On this week's episode of The Athletic Hockey Show:
- Thoughts on the Jesperi Kotkaniemi offer sheet, and where it goes from here
- Still no Jack Eichel trade, and is there any good way out for the Sabres?
- Lots of listener feedback on our August debate episodes
- Is Patrik Elias a Hall-of-Famer?
- The 30-year anniversary of the Scott Stevens/Brendan Shanahan ruling
- Plus Lundqvist's popularity, McSorley's high-stick, the 1972 Summit Series opener and lots more...
The Athletic Hockey Show runs most days of the week during the season, with Ian and I hosting every Thursday. There are two versions of each episode available:
- An ad-free version for subscribers that you can find here
- An ad-supported version you can get for free wherever you normally find your podcasts (like Apple or Spotify)
On this week's episode of The Athletic Hockey Show:
- Things just keep getting worse in Buffalo
- Should anyone even want the Sabres coaching job?
- The Rangers destroy the Flyers and it's not good news for either coaching staff
- Is goaltending a problem in Philadelphia yet again?
- Robin Lehner publically addressing his concussion, and those mental health rumors
- The most profitable teams to bet on so far this year
- Listeners call in with a question about Seattle hockey history and a new/old idea for the Skills Competition
- This week in hockey history covers the Richard Riots and the St. Patrick's Day Massacre
The Athletic Hockey Show runs most days of the week during the season, with Ian and I hosting every Thursday. There are two versions of each episode available:
- An ad-free version for subscribers that you can find here
- An ad-supported version you can get for free wherever you normally find your podcasts (like Apple or Spotify)
Tonight’s NHL schedule features one of the most anticipated matchups of the season so far, as the Oilers host the Flames. It’s an important game, one that could help decide an incredibly close Pacific Division race. But of course, that’s not why everyone is focused on it.
No, for that we can thank Matthew Tkachuk and Zack Kassian. This will be their first meeting since the Jan. 11 game in Calgary that featured several controversial hits, a one-sided fight, and more than a few postgame soundbites. It also earned Kassian a suspension, and led the hockey world to wonder: What comes next?
We didn’t have to wait long to find out, because the Oilers and Flames play twice this week, with tonight’s game followed by a rematch in Calgary on Saturday. Kassian hasn’t exactly been shy about suggesting that he’ll be looking for further payback. Tkachuk’s options are a little more complicated, but it’s fair to say that all eyes will be on both players as we wait to see what – if anything – happens when they cross paths.
So that will be the next chapter in the story. But at the risk of skipping ahead, how will it end? This is hardly the first time that two players have developed some bad blood, so we have plenty of examples of how this might go. So today, let’s dig back into the archives and try to figure out what the end game might look like here.
This can end: With a decisive moment
What happens: After months or even years of a back-and-forth, give-and-take sort of rivalry, something finally happens that tilts the scale. Maybe it’s a crushing hit or some sort of altercation, or maybe one guy just goes out there and wins the big game for his team by actually playing hockey. But either way, everyone remembers the moment, and everyone remembers who won.
Why it’s good: This is the exclamation point on the story, and while it may not end the rivalry completely, it’s pretty definitive. It happens, we all see it, and then everyone moves on.
Why it’s not: Often, “decisive” can mean that somebody gets hurt.
Historical example: Scott Stevens vs. Eric Lindros. They were natural rivals from the moment Lindros arrived in the league, two big physical alpha dogs staking out their territory as franchise players and captains of teams in the same division. They fought in Lindros’ rookie year, traded big hits, always seemed to be in each other’s faces, and competed for the title of the league’s most-feared physical presence.
We all know how it ended.
That was pretty much it for the rivalry. And in some sense, that was also it for Lindros as an elite NHL star. The devastating hit looks very different through today’s eyes than it did at the time. But whether you see it as a clean hit or a predatory headshot – or maybe, based on the rules of the day, both at the same time – it became the rivalry’s definitive moment. And its last.
This can end: With a signature fight
What happens: Enough is enough. Two guys who hate each other and who’ve spent a chunk of their careers exchanging shots on and off the ice decide to settle things the old-fashioned way. They drop the gloves, everyone else clears out, and may the best man win.
Why it’s good: Even if you hate fighting, there’s a certain old-school appeal to seeing two rivals go this route. It’s almost honorable.
Why it’s not: Depending on how you view fighting, two professional athletes settling a score with bare-knuckles fisticuffs can seem silly, if not barbaric. There’s the risk of injury. And half the time, the guy who loses will insist on a rematch, so nothing really gets settled at all.
Historical example: Scott Stevens vs. Dave Manson. Before he was battling Lindros in the Patrick Division, Stevens had an epic rivalry with Blackhawks blueliner Manson. They tangled when Stevens was in Washington, in a controversial fight that resulted in multiple suspensions for biting and eye-gouging. A year later, Stevens wound up playing for the Hawks’ top rival. It wasn’t hard to see where this was headed, and during a brawl that would be remembered as The St. Patrick’s Day Massacre, it got there.
One of the most memorable fights of the ’90s didn’t exactly smooth over the bad blood, but it served as a climax to the rivalry. And at least nobody got bitten or gouged.
It’s been almost two weeks since the end of the William Nylander contract saga, with its twists and turns and last-minute buzzer-beater resolution. As the round-the-clock coverage fades into more reasonable daily updates, we’re trying to sort through the various details that are emerging on how this deal was put together.
One of those details is Nylander’s apparent belief that Kyle Dubas has promised not to trade him.
Nylander says he has assurance from Dubas he won’t be traded while he’s the GM.
Because of the way the CBA works, the personal word of his GM is the only sort of trade protection Nylander can get; players aren’t eligible for no-trade or no-movement clauses until the reach their UFA-eligibility seasons. So Nylander has to rely on Dubas to hold up his end of the bargain here.
And Dubas probably will – after all, trading Nylander wouldn’t make much sense for the Leafs, and this is a rookie GM who’d no doubt prefer to establish a reputation as a straight-shooter. Assuming Nylander’s version of the conversation is accurate and Dubas really did give his word, there’s no reason to think that the young winger has anything to worry about here.
But just to be safe, he might want to stop reading right about now.
Because as it turns out, NHL history is filled with players who’ve believed they’d been given the same sort of assurance that Nylander says he got from the Maple Leafs. And more than a few times, those promises turned out to not be quite as ironclad as the player would have hoped.
So today, let’s look back at a few of the (many) trade scenarios in hockey history that started with a firm handshake or at least a perceived wink and nudge and ended with a player angrily mumbling about loyalty while packing a suitcase.
1975: The Bruins trade Phil Esposito to the Rangers
We’ll start with what may stand as the most famous example of the genre: the 1975 blockbuster that saw the Bruins trade Esposito and Carol Vadnais to the Rangers for Brad Park, Jean Ratelle and a minor-leaguer. It was a monster deal, one that saw New York acquire the player who’d led the league in goals in each of the last six seasons. And it didn’t make Esposito very happy.
That was because he’d signed a new contract that summer that he assumed would let him finish his career in Boston. He’d reportedly been offered $2.5 million on a five-year deal to join the WHA’s Vancouver Blazers, but took roughly half that to stay with the Bruins. According to Esposito’s version of events, Harry Sinden promised him that he wouldn’t be traded, and even offered to write a no-trade clause into the deal, which at the time was rare. Esposito says he told the GM not to bother, and that his word was enough. Weeks later, he was gone.
The trade, of course, ended up being a steal for the Bruins. Esposito played well in New York, but Park became the best player in the deal. And it got even more lopsided when the Rangers decided to reunite Esposito with center Ken Hodge, and sent a young Rick Middleton to the Bruins to get him. Park and Middleton became key parts of the late-70s Bruins teams that nearly won the Cup.
At the time of the trade, Esposito told reporters that he was “crushed” and that “I thought I had a home in Boston.” But he said he had “no regrets” toward Sinden or the Bruins. That tone would change over the years, as Esposito carried the grudge well past retirement. In 2013, almost 38 years after the trade went down, he was asked about the Bruins facing the Blackhawks in the Cup final and responded that “This series doesn’t mean shit to me.”
Last year, NHL coaches made it to very end of the season before anyone was fired. This year, they almost made it one month.
Hey, at least NHL GMs are getting better at something.
The first pink slip of season arrived yesterday, with the Kings firing John Stevens and replacing him on an interim basis with Willie Desjardins. The move came as a bit of a surprise; Stevens was only in his second year behind the Kings’ bench, had made the playoffs last season, and was coming off of a nice win over the Blue Jackets despite his star goalie being hurt. On the other hand, the Kings are tied for dead last in the league, so nobody can claim to be completely shocked.
We’ll get to what this means for the Kings in a bit – spoiler alert, they might show up in the bottom five rankings. But there’s a more pressing question: Now that the firing squad has broken the seal, who’s next?
We’re not exactly short on candidates. When The Athletic rounded up our opening night predictions, ten coaches received votes in the “first fired” category, and Stevens wasn’t among them. But Randy Carlyle was. So were Dave Hakstol and Mike Yeo, although with just a single vote each. Jeff Blashill finished second to Guy Boucher. And nobody even cast a vote for Florida’s Bob Boughner. (But we did have him ranked third for Coach of the Year honors. We might need a mulligan on that one.)
There are plenty of names in play, although some of them are safer than others. But you wonder if seeing the Kings make a move this early turns up the heat on other struggling teams. If the Kings run off a few wins to get back into the playoff picture, it might get awfully tough to preach patience.
That’s a topic of particular interest to the league’s bottom-feeders. But first, let’s get to the top five, which inconveniently features way more than five teams with a solid case this week. Will I be able to sort it all out? Not really, no, but read on.
Road to the Cup
The five teams that look like they’re headed towards a summer of keg stands and fountain pool parties.
We’re into November, which in theory means the top five should be getting fairly stable. We’ll have some movement each week, and maybe even the occasional team moving in or out of the list, but for the most part we should all be settling in on the same page. One big happy family, am I right?
Oh wait, I’m told I have some reader feedback, let me just crack that open …
Huh. OK, maybe we’re not all on the same page just yet.
First things first: despite last week’s throat-clearing, the Carolina Hurricanes didn’t make the grade after all. Three losses in three games will do that. I’m not saying I jinxed them by writing that we all needed to “[s]tart mentally preparing yourself now for a world where the Carolina Hurricanes are considered one of the very best teams in the NHL,” but if they go 0-and-68 the rest of the way, I’m going to feel just a little bit responsible.
That said, there is opportunity for some new blood in this week’s top five. With teams like the Jets, Sharks, Bruins and Penguins all wobbling, maybe it’s time to get just a little bit crazy.
5. Calgary Flames (9-5-1, +2) – Like I said … a little crazy.
Look, I’m not sure the Flames will be here at any other point this season. I’m far from convinced they deserve to be here now. These are the guys who got speedbagged by the Penguins just over a week ago. But they’ve won four straight, including some impressive outings against the Leafs and Avalanche. Their underlying numbers are good. They’re basically unstoppable in the third period. They’re in first place in a bad division and are tied for top spot in the league in goals scored.
Should all that be enough? In a typical year, maybe not. But with just about everyone apart from the top two teams looking decidedly iffy, it’s enough to get the Flames in for now. I called them one of my most confusing team in the offseason and they’re not doing much to make me feel wrong.
The Erik Karlsson watch continues. After rumours swirled all weekend that a deal to send Karlsson to Tampa was imminent, we’ve made it into the week without a trade. The Lightning still seem like the frontrunner, but for now, nothing is official.
That’s good news for everyone who isn’t a Lightning fan, because it means there’s still a chance that the two-time Norris winner won’t end up playing on the same team as this year’s recipient – Victor Hedman — and maybe even on the same pairing. That’s vaguely terrifying for the rest of the league, since we’re told that defence wins championships and the Lightning would have two of the very best in the league.
That kind of star power sharing the same blue line is rare, but not unheard of. So today, let’s run through some of the times over the past 30 years or so that one team could run out a pair of Hall of Fame defencemen. Note that we’re talking about a pair here, not necessarily a pairing – in most cases, these players weren’t used on the same unit, and we don’t know whether Karlsson and Hedman would be. But even if they’re deployed separately, having two Norris-caliber defencemen gives a coach all sorts of opportunity to dominate matchups.
It also virtually guarantees a Stanley Cup… most of the time. As we’ll see, there are no sure things in the NHL, although having an all-star blue line comes awfully close.
Chris Pronger and Scott Niedermayer, Anaheim Ducks
There’s a good chance that when you saw the subject for this post, this is the first pair that came to mind. They land right in that sweet spot where they’re recent enough that everyone remembers them, but long enough ago that we can start to build a mythology around them.
In the case of the Ducks, the mythology goes something like this: Anaheim was a good team coming out of the lockout, and they became a very good one when they signed Niedermayer as a free agent in 2005. But it was the acquisition of Pronger in 2006, thanks to some aggressive maneuvering by GM Brian Burke, that gave Anaheim one of the greatest pair of blueliners in modern NHL history, and they rolled to the Stanley Cup the very next year.
Those minor details aside, it’s hard to deny how overpowering the pair were. Randy Carlyle often used them on the same unit; other times he’d split them up and basically play the entire game with a Norris winner on the ice. During Anaheim’s Cup run, both players averaged roughly 30 minutes a game, miles ahead of any other Ducks.
When you think of a potential Karlsson/Hedman combo, this is the scenario you’re dreaming of if you’re a Lightning fan and dreading if you’re anyone else. But the story ending with a Cup parade isn’t quite inevitable, as Pronger himself can remind us…
In the Friday Grab Bag:
- In an important message for hockey fans of the future, I spell out the Ten Commandments of Adding More Replay Review
- The mysterious injury problem that's sweeping the league, just like it does every year
- An obscure player who snapped the longest goal-scoring drought ever
- The week's three comedy stars are homer-ific
- And a YouTube breakdown of the big brawl from the St. Patrick's Day Massacre. No, the other one.
If you’re the sort of fan who enjoys a good trade rumour, these days it’s all about the blue line.
That’s not all that unusual – in today’s NHL, it always feels like just about everyone needs help on defence. But for a change, we’re not just talking about depth pieces or short-term rentals. Instead, it’s some of the biggest names in the sport who are rumoured to potentially be available. In Ottawa, there’s been talk that Erik Karlsson could move at some point before he hits free agency in 2019. Arizona is facing a similar dilemma with Oliver Ekman-Larsson. And the slumping Penguins are now reported to at least be considering a move involving Kris Letang.
That’s not to say that any of those trades will happen, of course. But it’s rare to even see names of this magnitude show up in discussions at all. After all, as we’re so often told, nobody trades elite defencemen in their prime in this league.
Or do they? It turns out, trades involving top defencemen have been more common than you might think.
So today, let’s crack open the history books for a look at some of the times in NHL history that an elite defenceman was traded in his prime. We’re looking for guys who were established stars, which we’ll define as already having at least one post-season all-star pick or multiple top-five Norris finishes in their career. We also want players who were still relatively young, which we’ll say means they were 32 or younger. That rules out guys who were traded later in their career, like Brian Leetch and Ray Bourque, as well as some who blossomed into top-tier stars after they were traded, like Ryan McDonagh and Brent Burns. But it still leaves us with a surprisingly long list of candidates.
Here are 10 times in the last 30 years than an elite defenceman was traded in his prime, and what those deals might teach us about what to expect from today’s rumoured moves.
Paul Coffey
The trade: We have plenty of trades to choose from with Coffey, who was traded seven times. We’ll go with his first, the 1987 deal that saw the Oilers send him along with Dave Hunter and Wayne Van Dorp to Pittsburgh for Craig Simpson, Dave Hannan, Moe Mantha and prospect Chris Joseph.
The reason: Coffey was a two-time Norris winner at the age of 26 and had been a key part of three Edmonton championships, but by the start of the 1987-88 season he was holding out in a contract dispute. The Oilers made him wait until November as they worked to get a top asset back; they found one in Simpson, a 21-year-old who’d been the first-overall pick two years earlier.
The result: This trade allowed Simpson to become the first player to ever score 50 goals in a season split between two teams. But over time, Coffey had the greater impact, including three 90-point seasons, and he helped the Penguins win their first Stanley Cup.
The lesson: Sometimes, your hand is forced and you just have to bite the bullet and do the best you can. Under the circumstances, the Oilers did OK on this deal.
Rob Blake
The trade: In February 2001, the Kings sent Blake and Steve Reinprecht to Colorado for Adam Deadmarsh, Aaron Miller, a player to be named later and two first-round picks.
The reason: Blake was a pending UFA and wanted big money, so Kings ownership decided to move him even though the team was contending for a playoff spot.
The result: The deal worked out great for the Avs, who won the Cup that year and then re-signed Blake for five more seasons. The Kings didn’t get much from the deal – Deadmarsh had his career cut short by injuries and the picks turned into Dave Steckel and Brian Boyle – but did get Blake back for a few years at the end of his career.
The lesson: When a Norris-calibre player becomes available, sometimes going all-in pays off. The Avalanche had already traded for Bourque the year before, so they were firmly in all-or-nothing mode. They ended up with “all”, and have a banner to show for it. Remember that when contenders start to hem and haw about the asking price for Karlsson or Ekman-Larsson being too high.
In the Friday Grab Bag:
- Offer sheets are usually a waste of time. But this year, one specific one wouldn't be.
- Something that's been bugging me for years about how penalties are announced
- An obscure player who made played in three Olympics for Team Canada
- The week's three comedy stars, featuring an NHL vs NFL matchup that goes about as well as you would expect
- And we travel back to 1990 for some blooper tape fun in the weekly YouTube breakdown
On the one hand, the idea seems crazy. Even putting aside whether the Leafs should be trying to fast-track their rebuild, offer sheets almost never work — there’s only been one successful attempt since 1997. But Dellow lays out a convincing argument that this year’s Leafs are a rare case of a team that could pull it off, because they have lots of short-term cap room, an obvious hole in the roster, and draft picks that are unlikely to fall at the top of the draft.
So today, let's break out some alternate history as we look back at some of the bigger offer sheets over the years and ask: What might have happened if the team hadn't matched?
Michel Goulet, 1991
The offer sheet was still a relatively new weapon in 1991, having been in play for just five years, and at that point one had never actually been matched by the player's original team. The Blues had pulled off what still stands as the most successful offer sheet ever in 1990, when they'd pried Scott Stevens away from the Capitals. A year later, they decided to try again.
Their first target was Goulet, a veteran sniper coming off his first full season in Chicago. Going after Goulet served a dual purpose for the Blues, who could land a decent scorer while hurting their arch-rivals in the process. The Blues and Hawks had battled it out for the Presidents' Trophy in 1990–91, and Goulet's offer sheet continued the rivalry. St. Louis offered the veteran a four-year deal worth nearly $3 million, but Chicago matched, and the Blues had to turn elsewhere.
What if?: Goulet would play three more years and score 61 goals; decent numbers, but not enough to really change the course of history for either team. (Although he did help the Blackhawks make the final in 1992.)
But there may have been a crucial side effect of the Goulet deal. Having missed on one winger, the Blues turned their attention to a bigger offer-sheet prize: New Jersey's Brendan Shanahan. The good news is that they got him. The bad news is that it cost them far more than they imagined, when the Devils demanded Stevens as compensation. An arbitrator agreed, Stevens became a Devil (after a brief holdout) and the rest was history.
If the Blackhawks had let Goulet go to St. Louis, there's at least a decent change that the Blues never target Shanahan. And that means Stevens doesn't end up anchoring the Devils' blue line for the next dozen years.
Kevin Stevens, 1991
The Bruins and Penguins waged one of the better feuds of the early ’90s, spurred on by Cam Neely and Ulf Samuelsson. After the Pens knocked off the Bruins in the 1991 conference final, Boston decided to take the rivalry off the ice during the off-season by targeting one of the Penguins' best young players with an offer sheet.
Bruins' GM Mike Milbury gave the power winger a five-year deal reportedly worth over $1 million per season. The idea of Stevens, a local boy, playing on a line with Neely seemed irresistible. But after several days of suspense, the Penguins matched the offer.
What if?: Stevens scored 109 goals over the next two seasons and was a first-team all-star in 1992. The Penguins beat the Bruins in the conference final yet again that year, including a game in which Stevens scored four goals against his would-be team. Would the series have turned out differently if Stevens had been on the other side? It's unlikely — it was a four-game sweep — but we'll never know for sure.
Teemu Selanne, 1992
Here's a trivia question that would stump most fans: Who did Teemu Selanne sign his first NHL contract with?
Yes, despite being drafted by the Jets in 1988 and making his NHL debut in Winnipeg four years later, Selanne actually signed his first deal with Calgary, in the form of an offer sheet. The Flames gave the Finnish rookie a three-year deal worth $2.7 million, nearly double what the cash-strapped Jets were hoping to pay.
It was worth a shot, but Jets GM Mike Smith quickly matched. Any lingering bad feelings were quickly forgotten when Selanne took the league by storm with a 76-goal rookie season.
What if?: One can only imagine when Selanne could have done playing alongside Theo Fleury, Gary Roberts and Joe Nieuwendyk. At the very least, you'd have to assume the Flames wouldn't have gone a dozen years without winning a playoff round.
The World Cup is just days away, and much of the recent buzz has been around Team North America. The new entry, made up of some of the game’s brightest young stars, has already beaten Team Europe in a pair of exhibition games.
They’re fast, they’re skilled, their uniforms are kind of cool, and they’re gaining credibility as a dark horse to make some noise, if not win the whole thing. It’s all led to talk that the Team North America concept, originally thought to be a one-time deal, could end up becoming a permanent fixture in future World Cups.
But today, let’s forget about the future and turn to the past, with what could make for a fun hypothetical: What if there had always been a Team North America? What if every Canada Cup and World Cup had featured a team of the best 23-and-under Canadian and American players of the day?
Let’s find out. We’ll go back over each of the seven Canada and World Cup tournaments, and figure out what a Team North America roster would have looked like.
First, some ground rules. We’ll use the same criteria that the 2016 tournament is using, meaning players have to be 23-or-under as of October 1 in the year the tournament is held. As with this year, we’ll allow players who don’t have NHL experience, but limit the roster to players who’ve at least been drafted.
As best we can, we’ll ignore the benefit of hindsight and try to go by a player’s reputation at the time of the tournament, meaning some late-blooming stars may be passed over. And to keep it simple, we’re going to pretend that everyone is healthy and available.
(All research for this post was conducted using the tools at the indispensable hockey-reference.com.)
We’ll count the seven teams down from worst to best. And as it turns out, that means we’ll begin at the beginning.
No. 7 – 1976
Up front: There are some recognizable names here, including Bryan Trottier, Lanny McDonald and Clark Gillies, but it’s not a star-studded group. Despite being in the middle of the record-breaking 70s, we’ve got only one 100-point scorer, and it’s Pierre Larouche.
The blue line: Denis Potvin is the big star here, not to mention the team’s best player. Ian Turnbull would be there too. And since the real-life teams decided to allow WHA players, we will too, which lets us scoop up Mark Howe.
In goal: There’s not a ton to choose from; we’re probably rolling with John Davidson as our starter and hoping we don’t need to turn to a backup.
Worth noting: This would really be a Team North America in name only; other that Howe, I’m not sure a single American would make the squad.
Overall outlook: They’d have been fun to watch, but there’s just not enough talent here to compete with the world’s best.
No. 6 – 2004
Up front: We have to go back over a decade for the last World Cup, which means we just miss out on the Sidney Crosby era. But we do pick get to include players from the ridiculously stacked 2003 draft, one that’s often considered one of the best ever.
The biggest name would be Rick Nash, who’d just won a share of the Rocket Richard as a teenager. He’d make a nice first-line combo with soon-to-be Senator teammates Jason Spezza and Dany Heatley. It gets thin after that, though, with big names like Joe Thornton and Vincent Lecavalier just missing the cutoff, and the team wouldn’t have a 60-point scorer.
In goal: In theory, this would be considered a strength, since you’d have the only two goalies since 1968 to go first overall in Rick DiPietro and Marc-Andre Fleury.
You’d likely see DiPietro as the starter, given that he was coming off a decent year and wouldn’t be widely considered a bust until a few years (and one big contract) down the road.
Worth noting: That 2003 draft class doesn’t end up helping as much as you’d think it would.
Overall outlook: It’s not a bad squad, but it’s impossible to look at it without thinking about how much better it would be if we’d have had even one more year to work with.
Last week, we looked back on the league’s long history of arbitrators having to sort out messy cases. One of the biggest was the 1991 case that saw Scott Stevens awarded to the Devils as compensation for the signing of Brendan Shanahan. It was part of the league’s old RFA system, under which some players who signed with a new team weren’t subject to a right to match or draft pick compensation, but rather to a forced trade in which each team submitted what they felt was a fair offer and an arbitrator picked one.
It was, to put it bluntly, a fantastic system. Oh, the players hated it, and so did most of the teams. But for fans, it was a great source of entertainment. It was all sorts of fun to debate the teams’ offers, come up with ones of your own, and speculate over which side the arbitrator would ultimately land on. The system lasted until 1995, when Gary Bettman’s first lockout ended with a new CBA that ushered in new RFA rules. This excellent blog post contains a detailed history of the old system; it’s fair to say we’re unlikely to ever see it return in the NHL.
So today, let’s look back on five more cases where RFA signings resulted in an arbitrator forcing a trade as compensation. None were quite as big as the Stevens-for-Shanahan blockbuster, but each had its own impact on hockey history.
The battle of the enforcers
Despite having just two seasons and 69 games under his belt, Troy Crowder was one of the league’s most feared enforcers in 1991. That was almost entirely due to a single fight, one that came on opening night of the 1990-91 season. Crowder’s Devils were hosting the Red Wings, and midway through the game Crowder found himself squaring off with the league’s undisputed heavyweight champion, Bob Probert. The legendary Wings’ tough guy had a nearly spotless record over the years, but Crowder won the fight handily, a shocking result from a virtually unknown contender. When the two split a pair of January rematches, Crowder cemented his status as one of the league’s best.
And so, during the 1991 offseason, the Wings went out and signed him. The logic seemed sound – if this was one of the few guys in the league who could give Probert trouble, the Wings would make sure their big dog wouldn’t have to worry about him. The Wings offered Dave Barr and Randy McKay as compensation. But Lou Lamoriello and the Devils responded with the same strategy they’d used in the Shanahan case: swinging for the fences. They demanded Probert himself as compensation.
This time, the arbitrator wasn’t having it. Just days after they struck gold with the Stevens ruling, the Devils lost the Crowder case, and settled for McKay and Barr. Probert remained in Detroit for four more years, while a back injury limited Crowder to just seven games in Detroit.
Graves consequences
Today, Adam Graves is a Rangers legend. He was a key part of the 1994 championship team and once held the franchise record for goals in a season, and in 2009, the team retired his number.
But back in 1991, Graves was still a highly regarded prospect who hadn’t done much in the NHL. At 23 years old, he’d yet to so much as crack the 10-goal mark in four NHL seasons. So it was a mild surprise when the Rangers targeted him during the offseason, signing him away from Edmonton and opening the door to a compensation ruling.
The Oilers asked for Steven Rice and Loui DeBrusk, while the Rangers offered Troy Mallette. None of those were especially big names, and in some corners of the hockey world the Graves case didn’t get much attention. When the arbitrator sided with New York and sent Mallette to Edmonton, most fans shrugged.
But the ruling turned out to be a crucial one. The Oilers had had their eye on Rice and DeBrusk as part of a far bigger deal, one that would send captain Mark Messier to New York. That trade had been rumored for months, but had taken a backseat during the Graves case. But when Messier announced his intention to hold out in an attempt to force a trade, the Oiler had to make a move. And so, on October 4, 1991, they made a deal with the Rangers. In exchange for Messier, they’d get all-star center Bernie Nicholls and the two players they’d targeted in the Graves case, Rice and DeBrusk.
Would the Messier deal have still happened if the Oilers had already landed Rice and DeBrusk? It’s tough to say. In hindsight, it seems impossible to imagine Messier winding up anywhere other than New York. But he could have, if we’d seen a different decision in an arbitration case over a little-known prospect.
It’s been a rough few weeks for NHL arbitrators. While 25 contract cases had been scheduled for hearings, only Tyson Barrie made it to a hearing, and that was resolved before a ruling was issued, meaning the league’s arbitrators didn’t get to render a single decision. And all that comes on the heels of news that James Oldham, the neutral arbitrator who ruled on the Dennis Wideman case, had been dismissed by the league.
But during these dark days for the league’s proud arbitrating fraternity, it’s worth remembering that times weren’t always so tough. The NHL has a long history of arbitrators making headlines, on cases involving everything from contract signings to disputed trades and beyond.
Here’s a look back on five times in NHL history that an arbitrator got the chance to bask in the spotlight.
THE RFA FILES
The case: Today’s fans are familiar with the concept of restricted free agency. Certain players, typically those in the early stages of their pro careers, can find themselves eligible to sign offer sheets with other teams. If the offer isn’t matched, compensation is paid in the form of draft picks, based on a league-mandated scale. But the offer is matched, pretty much every time, which is why they’re rarely even attempted anymore and restricted free agency usually ends up being a dud.
Years ago, things were a lot more interesting.
Back before the current system came into place, the league went through a period where RFA signings were still subject to compensation. But instead of a list of draft picks and dollar signs, the compensation took the form of actual players. Each team – the one that had signed the RFA, and the one that was losing him – would have to submit what they thought was a fair trade to an arbitrator. And that arbitrator would have to pick one offer or the other, with no room to split the difference or compromise.
It was amazingly entertaining, and the strategy involved was fascinating. If you were signing another team’s RFA, would you lowball on your compensation to try to get the best possible value? Or did you make a generous offer just to make sure you weren’t burned? And if you were losing a player, did you retaliate by asking for someone even better in return?
OK, that last one sounds kind of over the top. But the New Jersey Devils tried it anyway, it worked, and everyone lost their minds.
The ruling: The player compensation system was used in all sorts of RFA signings over the years (I’m still not over the Maple Leafs losing Peter Zezel for Mike Craig). But the most famous case came in the early 90s, when the St. Louis Blues went on a spending spree targeting other teams RFAs. In 1990, they signed Scott Stevens away from the Capitals and named him team captain. And then in 1991, they went after Brendan Shanahan of the Devils.
Those were two big moves – Shanahan was a 22-year-old power forward who looked like a future star, and Stevens was already considered one of the best defensemen in the league. Put them together, along with established stars like Brett Hull and Adam Oates, and you had the core of a potential Cup champion. But as it turned out, it was the “put them together” part that ended up being a problem.
When it came time for an arbitrator to rule on Shanahan’s compensation, the Blues made a generous offer: Curtis Joseph and Rod Brind’Amour, two very good young players who’d go on to long and successful NHL careers. But the Devils shocked everyone by swinging for the fences and asking for Stevens. That seemed crazy – Shanahan was good, but Stevens was far better. But arbitrator Edward Houston stunned the hockey world by siding with the Devils, sending Stevens to New Jersey.
Understandably, the Blues flipped out. Stevens was also furious, initially refusing to report to the Devils before finally backing down shortly before the season started. The deal was a lopsided steal for New Jersey, one that helped set the stage for three Stanley Cups to come. To make matters worse, the Blues even tried to get Stevens back in 1994, and ended up getting nailed for tampering because of it.
To this day, Stevens-for-Shanahan stands as one of the biggest trades in NHL history. And thanks to an arbitrator, it was made against the will of one of the teams involved.
In the Friday Grab Bag:
- A word about Dan Boyle, Cal Clutterbuck, and when players yell at the media
- The award finalists are being announced, and they're all wrong
- The three comedy stars, including the Blues' newest fan
- An obscure lottery winner
- And a YouTube clip that's light and fun and features the darkest ending in the section's history
In this week's Grab Bag:
- The snubbing of the Toronto Maple Leafs
- When stars get benched
- Comedy stars, featuring D-Boss and a bunny
- Introducing the concept of prebuilding
- And the New York Rangers show Madison Avenue how to do commercials right
After a relatively quiet first few weeks of the season, the department of player safety was back in the spotlight over the weekend, faced with decisions on two controversial plays: Brandon Dubinsky's crosscheck to Sidney Crosby's neck and Matt Beleskey's late hit that injured Derek Stepan.
The verdicts: One game for Dubinsky and nothing at all for Beleskey. The reaction, as always: Frustration, eye rolls and plenty of criticism that the league just isn’t doing enough to get questionable hits out of the game.
The department has an important job, and because of that they deserve to be scrutinized. For my money, I thought Dubinsky got off too lightly with a one-game suspension, and I gave my thoughts on the Beleskey hit as it happened. I’d like to see the DOPS hand out harsher suspensions overall, although that's something that will only happen when their bosses -- the league’s 30 teams -- give them the go-ahead to start doing so.
But after we’re done shaking our heads over another round of relatively light sentences, let’s do something else. Let’s take a step back and recognize how far this league has come in recent years. Because, when it comes to discipline and player safety, the current lay of the land, imperfect as it is, would be all but unrecognizable to fans even a generation ago.
A look back at the biggest games and emerging story lines of the NHL weekend.
Theme of the Week: Giving the Devils Their Lou
The New Jersey Devils are a mess. That in itself feels like news, since this has been one of the league’s model franchises going back almost a quarter century. Over the last two decades, the Devils have won three Stanley Cups, made five appearances in the final, finished with 100-plus points in 13 seasons while missing the playoffs in just four, and finished with a points percentage under .500 just once (by a single point, in 2011).
So it would be strange enough to say that they’re a standard-issue mess. At 12-18-7, they’re tied with Buffalo for the second-worst record in the East, and have already been all but eliminated from playoff contention before the season’s second half even arrives. But even that doesn’t go far enough, because as of this weekend, the Devils have now become a mess in ways we’ve never quite seen before.
On Friday, the team announced the firing of coach Peter DeBoer, who becomes the third NHL coach this year to lose his job. DeBoer is a good coach who’ll work again somewhere, but he’s certainly not blameless here. While he guided the Devils to the Cup final in 2012, he left plenty of points on the table last year by insisting on starting Martin Brodeur in half the team’s games, and then seemingly overcompensated this season by using Cory Schneider to the point of exhaustion.
DeBoer’s firing led to the usual speculation as to who would replace him, with early reports suggesting Paul MacLean would get the job. Instead, the team announced a highly unusual co-coaching scenario, with Hall of Fame players Adam Oates and Scott Stevens splitting the job. Oates will coach the forwards, Stevens will take the defensemen, and neither will get an official head coach title or, we’re told, be allowed to speak to the media. And overseeing it all, at least temporarily, will be good ol’ Lou Lamoriello, the longtime GM who steps behind the Devils’ bench on an interim basis for the third time.
The whole thing is bizarre, and it’s led to what would have once been unthinkable: calls for Lamoriello to follow DeBoer into unemployment. Lamoriello has been the Devils’ GM since 1987, almost a full decade longer than any other current GM in the league. He took over a Mickey Mouse organization and turned them into champions, and no front-office face is as tightly linked to his franchise as Lamoriello’s.
And yet some pundits, both locally and beyond, are now asking whether the time has come for Lou to move on, too. This current Devils team bears little resemblance to the one that went to the final just a few years ago, and is largely made up of a mishmash of players and features just a marginal talent level. And they’re old — almost ridiculously old, featuring 16 players over the age of 30 (six of whom are 35-plus).
With the season all but lost, at this point the organization’s best bet is probably to just bottom out and hope for Connor McDavid. If so, maybe this odd three-headed coaching monster is all part of the plan. That may be the only way that it makes much sense — both for the franchise, and for the man who’s calling the shots, at least for now.
Cup Watch: The League’s Five Best
The five teams that seem most likely to earn the league’s top prize: the Stanley Cup.
5. St. Louis Blues (21-11-3, plus-13 goals differential). After dropping a 4-3 decision to the Stars, they’ve now lost four straight and given up 18 goals in doing so.
4. Nashville Predators (23-9-2, plus-28). They’re two back of Chicago for first in the Central. They also face the Blackhawks tonight.
Well, we knew it couldn’t last. The NHL’s department of player safety has finally had to get back to business.
It can thank San Jose enforcer John Scott, who left the bench to start a fight in Sunday’s game between the Ducks and Sharks, earning himself a two-game suspension. It was the first ban for an on-ice infraction all year, including the preseason, ending an almost unheard-of period of peace and quiet for our friends in the department of player safety.
In recognition of the recent stretch of leaguewide good behavior, let’s take a look back at some other incidents from NHL history that also didn’t earn a suspension. Of course, circumstances were a little different back then. For all the criticism the department of player safety comes under these days for just about any suspension it hands out (and especially the ones it doesn’t), it’s fair to say that today’s players don’t get away with anywhere near as much as they used to.
As evidence, consider the five hits below. None were deemed worthy of a suspension at the time. Today, that probably wouldn’t be the case. So let’s take a look back at some of the dirtiest clean hits of all time.
Matt Cooke on Marc Savard, March 7, 2010
The hit: We might as well get the obvious one out of the way first.
This was the hit that literally changed the sport, or at least its rulebook. Matt Cooke’s blindside hit of Marc Savard was vicious, dangerous, and unnecessary, a blatant attempt to injure a defenseless opponent. It was also, strictly speaking, legal. It wasn’t an elbow or a charge, it wasn’t especially late, and Cooke didn’t leave his feet. As much as the hit turned everyone’s stomach, there was nothing in the rulebook that said it was dirty.1
The verdict, then: No suspension, since the play didn’t technically break any rules and similar hits had always been deemed clean. But in an era in which we were beginning to understand the seriousness of concussions, it sure seemed like Cooke’s hit should have been suspendable, and even Don Cherry wanted him gone. It led to the introduction of Rule 48 the following offseason, which made it illegal to hit a player in the head from the blind side.
The verdict, now: If Cooke did it? He’d be out of the league. That’s not an exaggeration; after Cooke was busted for targeting the head yet again a year later, the league made it clear he had to change his game or find a new job. To his credit, for the most part he has.2 But if he ever throws another hit like this one, they’ll have the nameplate off his locker before the whistle finishes blowing.
If it was someone other than Cooke, we’d see a lengthy suspension that would depend partly on the resulting injury and the offending player’s history. Rule 48 is still poorly understood by many fans, and it’s led to plenty of debate over just how severe the resulting bans should be, but to its credit, the league has done a good job of making it clear that blindside hits to the head are no longer tolerated.
Which is a good thing, because those hits used to happen all the time, and sometimes they were really ugly, as we’ll see in our next clip.
Mark Messier on Mike Modano, February 26, 1994
The hit: Early in the third period of a 1994 regular-season game between the Stars and Rangers, Mike Modano cuts across the blue line and momentarily looks down for a pass in his skates. New York’s Mark Messier catches him with his head down.
Ignore the stuff with the stretcher that happens at the end of the video. The hit itself is a classic blindside, as Modano is in a defenseless position and Messier delivers a …
[Realizes everyone is just skipping ahead to the stretcher part anyways.]
Sigh. Yes, this is the infamous clip in which the medical staff drops Modano’s stretcher. Go ahead and watch that part 30 or 40 times if you must, but we’re not going to make fun of it here because we’re a little more mature than that, thank you very much. (And, uh, we already covered it frame by frame a few months ago.)
So Modano is in a defenseless position and Messier delivers a shoulder to the head that appears to knock him out cold. To make matters worse, Modano’s helmet comes off and he hits the back of his head on the ice, opening up a bad gash. He suffered a concussion and missed several games.
The verdict, then: No penalty, no fine, no suspension. Also, Modano’s own GM defended the play, saying, “I don’t know if it was so much a hit as Mike turned and skated right into him.” That’s a real quote. The whole incident was probably the most mind-boggling thing Messier was ever involved in, right up until that commercial that came out a few weeks ago in which he’s standing in a room full of Canucks fans and none of them are throwing garbage at him.
The verdict, now: In 1994, this was considered a clean hit. Today, it would be a classic Rule 48, and the resulting injury would make a hefty suspension all but inevitable. As a star player, Messier would get some benefit of the doubt. But he also had a history of questionable plays on his record, including a 10-game suspension for sucker punching Jamie Macoun in 1985. He’d get at least that much for this hit, and probably more.
(By the way, this wasn’t even the most ridiculous non-suspension hit against a Dallas Stars player in 1994. More on that in a minute.)
Ever the sportsman, Chara decided he wouldn't hit the
guy until he’d given him a chance to stand up.
The Conference Finals are underway, and so far they haven't exactly been the most entertaining. The Penguins and Bruins may be headed for a sweep, and the Hawks and Kings have so far served up a predictable series of home team wins. While there's still time for some excitement, so far the two series haven't served up much.
That's unfortunate, and it's also at least somewhat rare. Over the years the Conference Finals have often proven to be the most interesting round of the NHL playoffs, and have featured some of hockey's most enduring moments.
Let's take a look back through the NHL history book at some memorable Conference Finals matchups.
1979 - Don Cherry's Bruins take a too-many-men penalty during game seven against the Habs, which must be some sort of call that they've since taken out of the rulebook according to current Penguins players who are pretty sure the Bruins have been using an extra guy this entire series.
1989 - Ron Hextall earns a 12-game suspension after charging from his net and viciously attacking Montreal's Chris Chelios. Or, as an entire generation of Philadelphia sports fans will grow to refer to it, "the most sensible thing a Flyers goalie has ever done in my lifetime".
1993 - While it's normal to want to celebrate taking a 3-2 series lead with a little bit of music, the Maple Leafs will later regret asking Wayne Gretzky if they could borrow that piano he's been carrying around on his back.
2000 - Scott Stevens cements his status as the league's hardest hitter on a devastating open ice check on Eric Lindros, and by "status" we mean "shoulder pad" and by "cements" we mean "fills with actual cement".
How YOU doin'? Oh, right, I knocked you unconscious.
As the lockout continues to drag on, some pessimistic fans have already started wondering which players may not return if the 2012-13 season is cancelled. If the NHL and NHLPA can't figure out a way to make a deal and save the season, we may have seen the last of popular veterans like Teemu Selanne, Martin Brodeur, and Daniel Alfredsson.
Hockey fans have been through this before. When the 2004-05 season was cancelled, it cost fans the chance to see one more year from several hockey legends. Here's a look back at some of star players whose careers were cut short the last time the NHL scrapped an entire season.
Adam Oates - Retired after the lockout but attempted a brief comeback in 2009, we assume, since that's the only logical way to explain a guy with 1,400 career points not making the Hall of Fame until this year.
Al MacInnis - Decided to use some downtime during the last lockout to try out his slapshot with one of those fancy modern superfelx sticks, at which point he was immediately kidnapped by government scientists who used him to power the Large Hadron Collider.
Ron Francis - Was so well-respected during his long career with the Whalers, Penguins and Hurricanes that some fans paid tribute to him upon retirement by creating bizarre Photoshops of him wearing a Maple Leafs uniform for some reason.
Puck Soup is a podcast featuring me and Ryan Lambert. We release one free episode each week during the season, plus mailbags and other bonus episodes for Patreon subscribers.
"Biscuits" was the Vice Sports hockey podcast, hosted by DGB and Dave Lozo. It ran for two seasons; the final episode was in July, 2018. You can find the archives below:
