3rd OVERALL draft pick who had ONE respectable season, absolutely fair to label him a bust.
- BlazinMike

Until Barker shows otherwise, I agree.

Maybe? Who knows how it's going to shake out?

I'd venture to guess that Bowman probably has some deal already in place to ship Rozsival out for some lower round pick or "future considerations." Doing that get Bowman under the cap ceiling with a roster of 22 and a drop in the bucket for cap room.

That wouldn't be my ideal situation, but it gives Bowman just enough room and time to make the trade he really needs to make.
- EKolb13

this makes the most sense especially if one of the young defenseman shows he is ready for prime time

No offense but you preach a lot.

"Lingering injury" does not necessarily imply illegitimate.

Example: Anyone who has fractured an ankle or experienced a rotator injury (strain or partial tear) can probably attest to the fact that you can reach a point where activity is possible but further rest would help.

I'm sure many professional sports rosters have players (particularly older players) who could legitimately go on IR that continue to play. I would bet Hossa has played through some injuries in the RS that could have put him on IR. Now that he is older management should make sure he does not. If that also helps with the cap then even better.
- tredbrta

Now that I have some time to more properly respond to your "preach a lot" comment:

I have opinions, and I have ethics; if that does not conform to HB policy, please let me know.

The league should not be in the position of vigorously enforcing some rules and not others. LTIR a should be reserved for players with - yes - lingering injuries from some trauma that (a) could be further injured by playing, or (b) does not allow them to play effectively. It should not be used to allow Hossa to "rest" for a few games without a demonstrable injury - or to park a player to allow a team to temporarily get below the cap. We have read here that the Hawks should put any number of players on IR - Roszival, Versteeg, Oduya - without (except for Oduya, who apparently seems to be skating well) any apparent injury, to buy time to get under the cap.

Preachy? OK - just me trying to channel an old shtetl rebbe to the modern hockey world.

Now that I have some time to more properly respond to your "preach a lot" comment:

I have opinions, and I have ethics; if that does not conform to HB policy, please let me know.

The league should not be in the position of vigorously enforcing some rules and not others. LTIR a should be reserved for players with - yes - lingering injuries from some trauma that (a) could be further injured by playing, or (b) does not allow them to play effectively. It should not be used to allow Hossa to "rest" for a few games without a demonstrable injury - or to park a player to allow a team to temporarily get below the cap. We have read here that the Hawks should put any number of players on IR - Roszival, Versteeg, Oduya - without (except for Oduya, who apparently seems to be skating well) any apparent injury, to buy time to get under the cap.

Preachy? OK - just me trying to channel an old shtetl rebbe to the modern hockey world.
- StLBravesFan

Preach brother, preach.

I'm as far from a Barker fan as you will ever see, but Barker was nowhere near the level of bust that Beach was. It's not even close.

Barker had one productive NHL season. 2008-09. 40 points (6 goals, 34 assists) as a young defenseman in the toughest league in the world. His play fell off a cliff after that, but that season still occurred and should be credited to him in such a comparison.

Kyle Beach? ZERO NHL GAMES PLAYED. 4 years in Rockford and his highest point total was 36 points (16 goals, 20 assists). So Beach, a 1st round draft pick touted for his power forward abililities, never scored more in an AHL season than Cam Barker, a 1st round draft pick defenseman, did in his best NHL season.

Clearly, they are both busts - however, even the most cursory qualititative analysis shows a chasm between them in terms of performance.
- BreakoutHockey

I heard a ton about the 3rd overall choice. First time I saw the guy skate AND play I said the guy was horsebleep. I heard a lot more about Barker being a great player than Beach. Proportionately speaking, Barker was a bigger bust than Beach. Barker couldn't miss, or so we were all told. At least that's what I think.

Preach brother, preach.
- Ogilthorpe2

Love is the morning and the evening star....

Now that I have some time to more properly respond to your "preach a lot" comment:

I have opinions, and I have ethics; if that does not conform to HB policy, please let me know.

The league should not be in the position of vigorously enforcing some rules and not others. LTIR a should be reserved for players with - yes - lingering injuries from some trauma that (a) could be further injured by playing, or (b) does not allow them to play effectively. It should not be used to allow Hossa to "rest" for a few games without a demonstrable injury - or to park a player to allow a team to temporarily get below the cap. We have read here that the Hawks should put any number of players on IR - Roszival, Versteeg, Oduya - without (except for Oduya, who apparently seems to be skating well) any apparent injury, to buy time to get under the cap.

Preachy? OK - just me trying to channel an old shtetl rebbe to the modern hockey world.
- StLBravesFan

Doctors also have opinions and most have ethics as well. In fact, most of the process of determining an actual return from injury is based on opinion - even more so than the screens.

I make a point that older players may be carrying legitimate injuries that warrant IR and you repeat the same point about not using IR to rest players or relive cap space..

What exactly is a "demonstrable injury" to you? Do you need to see a tear or break in an image or xray? What about concussions - a lot of subtle symptoms with that kind of injury. Are only demonstrable ones IR worthy? How do you enforce your high ideals when they run into reality?

Oduya is skating? So what? Let's say he was dealing with a fractured ankle and may be coming back too early - he could easily be increasing the chances of another fracture and/or permanent damage and I am certain he can find 10 MDs who will put that in writing and could use that legitimately to sit out.

Now, if someone was advocating finding a way to place a young player on IR - say Rundblad if he had Rosi's contract - just because he was under performing and they needed the space there would be no debating your point. That would simply be wrong. The problem with your tangent is no one (at least from what I have seen here) was - even the names you listed are older players who have had their share of injuries and those are the names which have primarily been discussed here (from what I've seen).

IR will be used to maneuver around the cap. That is a fact. I really doubt any team is going to take the chance of doing it without a legitimate medical opinion to back it up. Not with the potential fallout and penalties.

Love is the morning and the evening star....
- StLBravesFan

....that shines on the cradle of the babe.

I heard a ton about the 3rd overall choice. First time I saw the guy skate AND play I said the guy was horsebleep. I heard a lot more about Barker being a great player than Beach. Proportionately speaking, Barker was a bigger bust than Beach. Barker couldn't miss, or so we were all told. At least that's what I think.
- 6628

Just looked at Barker's draft. That 2004 draft was full of busts. Barker was one of many. Andrew Ladd and Blake Wheeler were the next 2 picks. Drew Stafford and Cory Schneider late in the 1st I think. All of those panned out somewhat. The other names you see are Rusty Olesz, Montoya, Radulov, Dubnyk, Chucko, Picard, Smid, Valabek. Guys like that. Half of the 30 picks I don't remember seeing in the NHL. Maybe 7 are legitimate NHL players.

Of course the first 2 picks were Ovechkin and Malkin......

....that shines on the cradle of the babe.
- Beaver-Warrior

Until the babe craps and the whole place smells like poop.

Sort of like high ideals vs reality.

It's nice to believe that vigorous enforcement of IR standards may be practical. In reality, since they are based primarily on opinion, impossible.

If it was possible there would be about 50-70% less people collecting disability.

Doctors also have opinions and most have ethics as well. In fact, most of the process of determining an actual return from injury is based on opinion - even more so than the screens.

I make a point that older players may be carrying legitimate injuries that warrant IR and you repeat the same point about not using IR to rest players or relive cap space..

What exactly is a "demonstrable injury" to you? Do you need to see a tear or break in an image or xray? What about concussions - a lot of subtle symptoms with that kind of injury. Are only demonstrable ones IR worthy? How do you enforce your high ideals when they run into reality?

Oduya is skating? So what? Let's say he was dealing with a fractured ankle and may be coming back too early - he could easily be increasing the chances of another fracture and/or permanent damage and I am certain he can find 10 MDs who will put that in writing and could use that legitimately to sit out.

Now, if someone was advocating finding a way to place a young player on IR - say Rundblad if he had Rosi's contract - just because he was under performing and they needed the space there would be no debating your point. That would simply be wrong. The problem with your tangent is no one (at least from what I have seen here) was - even the names you listed are older players who have had their share of injuries and those are the names which have primarily been discussed here (from what I've seen).

IR will be used to maneuver around the cap. That is a fact. I really doubt any team is going to take the chance of doing it without a legitimate medical opinion to back it up. Not with the potential fallout and penalties.
- tredbrta

LTIR is the new cap circumventing tool.To think that Hossa will play out his contract is wishful thinking.With the number of law suits coming down the pipe against the NHL why would a doctor take a stand against an injury?If a player happens to have a history of head trauma,especially so.

Doctors also have opinions and most have ethics as well. In fact, most of the process of determining an actual return from injury is based on opinion - even more so than the screens.

I make a point that older players may be carrying legitimate injuries that warrant IR and you repeat the same point about not using IR to rest players or relive cap space..

What exactly is a "demonstrable injury" to you? Do you need to see a tear or break in an image or xray? What about concussions - a lot of subtle symptoms with that kind of injury. Are only demonstrable ones IR worthy? How do you enforce your high ideals when they run into reality?

Oduya is skating? So what? Let's say he was dealing with a fractured ankle and may be coming back too early - he could easily be increasing the chances of another fracture and/or permanent damage and I am certain he can find 10 MDs who will put that in writing and could use that legitimately to sit out.

Now, if someone was advocating finding a way to place a young player on IR - say Rundblad if he had Rosi's contract - just because he was under performing and they needed the space there would be no debating your point. That would simply be wrong. The problem with your tangent is no one (at least from what I have seen here) was - even the names you listed are older players who have had their share of injuries and those are the names which have primarily been discussed here (from what I've seen).

IR will be used to maneuver around the cap. That is a fact. I really doubt any team is going to take the chance of doing it without a legitimate medical opinion to back it up. Not with the potential fallout and penalties.
- tredbrta

Please read what I wrote about LEGITIMATE use of LTIR if the injury could be further injured.

As far as most doctors having ethics: I'm afraid doctors for sports teams have a very bad ethical history of putting the interests of the team ahead of the health of the player - doping them up to get them back on the field to further injure themselves. I have no doubt the some teams would apply great pressure to have doctors do the opposite in this case. Doctors, too, have a way of justifying doing what their bosses want.

LTIR is the new cap circumventing tool.To think that Hossa will play out his contract is wishful thinking.With the number of law suits coming down the pipe against the NHL why would a doctor take a stand against an injury?If a player happens to have a history of head trauma,especially so.
- eagle50

In addition to this, why would a doctor possibly do a favor for a team and say a player is hurt more severely than he really is? And if a player is forced into LTIR by the team, wouldn't you think that the Players Union might file a grievance?

Anyways, is anyone who posts or lurks here a M.D.? I'd love to hear your input.

LTIR is the new cap circumventing tool.To think that Hossa will play out his contract is wishful thinking.With the number of law suits coming down the pipe against the NHL why would a doctor take a stand against an injury?If a player happens to have a history of head trauma,especially so.
- eagle50

Thank you. Liability is probably the single largest issue the reality of "vigorous enforcement" of the use of LTIR can never overcome. What doctor will ever not support further rehabilitation - particularly rest or limited use - if a patient claims to still have pain? Not happening in the current legal environment here.

So there you have 2 layers of opinions - the player claiming pain and the doctor prescribing no game play in order to heal - for the NHL to disprove an LTIR claim. Good luck with that.

In addition to this, why would a doctor possibly do a favor for a team and say a player is hurt more severely than he really is? And if a player is forced into LTIR by the team, wouldn't you think that the Players Union might file a grievance?

Anyways, is anyone who posts or lurks here a M.D.? I'd love to hear your input.
- EKolb13

Why would a doctor do a favor for a team by doping up a player to get him prematurely back on the field, subject to further aggravating an injury?

Happened (happens) all the time.

Players' union? Don't know - but it does open up a roster spot.

In addition to this, why would a doctor possibly do a favor for a team and say a player is hurt more severely than he really is? And if a player is forced into LTIR by the team, wouldn't you think that the Players Union might file a grievance?

Anyways, is anyone who posts or lurks here a M.D.? I'd love to hear your input.
- EKolb13

If a player is one of the 6 that a team can insure, those insurance scumbags would lalso have a say in this. After 30 games, they become responsible for paying that player's wages until he can come back and play. I'm sure they would have their own medical examiners available to scrutinize a questionable diagnosis.

In addition to this, why would a doctor possibly do a favor for a team and say a player is hurt more severely than he really is? And if a player is forced into LTIR by the team, wouldn't you think that the Players Union might file a grievance?

Anyways, is anyone who posts or lurks here a M.D.? I'd love to hear your input.
- EKolb13

Again, you can determine the severity of many injuries but no on can determine the time necessary to heal. It is all subjective.

I completely agree that LTIR would almost never be a long term answer without a very serious and real injury. Most hockey players will want back on the ice ASAP. Unless Hossa suffers something serious I doubt he will cooperate with any LTIR plans if they are to run into multiple seasons. He just seems like the type who will simply call it quits if he isn't playing to his standard.

Lets hope he is like Teemu.

Thank you. Liability is probably the single largest issue the reality of "vigorous enforcement" of the use of LTIR can never overcome. What doctor will ever not support further rehabilitation - particularly rest or limited use - if a patient claims to still have pain? Not happening in the current legal environment here.

So there you have 2 layers of opinions - the player claiming pain and the doctor prescribing no game play in order to heal - for the NHL to disprove an LTIR claim. Good luck with that.
- tredbrta

I lose no sleep over the Hossa contract for these reasons.

Thank you. Liability is probably the single largest issue the reality of "vigorous enforcement" of the use of LTIR can never overcome. What doctor will ever not support further rehabilitation - particularly rest or limited use - if a patient claims to still have pain? Not happening in the current legal environment here.

So there you have 2 layers of opinions - the player claiming pain and the doctor prescribing no game play in order to heal - for the NHL to disprove an LTIR claim. Good luck with that.
- tredbrta

You're making an argument that conspiracy to subvert LTIR is OK - you're right, they would probably get away with it. Doesn't make it OK.

In addition to this, why would a doctor possibly do a favor for a team and say a player is hurt more severely than he really is? And if a player is forced into LTIR by the team, wouldn't you think that the Players Union might file a grievance?

Anyways, is anyone who posts or lurks here a M.D.? I'd love to hear your input.
- EKolb13

I personally never expect a MD to trump up an injury,I would hope for some ethics.But due to the whole liability thing a doctor will have a hard time refuting one.

Until Barker shows otherwise, I agree.
- EKolb13

I'm not holding my breath on Barker doing anything. More often than not these reclamation projects don't materialize into anything, and that's league wide. Occasionally they do turn out well but nothing about Barker's situation leads me to believe he will.

You're making an argument that conspiracy to subvert LTIR is OK - you're right, they would probably get away with it. Doesn't make it OK.
- StLBravesFan

Exactly. Always enjoy reading your posts STL.

Just looked at Barker's draft. That 2004 draft was full of busts. Barker was one of many. Andrew Ladd and Blake Wheeler were the next 2 picks. Drew Stafford and Cory Schneider late in the 1st I think. All of those panned out somewhat. The other names you see are Rusty Olesz, Montoya, Radulov, Dubnyk, Chucko, Picard, Smid, Valabek. Guys like that. Half of the 30 picks I don't remember seeing in the NHL. Maybe 7 are legitimate NHL players.

Of course the first 2 picks were Ovechkin and Malkin......
- tredbrta

Look at it this way, if Ovechkin or Malkin fell to the Hawks, they would have never been bad enough to draft Toews and Kane a few years later and Ovi or Malkin would have probably been sent packing at the end of their ELCs under the old organIzation

See that goal on that wicked slap shot from Leddy at the point!

He aint' going anywhere

See that goal on that wicked slap shot from Leddy at the point!

He aint' going anywhere
- vabeachbear

Leddy is being showcased.