EHM The Blue Line

We lose Stamkos, Gaudreau and Hall long(ish) term on the same day, that's not a good day.

They're talking about 4 months for Stamkos now. Ouch.

It's quite long but it's a really interesting article about Marc Savard and what happened to him when he was forced to retired. This seems quite painful to live actually when it's really serious. I certainly miss him as a player.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2016/ ... story.html

darn Reimer was bad against Toronto.

Marner had a pretty nice goal.

Hammond on waivers. That went down quickly!

philou21 wrote:Hammond on waivers. That went down quickly!

Looks like he cleared them as well.

I thought someone would take a chance with him. Seems like nobody believes in him anymore than much.

philou21 wrote:I thought someone would take a chance with him. Seems like nobody believes in him anymore than much.

Two bad games for him and 3 good ones for Condon and this happens, lol?!

Just shows how bad NHL teams are at evaluating goalies. Hammond is a top 3 backup in the league over the last 2 seasons.

Most teams already have a backup goalie, not surprising he wasn't claimed

I heard Burns signed an 8 years deal with the Sharks. They're talking about 8 millions per season. Another contract that finishes a bit late but 8 millions a year is alright for what he brings IMO.

philou21 wrote:I heard Burns signed an 8 years deal with the Sharks. They're talking about 8 millions per season. Another contract that finishes a bit late but 8 millions a year is alright for what he brings IMO.

Until he's 40. Yet another contract neither side intends to honor....

Welcome to NHL for new franchise Vegas Golden Knights

The logo is ok but I don't really like the name.

Dunno what to think, except that I'd have liked some Nordiques back.

Eager to see the jersey (and all "new" jerseys in general), I wonder how they'll put grey, gold, red and black together.

I really dislike the name, to be honest.

I think everyone kind of expected the name to include Knights because the ownership group had something about Knight in their name. The "Golden" part doesn't really work that well though. "Desert Knights" might have been a tiny bit better. Honestly, I think most people were hoping for something like "Aces" or "Outlaws".

bruins72 wrote:I think everyone kind of expected the name to include Knights because the ownership group had something about Knight in their name. The "Golden" part doesn't really work that well though. "Desert Knights" might have been a tiny bit better. Honestly, I think most people were hoping for something like "Aces" or "Outlaws".

The owner is I think a graduate from West Point (US Army Academy), and thus wanted badly to use Black Knights like the Academy does, but couldn't for a variety of legal reasons. The funny thing is, the Golden Knights are a specialized parachute team of the US Army. I've seen them perform before. I can't help but wonder if that'll still cause problems down the road.

I think it's stupid that they chose the name "Knights" and then put what's pretty clearly modeled to be an ancient Greek hoplite Corinthian helmet on the logo. *eyeroll* (and before anyone asks, no, the concept of a knight is supposed to have developed sometime in Roman times with the "equestrians"). Medieval knight helms had open faces that had a visor you pulled down to cover it, usually with a point to deflect away blows.

Though I guess I give them a tiny smidge of credit for the "V" that's in the negative space of the helm.

And yes, I'm kinda' sick of NHL teams not being able to properly place their logos/mascots historically (I'm looking at YOU Ottawa Senators, with your hoplite "300"-ish speech which had absolutely nothing to do with Rome, the Republic, or the Roman Senator featured in your logo).

Primis wrote:I think it's stupid that they chose the name "Knights" and then put what's pretty clearly modeled to be an ancient Greek hoplite Corinthian helmet on the logo.

Omg I can't unseen this now. This is going to bother me alot.

Stop bothering the Knights. I haven't seen anyone complaining about the Ottawa "Senators" helmet either?

CJ wrote:Stop bothering the Knights. I haven't seen anyone complaining about the Ottawa "Senators" helmet either?

There's nothing really wrong with the helmet on the Senators' logo. That is, I believe, a "galea" helm and is accurate (the individual cheek protectors stand out on it) for late-Republic and early-Empire . There's even a precedent of Roman senators serving militarily, so a senator would have worn that very helmet while on campaign.

It's still bothering to see how the London Knights' logo is still by far prettier than Vegas' :






And again, "golden knights" with these colours ??? Really ?




EDIT : and I was just thinking, there was such a huge potential awesome logo in the "knights/king" playing card....

Don't care much for the name I think everyone will get used to it eventually. More interested in how their team looks like, expansion draft is going to be exciting for sure.

Having played around with the expansion tool a bit it feels like they'll have good goalies, pretty good D-men but awful forwards, barring trades (both Vegas trades and other teams trading so they can 'save' other players).

I hope for their sake they go full analytics atleast when it comes to drafting Forwards, or they'll have trouble scoring.

Ukko wrote:It's still bothering to see how the London Knights' logo is still by far prettier than Vegas' :

EDIT : and I was just thinking, there was such a huge potential awesome logo in the "knights/king" playing card....

How you do a knight logo: