Location: "The Alien has landed in Vancouver!" Joined: 03.09.2006
Aug 26 @ 7:24 PM ET
Henrique signed for 6 years/ 4 mil per .Where does that leave Coho Franson Kadri - VANTEL
Can't see Kadri signing for less than Henrique, but the Leafs don't want to give him the term, they want a Montreal/Subban type bridge contract of about 2.5 mil for 2 years which he'll never go for. Franson I can see taking less than he's worth to get arbitration rights in a year. Coho will hold out until he gets 6 mil for 8 years, guaranteed 1st line minutes, 1st PP minutes, a mansion in the hills, a sports drink/skate/hockey stick endorsement deal where he gets his name on them like Jordan, a massage after every game by 2 hot naked chicks, and Regier fired and his Dad named as GM.
Can't see Kadri signing for less than Henrique, but the Leafs don't want to give him the term, they want a Montreal/Subban type bridge contract of about 2.5 mil for 2 years which he'll never go for. Franson I can see taking less than he's worth to get arbitration rights in a year. Coho will hold out until he gets 6 mil for 8 years, guaranteed 1st line minutes, 1st PP minutes, a mansion in the hills, a sports drink/skate/hockey stick endorsement deal where he gets his name on them like Jordan, a massage after every game by 2 hot naked chicks, and Regier fired and his Dad named as GM. - DariusKnight
If I am Franson I am asking 4 mil per. As you know hockey careers are short and if he has a bad year next year then he is stuck at the 2 mil range for a couple of years. As they say strike while the irons are hot.
Just so everyone knows, resident favorite Travis Yost has been attacked across all media platforms of the web by Euge Melnyk and associates, you can't comment on his blogs without someone removing comments, now they're locked, and his twitter and every blog he ever wrote dating back to May 2010 was deleted from hockeybuzz in an attack.
This, shortly following a set of weird phishing attempts trying to get his IP address.
Point being, the idiotic old man has paid some ukranians he works with in a charity to attempt to wipe anything Yost has to say about his shady practices and his leveraging of the Sens to support his failing businesses from the internet.
The Canucks are trying to do what they can to get on the league's good side so that they don't get bent over by the officials again the way they were this past playoffs. Adding Raffi would have put an even bigger bulls eye on the team which is what they're trying to avoid.
Also, Raffi's next big suspension will likely cost him the rest of a season. - KB3Point0
Who cares...
The Canucks will always have issues with the refs with their current core.
Burrows and Kesler have developed reputations, as well, and no amount if toning it down will change that—refs are always going to be looking to make calls against them.
I'll take that risk with Raffi. He'll get a few PIMs, and maybe a suspension, but then they just replace him in the line-up with one of the lesser players who at this point us a starter. Big deal...
He'll be a constant thought on the minds of the other teams' players and he'll put up 25-35 points from the bottom6.
If he can consistently throw the other teams' best players off their game, or out of the game completely, he's worth the minimal risk of a suspension.
The garbage from the refs and the league will be there regardless. Might as well get their money's worth...
Location: Cody Hodgson can walk on water Joined: 10.04.2005
Aug 27 @ 12:13 AM ET
No, but both McSorley and Bertuzzi both were suspended for more than half a season and then had to apply to be reinstated once their suspensions were up, there is a precedent there. The same thing could apply to Torres as he is a massive repeat offender who's suspendable hits caused grevious injuries to 3 prominent players (Eberle, Seabrook and Hossa). We're not talking about an one or two time repeat offender, to my knowledge, Torres has had 6 suspensions in the last 3 years alone. - DariusKnight
There is huge difference between part of a season and a lifetime ban......a ban will never ever happen unless guidelines for such a ban were laid out in the CBA. The NHLPA would never allow such a ban to happen repeat offender or not.....
The Canucks will always have issues with the refs with their current core.
Burrows and Kesler have developed reputations, as well, and no amount if toning it down will change that—refs are always going to be looking to make calls against them.
I'll take that risk with Raffi. He'll get a few PIMs, and maybe a suspension, but then they just replace him in the line-up with one of the lesser players who at this point us a starter. Big deal...
He'll be a constant thought on the minds of the other teams' players and he'll put up 25-35 points from the bottom6.
If he can consistently throw the other teams' best players off their game, or out of the game completely, he's worth the minimal risk of a suspension.
The garbage from the refs and the league will be there regardless. Might as well get their money's worth... - Fosco
I'd rather save up the cap dollars to spend on a better player down the road. Having a player like Raffi who's primary purpose is to get the other team to keep their heads up is overrated. Teams are far more concerned with a player that can score than Raffi Torres.
No, but both McSorley and Bertuzzi both were suspended for more than half a season and then had to apply to be reinstated once their suspensions were up, there is a precedent there. The same thing could apply to Torres as he is a massive repeat offender who's suspendable hits caused grevious injuries to 3 prominent players (Eberle, Seabrook and Hossa). We're not talking about an one or two time repeat offender, to my knowledge, Torres has had 6 suspensions in the last 3 years alone. - DariusKnight
That's just additional precedent to not have them suspended for life. Plus the rules have changed in regards to suspensions. Also, the NHL hasn't shown the balls to suspend players for long enough time after time which creates a precedent for lower suspensions until they work with the NHLPA to increase them (double edged sword for the PA).
I'd rather save up the cap dollars to spend on a better player down the road. Having a player like Raffi who's primary purpose is to get the other team to keep their heads up is overrated. Teams are far more concerned with a player that can score than Raffi Torres. - KB3Point0
Yeah, I'm not factoring in salary cap or reality here. Obviously there are players I'd rather have on the team.
I'm not advocating using up the remaining cap space to add him.
Raffi is signed, and not going to be a Canuck. I know it's not going to happen.
I was just expressing my desire to have a player of his ilk in the bottom6.
He's put up 0.38 points/game from the bottom6 the last 3 seasons while being an absolute physical force.
Location: "The Alien has landed in Vancouver!" Joined: 03.09.2006
Aug 27 @ 1:20 AM ET
There is huge difference between part of a season and a lifetime ban......a ban will never ever happen unless guidelines for such a ban were laid out in the CBA. The NHLPA would never allow such a ban to happen repeat offender or not..... - chompsey
They can fight it all they want, but NHL has control over discipline, there's measures in the CBA to appeal the decisions handed down, but the appeal is heard by Bettman and since the league isn't subject to anti-trust laws, if Shanahan suspends Torres indefinitely and the NHLPA appeal and Bettman upholds it, there's not much they can do. Again, I believe any suspension over 40 games requires the player to apply for reinstatement to the league upon serving the suspension and the NHL can deny the reinstatement if they so choose.
