Just when I thought we were out — maybe they've pulled us back in?
On Saturday, the uber-reliable Chris Johnston of Sportsnet put his weight behind
a report out of Las Vegas that Vegas has been confirmed as one of the NHL's two hub cities.
"Ideally, the NHL would like to have a Canadian city serve as a hub alongside Vegas, but that won’t be finalized until the federal government makes a ruling (on the quarantine situation)," Johnston added. "Toronto is the preferred destination, assuming the quarantine issue can be managed."
Later on Saturday, I saw some chatter that the Rangers and Islanders are expected to play in Vegas, so it looks like they are trying to make sure that no team gets home-ice advantage. That's another reason why it would make sense for them to settle on one hub in the West and one in the East — and why Vancouver could be out of the mix.
But then, I found
this article in the Athletic, from Minnesota beat writer Michael Russo and Tampa Bay's Joe Smith.
They agree that Vegas is the front-runner at this time — and explain how the hotel situation could work, pointing out that non-gaming hotels like the Vdara are still currently closed, even though the Strip is open. If players got the run of a facility like that, it wouldn't be quite so quarantine-like — though I'd still argue that it'd be next-to-impossible to get any fresh air outside in Vegas' 100+ degree summer heat.
But here's another interesting tidbit from that story:
Nothing is official. The NHLPA executive board is expected to meet as early as Monday to discuss hubs, but the NHLPA has not yet agreed to any hub city, and the multimillion-dollar contracts needed to secure hotels, rinks and restaurants have not been fully negotiated, agreed upon and signed.
So while sources say that a report out of Las Vegas on Friday night stating the league has chosen Vegas to be a hub may and probably will ultimately end up true, it’s very premature and not yet the case.
So they're sayin' there's a chance?
Actually, Smith and Russo go on to say that if the Canadian government restrictions can be accommodated, the most likely scenario would be Vegas plus "either Toronto or Vancouver."
If Canada can't be worked out, then it would be Vegas plus "Los Angeles or Chicago."
They discount Edmonton as a Canadian option because there isn't enough high-end accommodation to house 12 NHL teams, as needed in the two-hub scenario. They give Vancouver high markets for hotels, restaurants and other amenities — and also mention that, like Vegas, Vancouver's J.W. Marriott/The Douglas complex currently remains closed and could easily be used as the main accommodation hub.
But if Canada does happen, Toronto fits more easily under the East/West framework — and I bet the fact that it also happens to be Sportsnet's main broadcast hub doesn't hurt, either — even though B.C. has delivered substantially better numbers in handling Covid-19.
The report out of Vegas said the hub city announcement could come on June 22, which is basically a week away. Johnston says "the truth is we should expect the official announcement before then," so this question could be answered quite soon — presumably, once the P.A. weighs in and the league makes a final decision on whether or not it can deal with Canadian government requirements.
There's another reason why this needs to be settled soon, too. Work visas.
NHL work visas typically expire on June 30, at the 'end' of hockey's calendar year. Elliotte Friedman is reporting that there's concern that if players don't return to their team of employment before that date, there could be a delay in getting visa extensions for the summer tournament processed.
This complicates matters — especially for Canadian teams.
There is going to be some dissatisfaction, because it is not mandatory for players to show up in their NHL cities until the start of those camps. Now, they are being asked to arrive 19 days earlier, with no certainty of resuming — although a ton of work is being done to prepare for it. Players were told to check with their teams about local quarantine rules. (There is a 14-day quarantine coming into Canada, although lobbying is underway to have team facilities included in the bubble.)
It'll be very interesting to see if Canucks players start to roll back into town this week, and if they're allowed to do the 'quarantine bubble' that would allow them to practice together during their first 14 days in the country.
To make a long story short — we're getting down to the wire. I'd say, within the next 7-10 days, we'll have a pretty good idea of whether the NHL's summer restart plan can actually come to fruition.
Now, on to other things...
I don't know when this year's NHL Awards winners will be announced — at this point, I imagine that will also depend on a lot of other things. But ballots from the PHWA members who vote on most of the awards must be in by Monday.
My sense is that Quinn Hughes is going to be in tough to beat out Cale Makar for the Calder Trophy. He did lead all rookies in scoring, and gets plenty of love in this market, but I've been hearing Makar's name more often. NHL.com writers don't vote on awards, but in
their poll for the award, Makar got 15 out of 18 first-place votes, while Hughes got just two and Elvis Merzlikins of Columbus got one.
Almost everyone says there isn't much to choose between the two players, and that they both could be Norris Trophy candidates down the road. But it also seems like almost everyone is giving the slight edge to Makar.
I do wonder if Elias Pettersson's win last year hurts Hughes' chances? Voters might be reluctant to give the Calder to a player from the same team in two consecutive years — it hasn't happened since Bobby Orr and Derek Sanderson won for the Bruins back in 1967 and 1968.
Even if Quinn doesn't win, the Canucks can still be very proud of having three Calder Finalists in three years, once you factor in Brock Boeser's second-place finish in 2018. But a win for Makar will give the Avs three winners in the last nine years, after Gabriel Landeskog took home the prize in 2012 and Nathan MacKinnon won in 2014.
And how crazy is that that Landeskog will already be starting his 10th NHL season next year? He has had his share of injury issues but ranks second in games played from his 2011 draft class with 633, 14 games behind Sean Couturier. He's also second in points, with 460, but that's 67 points behind leader Nikita Kucherov.
Anyway...
Iain MacIntyre doesn't address the Calder race in his new mailbag. He does suggest that Jacob Markstrom will get some Vezina votes, but acknowledges that because most of the stats that support Markstrom's case as one of the league's best goalies come from proprietary services, there likely isn't a groundswell of support. Also, a reminder — the Vezina is voted by the league's general managers, so MacIntyre won't get to put in his two cents on Markstrom's behalf.
He does drop one other tidbit, though, which I haven't previously seen discussed, when asked about the possibility of a Loui Eriksson buyout.
Eriksson is still owed $5 million over two years after another signing-bonus instalment of $3 million is paid this summer. Would you walk away from $5 million? Loui’s not retiring, but I do think the Canucks will try to run the Zach Bogosian playbook and see if the sides can mutually agree to terminate his contract, which would allow Eriksson to sign elsewhere and finish his career on his terms – instead of in the minors.
Bogosian, if you recall, was in the final year of a deal that carried a cap hit of just over $5 million when he was placed on unconditional waivers and had his contract terminated by the Buffalo Sabres on February 22, just before the trade deadline.
One day later, the Tampa Bay Lightning signed him to a deal worth $1.3 million. They couldn't have traded for him at his original salary, but were able to squeeze him onto their roster for their playoff run — which means the soon-to-be 30-year-old defenseman who was originally drafted by the Atlanta Thrashers could play the first playoff games of his NHL career this summer, with the Lightning.
Eriksson still has two years left on his current deal, which would make his situation trickier. And he turns 35 in July. In addition to having just $5 million still owed to him after his bonus this summer, his full no-trade clause also shifts to a 15-team no-trade list next season, which does give the Canucks some flexibility if Jim Benning is able to swing a deal for him.
Gary Bettman has given a hard no to the idea of compliance buyouts at this time — and teams have indicated that don't want to spend real money to buy out bad contracts. I wonder if that concept might get revisited once the salary-cap and revenue realities for our post-Covid world start to come into focus?
MacIntyre dismisses the possibility but as he says, "A compliance buyout would be better for the Canucks than what had been the planned NHL increase on next season’s cap. Six million buys a lot of wriggle room."
Dare to dream!
Vancouver Canucks Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»