Jump to content
News Ticker
  • News Around the NHL

Ducks Hockey Forum Coyotes Hockey Forum Bruins Hockey Forum Sabres Hockey Forum Flames Hockey Forum Hurricanes Hockey Forum Blackhawks Hockey Forum Avalanche Hockey Forum Blue Jackets Hockey Forum Stars Hockey Forum Red Wings Jackets Hockey Forum Oilers Hockey Forum Panthers Hockey Forum Kings Hockey Forum Wild Hockey Forum Canadiens Hockey Forum Predators Hockey Forum Devils Hockey Forum Islanders Hockey Forum Rangers Hockey Forum Senators Hockey Forum Flyers Hockey Forum Penguins Hockey Forum Sharks Hockey Forum Blues Hockey Forum Lightning Hockey Forum Maple Leafs Hockey Forum Canucks Hockey Forum Golden Knights Hockey Forum Capitals Hockey Forum Jets Hockey Forum


Site Manager
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


hf101 last won the day on June 4

hf101 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,999 Excellent


About hf101

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Specific Location
    Chester County
  • Favorite Team
  • 2nd Favorite Team

Recent Profile Visitors

24,690 profile views
  1. Since he likely won't be the #1 netminder, and even if he plays 50% -- that should be less of an issue.
  2. Yes, and that is why it is a good signing. There is also the familiarity, with Elliot and the consistency of which he played here when healthy.
  3. Frankly, I like the signing, the Talbot experiment was a disaster.
  4. yep. lol Except, is 6 min from the US Hockey Hall of Fame.
  5. So when having to state a weakness for the specific reports...and all they can come up with is that he can improve his acceleration, I"m just not seeing a red flag there what so ever. There probably isn't a player in the NHL besides McDavid and a few others that wouldn't say they would like to improve their acceleration. Boldy played on a line with Jack Hughes... which means his skating, hockey IQ, passing and scoring was on par with Hughes. Most mock drafts had Boldy going in the top 10. The Wild are lucky to have gotten him at #12.
  6. My opinion is probably not of the gold standard for most Flyer fans. I've griped for years that Holmgren rarely invested talent from his home state of Minnesota on the Flyers roster. It seems now with Fletcher that trend is changing.
  7. yeah, born in Virginia, Minnesota. 20 min from my home town. He also attended UMD.
  8. This team is getting more and more likeable...
  9. I"m trying to figure why this topic is posted in the Flyers forum?
  10. Looking at the picks yesterday, I'd say the 7th round pick of Bryce Brodzinsky could be a steal. Racked up 76 points (32g, 44a) in 23 games at the high school level this season and 17 points (7g, 10a) in the USHL and more impressively he was named Mr. Hockey Award (best high school player in Minnesota) this past season. Here is a list of recent Mr. Hockey recipients. Year Recipient School 2019 Bryce Brodzinski Blaine 2018 Sammy Walker Edina 2017 Casey Mittelstadt Eden Prairie 2016 Riley Tufte Blaine 2015 Jake Jaremko Elk River 2014 Avery Peterson Grand Rapids 2013 Grant Besse Benilde-St. Margaret's 2012 Justin Kloos Lakeville South 2011 Kyle Rau Eden Prairie 2010 Nick Bjugstad Blaine 2009 Nick Leddy[1] Eden Prairie 2008 Aaron Ness[2] Roseau 2007 Ryan McDonagh[1] Cretin-Derham Hall
  11. There were actually quite a few folks in and out of the chat discussing every pick. I thought Boldy was a nice pick for the Wild.
  12. VANCOUVER (June 20, 2019) — The National Hockey League announced today a series of rule changes for the 2019-20 season which will include the use of expanded video review and enhanced player safety initiatives, as well as promoting even more offense and flow in the game. The rule changes were unanimously approved by the League’s Board of Governors, NHL General Managers and the Competition Committee over the past week. NHL Hockey Operations will work on the precise Rule Book language over the coming weeks. Following is an overview of the changes: EXPANSION OF COACH’S CHALLENGE NEW CATEGORY: In addition to Coach’s Challenge for “Off-side” and “Interference on the Goalkeeper”, a third category will allow for the Coach’s Challenge of goal calls on the ice that follow plays in the Offensive Zone that should have resulted in a play stoppage, but did not. This change will allow Challenges of plays that may involve pucks that hit the spectator netting, pucks that are high-sticked to a teammate in the offensive zone, pucks that have gone out of play but are subsequently touched in the offensive zone and hand passes that precede without a play stoppage and ultimately conclude in the scoring of a goal. Plays that entail “discretionary stoppages” (e.g. penalty calls) will not be subject to a Coach’s Challenge. Coach’s Challenges for these types of plays (and for “Off-Side” Challenges) will only be available if the puck does not come out of the attacking zone between the time of the “missed” infraction and the time the goal is scored. PENALTIES FOR UNSUCCESSFUL CHALLENGES: The number of Coach’s Challenges that can be made will no longer be limited based on the availability of a team’s time-out. Teams will be permitted to exercise a Coach’s Challenge at any time, but with escalating “consequences” for unsuccessful Challenges. The consequences of unsuccessful Coach’s Challenges will be made consistent across all three Categories of Coach’s Challenges: (1) minor penalty for Delaying the Game on a Club’s first unsuccessful Coach’s Challenge; and (2) double minor penalty for Delaying the Game for each additional Coach’s Challenge that is unsuccessful. The Situation Room in Toronto will continue to be responsible for initiating video review in the final minute of regulation time and overtime as well as continue to have final authority over all Coach’s Challenge video review decisions with input and consultation from both the On-Ice Officials and a former Official staffed in the Situation Room. REFEREES REVIEW OF MAJOR/MATCH PENALTY CALLS AND DOUBLE MINOR HIGH-STICKING PENALTIES MAJOR & MATCH PENALTIES: Referees will be required to conduct an on-ice video review for all Major (non-fighting) and Match Penalties they assess on the ice for the purpose of: (a) “confirming” the penalty; or (b) “reducing” the penalty to a two-minute minor penalty. Referees shall not have the option to rescind a called penalty altogether. The Referees will be provided with all available video to review their own calls but will not otherwise consult with the NHL Situation Room with respect to their review. DOUBLE MINOR FOR HIGH-STICKING: Referees will have the ability to conduct an on-ice video review to confirm (or not) their original call on the ice, and, in particular, whether the stick causing the apparent injury was actually the stick of the Player being penalized. The Referee’s review of all High-Sticking/Double-Minor Penalties will be discretionary and not mandatory and will be conducted without consultation with the NHL Situation Room. OTHER APPROVED RULE CHANGES HELMETS: Subject to further consultation with the NHL Players’ Association on precise language, a Player on the ice whose helmet comes off during play must (a) exit the playing surface, or (b) retrieve and replace his helmet properly on his head (with or without his chin strap fastened). A Player who is making a play on the puck or who is in position to make an immediate play on the puck at the time his helmet comes off, shall be given a reasonable opportunity to complete the play before either exiting the ice or retrieving and replacing his helmet. Failure to comply with the above will result in a minor penalty being assessed on the offending player. A Player who intentionally removes an opponent’s helmet during play shall be assessed a minor penalty for roughing. LINE CHANGES FOR DEFENSIVE TEAM: The defensive team will not be permitted a line change when a goalie freezes the puck on any shot from outside the center red line. Similarly, if the actions of a skater of the defensive team cause a stoppage by unintentionally dislodging the net from its moorings, the defensive team will not be permitted to make a line change. In both of these instances, the offensive team will have the choice of which end zone dot the face-off will take place. FACE-OFFS FOLLOWING AN ICING & TO BEGIN A POWER-PLAY: Following an icing as well as at the beginning of any power-play, the offensive team will have the choice of which end zone dot the face-off will take place. AWARDED GOAL: If the goal post is deliberately displaced by a goalkeeper during the course of a “breakaway”, a goal will be awarded to the non-offending team. PUCK OUT OF BOUNDS: When the attacking team is responsible for the puck going out of play in the attacking zone, in all instances, the face-off will be conducted at one of the two face-off dots in the attacking zone. [Hidden Content]
  13. Awesome, glad you have now chosen to join in the conversation. This site is so... much better.
  • Create New...