To create some inter-league rivalry, here's a proposal:
"The Calgary Conference will beat the Out of Town Conference in combined Head to Head victories"
Thanks to Dan (who didn't even know he was helping me) I have been able to make some changes to my own blog by importing some of the items Dan added to the FUNHL site.
I'm still working on getting my picture added (I could just dump Doug as a contributor and my profile pic would appear again - but that is my last resort), but otherwise was successfully able to add a whole slew of links that I previously couldn't.
In any case, it's the new-improved antiphon rising - let me know what you think!
I'll be pulling down the links to the rule proposals (just in the side-bar, they will still be present on the blog, and you can search for them if necessary), and replacing them with 'Called Shots' so we can easily track how they are progressing.
Any other suggestions, just let me (or Dan, he has administrator access now) know and I'll see if I can't make the changes.
One other FYI - with the release of the Bible's information, and with the new clarity of our rules as to who will be available, I'll be doing an updated Top 12 Prospect List very soon. I also have my lists done (in what may well be a record time).
This off-season can't end soon enough.
Patrice Bergeron's deal averages $4.75 million per year, bringing the Bruins within some $500,000 of the $44 million cap. However, GM Peter Chiarelli reiterated last week that Alexei Zhamnov's $4.1 million will be deleted as soon as he is formally discharged via long-term injury exception.
-- Boston Globe
In other words, don't expect to see Alexei Zhamnov in an NHL uniform ever again. I know I won't miss him.
Unless a deal comes together this weekend, it looks as if Nikolai Zherdev will spend the season in Russia rather than Columbus. Blue Jackets GM Doug MacLean has offered a two-year deal worth $1.8 million a year, but Zherdev is believed to want around $1.5 million on a one-year deal.
-- Boston Globe
-- Vancouver Province
As rumours go, this one was both persistent and plausible. The Canucks are in the midst of blowing up the team's core (Cloutier, Bertuzzi, Ruutu, Jovanovski, Auld, Allen, etc. all gone), and dealing Naz for a younger LW with similar tools and contract made some sense. Likewise, it made some sense for Philadelphia to consider moving Gagne for Naslund if Gagne's $ demands go as high as they could.
That all said, Naslund is more than just a core player for the Canucks, he's their team captain, best player, and in ways that only Trevor Linden would understand, deeply connected to the team and its fan base. Even getting full value from Naslund in a trade for a player like Gagne, probably isn't enough to make up for what the team would be losing in his absence.
The fact he is sticking around means that Naslund will have a very serious chance of sending his jersey to join Linden's in the rafters.
As it should be.
Release #2: The likelihood of the Devils Lou Lamouriello signing Brian Gionta to a deal bodes well for Severed Heads prospect ZachParise, as with Gionta's return Parise's offensive output should increase.
Just getting the ole PR muscles back in shape
'Hockey - the Magazine' is a pool guide. At least, it wants to be a pool guide.
Let me count the ways it wasted my money:
- Too many glossy pics. The mag is simply packed with them. Which is fine if I were 4 years old and couldn't read, but now that I'm an adult, I'd prefer, you know, actual information.
Here's a sample of the bio information they do provide on a player; 'He was 7th in the league in powerplay goals'. Which is ok, but here's the thing, that is the sum total of writing on Patrick Marleau. However, in larger font, in bright orange on black background we are informed that he is the 28th ranked forward. Gosh, that's helpful. Not.
- The Ducks top prospect is... 'Matt Auffrey-R'. Who? No information to help me find the kids stats, just his name. Which I have never seen before. Worth noting the Bible has no knowledge of this kid either.
- Player bios.
A. These are broken up into forwards, defenseman and goalies, with players listed alphabetically. I hate that. I want everyone listed with their team, a rundown on how they've done and where they are going, and if possible, I'd like to have a reasonable expectation of who their linemates are. If I wanted to look up players alphabetically, I'd Google them.
B. The forwards are listed in an eye-gouging orange/black colour scheme that can induce headaches among anyone possessing both eye-site and a brain.
C. The projections are whacked beyond what any reasonable person should expect (more on that), but mostly they look lazy (How many pts last year? Put him down for that again).
D. The big feature no. for each player isn't the projection of their performance, no, that would make things easy for poolies, no, the big featured stat for each player is where they rank among the forwards/d-men/goalies. Useless.
- They offer pool creation tips at the front. None of the pool formats they reccomed couldn't have been invented by a group of autistic trainspotters in England who have never even heard of hockey.
Now, I mentioned the projected stats were whacked. Here's some examples of the sterling predictive power of this crap-tastic magazine;
Top goaltender? Marty Turco. Kipper is #2, Cam Ward is #5, Ryan Miller is #14, Henrik Lunqvist is #25.
Top forwards? Thornton (check), Jagr (check), Daniel Briere....(wtf?)
Most idiotic suggestions:
#14 Marc Savard over #15 Jason Spezza
#18 Andy McDonald over #19 Joe Sakic. Hands up all the GMs who think Andy (one hit wonder) McDonald will outscore SuperJoe this year? C'mon, raise 'em high so I can see 'em....
#8 Teemu Selanne over #9 Eric Staal. I sure hope Brian agrees with this prediction.
#30 Colby Armstrong over Lecavalier #33, and Modano #34. There ought to be a stupidity tax for people who think outside the box like this.
#51 Steve Bernier - #60 Todd Bertuzzi. Yeah, I had to read that twice and then swallow my own vomit too.
And then we got to the part where they simply blew my mind;
#32 Ryan Getzlaf, #34 Justin Williams, #35 Vaclav Prospal - which looks a little out of order, but isn't exactly ridiculous until we see...
#57 Marian Gaborik, #58 - Jarome Iginla, and best of all, #64 - Peter Forsberg
So, there you have it. It is now absolutely clear to me that we can put a better pool guide together than these complete bozos.
Who's with me?
In any case, you've been warned - save your money and buy the latest 'Astronomy Weekly' instead. I know I wish I had.
We have consensus that there should be a 30 minute break after the ED, before the PrD during which prospect drops are to be announced.
Currently the only rule on these drops is that no team can keep more than 8 prospects on their roster going in to the PrD.
So, the question is, once the PrD has started, what drops are allowed, and how do we handle them?
I would propose that we discuss as follows:
1) Do you agree that when a fresh P1 is picked in the PrD, he cannot be subsequently dropped during the same PrD - Yes/No
2) Do you agree that after the PrD has started, no further P2/3/4's can be dropped - Yes/No
3) Do you agree that after the PrD has started, P2/3/4's CAN be dropped - Yes/No
(Essentially to verify that the answer to 3 should be the opposite of your answer to 2)
4) If you agree that prospects CAN be dropped once the PrD has started, the current rules stipulate that the newly dropped player is then offered to each team (except the one that dropped him) in order of the unaltered PrD order to be picked up as a P1. The dropping GM is precluded from reselecting the dropped P2/3/4 until 12 REGULAR PrD picks have passed (to prevent a GM from dropping a P4 and immediately repicking him as a P1)
a) If you voted YES to #1, then a GM cannot pick up a dropped P2/3/4 by dropping a P1 - Do you agree with that consequence - Yes/No
b) If you agree with #4 as above, there is an implicit consequence that if a P2/3/4 is dropped, and another GM picks them up and in doing so, may drop a P2/3/4 themselves, that newly dropped prospect must in turn also be offered through the league as per #4. Do you agree with that consequence - Yes/No
5) Any other variations to consider?
(Recall Prospects dropped between ED and PrD, after which
Option 1 = no drops during PrD, Option 2 = can drop all but new P1’s)
In part because we were essentially splitting votes between three options (no, yes1, yes2) this rule failed to pass despite unanimous (or almost) recognition that there is a need for the rule to be fixed.
Once a few years back, Mike G. drafted a player with his 1st rnd pick, and then cut him (or threatened to, I believe the universal opprobrium may have changed his mind). The obvious incongruity of a GM making a selection and then ditching him for another guy later on, simply blew minds.
But, it is the only case of its kind that I can think of. Option two in effect addresses only this instance (and its not really an instance) and confers no actual benefit to the pool, or its processes. It is in fact, missing the entire problem with the prospect draft - that players - ANY players - can be cut during the draft forcing everyone to participate for another round of votes, etc. What drives us nuts year in and year out is not Mike G, drafting a guy and cutting him, it's GMs waiving a prospect during the 4th rnd of the draft forcing GMs to blow up their lists and make new plans on the fly. THAT is the absurdity that needs to be addressed.
There are in my mind, very clear reasons to prefer Option 1, to Option 2.
- Simplicity. The rule would simply state that all prospect cuts are made final prior to the prospect draft. When it comes to interpreting this rule, it couldn't be easier.
- Fairness. The best case scenario for Option 2. is this;
I have Grigorenko, a 22 year old rookie who is a P3. As the prospect draft progresses I take note that I can get a guy higher on my list than Grigorenko as a P1. So in rnd 3 I cut Grigorenko.
In Option 1 - I've already had to make the call on Grigorenko, one way or another, the decision has been made, and everybody knows ahead of time what it is.
In Option 2 - let's say Bob wants a shot at Grigorenko, but because he has just loaded his team up with P1 prospects (Bob only has one prospect at present), the rule FORCES him to pass. How is that fair? I release a prospect, and the one guy who could most make use of him is now obligated to cut the only prospect he kept rather than a lower pick in the current draft?
How on earth is that fair?
Further, if Bob was a low finisher, then his pick should be worth more than a middle round pick. Yet the player he wants (the secretly amazing Grigorenko) won't be available because of my dump-chase strategy till the middle rounds.
In effect, the current rules, and Option two rules PUNISH the low finishers by making the late cuts unavailable to them.
- Time. The prospect draft takes too long. Why? Because it has an infinite number of rounds. Gms go into spin cycle after the first two rounds and everybody wastes time holding until we are into rounds 9-10 etc, 'pass', 'pass', 'oh wait...', etc. and to what end? If everybody had been honest about their cuts from the start the maximum number of rounds we pick is 8. The number of prospects you pick is determined by how many slots you have open on your roster to sign rookies. With option one I know EXACTLY how large my prospect list needs to be - to the man. Simple.
-Planning. Because we have just ensured that untested players are available as prospects, the ability now exists to plan out exactly who will be available when based on your lists. However, if we allow option two to be the rule of the day, then no planning is possible because the cuts aren't known until some random points through the draft.
So to sum up;
- Option two doesn't address any actual problem, and is unfair.
- Option one is simple, fair, speeds things up, and rewards GM planning.
If there is a counter case in favour of Option 2, or benefits to the practice that I seem to be missing, I'm interested in debating it.
Well, we have some interesting results.
- A rule is approved if it is supported by 9 or more out of 12 GMs.
- Approved rules are enacted for the current year if 9 or more out
of 12 GMs support implementing it for the current year
- Otherwise, approved rules are enacted for next year
- Note that if a GM had no preference for year of implementation,
I counted them as a yes for both years (so total votes on year is
often more than 12).
Fait accompli changes:
- Rule 7 – Edit to change base goaltending calculation from 3.5 to 4.0
- Rule 18 – Edit to allow trading of next year’s PrD picks after Slot Selection lottery for
current year (eg trading of 07 PrD picks after 06 Slot Selection)
- (WDs – Provisional dates proposed of Dec 2nd, 06 and Feb 3rd 07 (to be confirmed)
Summary of results:
APPROVED FOR 2006: 10.x, 15.x (*See below), 15.y, 25.1, 27
NOT APPROVED: 41
Rule 10.x – ED Eligibility
Support Rule: 10 of 12 Do Not Support Rule: 2 of 12
Votes on implementation year - 06: 9 of 12 07: 5 of 12
RULE IMPLEMENTED FOR ED 2006
Rule 15.x – Prospect dropping during PrD
(Recall Prospects dropped between ED and PrD, after which
Option 1 = no drops during PrD, Option 2 = can drop all but new P1’s)
Support Change to rule: 12 of 12 Do not support change to rule: 1/12
(One GM voted no preference between either no change, or change to only one of the 2 options)
RULE CHANGE APPROVED
Votes on implementation year – 06: 12 of 12 07: 5 of 12
RULE CHANGE IMPLEMENTED FOR ED 2006
Support of wording - Option 1: 5 of 12 Option 2: 7 of 12
?? SO DO WE CHANGE TO OPTION 2 ????
Rule 15.y – Prospect dropping during ED
Support rule for no P drops during ED: 9 of 12
RULE CHANGE APPROVED
Votes on implementation year - 06: 9 of 12 07: 3 of 12
RULE CHANGE IMPLEMENTED FOR ED 2006
Rule 25.1 – Conditional WW bids
Support rule: 11 of 12 GMs
RULE CHANGE APPROVED
Implementation: 06: 11 of 12 07: 5 of 12
RULE CHANGE IMPLEMENTED FOR ED 2006
Rule 27 – WD drops final noon Friday Mtn before WD
Support: 11 of 12 GMs
RULE CHANGE APPROVED
Implementation: 06: 11 of 12 07: 4 of 12
RULE CHANGE IMPLEMENTED FOR ED 2006
Rule 41.1 – Trade deadline
Support change in rule wording: 8 of 12
Support not changing current wording: 5 of 12
RULE CHANGE NOT APPROVED
FYI Of those supporting change,
Option 1 (2nd Monday after NHL) – 7 of 8
Option 2 (Mon after March 16) – 1 of 8
2) Owen Nolan is back from the dead signing for a million +/yr in phoenix
3) Jason Allison is pushinghis wares on victims like ATL or NYI both whoneed a PP QB
The rumour is in the title
Because of future cap issues [Pens] and current [Habs], the following trade is all over the hockey buzz...
MTL sends Riberio, Ryder, Aebischer, Souray, Chipchurra and and 1st in 2007 for Malkin.
The trade would open room for MTL to sign JP Dumont longterm and Malkin while giving the PENS some depth to playoff competitive today
If that's a true offer...is it food for thought?
Imagine what kind of trade made mike milburry would do...
1. Great Whites - 19.5
2. Wolves - 17
3. Highlanders - 15.5
4. Bladerunners - 15
5. Severed Heads - 14
5. Knights Templar - 14
7. Ramapithicines - 13.5
8. Lost Boys - 13
8. Dogs - 13
10. Personal Vendetta - 11
11. The Edge - 10.5
12. Shadowmen - 7
- Without question the Personal Vendetta and Wolves will be gunning for left wingers early. The Heads and Edge will target goaltending (Kipper!), and the Shadowmen need just about everything.
- The PV and Wolves were my also my biggest surprises, the PV for clocking in with a low (for them) score of 11, and the Wolves for stepping up with the 2nd best score of 17.
- The Shadowmen are definitely in need of a serious restocking (what else is new). Two FPs, an RFA and a prospect. There are teams with more P2s than the Shadowmen have players.
- Despite the advantages these scores represent in terms of assets prior to the ED, the ED will still change things. It won't make the Great White's significantly better, but the Shadowmen won't be sitting with a score of '7' after all is said and done.
The Severed Heads
L: Heatley-Ott FP, Huselius-Cgy RFA, Parise-NJ P3
Heatley just had his first 50-50 season, but until the 4th qtr was on pace for close to 60-60. Huselius is a skill winger with little defensive game, and has yet to put a full season together warranting fulltime status as a #2. Parise has arrived in Jersey and is already developing chemistry with Gionta. A strong start followd by consistent play will get him promoted.
C: Spezza-Ott RFA, Schremp-Edm P2, Bourque-Wsh P2
Spezza gives the team a legit 100pt centreman to compete with the FP pivots common throughout the league. Schremp will be a lock to make the Oilers this year, and has the shoot-first offensive game of Jimmy Carson, but will be a consideration for promotion only if he supplants Horcoff as the obvious top pivot. Bourque didn't develop as much as hoped in his post draft year, but after getting his head on straight at the AHL level showed flashes of dominance towards the end of the season. Still another year away.
R: Jagr-NYR FP, Ruutu-Chi P4, Grigorenko-Det P3, Horton-Fla P3
Over 50 goals and over 120 pts, so Jagr is probably a lock for top spot. Ruutu had another injury plagued season to overcome, but was last seen making big time moves for Finland at the WC. Hopes are high he fixes his position on the top line in Chicago and makes a healthy run. Last time he was injury free he had 46 in 42 games. Very solid 2nd line numbers if they project out.
Grigorenko has all but run out of time to prove he has the goods to play. Lots of space on the Detroit roster for him, but without any signs of life over the last three years that he can be scoring winger, the opportunity may have come to late to save his contract from being dumped. Horton continues down the Tocchet path of power forward development, and flirted with 30 goals last season. A moderate step up would seen him go 35-35 - which puts him solidly in 2nd line territory.
D: Briseboise-Col RFA, Sopel-LA RFA, Tanabe-? RFA, Hatcher-Pha RFA, Jackman-StL P4, Eminger-Wsh P2
Breeze-by is a marginal top 4 defenseman, because of his streakiness. Blake's departure may help nose his numbers back up. Sopel's move to LA showed temporary improvements in his numbers, but he won't be getting the pp time he did on the Island. Tanabe has yet to land a team, and at the age of 26 the wait for his offensive game to come together seems to have peaked. Hatcher won't be matched. Jackman will get the default job of TG and should play in the teams top 4 comfortably in that role. Eminger is the up and comer the team hopes can be groomed for the powerplay, and with #8 calibre numbers last season its even hoped he might dress.
L: Tkachuk-StL FP, Samsonov-Mtl FP
Tkachuk needs to rebound from his buffet table excess last year and return to be a dangerous ppg+PIM monster to remain an FP for much longer. Samsonov's time has already run out as he failed to produce yet again last year, until eventually vanishing alltogether in the Carolina series.
R: Justin Williams-Car RFA
Williams had a break-out year in Carolina and looks to be a key core player as they defend their title. Will he be a regular 30 goal scorer? IMO an average #2 RW.
D: Whitney-Pit P4
38 points in 68 games projects to a 40+ season from the blueline, and makes Whitney a legit shot for #2 status. Even modest growth in points production (like a better pens powerplay?) will make him a household name like Dick Tarnstrom.
L: Tanguay-Cgy FP, Picard-Cbs P2
Tanguay is going to get everything he ever dreamed of, the uncontested spot of #1 centre, an elite winger who can score, and a team that is built for the playoffs. I'm thinking career year. Picard is a slightly built skill winger who may not have the speed for the new game. Bears watching as he develops, because his skill level is so high.
C: Sundin-Tor FP, Stumpel-Fla P2
Sundin is a machine virtually guaranteed to go for a ppg. However his lack of firesupport is nothing short of criminal. Stumpel is now a fringe forward in Fla, and is a likely release.
R: Hemsky-Edm P4
Hemsky is now Edmonton's most dangerous player, but can he crack 80 pts without shooting more? A solid #2 with upside.
D: Preissing-Ott RFA, Barker-Chi P2, Tyutin-NYR P2
Preissing came out of nowhere to have a career year, and now that he is in Ottawa, he'll have every opportunity to prove it wasn't a fluke. Over 40 pts is a possiblity. Barker has come along a little slower than expected but there is definitely space for him on the Chicago blue-line, and he has a terrific set of offensive tools when he arrives permanently. Could be a top 4 this year. Tyutin cemented himself a spot on the Rangers blue-line, but it remains to be seen what his offensive ceiling is. He doesn't run the pp yet, but as he gets more comfortable, he might.
G: Fleury-Pit P3, Biron-Buf P2
Fleury may have a starting role in Pittsburgh, but he'll be suffering from Luongo syndrome for a while as the defense corps is rebuilt and aged into a cohesive unit. Even if his numbers are good early on, I'd be scared to promote him. Biron has lost his job with Buffalo, but as yet not landed anywhere. He'll compete for a starting job, but won't have one handed to him.
L: Modin-Cbs RFA, Hartnell-Nsh RFA, Calder-Pha P2
I see Modin on a steady path towards permanent grinder role. It may not be this year, but I think the signs are inevitable. Hartnell is a meat-potatoes winger with heart. Combo his PIM and scoring and he's a decent 2nd liner. Calder is a slightly older version of Hatnell, but his presence in Philly gives reason to think the might post better numbers with the higher quality of line mates. All in all, a #3, and two decent #2's.
C: Horcoff-Edm RFA, Arnason-Col RFA, Brule-Cbs P2, Kopitar-LA P2, Wheeler-Phx P2
First, I'll admit my bias - I hate both Horcoff and Arnason as picks. In Horcoff's case, I simply am not convinced he has the pkg to be a 1st line centre, despite his ppg stats. He reminds me of Dave Gagne - another pivot who unexptedly had ppg stats for a couple of years. A career minor leaguer/fringe forward prior to a year ago, I just don't believe him. Arnason is actually worse, having not only bombed out of Chicago, but failed to impress despite generous opportunity in Ottawa where he wore out his welcome fast. As a GM I think of both players as poison, Horcoff because I have no faith in him despite production, and Arnason because he is a player with clear talent who yet seems content to show up to training camp flabby every year. The next three may not see much roster time, but all have terrific potential, and the first two make me drool. Brule may have all the pieces of the puzzle to be a dynamite 1st or 2nd line scoring centre. His fear level is somewhere between Matt Murdoch and Guy Gardner, and he will hit absolutely anything. Kopitar is a classic skill pivot with a long frame, wheels, stickhandling, and vision. Of the two, Kopitar may have the higher ceiling because of his shot (personally having seen Brule play, I adore his game - whenever you want to move him Rob, call me. I gotcha). Wheeler is the project, but he's an absolutely monstrous pkg for a skill player at 6'5" and over 230. Of the three Wheeler is probably furthest off (hockey sense - which will be the determining question with him), but both Brule or Kopitar could begin to dominate soon.
R: Iginla-Cgy FP, Cheechoo-SJ RFA, Vyborny-Cbs RFA, Kobasew-Cgy P2
Everybody and his dog new that Iggy needed a playmate to produce god-like numbers with regularity - and now he has one. I expect his numbers to rise back to the Richard level of a couple years back. Cheechoo had 56 goals last year. Not bad for your no 2 RW, eh? Vyborny is scarey except as a 4th liner, but Kobasew will be the beneficiary of increased confidence and ice-time - and that makes him an easy call ahead of Vyborny. Arguably the best RW in the league.
D: S.Niedermayer-Ana FP, Corvo-Ott RFA, Niinimaa-Dal RFA, Salo-Vcr RFA, Colaiacovo-Tor P3, Suter-Nsh P2, Phaneuf-Cgy P2
Niedermayer has the chains come off permanently, and is poised to take another run at the Norris. Phaneuf is one of Niedermayer's obstacles to that goal, and may already be while just in his sophmore year one of the two most complete defensemen in the game (Pronger being the other). Yes, he's that freakin good. Corvo surprised with an unexpectedly astute offensive game last year, and is a solid top 4. Niinimaa is now long in the tooth, and increasingly bizzare in his behaviour, but should stay afloat long enough to hit the WD. Salo may actually see an increase in his pp time with Jovo-cop's departure, and creep into the Wolves top 4 (which already looks solid). Colaiacovo and Suter can be left on the farm to await their breaking out, but both represent potential options to dress for the team if they are contributing numbers after the 20 game mark that teams use for the cut off on rooks.
G: Esche-Pha RFA, Roloson-Edm RFA
Here's the rub, Esche has essentially lost his starting job to Niitymaaki, and Roloson's best defenseman in front of him is Jason Smith. Either is a fine backup, but neither is a comfortable starter.
L: Naslund-Vcr FP, Upshall-Nsh P2, Vanek-Buf P2
Naz will be out of his comfort zone with Bertuzzi gone, and with the team transitioning its core players. Still, there are few more reliable gunners at LW in the league, and he should be good for ppg+ stats. Upshall IMO, is never going to be more than a Mathew Barnaby type. 20 goals might be his ceiling, but genuine penalty minutes might be his bonus. Vanek is a Pavel Brendl type forward. If his skating is for real, he could be considerably better.
C: H.Sedin-Vcr P4, Langkow-Cgy P4, O'Sullivan-LA P2
Sedin has made steady progress and is knocking on the door of being a reliable #1 pivot. A repeat of last years numbers with even a small improvement would make solidfy his arrival. Langkow is more of a #3 IMO, and with the arrival of Tanguay, steady time centering Iginla will vanish. O'Sullivan is the intriguing member of the group. He was trapped (pun intended) in Minnesota, but his trade to the Kings will give him a chance to prove his gaudy AHL numbers translate to the NHL.
R: Hejduk-Col FP, Barnaby-Dal RFA
Hejduk is still a ppg+ gunner who gets to play with Sakic and Turgeon on the PP. His numbers should hold steady for a couple more years still. Barnaby has been a solid third line goon pick for what seems like forever.
D: Bergeron-Edm RFA, Ohlund-Vcr RFA, Berard-Cbs RFA, Kronwall-Det P3, Staios-Edm P2, Weber-Nsh P2
Bergeron may be in a struggle to be more than a pp specialist moving forward (see my post on the Edm D, 'A Disaster in the Making'), but I still think he'll overcome to be a solid top 4. Ohlund will hold the fort among most teams active lineups, but is always a risk to slip out of the top 4. Berard looks to have made a nearly full recovery to where he was prior to his eye mishap. A 50 point season isn't out of the question. Kronwall's time is now, and Detroit has the red carpet out. He'll be groomed as Lidstrom's successor. Staios, well, the opportunity exists to correct this mistake by not renewing his contract. Weber has an all-round dimmension that is attractive to coaches, but anathema to poolies. He's in tough to crack a deep Nsh core, and won't get monster minutes game in and out.
G: Aebischer-Mtl RFA, Toivonen-Bos P2
Aebischer will probably split duties with Crystal-Ball Huet, but backup numbers should be decent. Toivonen is in the same position as Nytiimaaki, he'll be handed the reigns and expected to post playoff worthy numbers out of the gate. Can he?
L: Heatley (FP), Huselius (RFA), Bourque (P2)
Heatley as you all know is the best player in the world outside of Jagr and the team gets at least a 4 based on him alone. Huselius will post huge numbers this season on a line with Tanguay and Iginla (probably getting more points than either Tanguay or Iggy) while Bourque is fully expected to be a reincarnation of his namesake.
C: Spezza (RFA), Parise (P3), Schremp (P2)
Spezza is challenged only by some guy named Thornton as the best center in the food chain and the two prospects are absolutely brilliant. A half mark has been deducted as Schremp won’t center Edmonton’s top line this season – but the team is fully expecting him to be the next Gretzky.
R: Jagr (FP), Ruutu (P4), Horton (P3), Grigorenko (P3)
We all know how good Jagr is right? Well – I’ll say it again anyway. Jagr is good! Like Heatley on LW, the rating is at least a 4 based on Jagr alone. Ruutu and Horton are both going to light it up this season on their teams’ first lines. Grigorenko would make an excellent 2nd liner on most FUNHL teams but not on the Heads!
D: Sopel, Brisebois, Tanabe, Hatcher (RFAs), Jackman (P4), Eminger (P2)
The Severed Heads have assembled an all star cast of veteran RFAs who are supported by two excellent prospects. A half mark was deducted as it isn’t sure yet which team Tanabe will be on (although if playing for the Severed Heads – who cares?)
The Heads have the first pick overall, and will likely take Kiprusoff, so it’s a given that the goaltending should have a perfect rating. Yes – other teams get a rating of 0 for not having a player at a position but technically, come on.
TOTAL: 24 - others might say 25, but let’s be realistic here! ;-)
Ok, colour me a child of the 80's, but the picture to the left is of the Lost Boys.
The crew who hung out with Tinkerbell, they were lost, and boys, but lets face it, they were a children's fable written by a latent pedophile (or do I have my pedophiles of brit-lit mixed up?)
In any case, the name is simply fantastic, the origins irrelevant, and the team, well the team will be what it is.
Best of luck to Richard on his exams this month!
"The key to concentrate on here is potential. The reason people question the defense is because about most of the d-men are not NHL veterans. Some question the ability of Smith and Staios to be ‘#1 or #2’ defensemen. They aren’t in the typical sense. But, as Carolina and Buffalo showed us, defense by committee can work. The Oilers don’t have a stud on the back end any more, but I submit that they don’t need one to be successful." - Dan Tencer
Fair enough, you can make the case that a team doesn't need a stud to be successful (Carolina's defense corps was literally the worst I'd ever seen get that far in the playoffs by a wide, wide margin. Brett Hedican? BRETT HEDICAN? Nuff Said), but isn't it the case that by far the most successful teams have one or more? Yeah, I know I'm a killjoy.
Here's how he puts the Oilers brigade together;
1. Jason Smith
2. Steve Staios
3. Daniel Tjarnqvist
4. Matt Greene
5. Jan Heyda
6. M.A. Bergeron
7. Ladislav Smid
Now, I know he's got access to the Oilers and that means it will be crap where you live, but this blue-line is just not good, and it is one vent of pure sunshine that Mr. Tencer expectorates.
Jason Smith is just a younger version of Ken Daneyko. Which is good if you are looking for a team captain, someone to block shots all game long, a willing pugilist when linemates are bullied, a grinder, a good guy in the locker room, or in a street brawl with bouncers at 2:00 am - he's your guy. He's the kind of player whose jersey goes to the rafters after 10 years or more of bleeding on the ice every day dedication.
But a top 2 defenseman on a Cup team? No.
A #5-6 FUNHL defender? Sure.
But you take him.
Think about where Jason Smith would fit on the bluelines of other teams - and then convince me he's a #2.
Steve Staios. Every year like clockwork, 25 pts because of generous ice-time. A nice, safe, #4 on most teams, he's a typical #8 in the FUNHL. WD scrabble. If I were an Oilers fan, the day Staios stops taking minutes on the blue-line is a reason to think the defense corps is getting better. I once suggested he would be a top tier AHL guy. I still think I'm right.
Daniel Tjarnqvist. The Jonas Hoglund of defensemen.
Matt Grene. In the future, the Oilers project him out as a Jason Smith type. So your #4 defenseman is someone you project will one day be a good #3 ? Nice.
Jan Heyda. He's a Euro vet, is cheap, and speaks the same languages as Petr Sykora. Reminds me of Bykov in Detroit. Who? Exactly - his impact was so impressive he's back over in the Euros.
MA Bergeron. I actually think the kid is getting kind of a raw deal if this list holds true (I have him behind Smith), but maybe he does turn out to be just a powerplay specialist.
Ladislav Smid - by all accounts a very decent prospect with exceptional talents. He'll make an excellent FUNHL prospect pick, my guess, third roundish.
All in all, the D in Edm is an achilles heel begging for an arrow.
This isn't the First word; it certainly won't be the last word: so let me add this contribution as the Middle Word on my team.
First, forgive the disappearance. I (well, provided I don't entirely botch the exam I write tomorrow) am now Richard Birt Hon.B.A. (Urban Studies.) American History rather thoroughly seized my attention this past month.
But now there is space and time again for hockey. And doing research on Calgary. It looks increasingly likely that I'll be there for 2007, so need to put the effort in to make the most of my visit there in September.
The logos: Dan, Doug (uh... I think: sorry if thanks are misdirected) They're both great! Thank you! I had idly speculated with Bob about getting one together, but the pirate motif is just fine: seeing how it requires much less thought on my part. (And because the best logo of the league has been co-opted by the Dogs)
For the record: The Lost Boys are J.M. Barrie, yes. It gives me a little perspective when the team is down, and makes me laugh when it's doing well. (I notice some other teams present the same advantage: Dogs, Severed Heads, Ramapithicenes. On the other hand it must be fairly ominous when say "The Knights Templar" are in first place.) The Hockey team, by the way, is not the first thing in my life to be named from this particular source... I keep coming back to it.
However, so to improve my image with this particular clique: I encourage all of you to believe it is actually a sly reference to the classic American comedy-horror movie that formed those strong cultural archetypes. Yes, I am that cool. (And so you know you're not alone in assuming my coolness, wikipedia lost boys, or google it and see what comes up.)
But all that said, pirates are cool: I've attached the official shoulder badge for the LBs. (It's sparkliness distracts your Ds)
I guess we know where the PV are looking for players positionally speaking.
C: Forsberg-Pha FP, Reinprecht-Phx P2, White-Min P2
Forsberg, when healthy, is capable of dominating the scoring race. Reinprecht and White are 4th line filler material due for replacement.
R: Cammalleri-LA P3, Michalek-SJ P2
Cammalleri is a waterbug winger with Brian Gionta/Martin St Louis potential. He's thick across the chest and lower torso and has the speed to succeed. Michalek is the opposite. A prototype sized winger, he is good on the boards and down low, with an exceptional playmaking ability to make up for an underused wrist shot. Either one could be 3rd line winger for a competing team, but it's unlikely that both will put up those numbers this year.
D: Lidstrom-Det FP, Spacek-Buf RFA, Girard-Bos P2
Lidstrom is officially 'The Man' when it comes to offensive defensemen, adding yet another dominant season to his repetoire. He never gets hurt, and he never seems to miss a beat, he's the backbone of the Vendetta attack. Spacek is a 4-5 defenseman who will be on the bubble to play. Girard is I believe now out of the league with a back injury (I may be wrong on this).
G: Joseph-Phx RFA, Weekes-NYR P2
Joseph is exactly the kind of phantom goaltending the PV go with, in the tradition of Byron Dafoe before him. Historically a late drafted position for the team ,the PV can certainly fall back on Joseph as plan B should an elite goaltender not make itself available at the right position early in the draft. Weekes is a longshot to see any icetime for the Rangers or the PV.
L: Kovalchuk-Atl FP, Knuble-Pha RFA, Schaeffer-Ott RFA
Kovalchuk is a serious threat to go 60-60 and take home armfuls of hardware. Knuble is a line dependent (Forsberg or Bust) winger with above average finishing ability and zero hockey sense. Schaeffer is a speed winger who may work his way into a more prominent role for the Sens. A safe 4th liner. I expect the Lost Boys will want to find a high octane compliment to Kovalchuk in order to push this score up to 5.
C: Sakic-Col FP, Conroy-LA RFA, Turgeon-Col RFA, York-NYI RFA, Richards-Pha RFA
Sakic is still a ppg machine until he proves otherwise, and a solid #1 pivot. Conroy is a bland #2. He can still go a ppg with an elite winger, but its a stretch. Turgeon is probably a dead average #3, and choosing him over York is a close call. Richards is the wild card, he could bloom into something special, or take another year up the ladder. (His first goal in the NHL was a thing of absolute beauty - drive hard on the wing, take the check from the defenseman, roof daddy with the backhand. Welcome to the NHL.) As a result of Richards' promise York or Turgeon is expendable.
R: Fehr-Wsh P2
The Lost Boys don't have much at right wing, but what they got is pretty nice. Fehr should make the Caps full time this year and for a very good reason, the kid can score. In a dream rookie season he'll make a run at 30+ if he gets some help on the pp, or gets a gifted playmaker as a pivot. If he's around after 30 games, and is producing 3rd line numbers, he could be promotion worthy.
D: Visnovsky-LA RFA, F.Kaberle-Car RFA, Kubina-Tor RFA, Grebeshekov-LA P3, Koltsov-Vcr P3, Ziska-LA P3.
Visnovsky has the tools to flourish in the FUNHL as a powerplay QB, and is a legit #2. Kaberle is an equally legit 3-4, and provided he isn't supplanted by someone younger and faster (Jack Johnson) he should remain so. Kubina is an expensive joke. He'll fill out someone's D for the entire year, but is not going to help anyone win anything. Grebeshekov is still waiting for his breakout season and has slightly more promise than LA team-mate Zizska. Koltzov is a slight speed defender who is on the bubble for having an NHL career, but the buzz on him out here is zero for what its worth.
G: Gerber-Ott P3, Garon-LA P2
The Lost Boys can console themselves for their dearth of right wingers in the pipeline with the fact that they have two intriguing goalie prospects brewing. Gerber won the lottery and will get starting minutes behind the Senators deep defense corps, and should post dressable numbers. Garon is a threat to overtake Dan Cloutier for the number one job in LA, and if he does he could emerge as a very useful backup option. It ain't pretty, but it would compete.
L: Ovechkin-Wsh FP, Elias-NJ FP
Ovechkin is already as dangerous as Kovalchouk, and he's several years younger. As pure a goalscorer as exists or has existed. Elias seems to have recovered from his bout with Hepatitis. Now that he's healthy, he's returned to being lethal in his all round offensive game. There is no better one-two punch at LW in the league. Doesn't matter who the third is, this is the LW to beat.
C: Halpern-Wsh P2, Weiss-P2
Halpern was a mistake as a prospect, as he is destined to be a heart and soul character forward on the third line. Weiss is just about out of time to prove he is an NHL player.
R: Lehtinen-Dal RFA, Balej-R Vcr, Perry-Ana P2, Stewart-P2
Lehtinen is a solid #3 who if the season is good can be a #2. Balej is a project having broken into the league with a flash and vanished as suddenly with an injury. He's resurfaced in Vancouver where there is a chance he can get on a scoring line. Perry is the cream of the Edge prospect crop at RW. He's crafty and can score at an elite level, and if the wheels become average, he'll be a serious threat for a top line position. Stewart was supposed to be the unstoppable force, but so far, he hasn't shown the hands or points to be a high end winger. More likely is a Mike Grier role.
D: Martin-NJ P3
Martin is a emerging blue-liner in the Wade Redden mold. He's a good bet to play in the Edge top four, with 40+ pts a possibility.
G: Legace-? RFA
Still casting about for a team to call home and start for, Legace is the little goalie who almost could. Like Dwayne Roloson and Manny Fernandez in Minnesota, Legace has the ability to split a heavy load and carry his share, but has yet to prove he can do a starters job on his own.
L: Blake-NYI RFA, Brunette-Col RFA, Olesz-Fla P2
Blake is a third liner who can get streaky and play like a first liner. The downside is prolonged droughts as he isn't a natural finisher. Brunette is an average scoring winger on a good team and with a great centre, but his slow feet will doom him from realizing high levels of production. He will also be streaky in the extreme. Olesz is a skill winger with speed who has struggled to crack a lineup in Florida where mistakes get you lengthy pine time. If he can develop a thick skin he could flourish on a scoring line. Still best remembered as the victim of Dion Phaneuf's series ending concussion-causing shoulderblast. Given the weakness of the two ahead of him, could well end up dressing.
C: Thornton-SJ FP, Bell-SJ RFA, Crosby-Pit P3
Even if Bell is a washout when your top pair is the guy who just won a scoring title, and the other is a guy who could already be better, the third member of the trio is almost irrelevant. Bell, if only because he might actually wingman for Thornton, is better than irrelevant, and may end up with enough telepathy to dress comfortably as the teams #3.
R: Cole-Car RFA, Zherdev-Cbs P4, Kostitsyn-Mtl P3
Cole is rapidly turning into Gary Roberts, a middle-weight power winger with 30 goal hands, a non-stop motor, and a propensity for sitting at the front of the injury bus. Zherdev has been all tease so far, one day he'll let someone get to 3rd base, but so far, he's no better than a third liner. Kostitsyn is Zherdev only a year behind in development. Both are in the mold of Afinogenov, fast, skill forwards who aren't yet adept in the trenches.
D: Jovanovski-Phx FP, Souray-Mtl RFA, Klesla-Cbs RFA, Hamhuis-Nsh RFA, Campoli-NYI RFA, Pitkanen-Pha P4
Jovo-cop is marking time as the teams long term partner to Thornton. As soon as Crosby loses prospect status he'll be replacing the lumbering blue-liner. Till then, all he has to do is stay a top 10 defender to merit his status as the teams top dog. Pitkanen however, is closing fast, giving the team a legit top 2 defense pairing equal just about anyone elses. Souray's wrist is a crapshoot, so he could be dressable in the top 4, or merely filler. Klesla, Hamhuis and Campoli are the coulda-mighta-could yet be trio. Any of them could hit for 30+ or vanish completely.
G: Dipietro-NYI P3, Niittymaki-Pha P2
Dipietro has been waiting for his turn as the next big thing in netminding only a year less than Luongo has, but he has a far less stellar trackrecord. Niittymaki is the legit starter of the two, as he'll be the next in line for the Flyer goalie carousel. Historically this should give him close to top 5 numbers. With only his playoff performance to gauge his ability to field a full season of work, he's a high risk high reward player to be counting on.
L: Pyatt-Vcr P4, Rucinsky-NYR P4, Torres-Edm P4, Bouchard-Min P3, Brown-LA P2, Fedoruk-Ana P2
Pyatt will likely be released as his game has never approached FUNHL ready. Rucinsky is safe late round match to remain as an RFA at LW, comfortably filling the 4th line role and maybe more. Torres will also get a shot at the team and will vie with Rucinsky for an active roster spot. Bouchard is an up and comer who could have his breakout 'I'm here to stay' season as Minny retools its offense. Justin Brown in LA is a dynamite prospect, but is likely to get converted to centre, and that will delay his impact a year. Fedoruk is a waste of time as a prospect being marginal both offensively and as a goon and with no likelihood of ever improving. There is the basis of a solid depth and a potential future star or two in Bouchard and Brown, but overall, it won't carry the mail without some ED help.
C: Lindros-Dal RFA, Rolston-Min RFA, Kraft-Pit P3, Zigomanis-StL P2
Lindros will have to prove (again) that he can be an elite player. Dallas may be the perfect place to rehab his game, especially since he'll get to play out of the media spotlight that is TO. Rolston had his fluke year and will regress to being a marginal 4th liner in the FUNHL. Kraft has been a project on offense for what seems an eternity, but never gets any closer to a real points producing job in the NHL. Zigomanis has career AHL written all over him. He checks, shoots and makes plays at a level just below where he needs to be to be dressable. At least one high pick, and maybe two in the ED, and another in the PRD, will be needed to flesh out the centremen position. All hope is lost if Zhamnov is again a consideration for the knuckledraggers.
R: Afinogenov-Buf RFA, Vasicek-Car P4, Lupul-Edm P3, Nilsson-NYI P2
Afinogenov had by far his best season, clocking in at just under a ppg. Freewheeling more often and more successfully than in the past, he has only to put two seasons in a row together to be a mainstay on a FUNHL scoring line. He should be a solid #2 or more ideally, 3. Vasicek got lost in the mix with the additions of Weight, Recchi, etc. and his own injury. If he bounces back it's most likely going to be a centre. He has to prove again that he can play regular minutes before he'll get another FUNHL shot. Lupul has a chance to be a regular line contributor if he shows he belongs on one of Edmonton's top lines. Nilsson hasn't fully bloomed as a talent yet, but he's close. He could be at Afinogenov's level soon, sadly, it will be for the Islanders.
D: Chara-Bos FP, Numminen-Buf RFA, Backman-StL RFA, Kuba-Tbay RFA, McCarthy-Atl P3, Phillips-Ott P3
Monstrous Chara will have to show he can dominate for the Bruins the way he did for the Senators, but if he does, he's one of the top four players in the league. I think he takes a step back, and isn't the +/- threat he would have in Ottawa, but keeps his status as a first tier offensive producer (Boston will feed him gobs of ice-time), and TG. Numminen is done as a top 4 defender, but Backman is just entering his prime and could surprise with 30+. Kuba is following the Kubina path of destruction in that he doesn't have the footspeed to compete without hooking. McCarthy is still developing as an NHL calibre defenseman, but is already on his third team (Chi-Vcr-Atl) without that happening. Phillips may crack the team as a defensive defensmen or teritary goon, but is otherwise still a bubble defenseman.
G: Turco-Dal FP
Slipped a bit as an elite goaltender, but still has the goods to be top 5. The defense corps in front of him is the real question moving forward as they have to show they have the legs to play in the new league. Another step backwards would call his value as an FP into question.
L: Zetterberg-Det RFA, Frolov-LA P4, Nash-Cbs P4, Semin-Wsh P3, J.Jokinen-Dal P2, Ladd-Car P2, Miettinen-Dal P2
Zetterberg and Nash give the team two elite calibre wingemen for the position, and Frolov is a #2 calibre player in the#3 slot. Semin has Russia issues to handle before he lands with the Caps, but even if he makes it over for the season and excels, there is no room for him. J.Jokinen has 2nd line potential and could be a contributor, but there is a huge logjam ahead of him. Ladd faces similar obstacles, but has other attributes to throw into the mix. A goalscorer in junior with a powerforward pkg, Ladd will stick in Carolina and get serious minutes even if his offense takes some time to mature. He's an awesome longer term prospect, but almost certainly has another year on the GW farm to look forward to. Miettinen is an afterthought, so far down the depth chart he'll never see the light of day.
C: Nylander-NYR RFA, Arnott-Nsh RFA, Allison-? RFA
Nylander and Arnott both had their best seasons in almost a decade. In Nylander's case, he avoided the injury bus (a first), and got extended playing time with Jagr to boost his numbers to the bubble of 1st line status. For Arnott, his game was definitely benefitted by remaining healthy, and his slapshot returned to being a fearsome powerplay weapon. I expect the faults of these two cancel out their upsides - one of them will get hurt, or suffer some sort of anomalous accident rendering them below calibre. Allison will sign with the Leafs eventually and could produce enough for the third line, but his lack of footspeed will make him a longshot to hang on as a contributor of note in the FUNHL. In all a glaring need to use an early pick on the centre spot exists.
R: Gaborik-Min RFA, Parrish-Min RFA, Carter-? RFA, Svatos-Col P2
Gaborik has been on the verge of being a breakout 50-50 winger for half a decade. He has all the tools, including a dazziling array of shots in his arsenal, and elite wheels. Historically he's always lacked two things to push him into elite company; gifted linemates and the green light from mgt to do anything other than trap. Well, the Wild have addressed the first part bringing in fellow countryman Demitra and slick puckmover Kim Jonsson to help get Gaborik the puck on the fly. But will Lemaire let the horses run? Parrish is a one trick pony scoring winger who makes his living having good hands and acceptable speed. He's not due for a renaissance and 30 goals would be a surprise. Carter finds himself on the outside looking in, as no teams even sniffed at his asking price. The Canucks and Leafs remain potential destinations, but both teams also have cap issues to stay wary of and it won't be at Carter's current ticket. All in all Carter is usually a decent 3rd line winger in the FUNHL wherever he plays. Svatos is the wild card, has he started the year looking like a younger version of Milan Hejduk. Then the bus hit him, and we've been deprived of observing his development since. Has skills to produce and be a starter for the GW's but will have to prove himself again first.
D: Pronger-Ana FP, Desjardins-Pha RFA, Zhitnik-NYI RFA, Bouwmeester-Fla RFA, Liles-Col RFA, Regehr-Cgy RFA, Sutton-Atl RFA, R.Jackman-Fla RFA
Pronger is still the best all-round deffenseman in the NHL and should challenge for the scoring title among defenders especially with the upgrade in supporting cast he receives playing in Anaheim. Desjardins has retired. Zhitnik is nearing the end of the line. He may have another two years left as a depth defenseman, but the time of him playing an active role in any teams top 4 is over. Bouwmeester is the opposite of Zhitnik and is a serious threat to be poached at the ED in the free agent rounds. Liles has also moved up to being among the more reliable young powerplay QBs and could also face an earlier than desirable bid at the ED. Both should be top 4 for the GW's. Regehr, Sutton and Jackman are all on the bubble. Regehr and Sutton because offense isn't a big part of their history, and Jackman because his defense is so poor, the powerplay is all you get.
G: Brodeur-NJ FP, Giguere-Ana RFA
Brodeur is still the NHL's most reliable top 5 goaltender, and Giguere is the ideal RFA backup.
Overall, I can identify a serious issue for the Fins created by the presence of both Zetterberg and Gaborik as RFA matches likely to occur within the first two rounds. It leaves the team to hope that a serviceable 1st line centreman makes it through to them in the third round or they risk trying to compete for the title with a second rate group of pivots. Otherwise, the team has talent at every position and is virtually set in net, at left wing and on defense.
LW: Sejna-StL P3
Left wing will need to be a priority for the Bladerunners at the next ED, as they have no players in the pipeline other than Sejna, and he looks to be a career AHL player rather than a FUNHL contributor.
C: Stefan-Dal P4, Hudler-Det P3, Staal-Car P3, M.Koivu-Min P2, Malkin-Pit P2
Stefan, Hudler, and Koivu will all probably be released or traded. Stefan is now in Bonk territory and has no serious offensive ability. Hudler may yet make the Red Wings and contribute on one of the top lines, but so far he hasn't done anything but be above average in the AHL. Koivu the younger may eventually mature into an Ollie Jokinen style pivot, but it will take years of waiting.
However, Staal will be an anchor on one of the Bladerunners top two lines for the next couple of years, and Malkin will join him this year or next.
RW: Hossa-Atl FP, Avery-LA RFA, V.Bure-StL P2
Hossa remains an elite gunner for the right side, one who should all things considered hit the top 10 in league scoring. A shoot first winger, Hossa's assist total will depend more on the health of his elite linemate than on his own average playmaking ability. Avery had so worn out his welcome with the Kings last year they kicked him off the team before the end of the season. Volatile and loud mouthed, he could the NHL's pim king next year, or he could be auditioning in the AHL. High reward, but very high risk. Bure is superfluous to the teams interests, even though his production merits considering as as a depth winger. He no longer has ppg ability, and his lack of defense is deadly to him now that he has lost a step of that once elite speed. I expect he'll be dealt or released to make room for a prospect with a higher ceiling and lower age.
D: Boucher-Dal RFA, Pothier-Wsh RFA, Kraijcek-VCR P3
Boucher is not likely to ever return to being a +/- threat, but he should still claw his way to 25 pts or so on the Dallas D making him a decent if unspectactular #5 or 6. Pothier will now be playing on a rebuilding Washington team instead of a Stanley Cup threat Ottawa squad. On the Senators he was a +/- gem, for the Caps, he simply won't be. How he fits in offensively into his new team will determine whether he can maintain a role. Kraijcek has a fresh start with his new team, and he could finally have a breakout season. Here's the rub, his production is most likely to be highest early on until a decision is made to keep him with the team or not, and an early promotion to capitalize on his success could backfire. Otherwise, his stock has improved to the point where he merits consideration as the teams best blue-liner going into the draft, and without question their most valuable.
G: Luongo-Vcr FP, Grahame-Car RFA, Miller-Buf P3
The real question (indeed the existential question for the Bladerunners entire season) is whether Luongo lives up to the ability with Canucks D in a way he didn't with the Panthers. How confident is the team in Luongo being not just a starter but someone who hits the top 5? Grahame will split too much time with some MVP of the playoffs to post decent numbers, and after being humiliated in Tampa Bay as a starter his value isn't high even as a backup. Miller is the wild card. He could be the key starter for a very good Buffalo team, but one that has embraced offense as its new calling card. In short, he might be in a Grant Fuhr situation where despite obvious brilliance, his numbers are rarely elite. That said, he's an intriguing possibility to supplant Luongo should there be a crisis of confidence. Overall, the position should be a 5, the team has invested an FP and has a backup who is one of the highest calibre prospects at the netminder position - but there are too many question marks and novel situations (and in Miller's case contract concerns) to warrant that high a rating.
Ok, I've got a post of all Jarome Iginla's 52 goals from his Richard season, and a tribute to the monster that is Dion Phaneuf.
Ironically, both players belong to the Wolves, and they are among the teams that for tech reasons can't download the vids.
Consider this my incentive for the Wolves to get highspeed....
My top 5 reasons why Malkin wants to stay in Russia:
5 - The mob
4 - Dave King
3 - He's far and away the leagues best player
2 - The Superleague pays him much more than the rookie minimum
And the #1 reason for Malkin preferring to stay in Russia....
1 - Doesn't want to play for the Bladerunners
Now, we can go HERE and have a simulation run on the two teams (or any other teams you might wish to pick), and have it give you a detailed box score for the game.
How detailed? It is indistinguishable from a real box score, right down to ice-time and pim.
As for the hockey game I set up and who won it, I'll put my winner into the comments area. Let me know how your own sims go!
Covenant of the FUNHL Version 5.5
(Revised July, 2005 by DM esq.)
A. Franchise Composition
1. There shall be twelve (12) franchises in the FUNHL, each with its own General Manager (GM).
2. The GM is responsible for the managing of his or her franchise. These duties include, but are not limited to, the drafting, trading, promotion and waiving of players, the submission of weekly line-ups, participation in the Entry Draft (ED), Waiver Draft 1 (WD1) and Waiver Draft 2 (WD2), selecting a franchise name and prompt payment of League Fees. GMs are further expected to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with the best interests of the League and toward the end of improving their franchise.
3. Each franchise consists of a Team of twenty-two (22) players, of which two are designated to be Franchise Players (FPs), and may additionally have non-active Prospect players over and above the number of players on the Team. Each Team consists, as of the ED, of four (4) Left Wingers, four (4) Right Wingers, four (4) Centers, eight (8) Defensemen and two (2) Goaltenders as well as eight (8) Prospects with no restrictions as to their position.
4. The position of players is determined annually by that year’s Hockey News Yearbook roster list. In the event that a player is not listed in his NHL team’s roster list and not listed in the roster list for any other NHL team in Hockey News Yearbook, then the player’s position is determined first by reference to the list of prospects in the Hockey News Yearbook, secondly to any other reference to the player’s position in the Hockey News Yearbook, by reference to the most recent Hockey News magazine, and finally by reference to any other published material deemed acceptable to the Disputes Committee.
B. Calculation of Points
5. A franchise’s points are calculated weekly based upon the performance of that franchise’s Team’s Active Line-up over the course of the preceding week. The Active Line-up of a Team consists of three (3) Left Wingers, three (3) Right Wingers, three (3) Centers, six (6) Defensemen and one (1) Goaltender. The Active Line-up of a Team also includes the designation of two (2) players as Tough Guys (TG) who, in addition to regular points, earns points in relation to the number of penalty minutes garnered in that week.
5.1 As noted below, some statistics are subject to a calculation in order to determine points earned. These include goaltender, tough guy and plus-minus points, collectively referred to as “figured” points. All figured points are subject to off-season review, and may be changed between seasons. Once the Entry Draft begins, all figured point calculations are fixed for the duration of the ensuing season, and cannot be changed until the following off-season.
5.2 The official source for statistics is the NHL’s website, nhl.com.
6. Any player (except goaltenders) may be played for their points, or as a plus-minus player. If played for their points, they receive one (1) point for every goal they score and one (1) point for every assist they record in that week. If played as a plus-minus player, they instead receive two (2) times their plus/minus rating for the week. [Note: It is important to remember that a player played as a plus-minus player may receive negative points for the week if their plus-minus rating for the week was minus.]
7. Goaltender points are calculated by multiplying three and one-half (3.5) by the number of games they played for that week, then subtracting the number of goals allowed for the week. The number of games played during a week is calculated by dividing the number of minutes played by the Goaltender by sixty (60). Partial games are included in this calculation, as are minutes played in overtime games.
[Note: For simple calculation, a 60 minute shutout is worth 3.5 points.]
8. The two players designated as a Team’s Tough Guys (TG), receive points normally, or as a plus-minus player if so played, but in addition receive a quarter (1/4) point for every penalty minute received in that week.
C. The Entry Draft
9. Every year the Fun-HL GMs will gather to select their Teams in an Entry Draft (ED) on a date determined by the Disputes Committee. This date is usually to be set on the second-last weekend before the commencement of regular season play in the National Hockey League, but this may be altered at the discretion of the Disputes Committee. This date will be confirmed a minimum of one month in advance.
10. The GMs will draft players according to the rules already established in s. 3. They will draft in order, as determined by the Slot Selection meeting, and in a wrap-around format until each GM has a complete Team roster. [Note: The wrap-around format means that the GMs select players in order from slot one to slot twelve and then from slot twelve up to slot one again.]
10.1 A player’s status, that is his eligibility to be drafted, is determined by when the player is selected, if at all, in the previous ED or Prospect Draft. Players selected in rounds 1-10 are either Free Agents or Franchise Players. Free Agents are players whose rights, for the next ED, are not held by any team. Franchise Players (FPs) are selected by the team owning their rights, usually in rounds 9 and 10, but if they are replacing a waived FP then they are selected in round 1, or round 2 if two FPs are being replaced. Any player selected in rounds 11-22 are Restricted Free Agents (RFAs) for the subsequent ED. The GM holding an RFA’s rights can retain that player during the next ED by selecting them and can match any other GM’s attempt to draft that player by selecting them with the next available pick after the attempt is made. [Note: A GM matching several attempts to select RFAs that he has the right to may result in that RFA being ultimately selected several rounds after the bid was originally made, and potentially being re-selected as an RFA.] Players who have Prospect status can only be drafted by the GM whose team holds his rights.
10.2 Each GM is given two (2) minutes to make their selection. In addition, each GM may ask for one of two Time Outs during the course of the ED. Time Outs last five (5) minutes. When a GM’s time for a selection runs out, and the GM either opts to not take a Time-Out or they have already used all their Time-Outs, the draft proceeds with the next GM’s selection. After that selection the GM who was passed over is permitted to immediately make their selection. If the GM is still not ready then the draft proceeds with the next GM. After each subsequent selection the GM who was passed over is permitted to immediately make their selection before continuing with the next pick.
11. The draft order is to be determined at a Slot Selection meeting on a date selected by the Disputes Committee, usually during the final round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs. The Slot Selection process will occur by lottery. Lottery ballots are weighted according to the formula in s11.1 below. The first team drawn in the lottery is given first option to select the draft slot of their choice. Subsequent franchises drawn select the slot of their choice from the remaining slots. A franchise can only select a single slot – further ballots drawn with the same team name are discarded.
11.1 The Slot Selection draft lottery is weighted by giving 12 ballots to the franchise that finished last and won the Herbivore trophy. From then on, the Predator Cup Champion receives 11 ballots, second place 10, third place 9 and so on, with the eleventh place team from the previous season receiving a single ballot.
11.2 In the event of an Expansion franchise entering the league, the Slot Selection draft lottery will proceed as described in rule 69.
11.3 In the event of a lost NHL season where the Predator Cup, Herbivore Trophy are not awarded and the order of finish is not determined, the Slot Selection draft lottery shall be unweighted with each franchise given one ballot.
12. Draft picks in the ED can not be traded nor can Slot Selection ballots or draft lottery slots.
D. Prospects and the Prospect Draft
13. In addition to the players on a Team, a franchise may have Prospects. Prospects are players who remain with a given franchise beyond one season, but are drafted following the ED.
14. Prospects are selected in a Prospect Draft which immediately follows each year’s ED and can be any player except those selected in the ED, an FP, or a player who is already a Prospect. The Prospect Draft has no positional requirements and draft order is determined by reverse order of finish for franchises in the previous year. The Prospect Draft does not have a wrap-around format.
14.1 In the event that an NHL season has been lost and rule 11.3 is invoked, the order for the Prospect Draft will be the opposite of that used in the ED. In this case the Prospect Draft will use a wrap-around format.
15. Players drafted as prospects are placed on a Prospects List, which can not include more than eight (8) players at the start of, during, or at the conclusion of the Prospect Draft but which can exceed that number between Prospect Drafts. This number may be revised in the off-season, but must be fixed prior to the start of the Entry Draft for the ensuing year.
15.1 Each GM is given two (2) minutes to make their selection. A GM may use any Time Outs from the preceding ED that have not already been taken, otherwise the procedure for GMs running out of time before making a selection is the same as in the ED (see rule 10.1).
16. Players on a Prospects List can be promoted to a franchise’s Team by waiving a player at the Prospect’s position, as determined by rule 4, to the Waiver Wire. The franchise retains its rights to the Prospect so long as he is not traded or left unprotected during either of the Waiver Drafts.
17. Prospects are on the Prospect List for a maximum of four (4) seasons after which they must be drafted by the franchise’s GM during the ED before that year’s Prospect Draft. A GM may re-select a former Prospect in the Prospect Draft, or drop a Prospect still on his or her franchise’s Prospect List and re-select him in the Prospect Draft for an additional four (4) season period, but the GM must wait for twelve (12) selections (one round) before they can re-select the player as a Prospect.
17.1 When a prospect has been in the league for four seasons (prospects are designated P1, P2, P3 and P4 to indicate the number of seasons they will have been prospects by the next ED) the player loses his prospect status however for the course of the following ED the player has status as an RFA. If the player is not selected in that ED then he loses all status.
18. Prospects can be traded, as can Prospect Draft picks for the upcoming Prospect Draft but not Prospect Draft slots.
E. Restricted Free Agents
19. Players, other than FPs, selected in rounds 11-22 of the previous ED as well as P4 prospects, players who have been on one or more Prospect Lists for four consecutive seasons, become Restricted Free Agents (RFAs) at the next ED.
20. A GM from any franchise may attempt to draft any RFA during the course of the ED. The GM whose franchise holds the rights to that RFA may choose to match the other GM, by announcing their intention and then proceeding to select the RFA with their next available pick.
20.1 If a GM has two or more RFAs bid upon in any one round, he or she may still match all the offers by announcing his or her intention to match and then selecting the RFAs, in order bid upon, with the next available picks in order.
21. If the GM chooses to match, then the RFA is selected, by drafting him in the ED, and becomes a player for that GM's Team
22. In the event that a RFA is bid upon, the GM of the franchise with the RFA in question is granted an additional Time Out (see rule 10.1) to consider their options and/or to effect a trade if he or she so chooses.
F. The Waiver Wire and Waiver Drafts
23. When a Prospect is promoted to a franchise’s Team, a player at the Prospect’s position must be dropped from the Team to the Waiver Wire.
24. Players on the Waiver Wire are announced by the League Statistician following the submission of Line-Ups and before the deadline for the subsequent week’s Line-Up. The Statistician shall endeavor to be prompt in making this announcement, preferably including the Waiver Wire players with the weekly Statistical Update. At the start of the ED there are no players on the Waiver Wire.
25. GMs may attempt to replace other players on their Team with players who are on the Waiver Wire by bidding on them with their weekly Line-Up submission. Players are awarded to franchises after Line-Ups have been set and are awarded on the basis of reverse order of franchise standing, according to the most recent weekly Statistical Update. GMs are required to include in their bid the player they are replacing who will then be waived to the Waiver Wire for the next week. The player being replaced must be at the same position as the player being bid upon. [Note: In practice the process works as follows. A GM sends in a line-up on week 3 which involves promoting a prospect and waiving a player to the Waiver Wire. After the deadline for week 3 has passed, that player is on the Waiver Wire. Other GMs (and even the waiving GM) may bid on that player as of their week 4 line-up, including in that bid the player who will be waived to the Waiver Wire. Once all the bids have been submitted, at the week 4 line-up deadline, the player is awarded to the bidding franchise with the worst record as of the week 3 standings. The player is then available to be on that GM’s roster starting with the week 5 line-up.]
26. Every season there are two Waiver Drafts, WD1 and WD2. The dates of these Waiver Drafts are to be set by the Disputes Committee.
27. At the start of each Waiver Draft GMs must release all unprotected players from their Team and have them exposed for selection by other GMs. GMs may only protect an Active Line-up minus two players irrespective of position. A GM may not expose a FP. Prospects that have not been promoted are automatically protected.
28. During the Waiver Drafts, GMs may select players for their Teams that are not already protected on other Teams or on other franchises’ Prospect Lists. Provisional “drop lists” of a Team’s unprotected players are a welcome courtesy by GMs but are not mandatory.
28.1 The RFA status or the Prospect status of players left unprotected during the WD is preserved for the course of the WD but teams who expose an RFA have no right to match during the WD. Once the WD is over any RFAs who have not been selected lose their RFA status. Players, other than RFAs or Prospects, selected during the WD are Free Agents at the next ED.
28.2 Each GM has the same amount of time to make their selections in the WD1 and WD2 as they do in the ED, two (2) minutes. There are no Time Outs in the WD1 or WD2, but otherwise the rules for running out of time before making a selection is the same as that for the ED (see rule 10.1).
29. Draft order is determined by reverse standings as of the most recent weekly Statistical Update. There is no wrap-around at the WDs.
30. Waiver Draft picks may not be traded.
G. Franchise Players
31. Each franchise has two players designated as Franchise Players (FPs) who continue to belong to a particular franchise until traded or replaced.
32. FPs can be from any position.
33. FPs can be traded but any trade involving FPs must see an equal number of FPs exchanged. No franchise can have more or less than two FPs.
34. FPs must be protected during both Waiver Drafts and FPs can not be waived to the Waiver Wire.
34.1 A Franchise's FPs can only be replaced at the Entry Draft. Prior to the start of the ED, GM's are polled in draft order if they intend to drop one or both of their FPs. Any FPs no longer wanted by the franchise are released and are free to be drafted in the ED by any team without compensation. As Franchises must have two FPs, any team that has less than two FPs at the start of the ED must use its next pick(s) to select one (or two) replacement FP(s). [Note: There is no requirement that a replacement FP be drafted in the first round, just that they be drafted with the Franchise's next available pick.]
34.2 There is no restriction on the type of player that can be drafted as a replacement FP, but existing protections for drafting RFAs or Prospects exist. A GM can, of course, select a replacement FP from his or her own RFA or Prospect List.
H. Injury Protection
35. If any player is seriously injured, as determined by the GM holding his rights, the GM may move the player to a protected list by promoting a Prospect, at the same position as the player, into his spot on the team. To do so costs the franchise a first round Waiver Draft pick in the upcoming Waiver Draft. Two players would cost the GMs first two WD picks and so on. If the GM wishes to further protect the player following WD1, the protection may be continued but only at the expense of a first round Waiver Draft pick in WD2. Protecting a player in this manner after WD2 involves no penalty or cost.
35.1 In the event that an FP dies during the course of a season. The affected GM may waive that FP at no cost. Also the League Founder will be obliged to purchase the affected GM a beverage of his or her choice. [Note: Rule 35.1, may also be cited as "The Corey Rule".]
36. Subject to the rules contained herein, GMs may trade any combination of players, prospects, prospect picks, RFAs and FPs as they both deem appropriate so long as it does not prevent a franchise’s Team from having an Active Line-Up.
36.1 Trades which would result in a violation of the rules contained within are not valid.
37. No asset, other than those listed above may be the subject of a trade.
38. GMs are responsible for knowing the condition and value of their own assets. GMs are required to honestly and truthfully respond to any inquiries regarding the status of their franchise’s players being offered and traded. GMs must alert the other party to a trade to any known injury that may be suffered by a player involved in a trade. A GM is responsible for the accurate identification of injured players, and will be held responsible for the status of their players, even if that GM was not aware of an existing injury at the time of the trade. [Note: If a trade is found to include an injured player, not so-designated by both GMs involved in the trade, then as soon as the injury becomes known:
a) the GMs involved must settle on an appropriate restitution or compensation for the injury in question;
b) if the GMs involved cannot agree on the amount of restitution or compensation, each GM involved must submit a proposed restitution or compensation package to the Disputes Committee (DC) who will select one of the two proposals;
c) if one or more of the GMs involved with a dispute are on the DC then for the purposes of the dispute replacement DC members are to be chosen as per Rule 50.]
38.1 Conditional Trades are permissible within certain guidelines. The conditions must be clearly and fully defined at the time of the trade and the criteria for the condition must be objective and unambiguous. Compensation attached to a conditional trade can only be in the form of prospect picks. Picks so named can not be traded elsewhere prior to resolution of the condition. Conditions can not restrict a GMs freedom to manage their own players, even with the permission of the GM in question. Conditions can not be traded again, except along with the player they are attached to. A player acquired with a condition can be traded with or without the attached condition but trading a player without the attached condition does not nullify the condition. The GM who retains the condition is still owed the agreed compensation as per the terms of the condition.
39. Trades are not finalized until both GMs confirm the trade with the League Office (the League Statistician and the Disputes Committee, usually by way of e-mailing the trade to the whole league).
40. Trades take effect immediately upon League approval but do not affect points or statistics until after the next Line-Up submission.
41. Trades are not permitted to occur from the Fun-HL trade deadline until the end of the Stanley Cup Playoffs or the Fun-HL Slot Selection draft lottery, whichever comes first.
41.1 The Fun-HL trade deadline is as of the first Monday following the NHL trade deadline. This can be changed by the DC prior to the ED in the event that the NHL changes the timing of its trade deadline.
[Note: Historically the deadline has been in March. For clarity, if the NHL trade deadline is on a Monday, the Fun-HL trade deadline will be the following Monday.]
J. Weekly Line-Up Submissions
42. Every week GMs are to submit their Active Line-Up, benched players and Prospects to the League Statistician. Included in this submission are any Prospect Promotions and waiving of players to the Waiver Wire, changes of TG, and indications of players played for +/-, and bids for players on the Waiver Wire. Also GMs should indicate which of their players are FPs, RFAs and Prospects. [Note: To ensure that the League Statistician and League Office have a correct record of traded picks, a list of all a franchise’s assets should be included in the weekly submission. This is easily done if you just forward an e-mail of your complete roster to yourself and update it as you make trades. You can then re-forward that roster every week to the League.]
43. All GMs are required to submit their Line-Up via e-mail to the League Statistician every Monday prior to 6:00 Mountain Time (MST). Further, all GMs are to forward this Line-Up to all other GMs, unless they have asked not to receive this information or they are not on e-mail.
44. GMs whose franchises were Fun-HL members prior to September 27, 1997 and who do not have e-mail privileges may submit their Line-Ups via telephone to the League Statistician who will undertake to forward those Line-Ups to the rest of the League by e-mail.
45. Line-Ups sent after the deadline will only be accepted at the discretion of the League Statistician and only in extreme circumstances. Otherwise it will be determined that there was no Line-Up submitted.
46. In the event that no Line-Up is submitted, then the Team’s previous Line-Up will be followed. If the GM has traded away certain players in a trade confirmed by the League Office, then those players will be played by the other Team but the players acquired will not be automatically placed on the delinquent GM’s Active Line-Up.
K. Dispute Settlement, Rule Changes and the Disputes Committee
47. In the event of a question arising from these rules, a dispute between GMs or a disagreement between the GM and the League, the matter shall be decided by the Disputes Committee (DC).
48. The Disputes Committee shall be composed of three individuals as selected by the League GMs.
48.1. The DC shall be composed of 3 GMs interested in being on this Committee; 2 members shall selected from the GMs at large and Dan Ross, if he is willing, would remain the sole permanent GM on this committee. The current DC is composed of Dan, Bob and Rob. The League Statistician stats-keeper also plays a special unofficial role on this committee. No GM can be forced to be a member of the DC without their consent.
49. The Disputes Committee is empowered to decide on all disputes arising from the functioning of the Fun-HL. Its decisions are to be based on this document, where possible, and on matters not dealt with by this document they are to be based on principles of fairness and in the best interest of the Fun-HL.
50. In the event of a conflict of interest in a matter before the Disputes Committee and one or more of its members, the affected member(s) shall appoint temporary Disputes Committee members as required to maintain a state of impartiality; this could be the role of the stats-keeper.
51. Disputant(s) are given a chance to make a written submission to the Disputes Committee. In the event of a unanimous ruling by the Committee, the matter is thus resolved. If no consensus is found, the ruling of the majority of the Committee members shall be the ruling of the Committee.
52. The Disputes Committee, may be persuaded by, but is not bound by, its previous decisions and is to decide each case on its own merits
53. The Disputes Committee is also responsible for the amendment of these rules via rule proposals or changes to calculated stats such as goal-keeping. The Rules of the Fun-HL are not allowed to change during the course of a season without the agreement of all League GMs.
54. Following the Stanley Cup playoffs and the Slot Selection draft lottery, GMs may make submissions to the Disputes Committee regarding amendments to the rules governing the Fun-HL. The Disputes Committee itself may also choose to make such submissions.
54.1 Rule changes in general can only be voted into effect by a three-quarters majority i.e. 9 out of 12 GMs must be in favour of the Rule Change.
55. In the event that the Disputes Committee is unanimous in it’s finding to change a calculated statistic or if there are rule changes, this document must be revised to reflect that fact. The Disputes Committee must inform GMs of any impending changes to the rules.
56. If there is not unanimity among the Disputes Committee, or if a GM opposes a change unanimously agreed to by the Disputes Committee, then the Committee can ask for written submissions on the matter from all interested parties. The Committee shall consider these submissions and may otherwise seek the opinions of GMs. If the Committee is now, or is still, unanimous then the amendment will be made. If the Committee is not unanimous then the amendment may still be made if there is deemed considerable support for the amendment among the GMs (i.e. 9/12GMs).
56.1 Prior to each season's ED the DC will make these rules, as amended, available to all GMs, either through handout or posting on the Fun-HL homepage.
K. Awards, Prizes and Fees
57. The Fun-HL awards the Predator Cup to the franchise and GM with the most points at the end of each season. The Fun-HL will, in addition, pay a sum, from the Fees and accrued interest, to be directed by the winning GM towards the purchase of a hockey jersey of the GM’s choice.
58. The Fun-HL awards the Omnivore Plaque to the franchise and GM who improves his franchise the most from the ED. The calculation of improvement is based on the difference between the franchise’s final standing and the points that would have been gained had the franchise played its ideal (Omnivore) Line-Up all season long.
59. The Fun-HL awards the Herbivore Trophy to the unlucky franchise and GM who finishes last in the League that year. The winner of the Herbivore Trophy is also required to pay for the engraving of all awards.
60. The Fun-HL also awards the Challenge Cup to the winner of the playoffs (following “regular season” play) of the Head-to-Head schedule, set prior to the start of the current season.
61. Each GM shall be required to pay a Treasurer usually the stats-keeper, designated by the League Founder, a Fee to cover the costs associated with the running of the Fun-HL and the awarding of its prizes. The Fee is to be established each year prior to the ED and payment of it is a pre-requisite to allowing a franchise to draft. This requirement can only be waived by the Treasurer and only in exceptional circumstances.
62. The Treasurer is responsible for entrusting the Fees in an appropriate banking account and with directing the Fees and interest to the appropriate person or persons following the conclusion of the Fun-HL season.
63. While not a part of the rules, there is nothing in these rules that would prevent subsequent amendments which would award a portion of the Fees to League officials for the performance of their duties or for the use of such fees for other League activities.
L. Franchise Transfers and Expansion
64. In the event that a GM is unable or unwilling to carry out his or her duties as a GM, that person may resign as a GM in the Fun-HL. The franchise is to be placed in the temporary custody of the League Office until a new GM can be found.
64.1 For the period that the franchise is managed by the League Office it is not allowed to conclude any trades. It will continue to dress the last submitted valid line-up and in the event that there is no such line-up the League Office will submit one on the franchise's behalf being the best possible line-up in the League Office's opinion.
65. Replacement GMs may be recommended by any existing GM but their final approval is subject to the unanimous agreement of the DC.
66. The replacement GM, when approved, has the franchise transferred to him or her and they take on the rights and responsibilities of that franchise, including any obligations of the franchise made under the previous management in the way of traded draft picks and conditional trades. The replacement GM is allowed to rename the franchise if he or she so chooses.
67. The Fun-HL can expand the number of franchises with the unanimous approval of the DC and the general approval of a significant number of league GMs. (As a general rule the League will only expand by two teams at a time.)
68. Expansion franchises, if approved, will officially enter the League at the Slot Selection Meeting to be held during the last round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs.
69. Expansion franchises will have their Slot Selection "ranking" chosen by way of a weighted lottery. (Chances to make the 1st selection = 0, 2nd selection = 1, 3rd = 2… 12th = 11, 13th = 12, 14th = 13.)
70. In the ED, once an expansion franchise uses its first round pick (with which they must select an FP) the second expansion franchise gets a "bonus pick". When the second expansion franchise uses its first round pick, the first expansion franchise then gets a "bonus pick". These "bonus picks" are provided solely for the selection of FPs.
71. Expansion franchises, as with all franchises, may not trade their ED picks, including their bonus picks.
72. In the Prospect Draft, expansion franchises will receive the final picks in the first round and the first two picks in subsequent rounds. The order between the two expansion teams to be determined randomly and then altered every round.
K. Final Rule
73. GMs are expected to be involved, discuss the pool with other GMs and most importantly to enjoy the Game and themselves.