Vancouver Canucks Messageboard

Whatever, I was debating a coupla guys who subtly changed their position mid-debate, but yeah time to move on...

Cornuck wrote:All conflicts of interest and joke LTIR aside, just the idea of having a dirty player like Pronger in the department of "player safety" is a joke.

"Yeah - sure he stomped on the guy's ankle, but it isn't 'that' broken - no suspension".

Ummm.....I think Pronger got 8 games for that (rest of the regular season). I'm fairly confident he'd be handing out discipline for the same.

mathonwy wrote:I don't know Pronger from a hole in the ground

No, that was Saddam Hussein, but fair enough; if Saddam had played hockey, he'd had the exact same attitude as Pronger, so easy mistake.

Per wrote:

mathonwy wrote:I don't know Pronger from a hole in the ground

No, that was Saddam Hussein, but fair enough; if Saddam had played hockey, he'd had the exact same attitude as Pronger, so easy mistake.

+1

Strangelove wrote:

ClamRussel wrote:

Strangelove wrote:

ClamRussel wrote: Exactly. This is something only a raging capitalist Rand idolizing sociopath cannot understand. Just because something isn't technically illegal doesn't mean you should do it.

For the record, it seems to me that you and IN have been suggesting this hiring is illegal somehow.

For the record, in response to the suggestions of you two gentlemen...

I have been trying to explain the difference between illegal and "something the NHL shouldn't do".

Yeah, I agreed from the get-go they shouldn't do it bro (unless they're trying to be hilarious).

Drunk again, bro?

Sober as a judge.

You (and IN) were clearly stating earlier that it may be illegal for the NHL to hire Pronger in this capacity.

I disagreed and argued otherwise.

Now you're saying well it SHOULD be illegal.

I win.

I may have been slightly intoxicated the other night, but I was right...

We "clearly" stated "it may be illegal"... Next round's on me Doc.

Tciso wrote:

Per wrote:

mathonwy wrote:I don't know Pronger from a hole in the ground

No, that was Saddam Hussein, but fair enough; if Saddam had played hockey, he'd had the exact same attitude as Pronger, so easy mistake.

+1

The NHL would certainly have put Sadaam in charge of player safety when he retired, no doubt.

Kings re-signed Muzzin 5 years $20M.

Ducks demote John Gibson to the AHL so Fredrik Andersen is thee starter with Jason LaBarbera as backup...didn't take long for that young goalie duo to get taken a part by the cup contenders.

So the Nuge is hurt?

I wonder if Hamhuis gave him a boo boo?

ClamRussel wrote: We "clearly" stated "it may be illegal"... Next round's on me Doc.

Clam, at some point in the conversation you switched over to “Well it SHOULD be illegal”.

But don’t say you weren’t originally clearly implying it is actually illegal:

ClamRussel wrote: Kinda like collecting compo while working a 2nd job.

ClamRussel wrote: Isn't Bettman admitting the Flyers are circumventing the CBA/cap?

ClamRussel wrote:

Vader wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:
Given Pronger is still under contract with the Flyers they would have to consent to this job with the NHL. No way they do so unless they are guaranteed no cap hit. That's collusion.

Did the Panthers ask for salary cap relief when Luongo took a cap with TSN durng the playoffs? Did Luongo have to retire to take a second job?

Was Luongo on LTIR and not counting against Fla/Van's cap? Was Florida in the playoffs? Are there salaries & a cap during the playoffs?

ClamRussel wrote: Elliotte Friedman says not so fast:

Article 26 of CBA

"No player being paid by a team can be paid by the league."

The way you summed up Article 26 was incorrect.

A player actually CAN be paid by a team and be paid by the league.

This was one of the things I argued.

Pronger does NOT have to retire before legally taking this job.

And there's no "collusion".

Anyhoo… MOVING ON…

herb wrote:So the Nuge is hurt?

I wonder if Hamhuis gave him a boo boo?

That's the rumor. Eakins is swearing that the injury happened on the hit but the suspicion is it happened during the fight.

So both Colorado goalies are injured. They are now in desperation mode trying to find a good starter, who can then be a good back up when Varly gets back. I wonder what we could get for Lack? Do we want to go there? They are said to be looking hard at Vokoun.

Hockey Widow wrote:So both Colorado goalies are injured. They are now in desperation mode trying to find a good starter, who can then be a good back up when Varly gets back. I wonder what we could get for Lack? Do we want to go there? They are said to be looking hard at Vokoun.

How bad is Varlamov? Colorado has tons of youth, but I don't see them trading away what we want. I believe their young core is untouchable. Are they Mathias and Lack for O'Reilly desperate?

I know this is totally wrong but I will say it regardless.

Trade Miller to Colorado.

Hockey Widow wrote:So both Colorado goalies are injured. They are now in desperation mode trying to find a good starter, who can then be a good back up when Varly gets back. I wonder what we could get for Lack? Do we want to go there? They are said to be looking hard at Vokoun.

I was posting on this issue in T&R, but looks like it's already happening here. I bet JB is seeing if Sakic wants Markstrom. I don't see him moving Lack to a conference rival, unless the return is hard to turn down (one of their good young D say), but Markstrom could get some depth or maybe prospect/pick for a guy who, let's face it, probably has next to zero future in the Canucks org.

Boston Canucker wrote:

Hockey Widow wrote:So both Colorado goalies are injured. They are now in desperation mode trying to find a good starter, who can then be a good back up when Varly gets back. I wonder what we could get for Lack? Do we want to go there? They are said to be looking hard at Vokoun.

I was posting on this issue in T&R, but looks like it's already happening here. I bet JB is seeing if Sakic wants Markstrom. I don't see him moving Lack to a conference rival, unless the return is hard to turn down (one of their good young D say), but Markstrom could get some depth or maybe prospect/pick for a guy who, let's face it, probably has next to zero future in the Canucks org.

Is Kesler can be dealt to the Ducks then anything is on the table IMO.