The Athletic Hockey Show - Jack Eichel traded to the Vegas Golden Knights, Gary Bettman's future, Nashville Predators will retire Pekka Rinne's number, and more

Episode Date: November 4, 2021

After the news broke early Thursday morning, Ian Mendes and Sean McIndoe are joined by Buffalo Sabres beat writer John Vogl to break down the trade that will send Jack Eichel to the Vegas Golden Knights. Then, is there a chance that Gary Bettman is replaced as NHL Commissioner anytime soon? And if so, who would replace him? Is there any chance the NHL will go out of the box for his eventual successor? Also, the Nashville Predators announced that they will retire Pekka Rinne's number, an interesting pitch for to change how penalties are served, a look back at the Detroit Red Wings' "Production Line" in "This Week in History", and more.Have a question or comment for the show? Email [e-mail], or leave a VM at [phone]!Save on an annual subscription to The Athletic: theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hey everybody, welcome back. It's the Thursday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. Been a lot of moving parts here lately, but happy to have your usual Thursday duo of Ian Medit and Sean McIndoo with you for the next hour. We're going to give you our initial thoughts on the Jack Eichl trade to Vegas after that saga finally reached its conclusion in the early morning hours on Thursday and John Vogel, who does a terrific job covering the Sabres. For us, he's going to drop by right off the top of this show here to give us the Buffalo

perspective on the deal. Plus, there's going to be some talk that Gary Bettman should step aside as NHL commissioner. If that does happen, we want to know who would be a suitable replacement. We'll chat a little bit too about Pecardine, getting his jersey retired in Nashville. And then this week in hockey history, we're going to look back in the circumstances that led to Al Arbor coming back to coach a single game in 2007. And it's the anniversary of the most famous line in Red Wings history being put together. But, Sean, as we kick off this show, why don't we get, I think we should just get right to John Vogel, shouldn't we? Let's do it. Yeah. Let's do it. Because my goodness, we've had him on in the summertime,

in the fall, and we kept asking, when's it going to happen? When's it going to happen? John Vogel, it happened this morning. Walk our listeners through this morning, how you found out this deal had come to fruition and your kind of initial thoughts here. Well, good, early morning from Seattle. I learned about it while I was sleeping. The phone went off. that the trade was completed. It was 4.43 a.m. in Seattle time, so a little early, but that's fine. I mean, people have been waiting a long time for this. Speaking of that, before we even get to what the trade is about, I just want to say that

this was more about a person and a family, too. I'm very happy for Jack Eichael and his family. I know what gets lost in this is he's been through a lot. Obviously, people say, oh, he's getting paid a lot of money. and this is part of the job. But it's been a long, it's been a long six month health-wise. It's been along, took a lot of toll on him and the family. So I'm glad it's finally over for him.

And I'm glad that it's finally over for hockey fans and selfishly myself as well. Yeah, and 443 Seattle time, so 443 Vegas time. No one's ever made a regrettable decision at 4 a.m. in Vegas. So this will probably work out. Look, we can talk a lot about what Vegas is getting. getting what this does to them as far as being cup contenders. But from the Buffalo perspective, given how long this all took, given how drawn out it was, now that we're at the finish line, did Kevin Adams get enough for Buffalo's franchise player?

He was resolute in the fact that he wanted four first round assets for him. He said that right from the outset to teams. they got three and 3.3, I guess. Obviously, Peyton Crabbs and Alex Tucker first round picks. They get a top 10 protected pick in 2022, and they get a 2023 second round pick. So he got close to what he was asking for. I'm sure at some point during the last six months, someone else came close. So for me, it always comes back to the stake longer than it should have.

But I think given the circumstances, it's a pretty good deal for Buffalo. You got a potential replacement for Eichel in Krebs. It's obviously not going to be this year. It's going to take him a few more years to grow into that role. Tuck, Alex Tuck grew up not far from Buffalo, about two hours away. He grew up playing street hockey with former Sabres Center, Tim Connolly, so he knows what the savers are about. The first round pick will be towards the middle or back of the round. So that's obviously not ideal for the savers.

But let's face it, Jack Eichol was never going to play in Buffalo again. he's an injured player who wasn't going to help any team right away that he went to. So given all that, yeah, I think the savers are happy this morning. And, you know, John, the classic modern day NHL trade is, okay, this is the trade. Now tell me about the salary cap implication. So just from a Buffalo perspective, obviously moving out a big, big ticket item in Ikel, where does this leave Buffalo from kind of a salary cap perspective? Yeah, let's go over the numbers, Jack.

they subtract the 10 million, which actually that 10 million was keeping them above the salary cap floor. So that was one thing. So they had to get significant salary back just to stay above the floor. Tuck brings 4.75. Prebs, I believe, yes, he's still on his entry level deal. So the savers are just above the floor now with this trade. So obviously they won't have salary cap, for years to come. I mean, they've, they've got all the room in the world as far as NHL teams go. So, yeah, they've, I'd be more worried if I were in Vegas that how these numbers are going to crunch, but Buffalo's all set. I can't help it feel a little bit for Sabres fans here, because I feel like they probably spent the last few months psyching themselves up for this kind of deal,

which is to say, a package that brings back some decent parts. But it does feel a little bit like getting three quarters for a dollar here. But that was the reality. You had a guy who was injured, a guy who wasn't going to play. You had to move on. And I feel like if I'm a Sabres fan, I probably spent the last few months getting my head around that and understanding that this was going to be the return. And then on the eve of the trade, we start seeing all these rumors out of Calgary,

saying Matthew Kachuk is going to come over. This is me first round pick. And if I'm a Sabres fan, I'm listening to that package going, that's pretty good. And then the rug gets yanked out and this deal happens. Is there any truth? Was there any truth to those Calgary rumors that Matthew Kachuk was going to be the key piece in a deal or at least in an offer? I've talked with Haley. She mentioned that Calgary did have offers.

She said she was heard that she heard that Kachuk was possibly involved in one of them. She also heard that the offer had changed five times in one day, so she wasn't completely sure. But I think Calgary was at least thinking about that move, which Sabres fans would have jumped at. Now, obviously, it would have been a, it probably would have been a short-term stay for Chuck and Buffalo. He'll, I can't imagine he'd be all that thrilled about making the city his long-term home with, with unrestricted free agency coming in about 18 months or small, a little more than that now. but so that was interesting. Our co-worker Tim Graham noted that Kevin Weeks,

who first put the Matthew Kachuk trade proposal out there, was a former teammate of Kevin Adams. So there might have been some jockeying for asset movement in that tweet. But who knows? That's just, that was just Tim's theory there. But yeah, I mean, I think it was, it was, Calgary was involved, whether it would have been Kinchuk, ultimately, who knows. but I think the savers are okay with what they did.

You know, John, I think obviously the biggest source of contention between the parties was how to go about the neck procedure. At least that was the straw that broke the camels back here with this fractured relationship. And was it your understanding that the Sabres basically allowed the Eichel camp to connect with other teams to see which teams would allow him to undergo his preferred method of surgery? which was the artificial disc replacement?

Like, is that, is that fair to say that they were allowed to go ahead? Ask Vegas. Vegas says, yeah, go ahead. You can do that surgery because it would be pointless, right? If he got traded to a team that had the same sort of view as Buffalo on this. Yes, I had talked to Paterson about things. And I'd used the phrase broker a trade with him. And he said, that's going a little too far.

He said, I understand my role. I'm allowed to talk to people about my clients. and that obviously included whether they would allow his client to have that surgery. Because you're right. I mean, now Jack would get to Vegas and he'd be still sitting in the same situation where he wouldn't be playing and wouldn't be having surgery. But yeah, I would assume the Golden Knights are ready that let him have the surgery. He wanted the artificial disreplacement.

Jack and company recently went on a tour of doctors and they've got multiple, multiple, I should say, again, doctors to say that, yes, artificial discreplacement surgery is a viable surgery for a hockey player. The savers' intention from the start was always that, hey, this has never been done on an NHL player. We don't want to allow it. But it's a surgery that's been done for almost two decades now. Jack found enough neck doctors to say that, yes, this is not really that big of a risk that the savers are making out to be. And Vegas obviously agreed. So as far as where this goes now for the Sabres. This feels like the sort of deal where

what they got is what they got. I don't think that there's other dominoes to go or anything that's going to be flipped or anything like that. They've got two players coming in. The Sabres has been a good story to start the year. We all kind of wrote them off as a team that was going to be at the very bottom

of the standings and they've surprised us a little bit. Does this give any sort of boost to the guys who are in Buffalo right now, the guys in the room, saying, okay, it's over. It's done. We don't have to hear about this guy anymore. Is it demoralizing in any sense that maybe the return wasn't as much as they thought? Are they just happy to get on with it, get a couple of new players in and keep building on what they've done to start the year?

I think they'll be happy with it. I'll talk to them. I've seen when we head to the morning skate. But I think they knew. They know Jack. The guys who played with them, they've talked to Jack. They've stayed in touch. They know that he was never coming back. It's not like any. and no one in the locker room was holding out, hope that, hey, this is going to get resolved, and our best players are going to come back to us. They knew that wasn't going to happen. So now they're actually getting some reinforcements.

Tuck, as injured at the moment, but when he comes back, he'll get a spot in the top six. Crabbs will compete for a spot in the top six. It'll probably be a third line center in Buffalo. If they keep on right in Buffalo, they might send him to Rochester for a little seasoning, let them get to know Jack Quinn and a few of the other prospects they have. But no, I think the Sabers are,

Saver's players will be excited. This hasn't really been weighing on them. They gave all the answers on the opening days of training camp. We haven't been pressing about it because we knew they weren't going to say anything different. So they've been able to go on with their daily routine of games. But they knew Jack wasn't coming back. So I don't think anyone's going to be sad that this trade happened. John, before we let you go, I want to direct all of our listeners here to the Athletic Hockey Show to read your column that dropped early on Thursday morning.

headlined Sabres trade Jack Eichel ending an era of drunken optimism, crushing disappointment, and bitter conflict. I need to know, John Vogel, when did you write this story? How long has that been sitting in your drafts? Because obviously, this is a great piece. And there's no way from 445 in the morning to now that you wrote this. So you just peel back the curtain a little bit. Tell us how long you've had this column sitting in the drafts. Definitely June, possibly May.

I'm trying to think back. I could look at the original origin date, but definitely June at the latest. Probably May, though, because this is all started. Jack was clear in early May that he was going to be on his way out. It's been tweaked a couple times. There's been a few lines added here and there and twists and turns when I thought of some things at midnight and said, oh, that should go in. But yeah, no, it's been sitting there since it was right before summer started in Buffalo. Well, listen, I appreciate all the times you've jumped on the podcast to give us the latest on this. And I certainly, I think Sean and I certainly appreciate you coming in at, let's be honest here. It's before 7 a.m. local time for you in Seattle when you're recording this with us. So thanks at Ton. Hopefully you get some sleep at some point here later in the day. But thanks for doing this. And we look forward to your coverage of the post-Ikel Buffalo Sabres.

Thanks for having me. I think I'm going to sleep from Friday till May. We'll see you ahead. That's good. Thanks, John. Take care. Thanks, John. All right. Yeah, that's great to connect with. I can't imagine getting, you know, 445 in the morning or 443, sorry, I think is what he said, Sean. 443, you wake up and you're like, there's like a seismic kind of job-related thing that springs you into action, right? Like, yeah. That is, yeah. Listen, it was great to get John's perspective on the deal. I'm just curious when you saw this morning.

on Thursday morning that this is the deal. What was your initial reaction to what you saw? Yeah, I mean, I think the first word that jumps to mind is underwhelming. This isn't a ton to get back for a player of Jack Eichel's caliber when he's healthy, when he's fully engaged and good to go. I mean, we all know the circumstances here. We've all seen this play out over most of the last year where you knew about the dispute over the health.

You knew that it was going to be months before this guy was ready to play again. You knew that he wasn't coming back. All of that has an impact. And, you know, I don't love the return for Buffalo. But at the same time, I've, I've already seen takes from people saying, oh, surely they could have done better. Surely there was some team out there that would have offered more than this. No, there wasn't because this was a situation where every team in the league knew the circumstances. And I'm sure Kevin Adams had conversations with pretty much everybody at some point.

This isn't the Boston Bruins trading Joe Thornton where half the teams in the league didn't even know that he'd could have been available. This was very well documented. We've been talking about it for months. And I clearly this was the best offer on the table, at least right now. Now, could Kevin Adams have done better in the summer? Maybe. Could he have done better if he had held out and waited into the season or even into next offseason? It's possible, although I doubt it. But, you know, clearly under the circumstances this was as good an offer as as as was out there for the Sabres unless we hear something from some other team. This is what was there. And at some point, if you're Kevin Adams, if you're the Sabres, if you're Sabers fans, you just got to say, do we take what's there and we move on?

And clearly that time had come. You get some decent assets back. I'm not sure you get much, much more than that, but you get what you get. And I'm not sure that there was any set of circumstances where the return was going to get significantly better than this in the future. You know, and let me throw something out there for Buffalo fans that maybe it'll make them feel better. But you know, when Ottawa traded Eric Carlson back in 2018, at the time, there was a lot of people saying, like, that's your return. Like, you got a first round pick. you got Josh Norris, who at the time was thought to be kind of a third line player, San Jose thought third line, maybe Ottawa thought second line. And then you got Chris Tierney, Dylan DeMello, Rudolph's balsers, like you'd, and a conditional pick.

Like, you didn't get that one, you didn't get Timel Meyer, and you didn't get Thomas Hurdle and you didn't get, right? So, but then the hockey gods were like, okay, you know what, we're going to put some sort of weird hex on San Jose. And they're going to put it to the bottom of the standings. and then Ottawa got Tim Stutzla and Josh Norris elevated. If you would have told me at the time that Ottawa was going to win this deal, I'm like, what are you talking about? This is, this is crazy. And now here we sit a couple years later.

Ottawa has significantly won that deal, I think. So it's tough to stomach right now if you're a Buffalo fan. I think you get Alex Tuck. If you look at it this way, now you just add Alex Tuck to a lineup that's kind of been punching above their weight to start the season. And like, so you're better today on the ice than you were yesterday. But this is a tough sell. It's a tough sell when you've given up on so many of the pieces that the Ristolinians and the, you know, the guys that you thought, Reinhardt and O'Reilly and Eichel, like all the guys that you thought three years ago, four years ago, were going to be part of this are all gone.

And that's the part that sucks. Yeah. And it does. And I mean, you mentioned that Carlson trade. And that feels like the best case scenario for Buffalo. the problem is even the pick is top 10 protected. So they don't even have that long shot lottery chance that Vegas just collapses and it turns into something like what Ottawa got. So boy, it's tough to find a lot of optimism here.

And yeah, you're right. I mean, this is a rebuilt that just never got out of gear. This is a situation. We all remember the great tank battle of 2015 with Buffalo trying to get Connor McDavid. but knowing that if they finished dead last that the consolation prize was Jack Eichael. We saw what that did to the organization and their recovery from that, the other pieces that they brought in. And it just never got there. It's one thing to have a rebuild and you say, you know what, at the end of the day, it didn't reach the level we were open for.

This didn't reach any kind of level. It just never added up to anything competitive. and now you're starting all over again. And boy, if you're a Sabres fan, you're sitting there going, man, 2015 feels like a long time ago. We waited a long, long time to reap the rewards. We never did. And now here we go again. We got to start over.

We all understand why this happened. We get why the Sabres had to do this. It's so tough on those Buffalo fans. I really feel for them right now. You know, I mentioned the hockey gods earlier. I'm wondering, that, we all remember the tankathon of 2015. And there was that game between Buffalo and Arizona, right?

The infamous game where, do you think the hockey gods are now six years later? Like, this is what you get. Yeah. Both of you. Buffalo and Arizona. This is what Arizona is winless. Buffalo just traded Jack Eichol.

Six years after they kind of had that weird game where they were cheering for their own teams to lose. Yeah. And Arizona got nothing. out of that either. You know, they got the the Dillon Strom pick, which didn't go anywhere for them. And yeah, there's, you know,

meanwhile, a team like Edmonton that wasn't openly tanking, they win the lottery. Conner, McDavid's the best player in the world. Yeah, maybe there's something to then. Yeah, and McDavid's, you know, playing like McDavid these days and Edmonton is rolling. So listen, I want to move on, but before we do, I want to point out that Jesse Granger,

who obviously, we got John Vogel on, people are like, Oh, Jesse Granger, he always joins you guys on the Thursday show for Granger Things. This will be great. Well, guess what? Jesse Granger is in Ottawa right now and is tied up. The Vegas Golden Knights are going to be doing an immediate availability here shortly. And the irony is, Sean, we both live in Ottawa. Jesse Granger is in Ottawa and he is unable.

The one time he's in our hometown, he's unable to join the pod. And the Vegas Golden Knights do something huge. Yeah, that's fun. And the funny thing is, last time Vegas was in Ottawa is when they fired Gerard Gallant and replaced him with Peter DeBoer. So anytime you see Vegas has come to Ottawa, just circle the date, something seismic is going to happen for the Vegas Golden Knights. But as we move along, you know, it's, I kind of mentioned off the top, been some moving parts here with the podcast. I missed the Monday episode of the show just based on some travel logistics and a hiccup for me. Thanks to Sean Gentile for jumping in.

You missed last week show, Sean, and a huge tip of the hat to Max Boltman for pinch hitting for you. It was a great podcast. But for the last week or so, Sean, a lot of the conversation on this podcast has been dominated and rightfully so by the Chicago Blackhawks situation. And as we look at this now, and I think our team has done an excellent job.

Gentile in particular, I really liked his column about kind of Gary Bettman and his past conference. And that's where I kind of want to take this here for a second. Because I know that there has been some people, Eric DeHochick, Sean, Gentle, among others, have suggested that basically, Sean, this recent news cycle might be the catalyst that pushes Gary Betman out of office. I have always felt that Gary was going to be able to orchestrate his own exit, that he would walk away. But this is the first time I'm not feeling that way. I'm starting to feel like maybe there's a little bit of pressure here.

So let's start with this. Do you think that the way that this recent news cycle played out, and in particular Gary's handling of the press conference on Monday, could potentially nudge him out the door of the commissioner's office? I think it's extremely unlikely. And the reason for that is that we can write all the columns we want. The fans can be as upset. That's not going to be what pushes Gary Bettman out.

It's the owners that he works for, and as has been well documented over the years, the owners are satisfied with the job that he has done. And, you know, I know a lot of people kind of get maybe too simplistic on this, and they just say, well, revenue is up. And as long as revenues, I mean, we can get into the whole debate over the job that Gary Bettman has done over the decades. but at the end of the day there's a satisfaction level with his bosses there's a satisfaction level with the owners that he reports to and I don't get the sense from them

that there's any real movement to push him out now you know Gary Benman has been at this for over a quarter of a century he is not a young guy anymore at some point he won't be doing this job anymore and that is probably something that's that's going to be up to him where he decides that maybe he wants to do something else.

I don't think anything here happens that pushes him out based on what we know so far. What we have seen is that of all the people that have lost jobs or are potentially facing that, it's people who were informed at some point of what was going on in Chicago and didn't take action. And there hasn't been a suggestion that I've seen that Gary Bettman falls into that category. If something like that were to come out, then yes, different situation. And that would change the circumstances. But until then, I think it's bad PR. It's a crisis of confidence for the fan base.

But we've had a whole lot of those in the Gary Bettman era and the people who decide whether he stays on don't really seem to care. And I'm not convinced that this will be any different. But you do bring up a good point in that, look, Gary's been at this a long time. Like we're closing in on three decades of Gary Bettman as NHL commissioner. Like, 2020, right, will be at 30 years, I think February 1st, 2023, 30 years on the job. Okay. So even if we were to operate in a vacuum and remove all of this stuff swirling around from the past week or so, you would have to think that logically speaking that the NHL is starting to work on a succession plan of who's going to be the next commissioner.

So I'm going to put this ball in your court. And I'm going to ask you, I'm going to give you, Sean, the opportunity. You could pick one person to be the commissioner of the NHL. And here's the problem, though, right? Because it's going to end up being some lawyer that we've never heard of. is going to be the commissioner of the NHL. And people like you and me are like, you know what, Ray Ferraro should be the next commissioner of the NHL

or Jen Bottero should be the next commissioner of the NHL, and it won't happen. They're not going to go outside the box, right? But if I gave you your one kind of, you know, the genie grants the wish, and you get to pick anybody on the planet is the commission. Who's it going to be?

Who would be a good fit? Man, I mean, I'm not even sure who would be a good fit under the way that this league is set up. You know, it's a league where the owners call the shots and then the GMs make the rules. And part of my criticisms of Gary Bettman, which I've had a lot of over the decades, is the lack of leadership, that lack of being able to walk into a room and say, no, here's what is better for the league. Here's what's better for our fans, better for the sport. And yeah, I know that it's going to make your jobs a little bit harder GMs.

And I know that, you know, maybe it's not going to absolutely maximize the dollars going into your pockets owners. But let's think long term. Let's have a vision here. And, you know, there's lots of people out there who would be capable of that. I don't doubt for a minute that Gary Bettman would be capable of that. It's just not how this league is set up. So I'm not sure it really matters a ton. obviously we're all looking at Bill Daley is the right-hand man, whether he's a guy who could take the job or not, hard to say.

The reality is it's probably, you know, you said some lawyer we've never heard of, it's probably going to be similar to how we got Gary Bedman in the first place. It'll be the second or the third or the fourth or the seventh in command at the NBA or the NFL or Major League Baseball or one of the many other sports that are growing. growing faster and doing better than the NHL has under Gary Betman. And that's, if anything, you know, the indictment of him is that, you know, where hockey is really not in any different a position than it was 30 years ago when Bruce McDonnell said, you know what, let's try to get David Stern. And that was at least a big thought and a big swing. And it didn't work out.

And they ended up getting Gary Bettman, who was number three at the NBA. It's probably something similar to that. If I could pick anybody, I like Adam Silver as a commissioner. But is he going to take the demotion of coming over to the NHL? I think the chances are exactly zero on that. So I'd love to see somebody who had some vision. I'd love to see somebody like that. I'm just, I'm cynical of it because put whoever you want.

Put your Ray Ferraro, put whoever. I think they get into that room. And then the old boys club looks them in the eye and says, we don't really want to change anything. and that's where the vision kind of gets flushed. You know, I love your idea if they're going to probably take the number two or three person from a fast-growing sport. I'm going to Google search the corporate ladder of pickleball.

Who's number two on the pickleball ladder? That person is going to be the next commissioner of the National Higone. But you're right. We do sometimes forget that the commissioner is really an extension of the 32 owners, that the 32 owners have sort of collectively come together and they get one person to sort of act on their behalf. It's not this sort of person who really truly oversees the game from the betterment of the game. It's somebody to act in the interest of the owners. And so, you're right. It's going to end up being somebody that, you know, we probably haven't heard of

and it's probably going to end up not affecting a kind of a seismic change. And that's, you know, that's kind of par for the course. But that's really, if you've been paying, attention to this for the last 20 years or whatever, that really we shouldn't be surprised, right? This is kind of the takeaway here. This is what the NHL does. It's what they do. And it, you know, on the one hand,

you can't talk about Gary Bettman without talking about the fact he reports of the owners. On the other hand, I do think there's a lot of fans out there who give him a pass on that. And they make it sound like he has just absolutely no power whatsoever. This guy doesn't get paid eight or 10 or whatever million dollars a year to just sit in a room and take notes and do whatever the owners tell them to do. In theory, at least, there has been all along room for leadership on any number of issues,

the quality of the play on the ice, concussions, you know, go on down the list, the current issues that we're seeing around players and, you know, drugs and medical treatments and the issues of Robin Leonard has raised, go on down the list, there's a half dozen major issues where at any point, Gary Bettman could have stood up and said, you know what,

I'm going to lead on this. And he never seems to. You know, now, would it be easy? Does he just get to walk into a room and say, this is what we're going to do? No. But boy, it would be nice to have somebody who could actually foster change

on any number of these things. You know, making hockey more expensive. accessible, making it more welcoming for, you know, the potential new fans that we're always chasing. I'd love to see it. You know, this is why I think ultimately we're going to look back at Gary Bettman's time in the NHL and consider it a failure, even though the revenues will have shot up through the roof, just like they did in every other sport and entertainment avenue. it's just never been there that leadership.

And my big worry is that 30 years of Gary Betman not leading has now led us to this place where there is no more expectation that a commissioner would actually lead. And the next guy is just going to be that guy who sits in the room and takes notes and does whatever he's told. And that's unfortunate for any league, but especially a league like the NHL that has so much work left to do. Sounds to me. You know how John Vogel mentioned that he had that column written for months? Sounds to me like you might have a Gary Bettman, whatever that is,

you've got some column in the drafts ready to go. The look back in the 30 years of Gary Bettman. I've written that column and I'll tell the story someday of what happened to it. But that was before my time at the Athletic and maybe the 30-year anniversary will be the time to break it out again. this podcast seems like the perfect platform for you to tell that story. I mean, I don't really know the story. There was a time when Gary Bettman was 25 years in, and I was asked to write a column about his time for a company that was a rights holder.

And I did. And the column didn't run. And I don't know much more than that, other than it's still sitting in the, it's not even a draft. It's a finished piece. I could probably go and update it. And, yeah, maybe, like I say, maybe the big three-oh will be the time to toss it out there. There we go.

Okay. See? I love that. Okay. I want to focus on a couple of quick things here on ice. In fact, I got a tweet this morning from a diehard Florida Panthers fan, Sean. Eric is a big Panthers fan. And pointed out to me, so on Thursday, Florida plays Washington.

On Saturday, Florida plays Carolina. And that's kind of a clash of the Titans, Panthers, Hurricanes. Consider this. And this is unbelievable. So this kind of mini three-team event here, Capitals, Panthers, and Hurricanes, right now those three teams are a combined 22, 1, and 4. One regulation loss amongst those three teams, Florida and Washington, Thursday night, Florida and Carolina Saturday.

But I wouldn't mind focusing on that Saturday game because I think that's, That's going to be great. Like, that should be the type of game. It'll never be the game that's on kind of national TV, but that's exactly the type of game we should have on national television in the United States, in Canada. You want to sell hockey at its fastest, at its best uptempo, fun, whatever. I feel like Panthers Hurricanes might be the thing.

I'm going to be really interested in Saturday's game because I do think it'll affect a lot of people, and you do these too, a lot of people's power ranking, and different kind of your views of teams early in the season, I think we'll be altered a little bit by these games involving the other Panthers here. Yeah, I mean, that's a great one. First of all, Southeast Division represent. Yes. The much maligned division is now giving us three of our best teams.

Yeah, I do the power rankings. I've had Panthers Hurricanes as my top too. I think most rankings probably have. It's going to be a great clash. And yeah, it's, it'll be a good one. We hope. You never know. Sometimes these games end up being a letdown,

but it'll tell us a little something. And it's always fun early season to have those meetings. You know, I'm sure I'm not the only one that, you know, once both those teams that started off, you know, five, six and oh, you start looking at the schedule. You go, well, when are we going to get this? And then you see it's coming right up. So it'll be a good one.

Yeah. And then you're right. is sort of getting a little bit forgotten, maybe. But they're up there too. Well, man, one regulation loss between three teams. That's going to be a fun few days. Yeah, you know, it's funny because I'm thinking about the hockey gods again. Maybe they're getting back at us for mocking the Southeast Division all those years ago.

Carolina, Florida, Washington combined one loss. Oh, yeah, and Tampa Bay is the two-time defending Stanley Cup champion. There's Winnipeg Jets fans out there saying, hold on. know, what about us? We had that one year. Exactly. Oh, yeah. Yeah. So anyway, that, that should be a lot of fun to watch, you know, kind of play out. Now, I want to also talk real quick. Now, Nashville wasn't, no, they weren't in the Southeast division. No, sorry. They were always in the Central, right? Yeah. Okay, but I want to talk real quick about Nashville. They announced the Predators did this week, Sean, that they're going to be retiring their first ever jersey in franchise history.

I know you thought it would be David Leguant, but it's not. It's, it's Pecaderee. His number 35 is going to be retired. And Pecorina had a terrific career in the National Hockey League. And certainly, I think when you look at the kind of foundational players of the first two decades of that franchise, he's top of mind. Right. So I have no qualms with them deciding to retire the jersey. I'm just curious. Like, when guys who aren't going to be Hall of Famers get their jerseys retired, like, what's your feeling on that?

Like, is there, like, is it just, does it only matter to that market? Because I'll be honest, like Chris Phillips got his jersey retired in Ottawa. People were like, oh, what a joke, like Chris Phillips. But I'm like, you know what, but he was really important here. He plays his whole career here, important to the community. I don't Ken Danico had his number retired in New Jersey. People like, that guy's not a Hall of Fame. I don't think Pecorina is going to end up in the Hall of Fame.

So what's your stance on guys who aren't Hall of Famers, but get their numbers retired? I'm good with it. I'm all for it. I do not understand that that stance. I get that there are some teams that have made that policy fine. But my view has always been that retiring a number, that's for the fans. That is a moment to recognize, yes, a player's accomplishments, but also a player's resonance in importance in that market and to those fans.

And absolutely, there are guys who do not qualify to be Hall of Famers. who are deserving of that honor. And, you know, this idea, oh, you got to be in the Hall of Fame. No, we already have an honor that is reserved exclusively for Hall of Famers. It's called being in the Hall of Fame. When it comes to retiring numbers, yeah, absolutely. You know, look, you mentioned Chris Phillips here, Ottawa. Daniel Alfordson's not in the Hall of Fame.

You're telling me you're not going to retire Daniel Alpherson's number in Ottawa? Of course you are. Trevor Linden, not a Hall of Famer. absolutely should have his number hanging in the rafters in Vancouver. Wendell Clark in Toronto. This guy was the defining player and the most popular player for an entire generation of Maple Leafs fans. You're not going to retire his number because he's not in the Hall of Fame. You know, go on down the list.

Mike Richter for the New York Rangers, you tell him you don't want to see his number hang, the guy who won you, your first Stanley Cup in 54 years. I have never understood trying to be super exclusive. And yes, sure, there has to be a cutoff somewhere. And there's always going to be good players who aren't honored in that way. But any of this stuff, whether it's retiring numbers, building statues, whatever you want to do, to me, it is for the fans. It's for the fan base. If the fan base wants to see that guy honored, that's all there is to it.

And frankly, the rest of us on the outside don't really get a say. and don't really get to tell some fan base that they picked the wrong guy. It's not our call to make. Now, on the flip side, I want to know, because you're, you know, and we're about to get into kind of this week in hockey history and it's right up your alley.

Like, now let's go to the other side of the equation. How many guys are in the Hall of Fame but don't have their numbers retired? So I'm thinking of the, like Pierre Turgeon's the first guy that came to mind, right? Yeah. Not a Hallfamer yet, but like those types of guys. that are like Dave Andrew Chuck, right? He's one of them, yep.

Those types of guys. Mark Recky, I don't think, has his number retired anywhere. He doesn't have one. So is there more guys than we realize that probably are in the Hall of Fame and don't have their numbers retired? There probably are, yeah. Dino Cicorelli, another guy, right? Like not, and it's those sorts of guys,

the Cicorelli-Denich-Recke, recie guys where they did move around a little bit. And I was a bit surprised that Andrew Chuck wasn't done in Buffalo, but that would be really the only team that you'd consider. Because generally speaking, you very rarely see guys get numbers retired where they've only been with the team for a short amount of time. You get the occasional Raybork situation in Colorado, but generally you've got to have been somewhere for a decade.

And so when you get to some of the guys that would be considered maybe borderline Hall of Famers, the Bernadford Urquos, Clark Gillies, those sorts of guys, they were with one team forever. They're typically going to have been honored. Both those guys have been. It's the guys who bounced around the Rekkes where it's, you know, it was three or four years here and then somewhere else. And, you know, in Reky's case, he had most of his success with the penguins. And the penguins are kind of one of those weird teams. They haven't retired very many at all.

though you would assume that's going to change coming up. But yeah, there have been guys like that. Not a ton, though. Generally speaking, you make the Hall of Fame. It sort of has to have been a very unique sort of career in the sense that you built those accolades without ever settling down and really putting down roots in one particular market. Okay, future down goes brown, column idea, best players to not have their numbers retired. It could be Sergey Federer.

another one that surprises people because it did wait he does that have his number not in Detroit no I like but in Columbus yes right yeah yeah absolutely yeah he was he was right up there for for that no they Detroit that that's a whole because that's the other piece right there are some situations where there's just bad blood or something is weird between the organization and it you have to wait till that gets smoothed over but yeah he's another guy so but uh I I I think those ones tend to get done time. There was a time where, you know, Paul Korea wasn't going to be done in Anaheim, and of course, they worked that out. Generally, that's how those end up.

Did things go off the rails for Federoff in Detroit? He signed some mega deal with Carolina, right? Yeah. Like, front loaded tape. An offer sheet. And then it was like, if you get to the conference final, there's a crazy bonus. Like, I wonder if that's the thing that just, you know. It was. And because he wanted out, and he sigh, if people don't know the story, this was back when you could sign offer sheets and the rules were a little bit different. And, and Carolina gave him a very big contract, but what they did is they said, okay, here's the salary we're going to pay you every year of this contract, but a huge chunk of it will move up and become a year one bonus if you make the conference finals.

Well, Carolina was no good that year. Everybody knew they weren't going to make the playoffs probably, let alone the conference finals. Meanwhile, Detroit is the defending Stanley Cup champions. It was basically a big middle finger to Detroit to make it, in theory, very, very difficult for them to match. They did, but Sergey Fedroff, as a result, he made like $28 million in one season. I think he was the highest paid pro athlete in like all of North America that one year because of the weirdness of that offer sheet. And yeah, that led to some bad blood.

But hey, credit to Carolina for trying. And, you know, I'm sure they probably never did another offer sheet. They learned their lesson. Yeah. All I can think of is I wish, I only wish Sarah Sivian was covering the hurricanes at the time. with the Sergei Federov offer sheet. That would have been a good one. Yeah, that would have been good.

Hey, let's open up the mailbag and then we'll do some this week in hockey history to close out here. A reminder that you can reach us via email. The athletic hockey show at gmail.com. The athletic hockey show at gmail.com. Or we love to hear your voice. We really do. 845, 445-84-59 is the number. Okay, so this is from Chris.

Chris has an idea about penalties. in the NHL. And I know what you like. You like out of the box thinking. You like things that are done differently. Just let's think about things in a different way. I don't mind this. I'm going to float this idea from Chris. He emailed into the show.

You tell me if you like this. Okay. Hey guys, when a penalty is committed on the ice, what if the player who committed that infraction, his position is gone for the two minutes. So, for example, if a centerman commits a two-minute tripping penalty, your team can't have a center on the ice for the duration of the penalty kill. So, for example, let's say Patrice Bergeron is in Boston and he takes a tripping penalty.

Well, when Bruce Cassidy puts his four guys out there, he can't have a center. Or imagine if Drew Dowdy takes a penalty in L.A. And now the Kings have to roll out with three forwards and a D. It's out of the box. What do we think of this? It's out of the box. It's, I'm not sure it's practical. I guess what you would have to do is force teams to narrowly define positions before the game so that you know you say these guys are my centers because otherwise it's you know what the Maple Leafs just go yeah Austin Matthews is a winger we're going to throw him out there and something like that but it would be it would be cool if you could do it especially if you could force the teams to actually play that way like no you don't get a defenseman you got to have one defenseman and

in three forwards, playing like forwards. That would be fun. I just think it's the sort of thing where the cynic in me is just like coaches would ruin this. This is yet another thing. The coaches are just ruined right away. They'd figure out a way around it. But it's outside the box. I like that kind of thinking.

I also wonder about the idea what happens when the goalie plays the puck in the trapezoid. Then what? You don't get a goalie? That's a big one. Yeah. You're out. Yeah. Okay.

Bruno writes in, everybody's been talking about Alexander Ovechkin potentially breaking Gretzky's record. And recently you guys have been talking about some great players who had really short careers. Do you think there's a case to be made that Mike Bossy is the greatest goal score in NHL history? And he would have been number one on the all-time list, if not for injuries.

That's from Bruno. Yeah, there's a case. This surprises some people, given how many goals Gretzky scored and how unbreakable we thought that record was. In terms of goals per game, Wayne Greskes is only seventh in NHL history. And the guys ahead of him, it's Alex Ovechkin, who is narrowly ahead of them. It's two guys from the very early era where scoring rates were just all over the place

and they didn't play as many games. And then it's three guys from the modern era who had careers shortened by injury. And obviously when your career shortened by injury, you don't have that, you know, through your 30s and late 30s where your production drops. I mean, Gretzky was off the charts as far as goals per game during the 80s. And then the 90s where he became more and more of a setup guy, that's when the number dropped. But the three guys ahead of them are Pavel Burray, Mario Lemieux, and Mike Bossy. And I think certainly with both Bossy and Lemieux, you could make the case that those guys stay healthy.

Those guys are the ones who end up holding that record. and especially Mario. I mean, he's he's the guy even more so than Mike Bossy. I mean, Bossy racked up just unbelievable numbers, doing it in an era where goal scoring was significantly higher. You know, what would Mike Bossy's career look like if he had played into the mid-90s? We'll never know. But certainly he would have been well up the list, you know, 700 plus, maybe an 800 guy. it's possible.

Mario is the guy that we saw him in the dead puck era. We saw him come in in the pre-lockout years where it was just clutch and grab and unwatchable hockey and everybody was trying to win every game won nothing. And he was still unstoppable. I mean, if Mary Lemieux is healthy and he plays 20 years,

I think he holds every offensive record in the book, including goal scored. But yeah, Mike Bossy is another guy, I think absolutely a great, you know, what might have been as far as what kind of numbers he could have got up to. Because he was unstoppable at his peak, absolutely. Okay, one more from the mailbag. This comes in from Sean, who writes in via email, guys, we've had four short seasons in my lifetime as an NHL hockey fan, 1995, 2013, 2020, and 2021.

All four of those Stanley Cups were won by powerhouse. teams who were either already a powerhouse or on the precipice of being a powerhouse. Sean, you have observed that in the NHL playoffs, things can seem to be the flip of a coin. But it seems to me that when they cut the number of regular season games down to around 60, it seems like maybe the best teams do rise above and they do better. So do you think it's worth debating whether the very long regular season wears down the best teams and brings them down to an average level and that in a short season, it kind of counterintuitively decreases the randomness of the final result.

So, Sean, basically what he's saying is, hey, listen, if you cut down the regular season from 82 games to, you know, 55, 60 games, the best teams are going to rise to the top by the end of the Stanley Cup playoffs. Yeah. You know what? It's an interesting point. And, you know, it is counterintuitive because I'm always going on and on about how the playoffs are basically coin flips and they don't actually tell us who the best team

was and this and that. But he's right. You could make a case, certainly I think of the four shortened seasons. Certainly the Chicago year. I mean, that was the best team in the league kind of start to finish.

They went undefeated for the first half of the season and kind of rolled. Tampa as well. New Jersey, I probably quibble with. I don't think anyone viewed them as a powerhouse. And yes, they did end up winning two cups several years later. But that is maybe the one where, If this theory held true, we would have expected Detroit or someone else to have had a bigger year.

But it's an interesting theory. It's small sample size. We've only got four of these seasons to go by. But yeah, maybe some of that randomness that I'm always complaining about is due to teams going through these very long seasons and arriving in the playoffs, beaten up and fatigued and all of these other things. And maybe if you shorten it a little bit, you do get some true results. I'm not sure I buy it, but I can see the evidence for it. And, you know, again, I'm always open to any sort of counterintuitive thinking like this one here. Okay.

Well, listen, it's great to get you back on the podcast, Sean, because we can get back to this week in hockey history. I love to wrap it up because there's always some colorful, neat stories from, you know, the past in hockey history that we can kind of, you know, inform and entertain our listeners with some anecdotes. So let's go all the way back to this week in 1947. That's right, November the 1st, 1947, the Detroit Red Wings put together a line of Gordy Howe, Ted Lindsay, and Sid Abel. It was their first game together. They would go on to have years of success as the production line.

So let me start with this. Is the production line the best nickname of a line in NHL history? You think of the auto industry in Detroit and the production assembly lines there. You get a great line that's producing. It's just the, it's the perfect name for the line. Is the production line the greatest nickname of a line in NHL history? It's up there. It's, you know, there have been some good ones.

Triple Crown line comes to mind. It just, you know, from my era, you can't be Legion of Doom. I mean, that was a great, that was a great name. Yeah, I mean, they stole it from pro wrestling. that's that's that's a good source of nicknames i've you know i've i've i've been on this soapbox before i i miss nicknames for both players and lines um i'm so sick of just taking like the the first letter of names and turning that into line being like oh it's the it's the q r l line like no that's that's not a nickname that's that's an abbreviation and uh you know i i i've

I've written about this. The problem, it's us. It's the media because we used to be the ones who came up with these names. And now we just go in and we ask the play, like, hey, what's your nickname? Oh, my, that guy, Joe Smith. Yeah, his Smithy is his nickname. And we just go, okay, his nickname is Smithy. No, it's not.

You got to make something up. You know, nobody went up to George Vezan. Like, what do they call you? And he was like, oh, the Shakutomi cucumber. Like, no, they probably called him Georgie or Vese or something. But some sports writer was like, you know what? I'm hanging this nickname on. I mean, it was beautiful.

We got to come up with more. But it's, and, you know, when it comes to lines, it is tougher these days because the lines don't necessarily stick together. And a lot of teams do the thing where they put two guys together and rotate someone else in. But I'd love to see us get back to that. It was, you know, it's cool. It was always fun to have, like, groups in sports, like whether it's an offensive line or, you know, an infield or something. Give them a good nickname. Let them stay together.

It makes it fun. And we've sort of abdicated on that. hockey because we all either lost her creativity or decided to just ask the players who are probably the least creative people in the world when it comes to this kind of thing. We stop. You know what? We need to go back to like you said, Chakutumby cucumber. Like, go back to guys' hometown.

Like, Carter McDavid is from Richmond Hill, isn't he? Yeah. Is he important? Richmond Hill Rocket or something. Yeah. Like something, we got to go back to guys' hometowns. Dude, I wrote a whole piece of people. and go look in my archives because there's a few years ago on nicknames and like what kind of

nicknames work and you know anything that you know rhyming nicknames or you know you're you basically throw an adjective on on something it can be done but the problem is you got to like you got to actually have the you got to stick to it right because as soon as you throw anything up people are going to go that's dumb or you know whatever that's not his name his name's just uh you know is he's jonesy and it's like no that's that's not a nickname that's a short form that people call. We got to come up with some nicknames. And I really mean we, the fans in the media, it's our job. Let's get to it. I'm open to suggestions. Anybody's got any suggested nicknames for lines or players, send them in. And, you know, we'll see what we can do with them.

I think the best nickname in the modern post-2000 for me. Do you remember Vancouver's the mattress line? The short-lived, it was Jason King with Daniel. Sadeen and Henrik Sadeen and they're like, this is perfect. A king with two twins. That's what we need. It was too beautiful for its time and that's it. That's a great line. And that's the other thing we need is, you know, maybe the NHL needs to take some leadership

here and say, if you come up with a good line for a good nickname for a line, that line has to stay together. That's it. I'm sorry. I don't care if the Siddians don't like playing with this guy. Now, this is what you're stuck with. And we got to just go with it. but no taking the first letter and spelling something out.

None of that. That's gone. Okay. One more this week in hockey history, November the 3rd. We're not going to go back that far. 2007, Ted Nolan, who was the head coach of the New York Islanders, decides to invite Al Arbor back behind the bench. Why?

Because Al Arbor was sitting on 1,49 career games as a head coach. Ted Nolan thought it would be a really classy gesture, bring him back, let him coach one more game. And guess what? He got to 1,500. And the Islanders won that game as well. A really cool moment to let him come back and win or sorry, and coach in career game number 1500. Yeah.

And, you know, it's cool that something like that would happen. The same thing have with Roger Nielsen, right? In Ottawa, didn't they let him get two games to get to a thousand for his career? It's, yeah, it's a rare situation. obviously, but I mean, Al Arbor in New York, just an absolute legend. Yeah, it's great. And I'd like to see it more. We've got to, like, check the list and see who's a few games away from a milestone.

And let's get them back in there. Like, I'm always, the Jacques Martin thing was really cool because Roger was at 998. And Jacques's like, you know what, I'm going to step aside. Roger's going to run the bench. And Roger, the last game that he coached, Bill McCall, had gone the entire season without scoring a goal. Okay? It was it was like the final game of the year. Bill he had played like 70 games. Roger put him on the first unit power play, gave him all the opportunity. Bill McCault must have had five great opportunities, didn't get a goal. But that's what

I remember from Roger coming in. And he probably had a bunch of video to show him and everything of just, you know, I'm surprised he didn't have some rule breaking thing to get him a goal. It's, it's great. Let me, let me throw one at you, okay? Because this is, you know, I'm looking at the the coaching lists. And I'm seeing there's a few guys who are close to milestones that we can bring back. But there are only four coaches in NHL history that have 100 playoff wins. The next guy on the list at 96, so four wins away from joining that club, Mike Keenan. We got to bring Mike Keenan back.

Let me just throw this at you, okay? If you're the Toronto Maple Leafs, bring in Mike Keenan for round one this year, what have you got to lose? What have you been doing that's working better than Mike Keenan coming in for that first play to get you those four wins that you need? And then he steps aside. I mean, how great would that be? You know what? Maybe you don't even do it to start, but maybe if they go out and they lay an egg in game one, yeah, next day practice. Hey, guys, we're changing something up.

Oh, yeah, we're mixing up the lines. We change the power plays. Nope. Whistle blows and their iron mic skates on in a track suit. Yep, just starts, you know, that's it. Martin, you're on the fourth line. Matthews, you're benched. Nealander, you're the goalie, and you're pulled.

Just, yeah, really, by that point, I'll tell you, if the Leifes get off to a bad start in the playoffs, the fans will be craving it anyways and just have him come in, you know, maybe make him GM too. He can work a few trades. I know they're not allowed in the playoffs, but he'll, the role's never really applied to Mike. That's my pitch.

Mike Keenan comes in to get the four wins that he, needs and with the leafs into shape. Let's do this. Okay. So I was looking this up too. I was like, well, who else is kind of like, you bring up a great example. Mike Keenan is close to, to a milestone there. Terry Murray is sitting at 499 career wins. Do you think at like at parties or at any, like, if he's on an angel circle, if you're Terry Murray, do you just drop this in a conversation and just be like, I'm at 499, sure wish there was a way to get to 500. Boy, wouldn't that be not. You know, the last team I coached won the Stanley Cup that year,

did I ever tell you guys? Oh, yeah, were you behind? Well, you know, he was with L.A. And here's the funny thing, somebody could bring him in to do that. And it still wouldn't be the weirdest Terry Murray new job story. Because the Terry Murray famously replaced his own brother as a head coach. When Brian Murray gets fired, he was the Capitals, right?

They fire Brian Murray. and they hire Terry Murray. Boy, you talk about the conversations you would have loved to have overheard. Imagine that call. Hey, you want to come to Washington? Well, be on my brother's coaching staff? Not exactly. Not exactly, Terry, but this is what we got to do.

Like, imagine Washington or L.A., somewhere where he coach is like, you know what? Terry's at $4.99. We're going to bring you back to coach a game and then they lose. Yeah, yeah, exactly. It just turns into like a long losing street. How long do we keep this guy to try to get that win? There's got to be, yeah, just how many losses in a row before you go, you know what? Maybe $4.99's just your number.

Just that's it. And I looked at it. I think Glenn Anderson's the close, like Glenn Anderson's at $4.97 for goals. Like there's nobody at $4.99. But Glenn Anderson would have been the guy that could he have come back to try to get the $500? That would have been it in terms of. kind of players in that. I mean, you're telling me the Arizona

coyotes, they couldn't do this just for, you know, for a couple of games. Just every once a month, just bring somebody back to try to get them to a milestone. They're not trying to win. So, you know, I mean, maybe maybe the wins for Ted Murray would be a little

too big of an ask, but give them the rest of the season and it could happen. But yeah, there's got to be, there's got to be a way to do this. Yeah. All right. Hey, listen, we'll leave it there this hour flew by and again, didn't have Jesse Granger for Granger things, but that's because he's all tied up today with that Big Vegas news. But make sure you read his latest on the athletic on that deal. Sean, this, and this was a ton of fun.

Thanks for doing this. And we'll get you again next Thursday. Right on. Sounds good. All right. I want to remind all of our listeners that the Friday Athletic Hockey Show, Prospect Edition, is coming your way on Friday. That's why it's the Friday edition of the show. Corey Prom and Max Boltman, they're going to be taking a deep dive. into the top prospects and the rookies this week.

Thanks again for joining us, like I said, drop us an email for The Athletic Hockey Show at gmail.com. You can leave us a voicemail at 845-4-5-4-5-84-59. And if you're not a subscriber with us, you can join us at theathletic.com slash hockey show. You'll get an annual subscription for just $3.99 a month.