Curt

Lol, I didn’t say he has been good, fine, or even acceptable. Just that he hasn’t been THAT bad, treading water. By all means, replace him with someone better. I’ll be happy.

Krebs has not been that bad. He is producing almost no offense but also allows almost no shots or goals against. He is treading water out there.

Yeah, this is a surgery for when your hips are too worn out to do what you need them to do. So anyone one who gets this surgery is going to be an old worn out guy. The question is: Can this surgery successfully allow those hips to do what is needed to be a good NHL player for a couple more years?

Jovanovski, he played thirty something games then retired. Kesler, Bakstrom, Hagelin. Basically no one has had the surgery then come back to be a real player. Small sample size, but concerning.

Not trying to put words in your mouth. The original comment w was replying to said that he should be “out of the league for good”, and you seemed to say that you were in favor of “banning” him from the NHL. Banning sound rather permanent to me. Did you mean a temporary ban? As in a suspension?

“Because everyone is doing it” is not a justification. I do concede that in some circumstances, things like this make sense, but not for the majority of jobs.

That’s totally fine. I never said that Lucic should face zero league repercussions. I assumed that there was a clause like that as part of the players’ contracts. What I objected to was people saying that he should be banned for life.

If being convicted of a DWI violates already established conditions of your employment, then that is not objectionable. How does someone get a second chance in the NHL if they are banned for life?

Hmm, pronto? Before any legal conclusions have been come to? All it takes is to be accused in order to be banned for life?

I was responding to a hypothetical scenario where Lucic is banned by the NHL, which he won’t be. I was just arguing that a banning would not be helpful to anyone. There is no reason that allowing Lucic to continue as an NHL player should be a risk to the NHL’s livelihood or business.

That makes sense. People are leaving their children in your care. I understand why that clause is in place.

1) Like I said earlier, if any contractual clauses are violated, then I’m fine with the repercussions layed out by them. 2) I’m well aware that blackballing/cancelling can happen. That’s my whole point. 3) Watson was not blackballed. In fact, in the middle of a known investigation, he was given a huge contract. He was suspended for violation of part of his contract, served his suspension, and went back to work. This case was handled in a proper way, as far as I know, in my opinion.

My definition of cancel culture differs slightly from your but that’s mostly irrelevant to the topic at hand. I’d argue that, while his actions were an assault on public security, banning him from the NHL doesn’t improve public security. It would just be a BS, low effort PR move on the NHL’s part. In the case of someone who does something like this, domestic violence, if you are in favor of revoking their ability to work, you probably should just be in favor of a long prison sentence for them, no? How is someone supposed to get help/improve themselves while they are blackballed from working?

Yeah, I get that, but I don’t totally get it. You know? I suppose it depends on any specific phrases about “being a role model” type conduct in the CBA. Especially for an organization that accepts players punching eachother in the face as “part of the game”, an outright banning for something like this is a tough moral hardline to justify. In my eyes at least. A very poor justification, in my opinion. Issue public statements denouncing the behavior, get him help with therapy or whatever he needs help with. Show some regard for him as a human being instead of simply discarding him, like some people call for. If you guys can’t tell, I’m not a big fan of cancel culture type stuff in general. In most cases I don’t think it does the world any good. It’s easy to discard and denounce people. It’s much harder to make a positive impact on the world.

Not that I condone domestic violence, but what would be the justification for banning someone from a job based on something they did unrelated to the job?

Yeah, I’m not trying to say Kane definitely can not play again, but a few guys have tried this surgery and have gone back to teams and tried, but none of them have been able to continue their careers for more than 40ish games. It’s a huge surgery. It’s not just ligament surgery or something soft tissue that needs time to heal. It’s a hip replacement. He has metal hip joints now. So he could be the first, but until someone is able to actually play after this kind of surgery I’m extremely skeptical that Kane will be able to or, if he is able to get out there, that he will be any good.

Marchand had a very very different surgery. These hip resurfacing surgeries, which is almost a hip replacement (you end up with a metal ball in metal socket for your hip joint), have terrible outcomes for NHL players thus far. It’s a small sample size, but the results of these surgeries has been truly awful in terms of continuing an NHL career. No one has been able to play more than half a season after getting the surgery. I don’t think people are putting enough consideration into the idea that Kane’s NHL career might actually be already finished.

Well, domestic basically means inside the home. I suppose it’s possible that it the term could be used for an altercation with a friend or something inside the home, but the term is almost always used when it’s an issue between spouses/significant others.

Are you asserting that a team’s playing style, be it offensive or defensive, has no correlation with the number of shots/goals that occur in their games? It’s a bold position. You may believe it, but you are going to need to provide some evidence to convince me. As of right now, I’m going to reject your comment as incorrect.

This is actually not true. At least any differences in playing style league wide have not resulted in a decrease in shots or goals per game.

I think last year they did a lot more of jumping out of the defensive zone early in order to generate offense off the rush. That’s great for creating scoring chances, but it also puts you in big trouble if you turn it over in the neutral zone. They come right back the other way, fast. I think they haven’t done that as much this year. They have been more likely to go back deep in the defensive zone to help the D, rather than try to get in position to blow the zone early. This certainly doesn’t mean they can’t play with pace or intensity. There will be less rush offense though. My guess would be that you are right about growing pains. I think they are being coached to play a more defensive style where they focus on getting back deep in the defensive zone, and they are still adjusting to that new style. I think they need to find a balance and learn when to pick their spots to generate rush offense.

Yup. You at least put him in the AHL and if he is awesome there for half a season, give him some NHL games in the 2nd half. At least make him show it at the lower level.

What happened? PS: I’m going to need you to brush up on your Game of Thrones. Basically, the guy who got his hand chopped off wasn’t the King. He is the Queen’s brother. Oh, unless you were talking about the King’s Hand, Ned Stark! Didn’t think of that first. That guy got his head chopped off.

No apologies necessary. I appreciate the conversation. It’s fine to just list out the 6-7 guys that you have the most money or term commitments to and call that your core I guess. And the idea that you should budget so you are able to adequately fill out both a forward and defenseman group makes total sense. I guess my sticking point is what I said in my previous post. In your mind, what is a core? What makes a player a core player? Is it just him being signed to a long contract? For example, Samuelsson is signed for a while, but he isn’t making a ton of money (it’s a very average salary) and he doesn’t have trade protection or anything like that. What makes him part of the “core”?

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/35377168/how-nicklas-backstrom-accelerating-return-ice-hip-surgery According to this ESPN piece by Emily Kaplan from earlier this year, only Jovanovski and Kesler had this procedure done previous to Backstrom. The outcomes have been quite poor. Seems like an absolute last ditch effort. I actually didn’t quite realize how serious this was. It’s in essence a hip replacement. A newer technique for it, but still the hip joint is now a metal ball in a metal socket.