I think the Milbury talk would be around him becoming coach, gotta believe his performance as Isles GM closed the book on that possibility forever
This is sort of how I try to convince people that I'm a demigod.TheRealness said:Not on an Internet message board. The burden of the affirmer has no place here.
Myt1 said:This is sort of how I try to convince people that I'm a demigod.
EDIT: I loved Milbury when he coached here at first, but I will lose my shit if they hire him now.
Edmonton's last ten years disagrees.lexrageorge said:The Millbury noise has to be just noise; I cannot imagine a dumber move being made by any NHL franchise.
I was taking Edmonton's last decade into account when I made my assertion. Hiring Millbury in any capacity outside of TV/radio personality will set this franchise back beyond the depths of Edmonton's despair.Chuck Z said:Edmonton's last ten years disagrees.
cshea said:Chiarelli is meeting with the Oilers brass today. MacTavish is still GM, but perhaps a front office shakeup is in the works?
Chiarelli and Julien in Edmonton would be fasciniating.
McDavid must be salivating over Claude's defensive style. At least Chia will trade him in 2 years.Kenny F'ing Powers said:
How could they make 4 full lines with all the young guys they'd have to stash on the bench?
Agreed. You just have to refer to this webpage for a refresher on how mindbogglingly terrible he really was:lexrageorge said:I was taking Edmonton's last decade into account when I made my assertion. Hiring Millbury in any capacity outside of TV/radio personality will set this franchise back beyond the depths of Edmonton's despair.
Seems like a new rule that they didn't think through completely. It's true though.Eddie Jurak said:Why are they entitled to any compensation for a guy they fired?
However, NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly, who authored the memo on this, told ESPN.com Monday that for coaches, general managers or presidents of hockey operations who are fired but remain under contract, their teams are privy to draft pick compensation if they choose to pursue it.
Can you imagine the scorched Earth campaign if the hiring of Chiarelli fell through due to draft pick compensation? They would go berserk up there.PedroSpecialK said:
Still better to get a 2nd rounder than a 3rd rounder.
Additionally, there is the chance that the Bruins would not pursue compensation simply to get the remaining salary owed to Chiarelli off their books. As this is not a cap-related expense, it would not surprise me in the least to see the Jacobs family go this route.
Looks like Chiarelli to Edmonton.PedroSpecialK said:To add on cshea - per Dom Tiano, if the Oil hire Chiarelli before the draft and the B's pursue compensation, because it'd technically be an in-season hire, it would be a 2nd rounder surrendered by Edmonton.
The Napkin said:Let's all throw out insane trades!
Claude, Subban, Lucic, d-man not named Dougie or Krug, and a salary dump for Hall and Eberle.
cshea said:Chara for Pittsburgh's 1st round pick that the Oilers hold.
What would they get for Claude if he goes to Edmonton?cshea said:Not pursuing the compensation pick would be dumb, IMO. I understand the Bruins may be content with just having Chiarelli's salary wiped off their books, but there is no downside to asking for a pick. It's not an either/or situation, if I'm understanding the rules correctly. The Bruins could free of Chiarelli's salary AND get a pick, if Edmonton wants Chiarelli so bad. I guess Edmonton could call a bluff and say forget it, but that seems rather unlikely.
3rdRedOctober3829 said:What would they get for Claude if he goes to Edmonton?
I don't think this would have any real value to the Bruins. The only advantage to moving Savard off the books is that if they can get far enough under the cap they can "bank" cap space to use in deadline deals. Given the Bruins' current cap situation, I don't think freeing themselves from Savard would let them bank much of anything - they will be right at the cap anyway.NYCSox said:Honestly I'd be happy if the Oilers just took Savard and freed up the $4 million cap space.
It primarily helps them to be compliant on day 1 when the LTIR moves aren't in effect. That gives them a little more flexibility with keeping players that may have to clear waivers otherwise. I'd obviously rather have the picks.Eddie Jurak said:I don't think this would have any real value to the Bruins. The only advantage to moving Savard off the books is that if they can get far enough under the cap they can "bank" cap space to use in deadline deals. Given the Bruins' current cap situation, I don't think freeing themselves from Savard would let them bank much of anything - they will be right at the cap anyway.