The Athletic Hockey Show - Kevin Fiala traded to Los Angeles Kings, will Nazem Kadri stay in Colorado, and Hockey Hall of Fame reactions

Episode Date: June 30, 2022

Ian Mendes and Sean McIndoe kick off the show discussing the Minnesota Wild trading Kevin Fiala to the Los Angeles Kings. What does this move signal foo the states of both clubs? Also, if we will see an offer sheet appear this offseason. Then, Nazem Kadri has earned himself a hefty contract, the duo discuss if he will be a member of the Avalanche next season, as well as the future of Evgeni Malkin.Next, they dig into Sean's piece awarding the "Conned Smythe", and they react to the Hockey Hall of Fame's selections for 2022. To wrap up, they dig into the mailbag, and look back with "This Week in Hockey History".Have a question/comment for Ian and Sean? Email [e-mail] or leave a VM [phone]!Save on a subscription to The Athletic: theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We're back. It is a Thursday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. It's the M&M crew, as we like to call ourselves. It's Mendez and McAid with you for the next hour or so. Coming up, we finally have our first big trade of the offseason. L.A. and Minnesota, we'll dive into the Kevin Fiala deal. Some interesting stuff going down this week with the Hockey Hall of Fame. Sean had some fun columns on that front and an interesting one too on Herb Carnegie,

which I think we should certainly highlight. We'll talk about that. We're going to introduce our listeners to the term conned, Smyth. Again, we'll explain that a little bit later. Have some fun emails to get into, including what's the worst division of all time. This Week in hockey history looks back at maybe the best one-for-one trade in the history of the game, or certainly in terms of Star Power, it's up there. So we got a lot to get to here.

And, Sean, I'll tell you what, it felt like the off season officially kicked off this week. Minnesota and L.A. pulling the trigger on a very significant deal. And I think my takeaway from this is, look, L.A. was always kind of like, hey, we're rebuilding and we don't want to, we don't want to really signal whether or not we're a contender. Look, they made the playoffs last year. To me, this is L.A. saying it's go time by trading for Kevin Fiala.

It feels like that anyway. I mean, is that fair to say that the L.A. kings are now, they're not pushing all of their chips in the table, but they're certainly saying we're a believer that we're a playoff team again next year. Yeah, I think that's fair. It's not all the chips going in. It is a handful of them. And it's, look, this is a team that's saying most of us didn't think was going to be a playoff team last year.

They were. They took the Oilers to seven games without Drew Dowdy and then watched the Oilers roll over a Calgary Flames team that we thought was the class of that division. I think if you're the Kings, you're looking at the other teams. in that division where they're at. And you're saying, we can absolutely make the playoffs again. Maybe we can be one of the best teams in the Pacific. Maybe we can have home ice.

Maybe we can even go for, you know, can we pass Edmonton and Calgary in the standings? We probably could. Vegas is still a big question mark. We don't really know what to expect from them. But it's fascinating to me because the Kings have been doing what I would consider a classic rebuild. You know,

they didn't strip it all down. They didn't move Dowdy Kopitar. guys like that. But they did the typical, hey, we're going to take a step back. We know we're not going to be very good for a few years. We're going to get some high picks. We're going to amass prospects. We're going to have future assets.

And then now they're at the point that is the tricky part because we see this all the time where teams do the rebuild. And it's important and you have to know when to do it. But the tear down is the easy part. And getting a bunch of picks is, I don't know if I want to say the easy part, but you know, we all know how that goes. You trade established players, you get picks back, you get enough picks. Eventually, you're going to hit on a few of them. You're going to have some good prospects. Corey Promin's going to have you in his top five or top 10 for the farm systems.

This is the hard part is then how do you put that vehicle back in gear and start moving forward? And we've seen all sorts of teams over the years that haven't been able to do that step. You know, every team that's ever rebuilt at some point has had a good farm system and, you know, good outlook for the future. But then how do you get moving forward? And, you know, we've seen the sabers being the classic example of a team that they put it in gear and they just spin their wheels and they never went anywhere. And, you know, the senators, the team you cover are sort of struggling with that right now and how do we make that next step forward. This is the Kings. And they kind of did it last year a little bit with Victor Robertson, but they're doing it again this year saying,

we want to start taking steps forward and we're willing to part with some of that future capital in order to do it, still have a very good system, still have, you know, lots, lots either on the way or lots to work with. But yeah, very clearly saying, this is now, it's time for us to start making steps. It's not good enough to just have moral victories and finish last. We've got to actually, at the very least, make the playoffs. Maybe it's time to win around, or maybe even more than that. That's the sort of move you make. And it's the trickiest part. It's the hardest part. And I think the kings have done a real good job of getting, themselves to this point and then we'll see if this move works

to get them where they need to be next. What I find interesting too is the other side of this is like where the Minnesota wild going because this is a team that 50 win season, 100 points, was a legitimate contender in the West. I don't think there's any doubt about that. This season they were a legitimate contender. And now they're headed to cap jail

for the next little bit because of those suitor and Parisi deals. That's really why they couldn't afford to keep Kevin Fiala, right? It's not like they don't like the players, it's just that they just don't have the room. So, like, what are you, like, if you're Bill Garan in the Minnesota Wild, like, what are you trying to tell your players? Where you're trying to tell your fan base? Because now you're in one of those really tough spots where you're in the murky middle,

where you're not quite bad enough to be a lottery team, but you're not good enough to be a contender. And now welcome to, yeah, the murky middle, the mushy middle. And, like, like, what does this mean for the wild trade in Kevin Fiala for a couple of picks? And I'll, sorry, a prospect in a first round. A prospect and, you know, and apparently a good prospect, maybe even a very good prospect, not a blue chip future superstar lock sort of guy. But, you know, they got a decent package back.

And Kevin Fiala, we all knew he was on the market. So any team for weeks has had the opportunity to step forward and make an offer. You assume this is the best that was out there. I'll give Bill Guerin credit for this. He hasn't played any games with this situation. He said really from, you know, even during the season, certainly at the end of the season, you know, he made it very clear that, look, we want Kevin Fiala back. We just might not be able to do it. And I don't think, and Minnesota wild fans can dispute this if they feel I'm mischaracterizing it. But, you know, I don't feel like there's any false hope here that, you know, unless there was some really, you know, Kevin Fiala, he's going to get a big deal.

He deserves a big deal. And they just couldn't afford it. And so they did the next. best thing, which is you go out and get two pretty good assets, neither of which is going to cost you anything on the cap next year. Bill Garrett did what he had to do. I think if there's a criticism of him, it's you go back in last year and you criticize the buyouts, because we all knew this was happening. We all knew that when they made the decision to buyouts at Carrizate, especially the decision to buy out Ryan Souter, everybody looked at the cap-friendly page and we realized that last year,

the 21-22 season, there was a window there where the, the, the, the, the full weight of that didn't hit. But now they've got three years where it's like 12 million, 14 million, just burned, just gone off the cap. That's going to be really hard to compete with. And yet at the same time, it's not a situation where you can rebuild here because you've got Carill Caprizov who's got four years on his deal. Like this is your window with him, the best player arguably in the history of the franchise.

So you can't really take a step back. It again, it just, the buyouts last year were a very confusing situation to me. and we knew there was going to be a price, and now we're sort of seeing them have to pay it. So Fiala is the first domino to fall in the offseason. And look, we go through this every year. We're like, well, there's going to be a bunch of trades. But it does feel like there are some legitimate big names on the market this year.

Alex DeBringcat, there's some smoke around there. J.T. Miller and Vancouver. You know, Clayton Keller. Like there's a lot of players who might be in play. Does Fiala's move set the table, you think, at all? or like kind of maybe, you know, how sometimes it's a bit of a log jam and then one move goes and then it's away we go. And we should point out, look, we're recording this on Thursday morning. So by the time we listen to this, hey, maybe there's been, heck, even Thursday morning, Craig Anderson signed an extension of Buffalo.

I didn't see that coming. He's 41 years old, whatever. And so you never know what's going to happen. But I'm updating. I didn't know that. So I'm updating my power rankings right now for, uh, with the Craig Anderson news. Okay. Craig Anderson, one more year.

Listen, guys like us in our 40s, we should be rejoicing. Anytime somebody in their 40s gets an extension, it's good for us. Good job, great. Yeah. It's, look, it's domino season, right? This is the time of year where we just constantly say every move, okay, maybe that's, here go the dominoes, right? There's one move that we're waiting for, and maybe this is it.

And you never know. I mean, sometimes you've got a guy, you know, Kevin Fial was, in fact, when the athletic put out its trade board yesterday for the first time yesterday morning he was number one on the list stayed there for a few hours and uh and and now he's off um but he was he was you know the big name or certainly one of the big names and now you wonder okay so what happens with the teams that were talking to minnesota that were interested uh do they now circle back do they go to an alex de bricette who presumably would maybe even cost more do they go to somebody else or they call in vancouver about jt my like there's any number of ways that

it could go. But, you know, it's the big, the big piece of this is we're a week away from the draft. And so this is the week. Because if you're a GM, you're going to get picks, you want to pick now. You want to be able to use it. You want to be able to use it next week. Put a guy in front of your fans and say, this is who we've got. You know, would you take a pick next year?

Yeah, especially with Connor Bedard. You know, in that very strong draft, you'd be okay with that. but GMs tend to be impatient. They want the pick now. They want to get the guy into the system right now. So I do think we'll see a lot of movement over the next week, whether it'll be, you know, today and over the weekend or whether it'll kind of wait until everybody gets to Montreal.

That remains to be seen. This deal, you know, obviously a case where the Kings made their move early. The Wild obviously had a price where they presumably went to L.A. and maybe some other teams and said, here's the package it will take. If you say yes, we have a deal right now. And if not, then we don't. and L.A. said yes. And so, you know, a nice bit of work by Rob Blake, because he's now got an item off of his shopping list before he even heads to Montreal next week. So the draft goes next week. Free agency opens the week after that, which is the 13th of July. There'll be some buyouts, I'm sure, in between.

Every year we also talk about RFAs and offer sheets. And look, it actually happened last year. And I know that there was a little bit of backstory to that. And it felt a little bit more like there was a storyline as to why Carolina went after Yersperi Kotkinemi. Not so much. They wanted to go back after Montreal after the Yahoo thing. If I'm asking you to put a percentage odds from 0% to 100% that we get a legitimate offer sheet this summer that would be kind of viewed as, wow, that's a predatory move. Or somebody is targeting somebody else's young star going after him. like, you know, Matthew Kachuk or, you know, whatever, whoever you're going to put a 0% to 100%? What are the odds that we see a legitimate offer sheet in the month of July?

Okay, legitimate as in it works like it did last year or legitimate as in just an attempt? I want a real attempt. 40%. Oh, that's how. You know what? That's higher than I thought. I'm giving you a high number and yet still less than 50. So still more likely than not that we don't see it.

But I do think there are some scenarios out there. And maybe it's not the Matthew Kachuk-level guy. Maybe it's not the, you know, it could potentially cost you four first-round picks or whatever it is. Maybe it's some more of those mid-level guys where you can go and say, hey, this will only cost us a first or only cost us a second. I know that Jesse's written that Vegas is potentially vulnerable to that. They've got a couple of guys who, you know, we know their cap situation. They're pretty close to maxed out. If some team were to slip in and say, you know, we're going to give a guy three million a year,

Vegas might just have to say, we'll take a second round pick or whatever it is and we'll let them go. I think you could certainly see something like that. I mean, every year we lay out the case of why it should happen. And every year it doesn't happen except for the last couple years and last year, it actually worked for the first time and forever, at least as far as getting the player. we can debate whether that actually quote unquote worked for Carolina or not. I guess we need a few more years to figure that out. GM should be doing it.

It's a tool in their toolbox. And it's ridiculous that it's as rare as it is. But maybe the fact that we've actually seen it done, we've seen it work, maybe that it gets some of these guys moving or at least gets owners and whoever else to say, I'm not going to accept the excuse that this just isn't done. because clearly now these days it is done again, at least sometimes. So go out and use the tools available to you, try to get a star player for my team. And now there's no way, like the Montreal Canadians, there's no way that they go after.

And Martin Nekash would be the guy from Carolina. Like that's the end of the Montreal-Carolina thing, right? Like, there's no way the HABs are going to go out and offer sheet NICash, is there? You never say no way. It's a new regime, though, with Montreal, right? It is. That's the thing, right? It's all different people.

So in theory, at least, there's no, the bad blood should be gone. Although, you know, ownership is still there. And it's a lot of times these, you talk about bad blood. I mean, that can be it. It can be the owners that get into the mix. I'd love to see it. I mean, it would make jobs like ours so much. You'd please, please do it, Montreal, and do it on like a Wednesday night or first thing Thursday morning so that I can dig into it when it's fresh.

But, yeah, I would say that's. Pretty unlikely. I will put the odds at that at, let's go 5%. 5%. 40% that we're going to get some sort of RFA offer sheet, 5% that is the HABs going after one of Carolina's guys. I want to know, too, like to me one of the best stories, and this is the first time you and I have done a podcast since Colorado won the Stanley Cup, but I think it's really hard to not be happy for Nazim Cadre. Seeing what he obviously went through in the Stanley Cup playoffs both, you know, emotionally and physically to see him hoist the cup, I think was quite emotional for a lot of people. But he's now set himself up for a heck of a payday.

He had a season in which he produced like a number one center. My concern would be, I think he's more like a two C, that's just me. But do you think there's any way they make it work in Colorado? Like I know they've talked about it and Nazim went on the radio in Toronto and said the doors open and the avalanche have said we'd love to keep them. But if you're Nazim Caddrian and his agent, like, you have absolutely, like, you'll never have this type of leverage ever again. I think you've got to go out and just go get the money, go secure the bag. But is there any way you see Nazim Cadrean back in Denver next season?

It's really hard to picture. I mean, the avalanche have got a ton of guys that they need to resign, including Darcy camper, including, you know, some key pieces, not the core. The core is locked in, but the, some of those secondary pieces and Nazim Cadry would fit into that category. They have cap space to work with, but they've got a lot of work to do. And it's just hard for me to imagine, you know, it's a great fit. It was a great fit for the team. It's a great fit for the player. So maybe they can, you know, if, very often players are not looking to squeeze every single dollar. Maybe he's, he's willing to take a little bit less.

But, you know, Nazim Kadri is a guy who has never had a big, huge contract. I mean, the deal he's been on for the last five years is pretty, you saw it very often show up on lists of bargain deals. And, you know, if I'm his agent, I'm saying, we're two weeks away from free agency. We got to at least get there and see what's on the market. We got to see what some team out there is willing to give you. Because he's a real interesting case because he's, he's been. a good player in this league for for a long time.

You don't see a lot of guys have career years at 31. And yet, there was a shift for him, especially in the first half of the season, where he had never really been asked to be a number one center in his career. And certainly in Toronto, you know, with Austin Matthews and John Tavares coming in. And then he goes to Colorado with Nathan McKinnon. He had never asked to be the number one guy. And yet when Nathan McKinnon was out and he had to step into that role, he'd looked, every bit like a certified number one center.

So there's got to be some teams out there who are saying this could be our guy. At his age, you wonder, you know, how many years is it going to be? And obviously, what is the cap number going to be? I think the odds that Colorado is going to offer him eight years at his age is very, very low, unless it's just a ridiculously low cap number. And so because of that, there's really no pressure to say we have to do this before free agency opens. We lose the ability to do that eight-year deal.

Remember, Colorado let Gabriel Landiskov walked free agency last year, basically to the Eva free agency, let Darcy Kempter, not Darcy Kempir, Philip Grubauer, go to free agency, and he got a bigger offer than they were willing to accept, and that's fine. So I think Joe Sackick, look, maybe what you do is you say, if you're Joe Sackick, you say, Naz. Nazim Kadri, you did a fantastic job for us. You did everything we ever asked. go to the market, see what's out there, then come back and let us know where you're at.

And if, you know, if Philadelphia wants to give you seven years times nine million or something ridiculous like that, good for you, go take it and, you know, we'll wish you nothing but the best. If it's something that's a little more in the wheelhouse of what we can do, we would love to have you. We'd love to have that conversation. But go ahead and see what's out there. You've earned the right to do that. Why is Philadelphia always the team that makes crazy offers, right? He's such a Philadelphia guy, right?

I saw this take from so many different fans, and I have to agree with it, that, like, when he had his little moment on sports now on Canadian TV, live TV telling everybody to kiss his behind. Like, so many people were like, he just shot up the Flyers chart. Like, that is such a Flyers move. Like, that's an extra million bucks a year on a contract from the Flyers right there. So, yeah, it's, hey, he'd be, they'd love him. They'd love him in Philadelphia.

I can tell you that much. Yeah, torts, torts in Nazim Cadry that seems like what they're trying to do. What could possibly go wrong? Yeah. If you're a Buffalo and you're trying to get some traction and you're trying to turn things around, would you go hard after Nazim Cadry?

Look, they kind of did the same thing a few years ago with Ryan O'Reilly. O'Reilly was younger and, you know, whatever. But if you're Buffalo and you're trying to do something, is Nazim Cadre a guy that you're saying, hey, let's go make a pitch on this guy? I hadn't thought of that. Boy, that's, just at his age, you know, being the 31, I mean, if you're buying and, you know, assuming if it's free agency, look, it's going to be a multi-year deal. We know how free agency works.

You always have to give a few extra years. And usually the way it works is you go, we know it's going to get ugly those last few years of this deal. But the first few years is where we're going to get the value. So I think it's got to be a team that says we, we have a window for the next few years. years. I don't know if Buffalo does yet. I don't think Philadelphia does either, but Philadelphia thinks they do, or at least the boss in Philadelphia thinks they do. And that's probably all that matters. Buffalo, I don't know, it's a lot like we just said with the Kings. When do you start pushing some of those chips in? When do you start making the move? Or is it perpetual rebuild?

And, and, you know, let's also not forget Taylor Hall a few years ago. Buffalo surprised us with that move. Maybe they make something like that again. You know, I'd love to see it just as a Leafs fan, that savers Leafs rivalry, you know, someday is going to explode again, having Nazim Kadri in the middle of it would be all sorts of fun. I'm not sure if that's the one that makes sense. But, but I mean, it's interesting because you look at it and you go, who's going to sign Nazim Kadry? It's going to be a contender, right? You figure it's a contender that needs a low-end number one center or a top-end number two center. Well, first of all, there's not a lot of contenders that need a center because that's a key thing that makes you a contender. And there's

not a lot of contenders out there that have a ton of cap space heading into free agency. So where's it going to be? He's going to be such an interesting one to watch. I really want to see where that winds up. Man, Taylor Hall and Buffalo feels like a fever dream. Yeah. Honestly. I don't have a single memory of him in Buffalo.

And then it just didn't. We just immediately went into what's he going to get at the trade deadline. And that was it. What other guy I want to ask you about? And I know that Josh Yoey in Pittsburgh has been all over this story. making it seem like Evgeny Malkin and to some extent

Christopher Latang but certainly Evgeny Malkin might have played his last game in Pittsburgh and that there is a realistic possibility that Gino is going to head elsewhere

and it feels like it's a dollar issue right? Like term isn't the issue it's can we get him at a dollar amount? Dollars and cap it. That works.

Like man like there's a guy I think I said this to Haley last week on the pod or earlier this week I said I would love him Evgeny Malkin, just like go to Nashville or go to like some random team where you're like, well, I guess. Like, I just don't know where he goes.

If he doesn't go back to Pittsburgh. Where does it get any, like who's in them running for Gengi Malkin? Because I, he's a hell of a player. I still think he's an point of game guy. Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, when he's healthy and his age especially, that's the question. There's always mystery teams that come out of nowhere at this time of year, right?

This is, you know, Taylor Hall going to Buffalo was the ultimate example of that. So it'll be interesting because, you know, what does he want? It would be another piece of it. This is a guy that, you know, he's got the three cup rings. We talked about with Nazim Kandar, he said he's never really had a big contract. Well, if Giddy Malcon's had huge contracts throughout his career and well deserved, so, you know, maybe the dollar value isn't the most important thing. But at the same time, you go, well, if the dollars wasn't the most important thing,

wouldn't he stay in Pittsburgh? Wouldn't they find a way to make that work? there's all sorts of scenarios that could work out. There are teams that are going to be looking, you know, this is a guy even shorter window where you're going to be saying, you know, for the next year or two, do we think we can win? I'm still holding out hope. I mean, people have heard me say this, but if it's not Pittsburgh,

you know where I want them to go? It's a team that needs a number one center because their guys hurt and probably on LTIR for at least for at least the next little while. Washington Capitals, Evgeny Malkin, Alexander Ovechkin, together going up against Pittsburgh, how much fun would that be? Maybe not too much fun for those two guys. But I feel like they've buried the hatchet mostly. So, I mean, if you're a Penguins fan and you wake up and you check Twitter,

you pick up the newspaper, whatever it is, and you find out if getting, you see of Vagnyn Malcon holding up a 71 Capitals jersey. How are you feeling if you see that? Okay, what would hurt a Penguins fan more? Malkin going to Washington or Mark Andre Fleury going to Washington? Ooh, yeah, that's, that is a tough. I feel like it's Flurry. You think Flurry, eh?

Yeah, I see, I mean, Fleury, it's just that he hasn't been there in a few years now. I mean, at this point, Mark Andre Fleury's three teams past his, his penguins days. And he'll always be a penguin forever. And, you know, they'll always love the guy there. But I don't know. I mean, just the rivalry there. I don't know. That would, you know what, it's great.

Let's do both. Let's do, but why not both? Both of them. Both of them. On league minimum deals, too. Exactly. Yeah. That's, well, I mean, we've seen weird stuff. Like, I mean, I know we're going back forever, but you remember Paul Korea, right?

Where he walks away from Anaheim because they didn't pick up his off. He had a $10 million option. They didn't pick it up. This is in 2003. So back in the days before where you could have an option, they had a $10 million option. They didn't pick it up. And they said, we want to work out a deal with you.

It's just got to be, you know, eight or nine or something like that. And he couldn't make a deal. And he walked away and then signed close to the league minimum in Colorado for a year. And it was just this, you know, screw you, Anaheim. I'm going to go to a better play. And I'll make, you know, and I think it was maybe this Burke was Brian Murray at the time was kind of like, you just signed for a third of what we were offering you. But sometimes, you know, you mess with these guys pride. Sometimes they make weird decisions or at least decisions that seem.

weird to us on the outside because we're not in the middle of it knowing everything that's being said and everything that's going on. That was the only time, I think, in hockey history where, you know, the NBA always has that feel of, you know, superstars will get together, go sign somewhere and try to win. To me, that was the only time that in the NHL, it felt like two legit stars in their prime in Korean and Salani said, you know what, let's go together, let's go to Denver. But the weird thing on that. And do it at a discount because Parisian Souter did it for Minnesota.

a but not at a discount as we're as as as wild fans are are reminded every time they they look at the cap situation but yeah they went like like salani took like medium money he was like a four or a five million dollar deal and there's no cap back then obviously so you know it was just a question of what you could afford and korea took like i think the numbers started with the one um and we all just went we went okay they got these two guys patrick walt was still there you know they've won the cup a couple like engraved the cup now, man, it's over. This is the dream team.

And it just didn't work out. They both stunk in Colorado and the team didn't go anywhere. But you know what? You just, now you got me thinking on something. The year that they went to Denver, didn't Patrick Guad just retire? Yeah, you're right. As you're saying that because it was 2003. Because Anaheim had just been to the final.

Yeah. And so Patrick Waugh retires that year. So that was it. We were sitting there going, well, you know, Patrick's gone. It's kind of the end of the road. Oh, but now they've loaded up and, you know, they'll be fine with like, who was it? Was it David Abasher? David Abyshire? Yeah, okay. They'll be fine with him. You know, this Swiss kid, he's going to be good. And it, yeah, it was just, uh, Colorado didn't, didn't win anything. And, and more surprisingly, I mean, you look at their numbers. It was just like, it just never got going for those two guys in what should have been a perfect situation. Yeah. No, that is, yeah, it is weird to think of, to think of, that. Your column this week, and kind of goes back a little bit to Nazim Cadry, one of your columns this week was introducing hockey fans to a brand new term.

And it's called Cond Smite, C-O-N-N-E-D, con. Like you've been had, you've, in this case, Cond Smyth is a term to an award, I guess I should say, that you handed out to the team that maybe inadvertently accidentally helped the Stanley Cup champion reached that that summit. And this year, the winner of the Con that Smy's trophy is the Toronto Maple Leafs because they ended up giving Nassim Cadres. It was a tough call, though. You had a couple of teams that were in the running.

Joe Sack is good at his job, man. The Islanders were a real tough one. And I know a lot of people, I barely even mentioned it were saying, like, what about an Ottawa Nashville combo for the Matthew Shane trade? Years ago, Montreal, you know, obviously. the deadline. There were a lot of, it was one of these things were going through year after year.

There were some years it was an obvious one. There were some years where it was tough because a team didn't make a lot of trades. This was the one where it was like, how do we even narrowed down all of the teams that Joe Sackick has ripped off? And so what you did in this column for the people that haven't read it,

Sean basically went back through the entire cap era, so every Stanley Cup champion since Carolina in 06. you looked at each year the team won the Stanley Cup and you said, you know what, which team, what other team helped them out the most with a trade or a roster move that benefited them? And it was a, listen, it was a fun exercise because you go back and I'm sure, you know, Flyers fans are probably boiling mad a couple of times because it felt like they were the team that won more. Am I wrong on that?

Did they win more consmites? They won two. They won two. The Leafs had two. And I think there may have been another. Buffalo. I know they had the Ryan O'Reilly. Definitely had the Ryan O'Reilly.

That was the easiest one about. No, you know, it was Columbus, because Columbus won it for both of the L.A. Kings ears. Oh, right. For Jeff Carter and then Marion Gabburick as well, the next year. And again, I didn't find,

I didn't get a lot of angry pushback from Flyers fans. Flyers fans are like in that fun place where, you know, they're angry all the time, but they're angry at their own team half the time, too. So if you go like, ah, that was a dumb trade, they're like, no, no, I wasn't a dumb trade. It was a really dumb trade.

And you got to, you know, you got to be. harder on us than that. So they, they, uh, they, they,

uh, that they showed up a couple of times. But, uh, yeah, I mean, it was interesting like the first one I did, because I did the cap era.

So we start with Carolina in 2006. And I was sort of going back and forth. G, God, they got them both. And then I was like, oh, they got them both from Philadelphia.

Perfect. That makes it nice and easy. I don't have to pick one. Uh, so yeah, thank you to Bobby Clark for making my job easier 15 years later. Yeah. Uh,

so that, That was one column you wrote this week. Another one that, well, you're a busy guy this week. You were just pumping out material here. And some of it had to do with the Hockey Hall of Fame. And, of course, we had the induction announcements earlier this week. And look, this happens every year. Induction announcement comes out and everybody explodes in anger, rage, et cetera.

My favorite time of year, man. I love the debate. I love the argument. This year was no different. because the, and now we're just looking at this strictly through the lens of the, we can talk about the lack of women's candidates here in a second. Oh, yeah. And because that absolutely deserves our oxygen and attention here.

But a lot of people looked at the four main guys that went in as NHLers and said, this is a joke that all four of them in Roberto Luongo, Hank and Daniel Sadine and Daniel Alfredson, combined for zero Stanley Cups. And that continually was, like, I was shocked at the amount of pushback I saw on that particular narrative of how could you elect four guys

who would never want a Stanley Cup amongst them? It's, and yeah, I saw that too. That hadn't even occurred to me. When I saw this class, like, that didn't even pop in my head. Guys, we got to get our heads around the fact that there's 32 teams in this league now. And we're in the era of parody. We are in the era where Gary,

Barry Bedman wants, he wants 32, 500 teams, except they'd be 550 because of the loser point. That's, that's his dream season. And every Stanley Cup series is a 50-50 coin flip. Like, that's what we're, there are going to be really, really good players who just don't win Stanley Cubs. And, you know, you look at, you know, all four of those guys, they all went to the final. You know, Daniel Offertson was the, you know, the captain and I would say probably best

player on a team that went to the final. And the three Vancouver guys, I mean, what, they won 15 playoff games in a season, but if they'd won 16, they would have been Hall of Famers, but they won 15 because they're a bum. All four of those guys won gold medals in best-on-best Olympics. So, I mean, you can't even say they weren't winners or whatever that means. We just got to accept it. Like, there's going to be a lot of really, really good players.

This isn't the original six days. This isn't even the 80s when half the teams in the league were just. trying not to go bankrupt. There's 32 teams and in any given year, there's like 20 teams that could potentially win the Stanley Cups. Guys having 10, 12, 15, even 20 year careers, there's going to be a lot of those guys who just never win. And if we consider that some sort of grand failing on a team with 20 other guys, we're going to get to some really ridiculous places. I would 10 times out of 10 rather have a guy like Roberto Luongo in the Hall of Fame with no Stanley Cups, then Kevin Lowe with six Stanley Cups as a second pairing defenseman,

you know, or the Cedines who were the first line in Vancouver on some absolutely outstanding teams, you know, give me those guys over, you know, some of these other guys who had a lot of cups by being the seventh best player on a team. Daniel Offertson, we'll see about that. Maybe a little, maybe a little different. But I like the three Vancouver guys going in. There you go. I knew. I knew there would be some. It convinced me. Convinced me that Daniel Offertson is, because I actually said this on my other podcast yesterday, Daniel Alfferson to me is exactly in that zone where, not that I didn't care,

because I do care about the Hall of Fame. I think it's great. But I didn't feel like I had a strong opinion. Year after year when he didn't get inducted, I went, yeah, that's fine. Guy had 400 goals. You know, he doesn't have to be in the Hall of Fame. And now that he's in, I'm like, yeah, sure. You could put Daniel Offerson in the Hall of Fame.

Like, he feels very borderline to me. But you had made the case for a few years that this guy absolutely should be in. Give us like the quick summary. Convince a skeptical, it may be a skeptical public or maybe just people who weren't in Ottawa didn't really watch this guy and understand who he was and what he meant. Yeah. So let me, okay, so now that you've put me on the spot here, let me just pull this up so that I have the pertinent information. See, he's got to pull it out.

He doesn't even remember. No, no, no, I want to make sure I'm accurate. Even he doesn't remember any Daniel Alpherson moments off the top of his head. he shot the puck of a guy and he pretended to throw a stick into the crowd. That's it. That's the two. Yeah, that's exactly. That's,

look, look, and I understand, like, I want people to understand, like, I know that he is a, uh,

or was a bubble candidate. Like, I know that. I'm not saying he was a, uh, lock it in. But I, like,

so I started to look this up. Okay. So let, let me, let me try and walk you through this. Okay. Okay. So in the history of the NHL,

in terms of Hall of Fame, eligible players, okay? Prior to this year, there had been 15 players, okay, who had a thousand points for one franchise and served as their captain for five seasons or more, okay? So the parameters are you score a thousand points for a single franchise and you're their captain for five years or more, okay? So we're talking Eisenman, Sackick, Bork, Ron Francis, Alex Delvecchio is on that, 14 of them were in the Hall of Fame. One wasn't, and the one that wasn't was Alfredson. Okay.

Johnny Busek was on that list. Gilberto was on that list. What I thought was even more shocking to me was not only were those other 14 guys all in the Hall of Fame, all of them were first ballot Hall of Famers. All of them were first ballot. So look, and I was, I never made the point that he was a first ballot guy.

My point was the discrepancy between Alfredson and say, you know, Jill Bear Perrault or Johnny Bucick or even a Matt Sundin wasn't so great that one of them was a lock-it-in first ballot Hall of Fame or the other guy is like, I don't think he should get in. Okay? So that's kind of point one. You start to look at guys in, and I think I look this up, yeah, I have it here, okay? So players to score 50 goals and 100 points. for a single franchise.

And that's a pretty big plateau. Now, I understand, too, that there's lots of guys, the Rekkes and the Gilmores and the, you know, the guys that bounced around. I'm not trying to, you know,

penalize them for bouncing around. Yeah. But I think when you score 50 goals and 100 points for a playoff franchise, that's a pretty significant accomplishment. So this is playoff numbers. And you say 50 goals and 100 points in the playoffs for one team.

Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And in terms of the guys that were holding, of Fame eligible, they're all in the Hall of Fame except for Alpherson. And all of them are first ballot guys except for Alpherson. So I'm like, okay. Like I get it. Um, you know, and now we start to look at, you know, and I think one thing that's really tough too is the ability to adjust, to sort of, uh, adjust for era, right? Like, it's, it's hard to say, you know, what would, what would

Alex Ovechkin have done in the 80s or what would, what would Gordy Howe do today, right? And so I love the era-adjusted points, right? Because what they do is they take, hockey reference takes the 82 game schedule. They kind of, you know, plug in the numbers there to kind of flatten the curve, so to speak. And if you use that formula in terms of all-time era-adjusted scoring, Daniel Lepertsen's 34th in the history of the game. 34th, that's better than Hosa. That's better than Rocket Richard. That's better than Yari Curry

that's significantly better than Henrik and Daniel Sadeen. Again, I won't make the point that he was a first ballot Hall of Famer. I understand that. But I just don't think that the discrepancy

between Alfredson and all of these other guys are so great that he should have had to wait five years and everybody else is in. And I think you look at his peak five seasons. They hold up very closely to Jerome McGinla and Matt Sundin

and the Siddins. And look, at the end of the day, I'm glad he got in. I understand why that there's some, some reservation. The guy was a better than a point per game player in 25 career Olympic games, best on best, won a gold medal, won a silver medal. He did all the things that I think a Hall of Famer should do. He was the face of a franchise for the better part of a decade. And so to me, he was a Hall of Famer. I'm glad he got in, but I do understand the pushback. That's good case. It's a fair case. And I am going to take this, and edit it, and make it sound.

I'm going to definitely take the soundbite. I heard you say the words better than Rocket Richard when I came to Daniel Offerson. So that's going to be a big one. Yeah, I mean, again, I don't, I can't really get fired up with, with strong feelings on this. I, you know, I would say this with, you know, the number that you cited five years as capped in a thousand points with with, or five years as, was a five, a thousand points. At least five years as a captain. Just one, with just one team or a thousand. And a thousand points with that same franchise.

With that same franchise. Okay. Because that was interesting. Because the guy that, you know, that I think is maybe a similar case to Alfredson is Rod Brindamor. And he was captain for four years in Carolina. But obviously he played with Philadelphia as well. And he wouldn't have had a thousand points with that franchise.

Right. Exactly. And I will say this. It's an impressive point. Your lucky Shane Donne didn't have like 20 more points than he did. Because that's the other. To me, Shane Dohn is more the guy where it's like, because I've said this before, when it comes to the hockey Hall of Fame, for whatever reason, guys who played most or all

of their career with one team seemed to get a boost to their case. This is like the Bernie Ferdurko scenario where, you know, you can look at guys who bounced around a lot and they either seem to take longer like at Doug Gilmore, Mark Recky took a few years, Dave Anderchuk took forever. Those are guys that didn't really have like one team that they spent a decade with. Whereas the Bernie Ferdurcos and, you know, you can go on down the list of some other guys, tend to have a little bit of a boost and get in. And, you know, maybe that's a good thing.

Maybe it's not. You know, Pierre Turgeon obviously still not in. Keith Kachuk still not in. Guys have moved around a lot. I don't know if that's because it just helps. Maybe when you have one fan base, one media market that's really pushing a guy or, or, Or maybe there is an element of this that, hey, it is the Hall of Fame. And, you know, that's an intangible thing, but maybe that should matter that you say,

Daniel Alpherson is the Ottawa Senators. He is that team. He is the play. I say Ottawa Senators and you picture Daniel Alpherson. And maybe that should count for something. I do think it's going to get very interesting with Shane Donne. And then obviously the other one that, you know, I can hear people, you know, yelling at their, at their device as their fan of this team is Patrick.

Gelliesh, because that's a guy with similar numbers, played forever, one team. You know, they would point out, he actually won Stanley Cups and, you know, I'll go on down the list. To me, he's very similar to Alpherson. Because the case against Alpherson was always, the numbers are fine. He played forever. He was an All-Star one time. Never won any awards, never won, you know, a Hart Trophy or anything. Never was a finalist.

He was a, when I say All-Star postseason, like the one that we vote on, one time in his entire career. So he just was never like a best in the best in the game sort of guy. But there's lots of guys in the Hall of Fame who fall out of that category too. Dave Andrew Chuck, Dino Cicerelli, the classic one. I mean, he was never in the running for any of that. I don't mind. And you know what? I'm here in Ottawa. I'm not a senator's fan. But I know there's a lot of happy senators fans these days. Between this and the arena, it's a good week to be a sense fan. So I'm not going to rain on the parade. Congratulations to Daniel Offerson and put it on the plaque, better than Rocket

Richard. There you go. Ian Mendez, 2012. Athletic hockey show June 30th, 2022. That's exactly what I meant.

Okay. A couple of other things on the Hall of Fame. By the way, Alex McGilney for me, remains a head scratcher. I have seen, Mike Harrington,

who covers the Sabres, has weighed in a few times this week saying he believes the reason why Mogilney is frozen out of the Hall of Fame is he thinks that,

McGillney would not want to participate in the award ceremony or in the induction process. And maybe that's part of it. But if you're asking, if you told me, hey, Ian, and this is before the, and I've said this on the record, I've written it down, if you told me before this week, you say, Ian, you get

one, you get to choose one guy who's not in the Hall of Fame, who should be in. You get one vote and that guy goes in. My vote would go to Alexander McGilney, because I believe, at the peak of his game, he was as good, as any goal score that I saw. 76

goals in one season, another 50 goal season. He won a Stanley Cup. He was unbelievable. And I think there's something to be said for the fact that this young man risked his life to come over here. There's absolutely something to be said. I mean, the whole

and really did. Like if you're a younger, you're a new fan and you don't really know the story. Like you hear like Alexander McGillian was the first Soviet star to come over. And you go, okay, well, sure, but somebody had to be first, right? I mean, this, we're talking like, you know, spies like us, James Bond stuff

where he's like being hidden in cars and there's guys in suits chasing him around. Like, it was this outrageous thing. And the hall has been very clear that they consider stuff like that, your impact. And you know, to me, Alexander McGilney,

just on his playing days, it deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, but you add that in. I don't get it. I do not get why this guy isn't, you know, to me, I would put him in before Daniel Offertson. I put him in before the Siddins. I don't get why. And the other thing with McGilney, and I know this is a very tough territory to get into, but it's the sort of thing where just if you were a fan and if you are a fan and you go to a game today, there are certain

guys that you look at and you go, I'm watching a Hall of Famer right now. And I don't know that you ever necessarily got that vibe from a Daniel Alpherson. Certainly, you know, the Cicarelli's and guys like that never gave you that. And I'm not saying it should be the only criteria. But Alexander McGilney was a guy that you went to a game in his prime or anywhere near, even his veteran years and you went, watch that guy. Because that guy is, that guy has a different aura to him. Even when he wasn't putting up huge numbers, he was just, he was just phenomenal.

And if he doesn't want to go to the ceremony, don't have him go to the ceremony. I mean, this isn't, the Hall of Fame is not about one day a year where everyone puts on suits and goes to, you know, some function. It's about all the fans who are going to come in and try to learn about the game. And you can't tell a full story of the NHL in the 90s and beyond without having Alexander McGillney be part of that. Yeah. A couple of other things I want to point out with the Hall of Fame stuff this week. And I said you were a busy guy this week in pumping out columns. But the one that I really thought we should highlight here, because I think it translates really well into a podcast,

is just explaining to people who Herb Carnegie was and why it was important to get him into the Hall of Fame, because it's not a name that the average hockey fan would know. It's not a story that the average hockey fan would know. And yet it's as important as any story that we've probably told over the last few years. So I'd love to just give you the platform here, Sean, to just kind of just explain to our audience a little bit about Herb Carnegie and his impact on the game long before a lot of us were even alive. I'm so happy that Herb Carnegie was inducted as a builder. It's, you know, I can criticize a lot about the Hockey Hall of Fame and the process and who they put and put in and who they don't. And that's part of the fun of this.

They got this one absolutely right. And, you know, and it took too long. It should have been, it should have happened years ago. But Herb Carnegie, and I know a lot of fans don't know, don't know the name. and Herb Carnegie was considered the first black hockey star. And this was even before Willi O'Re, this was coming up in the 30s and the 40s. And back in those days, the NHL had been around for a little while. The NHL was the top North American league, but it wasn't the only game in town.

It's unlike today, there were other pro leagues that were close to the NHL, not quite at that level. But, you know, they were close. and especially in places like Quebec. There were senior leagues that were very talented players. Herb Carnegie was a three-time MVP in one of the top leagues in Quebec. He went on to play for the Quebec Aces, which was the legendary team that Jean Belvo was on. He was actually one of John Belvo's first linemates. And John Belvo himself said this is one of the greatest players I ever played with.

And he obviously went on and played on all those great Montreal dynasties. Herb Carnegie didn't get that chance. And, you know, a lot of people have said, including John Belvo, that's, that was because he was black. It was the color of his skin is what kept him out of the NHL. He did get an invite to a training camp with the New York Rangers. It was offered a minor league contract, but it would have been a pay cut. It would have been, you know, there wasn't necessarily a direct path. So he turned it down so that he could stay in Quebec.

And just another offer never came. And there were, you know, there are stories from the time that some people have questioned. but that Kahn Smyth of the Maple Leafs had seen Herb Carnegie and said, I would sign this guy in a second if he was one. And in fact that Kahn Smyth had made the joke that he would pay $10,000 to anyone who could come up with a way to turn Herb Carnegie White so that he could sign him for the Maple Leafs. Which, again, some people say he didn't say that.

Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't say that. But at the time, that wouldn't have been all that unusual a sentiment. And you can only imagine what he heard from fans and opponents and everything. Imagine though, like just even if whether or not he said that, imagine like instead of saying, like I wonder if we could just change the rules to allow this guy to play. Instead of thinking about that, you think to yourself, I wonder if we could change the color of his skin.

Just think about the absurdity of that, right? And not, I mean, there weren't rules. Like it wasn't even a case that you could just go give him a contract. go get one of the best players in the world, certainly one of the very best players outside the NHL and put them on your team and go win a Stanley Cup. And yet, you know, not only consmite and Maple Leafs, but none of the teams at the time, other than the Rangers offering a minor league deal, who went and did it. He was not in the NHL at the time, but he was a known guy.

It was an inspiration for a lot of other players coming up, including Willie O'Reigh, who cited him as being a big inspiration when Willio Reeve finally does break the barrier becoming the first black player in the NHL years later. Herb Carnegie never gets to the NHL. He plays a long time in the pro leagues. And then when he retires, he goes on and opens Canada's first hockey school, basically, and spends the rest of his life teaching players how to play,

teaching respect, teaching, you know, all like the values. And he passed away in 2012, sadly. And certainly once the league finally put Willie O'Rey in the Hall of Fame, which took a disgracefully long time that they didn't do that until 2018, really there started to be some momentum behind that Herb Carnegie should be in there too. His family had been pushing forward. His kids and grandkids have been public on this. we at the athletic when we did our

Hall of Fame exercise last year we made the case for Herb Carnegie and we voted him in and you know I know at that time a lot of fans and I haven't even heard of this guy this guy isn't part of the history of this league that I've been taught

and that I know he is now because he's a Hall of Famer and it's just it's great and I encourage people read the piece that I wrote read up on on Herb Carnegie and it's a great job

by the hockey Hall of Fame to put him in and also, and this is a small thing, but to put him in as the only builder this year. You know, they didn't even do, they didn't do that for Willie O'Rea that really, you know, bug me that they had to put Gary Betman in that year too. And so Gary Bettman got a big chunk of the spotlight that Willie O'Rea should have had.

Herb Carnegie is going to be the only builder in this year's class, which is fantastic. I'm just, I'm so happy that he's finally being recognized in this way. Okay. So the Hall of Fame got that. one right with Herb Carnegie, where they got it wrong. I think a lot of people, I thought Haley Salvean,

just Haley just did a great job on this column. But first of all, and you don't want to take away from Rika Salon, who became really the first non-North American player to get inducted on the women's side of the game, which is great because it shows the growth of the game in Finland and in other places. So Saladin getting in was great, but they just left a blank spot. Every year they have the ability to induct at least two women into the Hall of Fame this year for whatever reason, they only decided that Rika Saladin was worthy. The head-scratching one here is Caroline Ulet, who I don't understand how somebody could win 10,

count them 10 gold medals in the course of their career, top five, top three, if I'm not mistaken, all time in scoring for Team Canada, and somehow could not secure 14 of 18 votes. What I think this is very indicative of is the Hall of Fame has an inability to properly evaluate women's players. Like, that has to be the takeaway from this. Because there's no other planet in which somebody with Caroline Ulet's credentials or resume

would be omitted as a first ballot Hall of Fame. They should have been a slam dunk, no? The only way it's not a slam dunk is if you say we don't have room because we have all these other worthy candidates. And we're going to put in Julia Choo, we're going to put in Megan Duggan.

We're going to put in, you know, there's other names. So some people, some of the new candidates are going to have to wait. There's no, absolutely no reason that you can say Caroline Roulette is not a Hall of Famer. And it's frustrating because when they opened the Hall of Fame to women players in 2010, they said, we've got two spots a year. And I know a lot of people say, why is it two spots for the women and four spots for the men? But that's not even the issue here, because they don't use the two spots. They did the very first year, 2010, they inducted two women, and since then, they have never used both of their, both of

their sluts. And in fact, there are several years where they didn't induct anyone at all. And I don't get it. And just in case people are wondering, you know, the way the committee works, it's very mysterious. We don't know who voted for who or how many votes anyone got, but it's not a situation where you could just have so many good candidates. They all cancel out and, oh, no, we only wound up with one. Like you did, there's different. runoffs and different rounds of voting, they absolutely could have said, guys, we're not leaving the room until we've got two women that we've named because we've got four or five excellent candidates. You said it's a lack of ability to properly evaluate. Maybe it's that. I just can't

help but feel like at this point, we criticize them every year for this. And the fact that it keeps happening, it just feels stubborn to me at this point. It feels almost a little bit petulant. Like this is a bunch of old hockey men saying, you're not going to tell us what to do. And if you're going to try to push us around and say, it's got to be two women, we're only going to give you one. And we know it's going to tick you off and, you know, too bad. Because they're using the full maximum of four men year after year. And, I mean, look, it's not, you know, not to keep going back to Daniel Alpherson. But Daniel Alpherson's got a pretty solid Hall of Fame case.

It's nowhere near what Carolina Latt has. There's not even, you know, not even close. yet we're using all this, every slot available for the men year after year after year and never doing it for the women. I don't get it. It's, there's no excuse for it. And it, it really diminishes the Hall of Fame in my eyes. Let's, uh, let's wrap up like we always do with, uh, opening up the, uh, the mailbag and doing a little this week in hockey history here. Dan from Chicago, let's start with this. A reminder, you can email us any questions you have. email us to the athletic hockey show at gmail.com,

the athletic hockey show at gmail.com. We also will gladly take your voicemails. 845-4-4-5-4-85-8-4-59. Dan from Chicago writes in, Sean, says two-parter for you guys. I know there's been some divisions in the past that pretty much made the playoffs just to get swept in round number one, the old Norse division of late 80s springs to mind. But I was wondering, what is the worst division of all time?

That could be in terms of total points, wins, maybe the worst division is made up of history's least successful teams, i.e., teams that collectively won the fewest amount of playoff games or Stanley Cups. Also, just curious, if the NHL did not force divisional winners into the playoffs, would there ever have been a year in which one of those divisions had a team that got into the playoffs, but probably shouldn't have because of the point system. That comes in from Dan in Chicago. So I know you've done this in the past, right? Like, looking back, what's the worst division of all time? Yeah, I did a ranking on Grantland on this way back when. And I did it subjectively. So, you know, Dan's kind of asking, you know, have we run the numbers?

Can we give you a winning percentage or whatever else? I don't have that. But I would certainly argue that it's, to me, I think it's a pretty easy call. And that is that the worst division of all time in the, in the NHL was the, the original West Division. And this is the one that came in. In 1967, the NHL famously expands. They go from six teams all the way up to 12.

And in their brilliance, the NHL goes, wait a second. We're going to have six established teams. We're going to have six expansion teams. Those expansion teams are going to get their teeth kicked in. What do we do? Oh, I know, we'll put all six of those teams in the same division. In the West Division. and it was the way.

So Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are in the West, even though Detroit and Chicago were still in the East. They call the original six, the East Division. They put all six expansion teams in the West Division, and those teams stink. But, you know, the ones that stink a little bit less, like the Blues, finish first with like 80 points, the ones in the East, you know, the teams in the East that are playing these guys over and over,

rack up huge totals. And what really made it dumb was the NHL had a playoff for me, where the two divisions just played within themselves, and each division sent one team to the Stanley Cup final. So you can imagine how that went. It was three straight years of original six East teams sweeping the expansion West teams, and that culminates in the famous Bobby Oracle against the Blues.

Three years in a row, three sweeps. It was the Blues every single year, three trips to the final, not one win. Just ridiculous. So I put them there. The Smythe Division, pre-oilers was quite awful. And then we also got to give a shout out to the everyone's favorite modern entry

in this field, the South Lease division, the Capitals, Hurricanes, Lightning Thrashers, and Panthers, which is what's interesting is that was a division for 14 years, I want to say. They won two Stanley Cups. The lightning and the hurricanes, you know, back to back the Stanley Cup, so, which, you know, a lot of the other divisions that I had did not, did not ever get there. but yeah, that was just a bad division and lots of years where they only sent one team to the playoffs, even though this was back when there were three divisions. So the other two divisions, three divisions per conference, I should say, the other two divisions in the east are sending seven out of the eight teams and they're only sending one.

I don't think there was ever a year where one of the South Lees teams got in, even though they finished ninth or worse in the conference. But certainly there were a lot of years where they went in as a three seed, because, the division winners got the top seat and had home ice against a team that finished well above him in the standings. Jesse wants to know which player has the distinction. And maybe this is because Corey Perry is top of mind. Corey Perry has gone in Stanley Cup final out three straight years and lost Dallas, Montreal. And then again this year, Corey Perry gets to the Stanley Cup with Tampa and doesn't quite

get over the mountain. So he goes to the cup three times and loses. But Corey Perry does have a Stanley Cup from 07. and Anaheim in his back pocket. But Jesse wants to know what is the record for most Stanley Cup final appearances by a player who never won the Cup? And I think you got the answer, right, Sean? I'm pretty sure I've got the answer. I'm pretty sure the answer to this one is Brian Prop, who was a very good player in the 80s and 90s,

who had very, very bad luck when it came to the finals. He, as a rookie, he was on that Philadelphia Flyers team, 7980. This is the team that had the 35 game undefeated streak. They go to the finals. They lose to the New York Islanders, the start of that dynasty. Flyers fans would say they lost to Leon Stickle for blowing the offside call. But the Flyers lose to the Islanders in 1980. They go on to go back to the final two more years in 1985 and 1987.

87's the Ron Hextel year. They lose to the Oilers both of those years. Finally, during the 89-90 season, Brian Prop gets traded from the. the flyers to the Boston Bruins at midseason goes on to lose again to the Edmonton Oilers in 1990. So that's his fourth trip to the finals,

four losses. And then presumably Brian Prop at this point is so sick of going to the final and losing that he as a free agent signs with the Minnesota North Stars. One of the worst teams in the entirely. He's done with this. No more finals, no more playoffs. Well,

the Minnesota North Stars get into the playoffs because it's the Norris Division, and then they go all the way to the final, one of the great Miracle Cinderella runs and then lose to Merrill Lemieux and the Penguins. And that made it five years in a row, or not five years in a row, but five years in his career that Brian Prop went to the Stanley Cup final with three different teams, and he went 0 for five, never did win a Stanley Cup. And, you know, he lost to some powerhouse, essentially dynasty teams, the islanders, the Orders, and the Pittsburgh Penguins.

Yeah, that's exactly it. He lost the Dynasty Oilers, the Gretzky, sorry, the Dynasty Islanders, the Gretzky Oilers, the Messia Oilers, then in 1990. And then you finally get back to the final and, oh, look, here comes Meril Lemieux and Yarmur-Jagger and everybody like that. Certainly, you could make a hell of an all-star team out of guys who beat Brian Prop in the Stanley Cup final. Yeah. As we wrap up with this week in hockey history, I'm wondering if you can help me. You know, I like segues to take a topic from one to the next. Help us out here, Sean.

How would I segue from Brian Prop to Chris Shelleyhouse? Yeah, gee, I can't imagine. Nothing connects those two guys. Yeah? Oh, wait, it just hit me. And by it, I mean, a furious Ron Hextel charging out to, of course, Chris Chellios, the guy who, it was his hit on Brian Prop that caused Ron Hextel to flip out and lose his mind in the 89 playoffs.

Yeah. And I mentioned this before. The crazy thing about that is you go back and watch that. That was game six. It was still a close game. Like it wasn't like a seven to one game. There was like, it was like a two-goal game. And Ron Hextel was like, forget it.

I'm just going to, it's more important to me that I destroy this dude. And he went and did it. Yeah. Because again, in game one of that series, Chris Chelyos, with one of the most, like even Pavel Burray thought that this was an elbow. Yeah. That was pretty nasty. He connects on Brian Prop and hits it. Prop's head hits the ice.

It's one of the worst hits you'll ever see. And then the Montreal Canadiens go on to knock out Philadelphia. They end up losing the Stanley Cup to Calgary. But the reason why I want to bring up Chris Chelyos is this week in hockey history, June 29th, 1990. So 32 years ago this week, Chris Chelyos traded by the Montreal Canadiens to the Chicago Blackhawks. In exchange for Denny Savard, a rare kind of one-for-one deal involving. megastars, and I'm going to ask you this, has there ever been another kind of essentially a one-for-one deal that saw Hall of Famers get traded for each other at any point in their

career? Now, I know there's been three for two and whatever, but just in terms of players being traded, one-for-one, Savard for Chellios, they're both in the Hall of Fame. Have we ever seen this before or since? Before I answer your question, is this a one-for-one trade? Because there was a second-round pick. There was a second-round pick-throw. But there no other players. So that's my question is, is that a one for one? Okay. Yeah. In that case, yeah, there have been, uh, maybe a surprising, a surprising number of, of deals where there were one player on each side, uh, and, and they were, they were Hall of Famers. Um, and also a bunch that you might think of as in that category that, like, everybody thinks Joe Neuendig for Jerome

McGillan and like, like, poor Corey Mullen is just sitting there. Like, dude, come on. Like, I was, I was in that deal too. But I'll throw some out of it. yeah. Terry Sautchuk for Johnny Busek was maybe the first really great one. That was a legit one for one, no draft picks. Another one that had no picks was Brennan Chanahan for Chris Pronger. That's one that you know, you way back in the day, that was a straight up one for one. Some other ones that did have picks involved, but Phil Housley for Al McKinness back in the day was one. Wait, Phil Housley got traded for Al McKinness? Yeah, that's how Al McKinness went from Calgary to St. Louis,

is that Phil Housley had a stop in, yeah, in St. Louis and then went to Calgary. I remember Phil Housley and Calgary. You know what? I think the reason why is I think of Housley for Howard Chuck. Yes, which is another great one that people kind of remember as one for one, but had some other pieces involved, including the draft pick that turned into Keith Kachuk, interestingly. Enough.

The, uh, um, some other ones would include, uh, Mike Gartner for Glenn Anderson. Would be another one. That one had a pick involved.

Yeah. Um, and, uh, that's, uh, and are there any other ones I'm trying to think now. The, you know,

obviously if you're, if you're saying just that had Hall of Famers on both sides, you get into Peter Forsberg, Eric Lindros, but there were a ton more players in that. Um, the, there was a two-for-two trade back in the day that had three Hall of Famers.

It was Scott Stevens, Mike Gartner, Larry Murphy, and Bob Rouse were all in a trade together. But I think that's, and oh, and Brandon Chanhan was traded for Paul Coffey, but Keith Primo was in that deal as well. Was there not a Paul Coffey, Mark Recky, big, I know Rick Tocket was part of that, but I don't think Tockett's in the Hall of Fame, but there was a big deal there too, right? Paul Coffey got traded a bunch of times and they were almost always in like really big trades with like a bunch of dudes so it was he was never in like a real

one for one type situation and then I guess the other one I should mention is because we mentioned Pronger for Shanahan but if you if you count it then the Brennan Chanahan Scott Stevens kind of free agency kerfuffle so to speak with the

arbitration and everything would be that was a force trade, but that would fall into the category as well. All right. Listen, we'll leave it there because we've gone just over an hour here, but this has been fun. Now, next week we should point out, you and I are actually going to be on site, right, at the draft in Montreal.

Now, are you coming? Like, what's your deal? Do you even have a plan? Like, obviously, for a guy like me, I cover the auto with senators, so that's kind of going to be my focus draft week. Are you, you're coming to the draft. What's your game plan? I have no plan, of course.

but I'll have some draft-related fun stuff during the weekend, and I believe the plan is I'm going to be one of the live bloggers for, I think, both days of the draft. So round one Thursday night, we'll be live-blogging that, and for at least some of day two on Friday as well, I'll be involved in that. The look on your face as you start to talk about live-blogging day two of the draft, I wish everyone you could see your faith. That day two of the draft, let's be honest here, it's a grind.

It's a grind and yet the one thing that gets me every year is how fast it moves. They fly through these draft picks to the point where they're announcing a pick. Some guy in the stand stands up, hugs his mob, he's halfway down the stairs and they've already announced the next pick. Like it is, and as the reason this always gets me and you know this well, I run some fantasy football leagues. You're in one of them. I can't get the draft to go anywhere near that speed. I need to know, like I, I wish Jim Gregory must have left like a book or something, a handbook, because I got to wait 20 minutes for people to flip through magazines,

but the NHL can get like every 30 seconds for three straight hours. They're just running through these picks. It's wild. Yeah. And again, listen, we're looking forward to getting to Montreal next week. We're going to certainly pressure Pierre LeBron into a cottage invite, make it weird for them. It's not going to happen, man. Just understand.

It's not going to happen. But we might get to watch them run a jukebox. And that's honestly even better. There we go. We'll leave it there. Again, we'll talk to again next week. Love to hear from you. If got any questions about our podcast this week, by all means,

drop us an email, The Athletic Hockey Show at gmail.mail. 4454-8459. Not a subscriber with us. You can join us at theathletic.com slash hockey show. Get an annual subscription for a dollar a month for the first six months. You can also subscribe to the Athletic Audio Plus on Apple Podcast. Sean and I love to do some fun trivia, things like that. You get a bunch of bonus content from our entire network.

You'll start with a 30-day free free time. trial there and then it's just 99 cents a month after that.