

I honestly think they roll a dice to determine the outcome.

16 hours ago, Tony Fresco said:

I can't understand how that was interference (which is now called by the war room in Toronto) when the Neal homerun swing to Helle's head was not interference.  I'd like to cue up those two plays side by side and let non-hockey fans decide which one they thought should be called interference.

I honestly think they roll a dice to determine the outcome.

I don't agree with this argument but...

I think Luongo had the puck under him, although the Preds were poking at it, and by turning (interfering with) him, the puck came loose. 

Buycky did not have the puck.