[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I don’t really care too much at all what he does.

Are you sure?

Spoiler!

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well, I never said it was simple.

I just look at it and see he spent 13 games in the ECHL after 48 in the AHL
Then the next season he was in a new organization, spent 59 games in the AHL on two different AHL teams and 16 in the ECHL.

He is generally around a point per game in the ECHL, so likely ready for the AHL. In the AHL, many stops, he is in the .2-.3 point per game range. Why wouldn’t a guy with that limited output be a candidate for the ECHL? Seems reasonable

Four more ECHL teams in the mix between 2014-15 and last year.

Let’s put it this way

If I had to choose between two narratives:
a) he is a fringe player that showed flashes of promise, had stints with 7 clubs in the ECHL over ~10 years, was ok in the AHL but bounced around and got a couple of sniffs with the Flames.
b) the demotion by Peters (who has not had any public say as to why he was demoted) and that 13 game stint somehow set the tone for the 21 (!) subsequent teams that he bounced between in the following decade.

I personally do not like what Peters did but have trouble choosing narrative b) over narrative a)

And I get it, US juries can give crazy awards and why not go for it, if that’s what he does. But I just don’t see anything from the player that suggests he was a sure fire NHLer, which is really the only level where you make could make the amount of money worth suing for

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ I am curious what Aliu’s case would be. How “derailed” was his career? He was in the NHL 2 years after the Peters incident and was never a 100 percent sure thing.

He was recognized on that NHL central scouting form as having very good to excellent skills in certain areas with average marks for work ethic and discipline. High marks on skills and low marks in competitiveness and defensive play.

Some highlights:
Player type: power forward
Pro potential: 6 - Good chance to play in NHL. Needs time to develop
Pro ranking - potential role should he make the NHL: 8. 1st line / top 2 D
Deserves consideration as one of the best prospects in these areas: Fighting, shot

Skating was generally ranked as very good.
Same with puck skills
Work ethic average, consistency poor
Average marks for back checking and defensive reliability.

I think that the NHL has changed a bit between then and now. More emphasis on speed and less on fighting. To me, the issues of consistency and work ethic have a lot to do with bubble players sticking.

Aliu did make the NHL, he showed flashes, and was given a fair shot in Calgary. He has bounced around afterwards, and a few times since then has played for 3 teams in one year.

Different people have different paths to the NHL. Some draftees don’t make it but he did. He was a feel good story when he made it, but he didn’t stick.

Being 30 now, he was, what, 22 or 23 when he made it? That is on track time wise for a lot of kids who get their first look.

He got into his first NHL games with Calgary 2 seasons after the Peters incident, as far as I can tell.

I know that there is a significant jump in earning potential between minor leagues to NHL, where the minimum wage of 695 K at the time (or whatever) is life changing.

Lawsuits in Canada as far as I understand generally involve damages that can be demonstrated.

I probably have no idea what they are based on in the US.

I guess my question is if he is suing anyone, be it an organization or a league, how he intends to demonstrate on the balance of probability that someone stopped him from making x dollars.

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Top D goal scorer? He was a winger with them as far as I am aware. Perhaps hockeydb inherited his player profile position in its table?

Again, he was in the NHL 2 years later.

Aliu’s 18 points in 48 pro rate to ~28 over 80.

Kyle Greentree was on the team as well. He got 45 points in 64 games.
He got all of 4 games in the NHL. 2 with Philly, 2 with the Flames

Brian Connelly and Peter McArthur had better scoring and never saw the NHL

Nobody is saying Peters is in the right. But this is a guy who 6 times over a 7 year span suited up for three teams in a season.

Again, the Flames gave Aliu two years of reasonable stability, and he was in the NHL twice with them, right in his early twenties. He had a chance, lived his dream of playing in the NHL, didn’t stick and then carried on with the pattern of 3 teams per season more often than not.

About belonging in the ECHL, well, he was sent down the following year as well. Did he not belong there again, in your opinion?

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

When people talk about mental gymnastics, this is an example.

I think the 10 years body of work tells a consistent story, which is the most likely one.

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I am not sure what you are arguing. I didn’t make the assumption you assert, but I certainly point to his record as data to be considered as evidential of his ceiling.

My basic musing way back was if he were to make a case that his career was derailed, how he could actually make that case. Throw all of the experts at it that you like, the best you can do is say *maybe* things could have turned out better, but you still can’t outline with a reasonable degree of probability at all what the different outcome would have been, what magical ceiling he might have had beyond what he accomplished.

So yes, imagining a substantially different outcome I believe does take mental gymnastics.

If he was demoted and never got a sniff of the AHL again, that’s one thing, but he caught on with another organization and was in the NHL just 2 years later. He had a chance very early in his career.

Consistency, work ethic and discipline were identified by central scouting as concerns.

As mentioned, I wondered how he could make a case, on the balance of probability, as to what quantifiable damages he sustained, and nothing I have seen establishes that.

Like you say, he may not be pursuing a lawsuit, and I do hope that his angle is to be a change agent to some extent, for the better.

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Hadn’t crossed my mind

Would you?

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Well it wasn’t a sustained situation. He wasn’t stuck with that employer and situation, grinding him down. Got out of it pretty fast, actually. Then had 21 more employers in the next decade.

In 2 short years he got in with a stable quality organization, and made it to the NHL.

Do you really think he was frustrated when he played with the Flames and got his first NHL goal?

That’s a lot of positive within the first two years of his career being derailed

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

^ Jesus. In the relatively short period of 2 years. Was it really that unclear?

By virtue of the fact that the Flames gave him his shot, not once but twice, I feel this imaginary case of organizations acting in bad faith against the guy has little merit


Although, if you want to go full conspiracy wingnut with it, maybe the Flames by not sending him to the ECHL when he was in the org defied the conspirators and now, fast forward, the officials have banded together to let them know it will not stand. Those 8 short handed situations didn’t come from nowhere

My goodness, I think you are on to something

I mean...that seems like quite a few long posts including lots of statistical research for any topic, let alone one you don't really care about...

To the last of those posts about the "relatively short period of 2 years" - I certainly understood what you meant, but I'm pointing out that 2 years is a neither short nor insignificant time period for an aspiring professional hockey player, especially before you reach your mid 20s.

But he did hire a second lawyer in the US, and some people reasonably wonder what his plans are.

Does he plan to sue any of the leagues or organizations?
If so, on what grounds?
What would you reasonably expect he could make a case for?

Being that this is a discussion board, it seems like, you know, something to discuss.

Would a lawsuit have merit?

Do you feel like there is a reason not to discuss it?

These are the discussions most of us are having. You seem to be the only one working pro-bono to refute a theoretical lawsuit...

I'm not one to discourage any kind of discussion. By all means, continue as you are. Just a heads up, IMO you seem to be passionately pontificating about a topic you claim to not care that much about. Sometimes we all need to push back from the keyboard and ask ourselves wtf am I doing here?