Bissonette on the Oilers

[IsDurbanodoingtime]

Their goaltending - just not good. Same old story. Skinner's sp is .81 over two games. A goal against every fifth shot. Brent Johnson redux. As much as they want him and prop him to be the guy, he just isn't. Yes he is not getting help from the d but If he had stopped one or two howlers he gave up in game 1, it would be a different series.

[bluetunehead]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

Part of the rationale from the Devils was that they had Chris Terreri as an established starter and Brodeur as a recent 1st round pick that they were high on being their future in goal. Lou didn’t want or need CuJo, even though he and Brind’Amour was a big offer (and massive in retrospect).

[TruBlueFan_1970]

Broberg and Holloway are obviously big pieces, but they lost some speed and size in other positions too. On defense, Ekholm is hurt, but they also lost Broberg, Ceci and Desharnais. At forward, a huge loss for them has been Foegele, Holloway and McCleod.

Not sure they make it out of the first round the way they are playing defense and getting swarmed by the Kings solid defensive play.

[theograce]

Broberg and Holloway are obviously big pieces, but they lost some speed and size in other positions too. On defense, Ekholm is hurt, but they also lost Broberg, Ceci and Desharnais. At forward, a huge loss for them has been Foegele, Holloway and McCleod.

Not sure they make it out of the first round the way they are playing defense and getting swarmed by the Kings solid defensive play.

Kane too. A healthy Kane can help a lot in these games

[Lloyd Braun]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

No, the Stevens signing compensation was dependent on how we performed in 1990-91. If we had finished outside the Top 7, the comp would have been 2 first round draft picks. But after we finished 2nd overall, we were required to give Washington five first round draft picks.

It would have been the same situation with Shanahan, except for the fact that we didn't have any 1st draft picks for five years. The only option was compensation of players. The Devils were under no obligation to accept a trade and always had the option of taking it to arbitration, as per the CBA rules.

Blues 2112 was correct. It was a huge risk, the Shanahan signing. We had no idea what the comp would be, and were going to be at the mercy of an Canadian judge.

The Blues had absolutely no leg to stand on in the arbitration. The prior year, they had just given Stevens $1 million per year and then we gave Shanahan the same amount just a year later (actually it was slightly more than Stevens). We essentially proved we valued Shanahan as much, or more than Stevens.

It was easy for the Devils to argue against the Blues. If Brind'Amor and Joseph were valued the same, then why weren't they getting the same money from the Blues?

The Judge was required to pick the offer that was closer to equal value... and the Blues made the mistake of defining Shanahan's value to be the same as Stevens'

[SpacemanSpiff]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

No, the Stevens signing compensation was dependent on how we performed in 1990-91. If we had finished outside the Top 7, the comp would have been 2 first round draft picks. But after we finished 2nd overall, we were required to give Washington five first round draft picks.

It would have been the same situation with Shanahan, except for the fact that we didn't have any 1st draft picks for five years. The only option was compensation of players. The Devils were under no obligation to accept a trade and always had the option of taking it to arbitration, as per the CBA rules.

Blues 2112 was correct. It was a huge risk, the Shanahan signing. We had no idea what the comp would be, and were going to be at the mercy of an Canadian judge.

The Blues had absolutely no leg to stand on in the arbitration. The prior year, they had just given Stevens $1 million per year and then we gave Shanahan the same amount just a year later (actually it was slightly more than Stevens). We essentially proved we valued Shanahan as much, or more than Stevens.

It was easy for the Devils to argue against the Blues. If Brind'Amor and Joseph were valued the same, then why weren't they getting the same money from the Blues?

The Judge was required to pick the offer that was closer to equal value... and the Blues made the mistake of defining Shanahan's value to be the same as Stevens'

Stevens was a Group 2 RFA. The Capitals were allowed to match.
Shanahan was a Group RFA. The Devils were not allowed to match, and the teams had to come to an agreement.

And yes, the fix was in the moment it went there.

The old guard told Houston to side with Jersey because so many were (upset) at the Blues.

Consider this:

Summer of 1990, the Blues sent waves through the league by signing Stevens, and they also gave huge money to Hull after he played out his option.

Summer of 1991, the Blues then signed Dave Christian to an offer sheet that was worked out by trading Featherstone, Thomlinson and a couple of draft picks to the Devils, and then Michel Goulet (matched by the Hawks) and they followed that up with the sheet to Shanahan. The league, via the Houston ruling, was trying to slow down the expanse of salaries.

[Blue Sabbath]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

Never seen it explained just exactly how the Blues "tampered"with Stevens. I know it's an old story that's probably been rehashed many times but does anyone want to weigh in on this for me?

[a smell of green grass]

1) When the history books record why Edmonton failed to get a Cup with McDavid and Draisitl, the Blues theft will be cited as a primary reason.

Lack of defense or goalie will be the reasoning.

Playing Devil's advocate... Imagine the goalie that Edmonton could have fetched by trading Broberg and Holloway.

[Lloyd Braun]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

No, the Stevens signing compensation was dependent on how we performed in 1990-91. If we had finished outside the Top 7, the comp would have been 2 first round draft picks. But after we finished 2nd overall, we were required to give Washington five first round draft picks.

It would have been the same situation with Shanahan, except for the fact that we didn't have any 1st draft picks for five years. The only option was compensation of players. The Devils were under no obligation to accept a trade and always had the option of taking it to arbitration, as per the CBA rules.

Blues 2112 was correct. It was a huge risk, the Shanahan signing. We had no idea what the comp would be, and were going to be at the mercy of an Canadian judge.

The Blues had absolutely no leg to stand on in the arbitration. The prior year, they had just given Stevens $1 million per year and then we gave Shanahan the same amount just a year later (actually it was slightly more than Stevens). We essentially proved we valued Shanahan as much, or more than Stevens.

It was easy for the Devils to argue against the Blues. If Brind'Amor and Joseph were valued the same, then why weren't they getting the same money from the Blues?

The Judge was required to pick the offer that was closer to equal value... and the Blues made the mistake of defining Shanahan's value to be the same as Stevens'

Stevens was a Group 2 RFA. The Capitals were allowed to match.
Shanahan was a Group RFA. The Devils were not allowed to match, and the teams had to come to an agreement.

And yes, the fix was in the moment it went there.

The old guard told Houston to side with Jersey because so many were (upset) at the Blues.

Consider this:

Summer of 1990, the Blues sent waves through the league by signing Stevens, and they also gave huge money to Hull after he played out his option.

Summer of 1991, the Blues then signed Dave Christian to an offer sheet that was worked out by trading Featherstone, Thomlinson and a couple of draft picks to the Devils, and then Michel Goulet (matched by the Hawks) and they followed that up with the sheet to Shanahan. The league, via the Houston ruling, was trying to slow down the expanse of salaries.

Still doesn't change anything. The Blues had no picks to offer New Jersey, so it had to be players involved in compensation.

We gave Stevens $1 million per in 1990. Then we gave Shanahan $1 million per in 1991. Judge Houston didn't even have to really make a decision... the Blues made it for him. Stevens = Shanahan according the Blues who defined their values as the same.

Brind'Amor, like Shanahan, was a forward drafted in the top 10, was 1 year younger. And instead of looking to re-sign him, we were trying to get rid of him and replace him with Shanahan. I mean... how much clearer could the Blues have been in admitting that Brind'Amour was not the equal of Shanahan? We even had to offer Joseph as a sweetener.

NJ didn't need or want Joseph. Another goaltender would have caused them to have to get rid of one currently in their organization. On top of that, Joseph was the Blues backup goaltender, who had a hard time snatching the starting job from Reindeau because he was always injured early in his career.

So the Blues wanted to offer an injured backup goaltender, and a forward they no longer wanted, for Shanahan, who they just made one of the richest players in the sport.

I don't doubt that the league was trying to keep down salaries and hated the Blues for it. But there is absolutely zero evidence of your claim that Judge Houston was in on any type of illegal shenanigans, and I just played out why his judgement of Stevens for Shanahan was sound based on the Blues' own faulty logic.

[seattleblue]

This whole thing about where the Blues finished the year in 90-91 being 2 versus 5 first round draft picks requires substantiation. I'm not taking that on face value, I've never heard that. Where's the NHL rule on that from 1990?

Spiff is right about them being different kinds of free agents and one you could match or not match.

[Hazelwood72]

Bissonette is a tool that just does that stuff to be "that guy" like on NFL broadcasts or ESPN shows. A lot of sports / media today is about clout and views and hot takes instead of just good production of the sports coverage.

He plays a character.

Totally agree. I do not like Bisonnette’s commentary at all. He’s a clown. But I’m sure ESPN pays him to play the clown role.

[MiamiLaw]

Bissonette is a tool that just does that stuff to be "that guy" like on NFL broadcasts or ESPN shows. A lot of sports / media today is about clout and views and hot takes instead of just good production of the sports coverage.

He plays a character.

Totally agree. I do not like Bisonnette’s commentary at all. He’s a clown. But I’m sure ESPN pays him to play the clown role.

He’s on TNT not ESPN, but yea he’s absolutely there to be a Stephen A Smith type

[Hazelwood72]

Bissonette is a tool that just does that stuff to be "that guy" like on NFL broadcasts or ESPN shows. A lot of sports / media today is about clout and views and hot takes instead of just good production of the sports coverage.

He plays a character.

Totally agree. I do not like Bisonnette’s commentary at all. He’s a clown. But I’m sure ESPN pays him to play the clown role.

He’s on TNT not ESPN, but yea he’s absolutely there to be a Stephen A Smith type

Oops. Sorry. You’re right. He’s on TNT.

[bluetunehead]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

Never seen it explained just exactly how the Blues "tampered"with Stevens. I know it's an old story that's probably been rehashed many times but does anyone want to weigh in on this for me?

The tampering came later. After Stevens initial contract with NJ was up, the Blues signed him to another offer sheet in the summer of 1994. The Devils matched the offer sheet to keep him. It was eventually determined a few years later that the Blues had been in discussions with Stevens and/or his agent early while he was still under contract. So the league made the Blues send a 1st to NJ and they had to swap 1sts with NJ in a different year.

[Blue Sabbath]

Blues double-down the next year by signing Shanahan, knowing the team did not have the necessary picks — BY RULE — and were taking a huge risk.

This is a slight mischaracterization of the Shanahan signing. Stevens was I think they called a Group VI free agent where it was defined as 5 first round picks, but there was not a required template for a different kind of free agent (Group III?) and for that procedure the teams were supposed to negotiate themselves in good faith for compensation. But failing that, and the way it was told was Lou simply refused to discuss it, the teams were each supposed to come up with a single offer and Judge Houston had to pick either theirs or ours, he couldn't craft his own alternate deal for example. We all heard what the Devils offered and dismissed it out of hand, and in fact were kind of surprised by how much value they had to offer (Joseph, Brind'Amour, plus two second round picks which would have been in the 40s overall). When Houston picked the Devils offer is was shocking. We had just witnessed Stevens essentially turn around the entire team there was no way Shanahan (4 years into his career averaging the same 50pts a year Stevens was on defense) equaled Stevens, just on its face.

I could be wrong about which category # of free agent they each were but it was different rules for Stevens than it was for Shanahan.

Never seen it explained just exactly how the Blues "tampered"with Stevens. I know it's an old story that's probably been rehashed many times but does anyone want to weigh in on this for me?

The tampering came later. After Stevens initial contract with NJ was up, the Blues signed him to another offer sheet in the summer of 1994. The Devils matched the offer sheet to keep him. It was eventually determined a few years later that the Blues had been in discussions with Stevens and/or his agent early while he was still under contract. So the league made the Blues send a 1st to NJ and they had to swap 1sts with NJ in a different year.

Thanks.