https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/breaking-nhl-fines-10-teams-for-salary-cap-violations

Doesn't look to me like simply overages rolling forward...
- ToewsdNKanefusd

Seriously??? How about we quit over-reacting to every piece of drivel posted by some hack site looking for clicks.

I know he's beloved and is a great interview, but I've never liked the guy, even when he was in his prime -- he's been a cherry-picker and stat hound his entire career. Jagr's been in the league for 36 years, and has yet to backcheck once. Now, he's slow as molasses, still plays no D, and in his rare appearances in the playoffs over the past 10 years, he was not impactful. I'd be a hard pass on this guy.


Maybe I'm just still bitter about '92 Stanley Cup finals ....
- Hank_Greenberg

To each his own.

Personally, I like him. He's a work horse to stay ion the shape he's in and some nights, out-plays guys half his age.

Kane isn't much of a back-checker either, but he has that offensive ability which you can kind of justify him being a little lax on the other side of the game. I think Jagr is the same.

Not to mention, he's a great veteran for the young guys to learn from. The Panthers loved him in the locker room. If they Hawks are getting younger, maybe it'd pay off to pick him up for a cheap contract.

https://www.hockeyfeed.com/nhl-news/breaking-nhl-fines-10-teams-for-salary-cap-violations

Doesn't look to me like simply overages rolling forward...
- ToewsdNKanefusd

It says overages right in the twitter feed below the chart. And the $ match the bounses paid. Its not a penalty

Pouliot has a weird year last year where he dropped off crazy. Chances are he'll rebound at least somewhat into a middle 6 performance range. On the cheap, it's a low risk/high reward situation.

I would stay clear of Hartnell tbh. He's been declining, is pretty slow, and has a low defensive impact. Looks like a good checking player - is actually an ineffective checking player. The risk that he slides more is also high. He also may want 35+ bonuses thrown in. Could be useful, but not necessarily the best use of cap space.

Definitely wouldn't want both Pouliot and Hartnell - if neither works, team is (frank)ed.
- L_B_R

Which stats are you looking at for Hartnell? You always seem to have good QoC info. I can only usually find Corsi stuff and shot suppression stuffk.

Seriously??? How about we quit over-reacting to every piece of drivel posted by some hack site looking for clicks.
- TheTrob

Whoa, deep breath. We're all friends here. This is a place you should be able to ask for explanations. Sharing info and BSing is what we're here for.

Hossa can then be bought out - doesn't impact Hawks, cap hit is low and salary is even lower.
- L_B_R

So, if Hossa is traded and bought out, there is no recapture penalty to the Hawks?

So, if Hossa is traded and bought out, there is no recapture penalty to the Hawks?
- Tanuki

That's what SecondCityHockey was reporting.

Whoa, deep breath. We're all friends here. This is a place you should be able to ask for explanations. Sharing info and BSing is what we're here for.
- Quicky72

That's why I come here. Love some solid hockey talk and good laughs.

Here is a snippet on Hockey Operations from NHL.com:

Injured Reserve List

In the event that a player is injured and a Club wishes to place him on the Injured Reserve List the Club must follow these procedures:
A club may place a player on the Injured Reserve List if such player is injured, disabled or ill and unable to perform his duties as a hockey player after having passed the Club's initial physical examination in that season.

A player who has an injury that renders him physically unable to play for a minumum of seven days after that date of the injury can be placed on the Club's Injured Reserve List. Once a player is placed on the list, the Club may replace said player on its NHL roster with another player. All determinations that a player has suffered an injury warranting injured reserve status must be made by the Club's medical staff and in accordance with the Club's medical standards.

A player placed on Injured Reserve is ineligible to compete in NHL games for a period of not less than seven days.
Players on Injured Reserve may attend Club meetings and meals, travel with the Club and participate in practice sessions.

So playing a rival GM, my questions would be:

- When did Hossa sustain the injury, illness, or become disabled? Since there is a record of him having this condition, why is he choosing now to take a break?
- What is the timeframe for his return? If it's indefinite, what is the protocol for him taking a physical to see if he is fit to return? If there isn't one, how is this not a retirement?
- When did he pass the league year 2017-2018 season physical and then become ill?

I'm interested in what the definition and timing of LTIR is. If Hossa can pass a physical, shouldn't he be on the active roster since he's under contract? If he can't, then LTIR should be an option with the caveat of WHEN will he be able to pass a physical. If, under doctor's orders, he SHOULDN'T play but physically could, isn't that, by definition, retirement?

Don't get me wrong, he's my favorite player and want him back (or his cap space). But I'm not sure it's as much of a slam dunk (knowing what I know, which isn't necessarily all the information) that he gets LTIR as people are saying.
- DMCsPulledHammy

There is always a fuzzy subjective line between players that can play and should play. I mean, a guy can have a knee injury and technically can stand up and skate, but maybe he is only able to go 50% speed until it heals fully. Does that mean he should play? He physically could play. Hossa is in a situation where his medication to treat a condition is a problem. He has to draw the line somewhere and why not after finishing a season. He obviously had issues with missing practice because of it, but at the end of the day you know he wouldn't want to leave mid season. This is no different than a player gutting it out to finish the year or the playoffs when they have a nagging injury that might put them on the IR or require surgery. It is up the player and the team doctors to determine the best course of action for when they player should play or not.

Pouliot has a weird year last year where he dropped off crazy. Chances are he'll rebound at least somewhat into a middle 6 performance range. On the cheap, it's a low risk/high reward situation.

I would stay clear of Hartnell tbh. He's been declining, is pretty slow, and has a low defensive impact. Looks like a good checking player - is actually an ineffective checking player. The risk that he slides more is also high. He also may want 35+ bonuses thrown in. Could be useful, but not necessarily the best use of cap space.

Definitely wouldn't want both Pouliot and Hartnell - if neither works, team is (frank)ed.
- L_B_R

L_B_R, I really appreciate your analysis and use of advanced stats. I think that you explain them well within the context of individual players, their effectiveness and impact. I think use of advanced stats plays a role, however, that being said, there is still something to be said about the good old eye test.

It's all a matter of how you use the advanced stats. I think for many of us, we may watch the games and players and form an opinion based on what we see, then use advanced stats to backup our arguments. At times, we may look at advanced stats and a player may "pop out" that we may not have even considered previously, but bears taking a second look. I tend to believe that the front offices, scouts, coaches, etc. more tend to fall in the first category. They believe their eyes first, and back it up with the stats. Doing it the other way around leads you to Tanner like Rundblad evaluations.

I think if you look at a Hartnell, your eye tells you he has declined significantly and unless you can get him for a mil or less where you can then bury him if necessary you stay away. Pouliot maybe you say it was an aberation and take a chance at a low cost. In either case I don't think they are the piece to the puzzle Stanley is looking for.

JJ you mention a lot of horse trading going on in last post anything make any sense or too much going on and lot of moving parts.

L_B_R, I really appreciate your analysis and use of advanced stats. I think that you explain them well within the context of individual players, their effectiveness and impact. I think use of advanced stats plays a role, however, that being said, there is still something to be said about the good old eye test.

It's all a matter of how you use the advanced stats. I think for many of us, we may watch the games and players and form an opinion based on what we see, then use advanced stats to backup our arguments. At times, we may look at advanced stats and a player may "pop out" that we may not have even considered previously, but bears taking a second look. I tend to believe that the front offices, scouts, coaches, etc. more tend to fall in the first category. They believe their eyes first, and back it up with the stats. Doing it the other way around leads you to Tanner like Rundblad evaluations.

I think if you look at a Hartnell, your eye tells you he has declined significantly and unless you can get him for a mil or less where you can then bury him if necessary you stay away. Pouliot maybe you say it was an aberation and take a chance at a low cost. In either case I don't think they are the piece to the puzzle Stanley is looking for.
- TheTrob

Hartnell was still an effective player last year, and his advanced stats show that. he played les, but hes Goals per 60 and Corsi were still top 5 on the team. his opposition corsi while he was on the ice is also low, which is good. The worry there is that he's 35 and has dropped the past 2 seasons. 1-1.5m is all I'd want to see.

That's what SecondCityHockey was reporting.
- JRoenick97

For any of that to happen Bowman would have to find a team which is about $5.2 mill below the cap floor.

For any of that to happen Bowman would have to find a team which is about $5.2 mill below the cap floor.
- Al

Right now, there are 9 teams below the floor. Carolina is the one with the most signed players as of now though.

That's what SecondCityHockey was reporting.
- JRoenick97

Interesting.

However, I don't really see a point to buying him out, unless the team that trades for him to make the floor find themselves near the ceiling in the next couple of years.

Interesting.

However, I don't really see a point to buying him out, unless the team that trades for him to make the floor find themselves near the ceiling in the next couple of years.
- Tanuki

It would just be about paying less real salary.

Whoa, deep breath. We're all friends here. This is a place you should be able to ask for explanations. Sharing info and BSing is what we're here for.
- Quicky72

Yeah Quicky we are and it is, but it is also one where we should all be conscious about not posting click-bait. Do you forward the posts on your facebook or email about Bill Gates giving out money because he's testing a new email program, or about a $75 Target/Best Buy/etc. coupon or any of the other spam/phishing/click-baits that circulate. My guess is you don't, or you take 15 seconds to research and realize it's nothing. If Bettman had levied fines against 10 teams, don't you think it would be on the NHL.com and other sites, or even have been posted here on the Buzz?

Hartnell was still an effective player last year, and his advanced stats show that. he played les, but hes Goals per 60 and Corsi were still top 5 on the team. his opposition corsi while he was on the ice is also low, which is good. The worry there is that he's 35 and has dropped the past 2 seasons. 1-1.5m is all I'd want to see.
- JRoenick97

Personally, I'm not a huge analytics guy. I think there's obviously a place for both the numbers game and the gut feeling.

Some guys can have bad stats with one team, but get traded and things turn around. I think the system/style and coaching of an organization should be taken into account, too. Some guys shine for certain teams, while others don't--just depends.

Personally, I'm not a huge analytics guy. I think there's obviously a place for both the numbers game and the gut feeling.

Some guys can have bad stats with one team, but get traded and things turn around. I think the system/style and coaching of an organization should be taken into account, too. Some guys shine for certain teams, while others don't--just depends.
- Hank3Henshaw

Analytics can be hard because you can sometimes tailor them to any argument you are making for a player. I try to stay neutral in looking at them. I think L_B_R does a good job here too.

The usual issues with Pulliot are that he can be invisible for long stretches and that is he can take some bad ozone penalties at times.

To each his own.

Personally, I like him. He's a work horse to stay ion the shape he's in and some nights, out-plays guys half his age.

Kane isn't much of a back-checker either, but he has that offensive ability which you can kind of justify him being a little lax on the other side of the game. I think Jagr is the same.

Not to mention, he's a great veteran for the young guys to learn from. The Panthers loved him in the locker room. If they Hawks are getting younger, maybe it'd pay off to pick him up for a cheap contract.
- Hank3Henshaw

Kane backchecks sometimes far deeper into his own zone than responsible for. Kane is about winning and doing whatever is required to win.

Pouliot has a weird year last year where he dropped off crazy. Chances are he'll rebound at least somewhat into a middle 6 performance range. On the cheap, it's a low risk/high reward situation.

I would stay clear of Hartnell tbh. He's been declining, is pretty slow, and has a low defensive impact. Looks like a good checking player - is actually an ineffective checking player. The risk that he slides more is also high. He also may want 35+ bonuses thrown in. Could be useful, but not necessarily the best use of cap space.

Definitely wouldn't want both Pouliot and Hartnell - if neither works, team is (frank)ed.
- L_B_R

You might change your mind on Pouliot after reading David Staples article in the Edmonton Journal about the buyout.

I just don't know how to post it on here, sorry.

You might change your mind on Pouliot after reading David Staples article in the Edmonton Journal about the buyout.

I just don't know how to post it on here, sorry.
- RickJ

http://edmontonjournal.co...oilers-headed-for-buy-out

Analytics can be hard because you can sometimes tailor them to any argument you are making for a player. I try to stay neutral in looking at them. I think L_B_R does a good job here too.
- JRoenick97

I agree with you on both points.

The other thing that gets lost in translation with the numbers game is all the stuff that isn't recorded on the stats sheet.

Sure, player X doesn't might not hit certain numbers, but all those times he went into the hard spots and came out with the puck or took a hit to make a play, don't get recorded on a piece of paper. So the stats are certainly not the end-all-be-all.

It's interesting how they're starting to really dominate pro sports--especially if you look at baseball.

Columbus Blue Jackets Buy Out Scott Hartnell
June 29th, 2017 at 12:32pm CST • By Gavin Lee
The Columbus Blue Jackets have bought out the remaining two years on Scott Hartnell‘s contract, making him a free agent.
- walleyeb1

Gotta take a look at this guy. His compete hasn't changed a bit and from what I saw last year he hasn't lost much speed..... Hartnell is hungry every shift and has plenty of back class.