- Bucky Gleason of the Buffalo News: Tyler Myers isn’t going to get Shea Weber money ($7.5 million, 1 year deal), but he could get around $6 million a year. Gleason thinks it would be a good idea to get a deal done early this season (he’ll be a RFA at seasons end) before he gains more leverage. He thinks a 5 year deal at $30 million makes sense.
- Kirk Penton of the Winnipeg Sun: Zach Bogosian on contract talks with the Jets:
“Things are good. We’re talking. That’s about all I will say,” Bogosian said. “You’ve just got to sit back and let the agents and GM deal with all that kind of stuff.”
Bogosian has played in 199 games so far. He recorded 17 points in 71 games last year and was a -27. Bogosian and Luke Schenn should get a deal in the same neighborhood.
- Matt Reitz of Pro Hockey Talk: The Jets and Bogosian may be having trouble finding fair market value for him. There are question marks surrounding Bogosian’s game. The others from his draft class: Drew Doughty has already been a Norris Finalist, Alex Pietrangelo has shown signs that he could be a Norris candidate one day, and Luke Schenn “has already made a name for himself as a nasty defenseman.” From an NHL executive:
“They were comparable players in junior but haven’t been to date as pros. It’s difficult to know what Winnipeg has in Bogosian at this point. He may very well turn into a fine player but that has only been demonstrated in flashes so far.”
Reitz wonders if the systems of former coach Craig Ramsey didn’t give Bogosian a chance to succeed. He’s currently just an average defenseman, but do the Jets want to “gamble on a long-term contract hoping to lock him at a reasonable cap hit?” Should they sign him to a short-term deal to see how he develops?
- James Mirtle of the Globe and Mail: Mirtle lists 8 of the more interesting rule tweaks the NHL is testing at its R&D camp. 1. Changes only permitted on-the-fly. 2. No line change for a team committing an offside. 3. After offside, face-off goes back to the offending team’s end. 4. No icing permitted while shorthanded. 5. Overtime variation (four minutes of 4-on-4 followed by three minutes of 3-on-3). 6. All penalties to be served in their entirety. 7. Verification line (additional line behind the goal line) – if puck touches line, it’s a goal. 8. In-net camera: a mounted camera with view focused on the goal line to help verify goal. Mirtle lists other rules on the agenda, click here.
- Eric Stephens of the OC Register: Ducks GM Bob Murray on the chance that Teemu Selanne doesn’t play this year:
“You don’t replace him so you just have to …. we’d have to change the team. Yes, there’s a Plan B. We’d have to do some things that I don’t want to discuss right now.
“But we’d have to look at building the team a different way without Teemu. There’s no doubt about that. And you don’t replace him. You go about it a different way with your hockey team.
“That time is going to come. Of course, we talk about it.”
#1 by Joseph at August 10th, 2011
Can say I’m only in favor of #5, as far as the rule changes go. All of the others just don’t seem right to me…
#2 by Joseph at August 10th, 2011
Scratch that, 7 and 8 are OK too if they can work out any kinks involved with them…
#3 by D at August 10th, 2011
i can see #2 working like icings work now, and #8 would work too, but asides from that they’re all pretty iffy
#4 by Mark Easson at August 10th, 2011
I’m not sure about the overtime variation (#5) … 7 and 8 I’m fine with.
#6 – Servering entire length of penalty is interesting, but if the call is a bad one or one of those over the glass delay of game penalties, it would be tough to swallow giving up possibly 2 PPG.
#2 – players don’t normally go offside intentionally, so don’t know why they would be put at a disadvantage for it.
#5 by Joseph at August 10th, 2011
Only reason I’d be in favor of #5 is because 3-on-3 is ridiculously exciting, not to mention it’s a less fluky, less “skills-competitiony” way to earn two points after 4-on-4 than a shootout. You never get to see 3-on-3 during a regular game, and it’d reward teams with skill, as a shootout does, but it’d also allow teams to actually play hockey to decide a hockey game, which a shootout doesn’t let you do…
#6 by Mike Ski at August 11th, 2011
I’d be fine with Rule #6, having penalties served in their entirety, with one stipulation. If a short-handed goal is scored, the player may then come out of the penalty box.