xzzy posted:

I just hope they remove the ridiculous $2500 cap on fines.

There shouldn't be a cap at all, but if it's impossible to get rid of, at least make it a percentage of the athlete's salary, or maybe calculated off a league average.

CBJSprague24 posted:

Playing NHL 12, I just won the Cup with the CBJ and have the Calder Cup Final still to play with the Springfield Falcons. Which brings me to a question I'd never really thought about :

In a situation like this where the NHL team is finished with their season but the AHL Playoffs are still ongoing, would the NHL team send players on two-way deals down (in my CBJ's case, Byers, Atkinson, Johansen, MacKenzie, Giroux, Williams) to provide reinforcements to the farm, give them the summer off, or let the players decide for themselves? Is there something in the CBA, etc. that allows or prevents this from going on?

quote:

The NHL trade deadline is today (February 27, 2012) and any moves made can and usually do have some sort of impact on American Hockey League teams but that doesn’t mean moves are over. Teams can still trade players in the AHL and any moves have to be done by the deadline of March 5th at 3pm eastern time which is when clear day rosters are due and usually announced a day or two later. Also, any players in the NHL must be on an AHL roster today February 27 at 3pm to be eligible for inclusion. Corey Tropp was already sent to the Amerks today and we can likely expect Zack Kassian to be sent down as well and then immediately called back up.

What is the clear day roster? According to AHL by-laws, only those players listed on a team’s Clear Day roster are eligible to compete in the remainder of the 2011-12 AHL regular season and in the 2012 Calder Cup Playoffs, unless emergency conditions arise as a result of recall, injury or suspension.

That still leaves plenty of room to make changes to the roster but it’s done to prevent teams from sending down half of an NHL roster once the season is over. Teams may also add signed draft choices and players signed to amateur tryout contracts, provided that their respective Junior seasons are complete. If a player is called up to the NHL or a player is injured a team can still have someone play that’s not on the 22 man list.

This is all something that generates a lot of confusion this time of year and happens every year, myself included. Will try and send this out earlier than usual next season so we can all be informed!

FuzzySkinner posted:

since I'm a newb, but a casual fan of the sport, I do have a dumb hypothetical based off the movie "Sudden Death" with Jean Claude Van Damme.

There's two questions I have related to it.

One, the villain in the movie goes "I wonder who they'd give the trophy to if I blew up the arena right now?". Well, who would they give the trophy to?

And two, if the events did transpire, how would the NHL handle playing the rest of OT?

Thanks guys.

Zone of Danger posted:

This sorta happened in the 88 Cup Finals. Halfway through game four the power cut out, tied at three. They ended up replaying the whole game two nights later. Not sure if the stats from the abandoned game count towards people's career totals, but Wikipedia would have me believe that a record was set for fastest goal in a Cup Finals, and that that record is official.

I guess that's a little less lethal than your hypothetical Van Damme scenario though, so if an arena blew up and people died? Hard to say, but 'who won the cup' is probably the least of their worries. If nobody died I guess they would replay it, if people died they would probably suspend the series and never settle it.

Moe_Rahn posted:

based on the physics of the helicopter crash I think it is safe to assume that Sudden Death takes place in an alternate dimension where standard rules of hockey would not necessarily apply

FuzzySkinner posted:

since I'm a newb, but a casual fan of the sport, I do have a dumb hypothetical based off the movie "Sudden Death" with Jean Claude Van Damme.

There's two questions I have related to it.

One, the villain in the movie goes "I wonder who they'd give the trophy to if I blew up the arena right now?". Well, who would they give the trophy to?

And two, if the events did transpire, how would the NHL handle playing the rest of OT?

Thanks guys.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disaster_draft posted:

The National Hockey League (NHL) contingency plan activates if five or more players[1][5] on a team "are killed or disabled."[3] The team would select players from other NHL teams, paying with funds from a special insurance fund. Once its roster has one goaltender and 14 other players, a special draft involving the teams unaffected by the earlier selection could be held, with each team able to protect one goaltender and 10 other players.[1][5]

FuzzySkinner posted:

I'm not psychotic or anything, just was wondering if there were indeed a precedent for that, or a rule in case such an event took place.

xzzy posted:

After the '05 lockout, rules were put in place that if an NHL season were lost, minor league teams could challenge for a cup win. Stems from the fact that the NHL doesn't actually own the stanley cup and some of the historical language was interpreted to mean that anyone could play for the cup if they wanted to.

That's the only hard rule I know of that exists to handle the championship if something were to go wrong.

a false posted:

here's a fairly serious answer:

if the arena was blown up and the teams were killed, i'd imagine they would do something like they did during the cancelled 2004-05 season where the trophy was engraved with SEASON NOT PLAYED, except instead with TROPHY NOT AWARDED. alternatively, they might engrave the trophy with the names of the personnel of both teams.

quote:

1919
Montreal Canadiens
Seattle Metropolitans
Series Not Completed

Hand Knit posted:

The 1919 Stanley Cup between Montreal and Seattle was abandoned with the series tied 2-2 due to an outbreak of influenza that resulted in the death of Joe Hall. The cup reads:


I guess it is worth noting that Montreal formally forfeited the series to Seattle and the Metropolitans coach declined the forfeit, but the procedure would probably be the same.

FuzzySkinner posted:

Having just read the history of the Seattle Metropolitans, it's weird that they have a Stanley Cup title, yet have not had a pro team since then.

I'd love to see Seattle get one back and for them to have a rivalry with Vancouver fwiw.

Thufir posted:

http://www.letsgoamerks.com/2012/02/27/information-about-the-deadline-for-ahl-playoff-rosters/

myron cope posted:

I don't think NHL 12 prevents you from sending them down, though.

And it handles waivers wrong. It goes by 2-way deals, which only really deal with compensation (2-way have separate AHL and NHL salaries, 1-way don't. It's why Wade Redden still makes his 20 million a year*--and no escrow!). NHL 12 treats anyone on a 2-way deal as waiver exempt. Really, your waiver eligibility is determined by number of NHL games played + number of NHL seasons (or is it age?). And I think maybe "emergency" vs "regular" call-ups. But I'm not sure on that one.

*not his actual salary

xzzy posted:

Ring up Seattle's favorite pal, Steve Ballmer, and get him to pay for a new arena.

toe knee hand posted:

I was at a hockey game today (English league) and someone got a 2-minute minor for icing... It was announced as "2 minutes for icing infraction" and it wasn't a bench minor (i.e. for illegal change or something) but was called on a player. It's a league with no-touch icing if that's relevant. Anyone have any idea why it was a minor penalty and not just normal icing? Google has failed me.

e: I guess it could have been a bench minor, though it was not announced as such.

tadashi posted:

What are the skills/tools that generally separate a center from a guy who plays on the wing?

myron cope posted:

Grittybeard posted:

I followed the last lockout closer than I have this one and remember being sort of on the owner's side. What is the general opinion on this one? This is sort of a weird question since I'm just asking for the average dumb guy on the street's argument for both sides, I'm not asking to be convinced.

Grittybeard posted:

If there's a short version of the owner's side that's more involved than 'gently caress you got mine' I'd be interested in hearing it

Grittybeard posted:

Thanks, that works. If there's a short version of the owner's side that's more involved than 'gently caress you got mine' I'd be interested in hearing it, but the general thought that there's a lot better balance this time around seems to fit with what I was thinking.

Lawnie posted:

Centers have significantly more defensive responsibility, for one. Wingers are supposed to stay high and cover the opposing d-men to prevent point shots and keep the offense from going low to high, and to be ready either along the boards or cutting across the defensive zone to receive a breakout pass from someone. The center is responsible for essentially chasing the puck, getting in passing/shooting lanes, and helping his defensemen with covering the slot or winning puck battles in the corners. Centers also take essentially every faceoff in the game, so that's a specific skill that typically sets them apart from wingers. Offensively, the center will more often carry the puck up the middle into the offensive zone and will have the puck more than the wingers. Again, centers don't necessarily have a specific location to be in the offensive zone, while wingers will usually spend most of the time along the half-boards (halfway between the goal line and the blue line, along the side boards) or lower. Offense is much more coach and strategy-dependent, too, so positioning in the offensive zone is often more fluid than it is in the defensive zone.

I hope that's sort of clear and helps explain the difference, at least a bit. There are many people here that are much more knowledgeable about this part of the game than I am, though; hopefully one of them chimes in as well.

EDIT: just saw that you have a cubs-related avatar. Once hockey starts back up, watch some blackhawks games and pay close attention to Jonathan Toews. He's one of the best 2-way centers in the game, so watch for how he plays in the defensive zone. He's phenomenal at coming in for support for his defensemen, and does a fantastic job of covering the parts of the defensive zone that the other 4 guys can't get to. Not to mention he can do some ridiculously amazing things offensively.

TheHoosier posted:

Yeah i'm sorry for being unclear. I'm just wondering what recent big games are must-watch for the Blackhawks or any team in general. You know, those defining games that are good to show to someone new. Last 10 years or so are fine. The Stanley Cup matches go without saying, I've been watching them

Again sorry for being unclear, it's inexplicably harder to find a great jumping off point for the NHL than for English football. For me, anyway.

myron cope posted:

You could watch Pens/Flyers from the 2012 playoffs for basically the exact opposite of soccer. It was like a basketball game with how much scoring there was.