Talk to me after year 3/4, he is 20 years old. This team has has no identity, not line combinations! This organization needs stability!
- Irish 14

He'll be 22 in November

I dont think friedman mentioned any of them as candidates...he said "type" probably referring to the structure those teams have

i.e Calgary has ownership-->burke--->treliving--->whoever the coach is

The futa thing is weird. two teams asked and kings didnt give permission. Id just leave him off the short list. I was all for the firing but they are on a bit of clock here.
- Sabresfan-365

I don't think Futa is likely either. It's just weird that they specifically deny asking the Kings to speak to Lombardi that they a) already have spoken to him or b) have asked permission to speak to someone else i.e. Futa or c) already know who they want and are trying to keep it quiet for some reason, team still in the playoffs, a contract issue...

........

That bottom line numbers don't matter. The "oh, he was the 2nd forward taken, and that the 3rd forward taken has better numbers but started playing later..." you can explain away anything you don't like.
- Wetbandit1

So if I posted that Sam Reinhart had a .11 PPG the year after he was drafted, while Barkov had a .44 PPG, you wouldn't say that's unfair to say Barkov was 4x better than Reinhart?

He'll be 22 in November
- chilliard77

I'll be 33 next March. I'm still 32. He's 21. I know he said 20, but it's not like he'll be 22 in June or something. It's still over 6 months away before he turns 22.

He'll be 22 in November
- chilliard77

Get him a "We Care Van" kid is old!!

I don't think Futa is likely either. It's just weird that they specifically deny asking the Kings to speak to Lombardi that they a) already have spoken to him or b) have asked permission to speak to someone else i.e. Futa or c) already know who they want and are trying to keep it quiet for some reason, team still in the playoffs, a contract issue...
- Wetbandit1

it is entirely possible they wanted Lombardi here in capacity that he didnt want.

I think hed make an ideal VP just based on experience, reputation hes established within the league but it would mean him not having much to do with roster construction, something he may not be interested in.

So if I posted that Sam Reinhart had a .11 PPG the year after he was drafted, while Barkov had a .44 PPG, you wouldn't say that's unfair to say Barkov was 4x better than Reinhart?
- sbroads24

I would say the number of games certainly matters when you're talking about that when one guy plays 9 and the other plays 54. If they both played about the same number then no that wouldn't be unfair.

I'm a believer the Olympic sized rink solves a lot. It doesn't seem much different when the best players make up all star teams to play for their country during the world tournaments, but at the very least the larger ice would open up sht lnes. Once the skilled players were used to playing on it, they would be taking advantage of more ice to work with. No questions asked. Also, I never heard it mentioned, but what if they pushed the blue lines maybe 6" towards center ice?
- Hatboro_Swords

I have a few ideas without changing the rink size:

-Call a (frank)ing interference penalty, FFS, it's literally happening almost every offensive zone entry. The constant hooking and slashing is bad enough but the holding and interference penalties are happening constantly and very rarely, if ever, called.

- Make the RED LINE the offsides line on powerplays.

- Don't let the team killing a penalty ice the puck

- Make a player serve his entire penalty, regardless of goals against

- Remove the trapezoid

- If the shootout stays, a SO goal counts toward season totals (this would never put a guy over 92 in a season and at most gets one or two guys a decade pushing 70; goal scoring increases)

Your suggestion at the end is one I haven't considered, though. If you put the blue lines closer to the center-ice line, then you have a smaller neutral zone but how much more in-zone possession as a result? There's only a handful of plays at the blue line per game that this would effect.

I'm all for increasing the rink size. This is so easily done that the NHL is lying any time they have an excuse against it. This would take ONE summer of renovations per arena, if that. You knock out the first 5 rows of seats, up ticket prices accordingly so the loss of a couple hundred seats doesn't affect revenue.

But this is assuming that a larger rink would actually increase scoring. There's always the international/Olympic argument but the NHL has the best goaltenders in the world. How much more scoring would this result in, if the NHL were to have bigger rinks? It might be negligible.

Goalie pads are humongous. If they cropped every piece of a goalie's equipment by .25'' or a couple CMs, that might have a profound effect on scoring. The more athletic goalies lose a few pounds of extra weight and the one's relying on large pads and positioning are exposed, so we'd see a potential paradigm shift in goaltending as a result.

There are dozens of ideas to increase scoring. Dozens. The NHL is doing maybe 1 small thing per year that doesn't dramatically effect anything. They're sitting on their hands because the Canadian market alone will ensure the NHL's success. They have no desire to compete with the NBA or NFL for casual ratings and that's the biggest issue in the end. The game is too boring to watch as a casual fan. If the game were fast and exciting, the casual fan wouldn't give 2 (frank)s about the rules if it was fun to watch.

it is entirely possible they wanted Lombardi here in capacity that he didnt want.

I think hed make an ideal VP just based on experience, reputation hes established within the league but it would mean him not having much to do with roster construction, something he may not be interested in.
- Sabresfan-365

Could be. I just think it's odd how much they've addressed it. Three times I think, which is two times too many.

I have a few ideas without changing the rink size:

-Call a (frank)ing interference penalty, FFS, it's literally happening almost every offensive zone entry. The constant hooking and slashing is bad enough but the holding and interference penalties are happening constantly and very rarely, if ever, called.

- Make the RED LINE the offsides line on powerplays.

- Don't let the team killing a penalty ice the puck

- Make a player serve his entire penalty, regardless of goals against

- Remove the trapezoid

- If the shootout stays, a SO goal counts toward season totals (this would never put a guy over 92 in a season and at most gets one or two guys a decade pushing 70; goal scoring increases)

Your suggestion at the end is one I haven't considered, though. If you put the blue lines closer to the center-ice line, then you have a smaller neutral zone but how much more in-zone possession as a result? There's only a handful of plays at the blue line per game that this would effect.

I'm all for increasing the rink size. This is so easily done that the NHL is lying any time they have an excuse against it. This would take ONE summer of renovations per arena, if that. You knock out the first 5 rows of seats, up ticket prices accordingly so the loss of a couple hundred seats doesn't affect revenue.

But this is assuming that a larger rink would actually increase scoring. There's always the international/Olympic argument but the NHL has the best goaltenders in the world. How much more scoring would this result in, if the NHL were to have bigger rinks? It might be negligible.

Goalie pads are humongous. If they cropped every piece of a goalie's equipment by .25'' or a couple CMs, that might have a profound effect on scoring. The more athletic goalies lose a few pounds of extra weight and the one's relying on large pads and positioning are exposed, so we'd see a potential paradigm shift in goaltending as a result.

There are dozens of ideas to increase scoring. Dozens. The NHL is doing maybe 1 small thing per year that doesn't dramatically effect anything. They're sitting on their hands because the Canadian market alone will ensure the NHL's success. They have no desire to compete with the NBA or NFL for casual ratings and that's the biggest issue in the end. The game is too boring to watch as a casual fan. If the game were fast and exciting, the casual fan wouldn't give 2 (frank)s about the rules if it was fun to watch.
- BeadyEyedDouche

I agree with these two, others not so much

........
- SABRES 89

2 days without hockey and this is what happens.

Could be. I just think it's odd how much they've addressed it. Three times I think, which is two times too many.
- Wetbandit1

we need the dubas/keefe combo.


just think how great it would be if they had a hand in building a team that beats the leafs.

I have a few ideas without changing the rink size:

-Call a (frank)ing interference penalty, FFS, it's literally happening almost every offensive zone entry. The constant hooking and slashing is bad enough but the holding and interference penalties are happening constantly and very rarely, if ever, called.

- Make the RED LINE the offsides line on powerplays.

- Don't let the team killing a penalty ice the puck

- Make a player serve his entire penalty, regardless of goals against

- Remove the trapezoid

- If the shootout stays, a SO goal counts toward season totals (this would never put a guy over 92 in a season and at most gets one or two guys a decade pushing 70; goal scoring increases)

Your suggestion at the end is one I haven't considered, though. If you put the blue lines closer to the center-ice line, then you have a smaller neutral zone but how much more in-zone possession as a result? There's only a handful of plays at the blue line per game that this would effect.

I'm all for increasing the rink size. This is so easily done that the NHL is lying any time they have an excuse against it. This would take ONE summer of renovations per arena, if that. You knock out the first 5 rows of seats, up ticket prices accordingly so the loss of a couple hundred seats doesn't affect revenue.

But this is assuming that a larger rink would actually increase scoring. There's always the international/Olympic argument but the NHL has the best goaltenders in the world. How much more scoring would this result in, if the NHL were to have bigger rinks? It might be negligible.

Goalie pads are humongous. If they cropped every piece of a goalie's equipment by .25'' or a couple CMs, that might have a profound effect on scoring. The more athletic goalies lose a few pounds of extra weight and the one's relying on large pads and positioning are exposed, so we'd see a potential paradigm shift in goaltending as a result.

There are dozens of ideas to increase scoring. Dozens. The NHL is doing maybe 1 small thing per year that doesn't dramatically effect anything. They're sitting on their hands because the Canadian market alone will ensure the NHL's success. They have no desire to compete with the NBA or NFL for casual ratings and that's the biggest issue in the end. The game is too boring to watch as a casual fan. If the game were fast and exciting, the casual fan wouldn't give 2 (frank)s about the rules if it was fun to watch.
- BeadyEyedDouche

Hhmmm - seems misleading

I would say the number of games certainly matters when you're talking about that when one guy plays 9 and the other plays 54. If they both played about the same number then no that wouldn't be unfair.
- Wetbandit1

That's partly why that list was so moronic.

Compare him to his peers. He's behind. People expect more.

Life goes on, he'll get over it. Or he won't, who knows

........
- SABRES 89

I'm just glad your here

That's partly why that list was so moronic.

Compare him to his peers. He's behind. People expect more.

Life goes on, he'll get over it. Or he won't, who knows
- sbroads24

Yep, having it both ways still...... you will never change. But you give the board some juice! Keep it up 57!

And those 3 guys, MacKinnon, Barkov and Drouin are all way better than the first 3 forwards taken in '14. You take what you're given, not what you want.

I'll be 33 next March. I'm still 32. He's 21. I know he said 20, but it's not like he'll be 22 in June or something. It's still over 6 months away before he turns 22.
- Wetbandit1

It's relevant because it's not like he's turning 22 at the end of next year. I look at age by the season in hockey. He's going to be 22 very early in the season next year.

That's partly why that list was so moronic.

Compare him to his peers. He's behind. People expect more.

Life goes on, he'll get over it. Or he won't, who knows
- sbroads24

His peers are Draisaitl, Bennett and DalColle. He's hands down better than 2 of those guys.

I agree with these two, others not so much
- sbroads24

The point is that the NHL could be doing a lot more to try and increase goal scoring and they aren't.

Get him a "We Care Van" kid is old!!
- Irish 14

The point is it's not like he's some 18 year old rookie anymore.

Don't use the condescending head shake emoji at me

It's relevant because it's not like he's turning 22 at the end of next year. I look at age by the season in hockey. He's going to be 22 very early in the season next year.
- chilliard77

And if he goes off does he get credit for being "only 22". We're only judging him on what he's done so far. He just completed his 21 year old season.

It's relevant because it's not like he's turning 22 at the end of next year. I look at age by the season in hockey. He's going to be 22 very early in the season next year.
- chilliard77

Really!! Let it go.....

we need the dubas/keefe combo.


just think how great it would be if they had a hand in building a team that beats the leafs.
- Sabresfan-365

Meh, the Leafs have 14 guys in the front office who knows who's doing what?