Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Notes From The Gm Meetings


Recommended Posts

Here were the major topics brought up at the latest GM meeting:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/stor...&id=3962804

Detroit GM Ken Holland has proposed an adjustment to the tiebreaker system. Holland would like to see the first tiebreaker go from games won to regulation games won. The logic is simple: Reward the teams that win games outright during the regular season, as opposed to winning in overtime or a shootout, when the opposing team also gains a point.

me: YES YES YES!!

Some GMs favor a move to a three-point system wherein a regulation win is worth three points and an overtime or shootout win worth two points, with the team losing in extra time still gaining a single point.

me: Yes, but thats almost the solution, just don't award anything for a loss, stop giving people credit for losing!!

St. Louis GM Larry Pleau's suggestion that on a delayed penalty, play should continue until the team about to be penalized clears its zone. Currently, play continues until the team about to be penalized gains control of the puck. The logic behind Pleau's suggestion is it would create even more offense and dovetail nicely with this season's new rule that sees all faceoffs after a penalty moved to the offensive zone.

me: YES YES YES!!

To maintain the integrity of the All-Star Game (boy, is it hard to write 'integrity" and "All-Star Game" in the same sentence), if you are asked or voted into one of the lineups, then you have to have missed at least the last game before the break or will miss the first game back. If a player is nursing an injury but attends the events, as Sidney Crosby did this year, no punitive action will be taken. Seems fair enough.

me: Good idea, that drama about Detroit was stupid.

Toronto GM Brian Burke will once again push for a change to the collective-bargaining agreement that would allow GMs to retain part of a player's salary when making a trade. Given the lack of meaningful trades, not just at the trade deadline but also throughout the season, Burke may be getting more support even though league officials hate the idea. The NHL believes that if a team could eat, say, $1 million of a player's salary in order to move him, it loosens the salary cap. Further, some believe having this ability favors big-market teams, which can afford to pay that money.

me: This makes sense and is a great idea in future years, not in this economy.

EDIT: Almost forgot,

Sources tell ESPN.com the GMs will examine the history of fighting, the types of fights -- including the loathsome appointment fight, in which two players agree to fight just because, well, that's what they do -- and how the league has tried to address fighting over the years, including the introduction of the instigator rule.

Don't expect this to be an easy one to get through, though. Fans love fights, and most, if not all, GMs believe there is a place for fighting in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a suggestion a while back that I liked about point distribution.

2 overtimes: first 4 on 4 for five minutes. If no goals, then 3 on 3 for five minutes. If no goals, then a point to each team. If someone does score in either of those overtimes, then they get the two points. Same amount of excitement as shootout, and noone gets a point for losing.

Of course, I always liked the idea of 5 on 5 five minute overtime, if noone scored, then a point to each.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the 3 points total per game idea. It prevents some games being worth a total of 2 points and some 3. I also don't agree that you shouldn't get a point for "losing" since I hate the idea that someone plays hard all game and then gets nothing because they lose in a non-team skill competition. I also think that by only giving 3 points for a regulation win, we'd see less teams "sit back" to let the game go to overtime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who would love to see it go back to the way it used to be...? :unsure: ....2 points for the winner.......0 points for the loser.....and 1 point each for a tie.

The only time I care to see a shootout is in the Olympics and the All Star game. Too much changing of the rules. Tsk Tsk <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who would love to see it go back to the way it used to be...? :unsure: ....2 points for the winner.......0 points for the loser.....and 1 point each for a tie.

The only time I care to see a shootout is in the Olympics and the All Star game. Too much changing of the rules. Tsk Tsk <_<

Shootouts are fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who would love to see it go back to the way it used to be...? :unsure: ....2 points for the winner.......0 points for the loser.....and 1 point each for a tie.

The only time I care to see a shootout is in the Olympics and the All Star game. Too much changing of the rules. Tsk Tsk <_<

I'm not really opposed to that, but we NEED to eliminate the shootout first. The difference between 2 and 0 points shouldn't depend on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the 3 points total per game idea. It prevents some games being worth a total of 2 points and some 3. I also don't agree that you shouldn't get a point for "losing" since I hate the idea that someone plays hard all game and then gets nothing because they lose in a non-team skill competition. I also think that by only giving 3 points for a regulation win, we'd see less teams "sit back" to let the game go to overtime.

I just think they should get rid of the shootouts, but yah if not this is the best alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/news;_ylt=A...s&type=lgns

NHL Players' Association urges GM to consider penalizing hits to the head

Chris Johnston, THE CANADIAN PRESS

NAPLES, Fla. - The NHL Players' Association would like to see a league rule that would penalize intentional hits to the head.

Union boss Paul Kelly proposed the rule while giving a presentation at the NHL's general managers meeting Monday morning. He would like referees to have the option of handing out a minor, major or match penalty to players that "intentionally or recklessly" target the head of another player.

It's a big issue for his membership.

"That's probably the most significant concern on the part of players," said Kelly. "I would say better than three-quarters believe that we need to have a new rule on hits to the head, that protects players.

"We're looking for not all hits to the head - there are accidental and inadvertent hits that don't cause a great deal of injury."

That is the key difference from a rule the Ontario Hockey League introduced this season where all headshots are penalized.

League disciplanarian Colin Campbell has tried to discourage headshots by handing out larger suspensions this year. Los Angeles Kings defenceman Denis Gauthier and Brendan Witt of the New York Islanders each received recent five-game suspensions for elbowing an opposing player in the head.

However, the NHLPA's rule change would give referees the power to hand out penalties on the spot.

That would mean a hit like the one Islanders forward Doug Weight laid on Carolina's Brandon Sutter earlier this season would become illegal. On that play, Sutter had his head down and was reaching for the puck when Weight knocked him out with a shoulder to the head.

Even though Kelly declined to discuss specific hits, he spoke clearly about the rule.

"We're talking about the unsuspecting player - the guy who is in a vulnerable position - who gets hit from a player who either intentionally or recklessly targets the head of the player," said Kelly. "Whether he strikes him with his shoulder or some other body part, it's the view of the players that those types of hits needs to be eliminated from the game.

"It's a pure safety issue."

The union's presentation also touched briefly on fighting, which will be the central topic of the three-day meetings. Kelly says the players are open to changes that could make fights safer.

- 30 -

the thing I wonder about is why has it taken the NHLPA so long to take a strong position on the issue... oh well, better late than never...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=413109

Daly addresses issues of the day

Monday, 03.09.2009 / 7:45 PM / NHL Insider By Dan Rosen - NHL.com Staff Writer

NAPLES, Fla. -- It's called the NHL General Managers Meetings, but they're not the only ones addressing a wide-ranging, plethora of issues down here this week.

All of the League's executives, including Commissioner Gary Bettman, Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly and V.P. and Director of Hockey Operations Colin Campbell are heavily involved in the discussions as well.

Daly took a few moments out of his busy morning to discuss many of the topics on the agenda with NHL.com. Here is what he had to say:

NHL.com: Fighting is the hot-button topic in the hockey world these days. Does the League have any particular stance on the topic at hand and where you stand on it?

Bill Daly: "That's what I think is going to be explored. Hockey is inherently a dangerous game and fighting is part of hockey and there will be dangers associated with that. Having said that, if you can look at the game, keep its basic integrity and still make it safer for the players, that's something we should always endeavor to do. That's what the exercise is this week."

NHL.com: Going forward, will there then be something that can be done on the quote-unquote staged fights? Is there a way to police that? Can we leave it in the hands of the officials, up to their discretion?

BD: "I think that's one of the questions that will be considered and talked about this week. I think that introduces some challenges that the managers may not want to deal with at this point, and I don't know the answer to that question because we haven't had the full discussion in the big group with those issues. It will be interesting to hear (Tuesday) what they think of the subject."

NHL.com: (NHLPA Executive Director) Paul Kelly said they have proposed a new rule on hits to the head. From the League's perspective, what do you think of the proposal and is it something that should continue to be discussed and thought about?

BD: "It's obviously something that our managers have focused on before as well. We had a very thorough discussion on hits to the head, being tougher on hits to the head and penalizing hits to the head going back to the summer of 2007. (The NHLPA) had some suggested language, but I'm not really sure if it's just a variation of some things that our group, the manager group, talked about two summers ago. Again, head injuries are a tough part of our business and something we should be taking steps to minimize. They will always be the result of a contact sport like hockey, but to the extent we can take steps to minimize the number of head injuries we should be doing it."

NHL.com: The players seem genuinely enthused about playing in the Olympics after 2010. I wonder if you could answer a question on what the League's thought is on that right now?

BD: "You know what, we don't have any preconceived notions on that subject. It was something that we were committed to as a result of our collective bargaining agreement in Torino in 2006 and 2010 in Vancouver. It's something that we decided a long time ago that we wouldn't make any decisions on until we go through the Vancouver experience, see what transpires there. I can say there were some things associated with the 2006 Games that didn't leave necessarily a positive impression on our clubs and I would suspect that those things can be corrected and they might be different in Vancouver and people might have a totally different view with regards to Olympic participation at that point. But, I don't think it's fair really even to gauge what clubs' views are on the Olympics until after 2010 to see how that experience goes."

NHL.com: Do you find it better to have the GM Meetings after the trade deadline as opposed to before?

BD: "Well, it's a first for me and for us since I have been at the League. It's really too early to tell. It's only one day in and we didn't really have much of a discussion within the broader group today. I think clearly there are some benefits to it. The managers were of the view last year when we decided to change it, with the stresses and time commitments leading into trade deadline, the managers meeting and the managers agenda doesn't get the full attention that it might if you did it after the trade deadline. That was the rationale on them moving it, so we'll see."

NHL.com: In Chicago at the one-day GM Meetings there was a lot discussed on the medical procedures and standards in the wake of the Alexei Cherepanov incident in Russia, with specific regards to the echocardiogram and the electrocardiogram. Was there or will there be anything discussed on that topic here?

BD: "Yes, I think we're going to report on those issues. That is something we have discussed with both our health management panel and our team physician society. There is a real split of opinion on the subject on whether an echocardiogram is the right thing to do, much less a wise thing to do, and it has to do with the amount of players you might end up disqualifying who might not have real heart conditions. There are false positive implications and the like. It is a product of a lot of debate in the medical community now so I'll report to the general managers either (Tuesday) or Wednesday on where we sit with the issue."

NHL.com: Is there anything new on the NHL Premiere games in Europe going forward, or are we just focused on 2009 right now?

BD: "At some point we'd like to be focused on a much longer-term horizon. We had some challenges this year in terms of the lateness of making the decisions we needed to make for a variety of reasons. We would have liked to have more teams going to Europe to open the season next year, but as it turns out we're going to open in two cities with four teams again. I would expect that we'll continue that and maybe expand it as we move forward. Obviously the World Cup of Hockey is an international opportunity that we're focused on going back to at some point. We're in discussions with the players association and we have an agreement to move forward on that. Hopefully we can stage a World Cup as early as 2011."

NHL.com: Would that be staged in September, February, or do you even know?

BD: "I think the current contemplation is we would keep it in the same time window as we have had it in the past, which would make it before training camp, during training camp time period as opposed to shutting down the season to accommodate a February World Cup. It is something the players association raised for the first time to us, the manager group, (Monday) morning. We're always happy to have that discussion, but it raises a lot of challenges. It raises a lot of the same challenges the Olympic break raises, quite frankly, which I think would make it difficult to accommodate.

- 30 -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im getting sick of this to the core. While they all sit in a warm "Southern State" and discuss the game of Hockey, and change something every year. Leave the darn game alone. Leave it be. Leave our game alone you Americans!!!

Firstly I live in a Southern State and I'm American and I take offense to this, I don't know who you think you are, but until you actually want to make a intelligent debate over the issues, rather than spew garbage like, "don't make changes" and rather say why the changes shouldn't be made. Please refrain from degrading my nationality and the society I live in, because we have as much a right to hockey as you guys do.

Just because you invent a game does not give you rights to it, no matter how many Don Cherry retard shows you watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Firstly I live in a Southern State and I'm American and I take offense to this, I don't know who you think you are, but until you actually want to make a intelligent debate over the issues, rather than spew garbage like, "don't make changes" and rather say why the changes shouldn't be made. Please refrain from degrading my nationality and the society I live in, because we have as much a right to hockey as you guys do.

Just because you invent a game does not give you rights to it, no matter how many Don Cherry retard shows you watch.

NBA-1 canadian team(were 2) MLB-1 canadian(were 2) team NHL 6 Canadian teams (were 8) NFL No canadien teams *see a pattern at all, just a bit, anything hmm!* Imagine if your sport of choice started taking US teams and throwing them into Canada, wouldnt you be abit concerned ?

your words were "Just because you invent a game does not give you rights to it" I see a pattern here. My problem lies with Gary Bettman. Holding the hands of all US franchises and protecting them. Imagine if Crosby was on a Canadian team, OMG He would lose it. But no, he decided where he was going, Im not dumb. So Gary made sure the Penguins werent going anywhere. Now, I dont think Pittsburgh should lose a team, but based on the reasons why they are staying is embarrassing. In every sport NY has 3 teams. I dont get this. The only reason so many changes are happening is to cater to the US, so that they can start watching more. Sooner or later point shots will be like 3 pointers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NBA-1 canadian team(were 2) MLB-1 canadian(were 2) team NHL 6 Canadian teams (were 8) NFL No canadien teams *see a pattern at all, just a bit, anything hmm!* Imagine if your sport of choice started taking US teams and throwing them into Canada, wouldnt you be abit concerned ?

your words were "Just because you invent a game does not give you rights to it" I see a pattern here. My problem lies with Gary Bettman. Holding the hands of all US franchises and protecting them. Imagine if Crosby was on a Canadian team, OMG He would lose it. But no, he decided where he was going, Im not dumb. So Gary made sure the Penguins werent going anywhere. Now, I dont think Pittsburgh should lose a team, but based on the reasons why they are staying is embarrassing. In every sport NY has 3 teams. I dont get this. The only reason so many changes are happening is to cater to the US, so that they can start watching more. Sooner or later point shots will be like 3 pointers.

The pattern is the US has a better market and larger population, maybe if Canadians could get their heads out of the sand and give a crap about something other than Hockey they could get more pro teams.

Don't make an accustaion like that about Crosby unless you can make it, otherwise you're just barking propaganda.

The NHL is a business, if you don't like it go watch amateur hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well , I am American and I have a few things to say about the above posts. I agree , the "southern" fan is a totally different fan than those from the North or from New England ( I am from Hartford,CT). They are basically exactly as described...Sportsfreak you are wrong about this one. I won't say all fans from the south but the majority. I spent some time on the some southern teams message boards , mostly Carolina and the things they discuss there are scary.

They have no respect for the traditions of the game. They have no respect for the Canadian teams. They would gladly change the game if it meant possible more American TV viewers. They would change the net size and anything else to give it a more circus feel. You can say all you want but this is the truth. I have seen them say that they would rather have a team in Vegas or KC then to see one in Winnipeg or Quebec because most people don't know where those cities are, they are not BIG NAME cities.

Trust me. go on the southern teams message boards and you will see what I am talking about. Canadian fans don't have their heads in the sand...far from it. They are the only ones who understand hockey. Canadian fans don't want all American teams to dissappear just the ones that are a strain and an embarrassment to the league. They understand what this game used to be like, what the league used to be like and they know the cities that should never have lost their teams

The southerner doesn't have a clue what the league was like when we actually had a national TV contract with ESPN based out of HARTFORD by the way. They don't have a clue what it was like to have traditions such as the Adams , Norris, Smythe divisions. When we had actual rivals ( Montreal/Quebec) (Hartford/Boston).

AND YES BETTMAN HOLD THE HANDS OF THE TEAMS HE WANTS TO HOLD HANDS WITH..........where was he for Winnipeg or Quebec and yes I know I am like a broken record but where was he in HARTFORD, WHEN WE OFFERED A NEW ARENA AND THE OWNER STILL PULLED THE WHALERS OUT.

Sportsfreak, you are living in a dream world if you think Bettman helped hockey. I believe it is less popular in America now than before. The only cities that give a crap about hockey are the one who have a team...THATS A FACT.

The league is a joke now...points for losing..HAHAHAH. Hey people, remember when the ref pointed to center ice for a penalty shot and the excitement was unreal, now it's like .....another breakaway.

* Eliminate the shootout ( go to a 4-4 OT, then a 3-3 OT then a damn tie , 1 point each)

* no points for losing...PERIOD

* 2 points for winning, no matter how

* leave net size alone

* leave the fighting alone

* Go back to our division names

* Eliminate the southern teams and others that are failing or soon will be ( Atlanta/Nashville/Florida/Phoenix) and place them in Winnipeg-Hartford-Quebec and Hamilton

* eliminate Bettman and replace him with Ken Dryden

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The southerner doesn't have a clue what the league was like when we actually had a national TV contract with ES

1.* Eliminate the shootout ( go to a 4-4 OT, then a 3-3 OT then a damn tie , 1 point each)

2.* no points for losing...PERIOD

3.* 2 points for winning, no matter how

4.* leave net size alone

5.* leave the fighting alone

6.* Go back to our division names

7.* Eliminate the southern teams and others that are failing or soon will be ( Atlanta/Nashville/Florida/Phoenix) and place them in Winnipeg-Hartford-Quebec and Hamilton

8.* eliminate Bettman and replace him with Ken Dryden

1. Somewhat disagree i prefer a 3 on 3 for 5 minutes then a tie.

2. Not bad

3. Not bad

4. Agree, they should leave the nets alone.

5. Agree, fighting is sweet in hockey.

6. I don't care

7. Agree i prefer Canadian teams

8. Love it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well , I am American and I have a few things to say about the above posts. I agree , the "southern" fan is a totally different fan than those from the North or from New England ( I am from Hartford,CT). They are basically exactly as described...Sportsfreak you are wrong about this one. I won't say all fans from the south but the majority. I spent some time on the some southern teams message boards , mostly Carolina and the things they discuss there are scary.

They have no respect for the traditions of the game. They have no respect for the Canadian teams. They would gladly change the game if it meant possible more American TV viewers. They would change the net size and anything else to give it a more circus feel. You can say all you want but this is the truth. I have seen them say that they would rather have a team in Vegas or KC then to see one in Winnipeg or Quebec because most people don't know where those cities are, they are not BIG NAME cities.

It doesn't matter if they are all intelligent, it matters if they give the league money, nobody gives a crap if you are good fans, but whether you have enough fans. Nobody has to respect squat, they can treat the game however they want to, nobody is obligated to anything. If the NHL feels a positive outcome can come from changing net size they will do it.

They won't because the players have been vocally against it as well as large portion of fans.

Trust me. go on the southern teams message boards and you will see what I am talking about. Canadian fans don't have their heads in the sand...far from it. They are the only ones who understand hockey. Canadian fans don't want all American teams to dissappear just the ones that are a strain and an embarrassment to the league. They understand what this game used to be like, what the league used to be like and they know the cities that should never have lost their teams

The southerner doesn't have a clue what the league was like when we actually had a national TV contract with ESPN based out of HARTFORD by the way. They don't have a clue what it was like to have traditions such as the Adams , Norris, Smythe divisions. When we had actual rivals ( Montreal/Quebec) (Hartford/Boston).

By heads in the sand I was referring to how Canadians can't get past hockey and actually appreicate other sports, everything you say about Southeners for hockey are what is said about Canadians in reference to basketball, football and baseball, unfortunately large Canadian markets are few and far betweem.

AND YES BETTMAN HOLD THE HANDS OF THE TEAMS HE WANTS TO HOLD HANDS WITH..........where was he for Winnipeg or Quebec and yes I know I am like a broken record but where was he in HARTFORD, WHEN WE OFFERED A NEW ARENA AND THE OWNER STILL PULLED THE WHALERS OUT.

Sportsfreak, you are living in a dream world if you think Bettman helped hockey. I believe it is less popular in America now than before. The only cities that give a crap about hockey are the one who have a team...THATS A FACT.

It is a fact that Bettman has decreased popularity, however there been upward swings the last few years and it looks like the NHL may overpass the NBA in a few years, but that doesn't mean that putting teams into large markets is not still a good idea, it just has to be initialized better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im getting sick of this to the core. While they all sit in a warm "Southern State" and discuss the game of Hockey, and change something every year. Leave the darn game alone. Leave it be. Leave our game alone you Americans!!!

There were six teams in the original six and 4 of said teams or %66.6 of them were american so it's a tough sell to say that hockey in regards to the NHL is anything remotely canadian regardless of how many players develop inside our borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...