Jump to content

2019-2020 NHL Gear Sitings


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

With the powers granted to me by the heritage of the GSBB in the prehistoric era of goaltending equipment admiration, here is the 2019-2020 NHL gear sitings thread we've all been waiting for!  Ca

Dear Mike, So. Good. As. Always. Love, TGN Regulars

Looks like his teammates are taking it in stride, they drew a chalk outline of where he dropped this morning at practice.

Posted Images

17 hours ago, MTH said:

It isn't much. In the day people told stories of no money for using certain brands... but decent gift cards.

Remember too that the teams buy the gear for the players. They all have limits on how much per player. Sometimes just free gear is enough for a player to wear it.  

I think system has changed over the years. Lundy has/had a long and big contract, Kiprusoff got couple hundred thousand dollars when Vaughn -> Bauer and Ovechkin was a big name between CCM and Bauer. I red some article maybe 10 years ago and even some 4th line forward in Toronto got maybe $10k wearing gloves and stick. Toskala was one of the biggest names in NHL after traded to Toronto.  

Nowadays there is Instagram etc. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2019/12/12/the-nhls-highest-paid-players-2019-20-mcdavid-matthews-score/#4c515f3c76a2

Maybe companies pay more to NHL nowadays and less to players. Players got some stuff from sister companies etc. Bauer stopped to use players names in stock sticks and blade patterns are now only numbers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Confirmed True 1 piece while I'm surprised due to the way the blade is locked into place, I wouldn't hold it past True - I have a post on TGN about the issues we (my son) had buying a pair of True skates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Korppi32 said:

I think system has changed over the years. Lundy has/had a long and big contract, Kiprusoff got couple hundred thousand dollars when Vaughn -> Bauer and Ovechkin was a big name between CCM and Bauer. I red some article maybe 10 years ago and even some 4th line forward in Toronto got maybe $10k wearing gloves and stick. Toskala was one of the biggest names in NHL after traded to Toronto.  

Nowadays there is Instagram etc. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2019/12/12/the-nhls-highest-paid-players-2019-20-mcdavid-matthews-score/#4c515f3c76a2

Maybe companies pay more to NHL nowadays and less to players. Players got some stuff from sister companies etc. Bauer stopped to use players names in stock sticks and blade patterns are now only numbers. 

Tried to share this before and much of it is "Very off the record", so I need to be cautious with what I post.

NO ONE gets anything close to LeBron, Tiger, etc. There is NO money in hockey gear.

Carey Price is the highest paid endorsement guy. From what I have been told, he's about the only guy that moves the retail needle.

Vaughn, contrary to what most people believe, probably has the most contracts out there? Murray, Quick, Tuukka all get decent checks. They start as low as the CHL with their contracts.

Most guys wearing CCM by Lefevre were NOT getting paid. Hence so many people on either side of the divorce.

Anyone that is not Lundqvist or Price and does have a great contract... it probably getting like $30k?

Point proven on Price, between UA and CCM (How does he have Nike and UA?) he is estimated at $500k total.

image.png.7f16c8ce41a344472ea10b8ca2902713.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always assumed mostly the big three (Bauer, CCM, Vaughn) paid their dudes a decent sum, and by decent I mean more than most of us would see from a normal job. I will say I'm definitely surprised that Price is as low as he is, but it's totally believable, I'd be interested to see what Lundy gets from Bauer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still can't wrap my head around him dying. I know it was an accidental drowning. Was there ever more details? Wasn't like he was old or non athletic. Way cool by Carter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, MTH said:

Still can't wrap my head around him dying. I know it was an accidental drowning. Was there ever more details? Wasn't like he was old or non athletic. Way cool by Carter.

I don't think they released any details or not.

I know stackem gave me shit for this at the time, but dude was a big skier, wouldn't be surprised if that was a major considering factor in what occurred.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coopaloop1234 said:

I don't think they released any details or not.

I know stackem gave me shit for this at the time, but dude was a big skier, wouldn't be surprised if that was a major considering factor in what occurred.

Wasn't alcohol a factor? Due to late night partying, didn't he go in at 2-3am? Something stupid like that.  

I can't wrap my head around it though, even intoxicated I can't see myself drowning, I been swimming at 7 years of age. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, WillyGrips13 said:

Joonas Korpisalo is an exceptional goalie. However, he seems uncommonly bad at covering the puck. I don’t understand it. 

When I used a newer production version of Vaughn's 5500 glove, I had a gap between the lip of the T and the ice when I went to cover the puck; it didn't sit flush against the ice and seal all the way around. Maybe something similar is happening here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WillyGrips13 said:

Joonas Korpisalo is an exceptional goalie. However, he seems uncommonly bad at covering the puck. I don’t understand it. 

Maybe Torts secretly told him to not stop play to force the Jackets to skate back and get in shape? That’s probably it, definitely not a gear/style issue.

Edited by TitanG
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

So yesterday I found out that the skate he was wearing when the blade popped out where 4 years old - his into a new pair of skates already, one piece true

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

I don't think they released any details or not.

I know stackem gave me shit for this at the time, but dude was a big skier, wouldn't be surprised if that was a major considering factor in what occurred.

I said I thought it was pointless and in poor taste for you to posit that someone you don't know met a tragic death just because you heard/read they did cocaine. I still think you sound like a kid who read some juicy drug gossip on a hockey forum, or heard something in a locker room, and felt that was enough for you to neatly conclude that it was the cause of someone's death.

I'm not asserting that Emery didn't have a drug issues or a cocaine habit, but going from whatever fuzzy notion of this private matter you have to "I wouldn't be surprised if it was a major factor in what occurred" is a laughable logical leap. You're not a coroner. I also think if you're going to talk about something serious like that, you don't flippantly say "dude was a big skier". You weren't Ray Emery's personal friend, you just read some Ottawa tabloid articles from your computer chair. Sorry if you felt that's an unfair assessment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, stackem30 said:

I said I thought it was pointless and in poor taste for you to posit that someone you don't know met a tragic death just because you heard/read they did cocaine. I still think you sound like a kid who read some juicy drug gossip on a hockey forum, or heard something in a locker room, and felt that was enough for you to neatly conclude that it was the cause of someone's death.

I'm not asserting that Emery didn't have a drug issues or a cocaine habit, but going from whatever fuzzy notion of this private matter you have to "I wouldn't be surprised if it was a major factor in what occurred" is a laughable logical leap. You're not a coroner. I also think if you're going to talk about something serious like that, you don't flippantly say "dude was a big skier". You weren't Ray Emery's personal friend, you just read some Ottawa tabloid articles from your computer chair. Sorry if you felt that's an unfair assessment.

Never said it was an unfair assessment, was just pointing out our discussion. I don't fully disagree with you calling me out.

But, despite your feelings on this, assuming that this was the cause of drinking/recreational drugs isn't this farfetched leap of logic. Automatically discounting it because I wasn't immediately rubbing elbows with the guy just doesn't allow for a discussion for a lousily kept secret.

There is enough of a painted picture of his death that we know that substances were involved. They were already admittedly drinking for a better part of a night and there is enough of a precedent with rich hockey players, let alone Emery, that ruling out the use of cocaine being a factor in his death is disingenuous. 

I'm fine with you calling me out on my "laissez-fare" attitude when it comes to my lack of empathy towards a celebrity's death, but let's not blind ourselves about how there is a high probability that cocaine was involved. Notice how it's still a big secret to his cause of death?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Notice how it's still a big secret to his cause of death?

Ray Emery was not a public figure in life, and did not become one in death. Not publicly releasing the specific details of his death does not mean there is a "big secret". Nobody but his family has any right to know.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Automatically discounting it because I wasn't immediately rubbing elbows with the guy just doesn't allow for a discussion for a lousily kept secret.

Automatically assuming it was involved because you read something online is a far larger jump. And I'm not discounting it—I'm saying you don't have nearly enough information to assert that it was a "major considering factor" or that there was "a high probability" that it was involved in his demise. You have a responsibility to back up qualitative statements about someone's death like that with some real facts, and you have absolutely nothing to stand on, other than vague notions you carry about Ray Emery and "the precedent of rich hockey players" or whatever you're swiping at.

Let's look at what you're working with, Coop:

  • Ray Emery is (more or less) known to have indulged in cocaine at various points in his life. Sure.
  • Plenty of hockey players drink heavily and party with cocaine. This is a generalization, but sure. But if all these guys love drinking and cocaine and boating so much, how come they're not all drowning? Why is Emery's (rumored) cocaine use so particular to him all of a sudden?
  • You personally find it strange that a man his age/size/condition drowned. It's not. People drown all the time. They get caught on things, cramp up, get trapped exploring, or get knocked unconscious. Most drowning articles will not reveal specifics as to the mechanics of the person's drowning—they simply state that the person's death was ruled as a drowning.
  • You feel his cause of death is "a big secret". It's not—it was ruled a drowning. Did he have something else in his system? Maybe, maybe not. Coroners may or may not have tested him for drugs. Really, who exactly feels there's more to the story? His friends? His teammates? His family? The police? The press? No, you and other bored people on hockey forums. The only reason you even perceive it as "a big secret" is because you and other people suspect there is more to the story. You have no idea if there is, and that's a fact.

I know this is the internet and all, and it's fine if you don't feel bad suggesting that Ray Emery was responsible for his own death because "he's a celebrity", but you have absolutely no basis to assert that drugs were a major considering factor or that there was a high probability they was involved in his death. If you're going to publicly post stuff like that for people to read, you're going to need to do a lot better than whatever weak generalizations you're trodding out here. And you've got nothing, other than an insatiable need to gossip and speculate about a man who's been dead for over two years. Let him rest in peace.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, stackem30 said:

Automatically assuming it was involved because you read something online is a far larger jump. And I'm not discounting it—I'm saying you don't have nearly enough information to assert that it was a "major considering factor" or that there was "a high probability" that it was involved in his demise. You have a responsibility to back up qualitative statements about someone's death like that with some real facts, and you have absolutely nothing to stand on, other than vague notions you carry about Ray Emery and "the precedent of rich hockey players" or whatever you're swiping at.

Let's look at what you're working with, Coop:

  • Ray Emery is (more or less) known to have indulged in cocaine at various points in his life. Sure.
  • Plenty of hockey players drink heavily and party with cocaine. This is a generalization, but sure. But if all these guys love drinking and cocaine and boating so much, how come they're not all drowning? Why is Emery's (rumored) cocaine use so particular to him all of a sudden?
  • You personally find it strange that a man his age/size/condition drowned. It's not. People drown all the time. They get caught on things, cramp up, get trapped exploring, or get knocked unconscious. Most drowning articles will not reveal specifics as to the mechanics of the person's drowning—they simply state that the person's death was ruled as a drowning.
  • You feel his cause of death is "a big secret". It's not—it was ruled a drowning. Did he have something else in his system? Maybe, maybe not. Coroners may or may not have tested him for drugs. Really, who exactly feels there's more to the story? His friends? His teammates? His family? The police? The press? No, you and other bored people on hockey forums. The only reason you even perceive it as "a big secret" is because you and other people suspect there is more to the story. You have no idea if there is, and that's a fact.

I know this is the internet and all, and it's fine if you don't feel bad suggesting that Ray Emery was responsible for his own death because "he's a celebrity", but you have absolutely no basis to assert that drugs were a major considering factor or that there was a high probability they was involved in his death. If you're going to publicly post stuff like that for people to read, you're going to need to do a lot better than whatever weak generalizations you're trodding out here. And you've got nothing, other than an insatiable need to gossip and speculate about a man who's been dead for over two years. Let him rest in peace.

This is mostly why I hate arguing with you Stackem, you generally make solid points and are tough to argue against because of it.

Though, aside from some nit picky things in your post that aren't accurate (suggesting Ray was responsible for his own death because he's a celebrity), you are right that most of my posts on this are speculative at best and gossipy.

I do still honestly believe that cocaine was a factor in his death, but I'll concede and let it all rest.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coopaloop1234 said:

This is mostly why I hate arguing with you Stackem, you generally make solid points and are tough to argue against because of it.

Though, aside from some nit picky things in your post that aren't accurate (suggesting Ray was responsible for his own death because he's a celebrity), you are right that most of my posts on this are speculative at best and gossipy.

I do still honestly believe that cocaine was a factor in his death, but I'll concede and let it all rest.

Coop, read it again. I said you don't feel bad about suggesting that Ray Emery was responsible for his own death because he's a celebrity—which you stated plainly with your "lack of empathy for a celebrity".

Regardless of what you believe on the subject of this person's death (and who cares what you believe? You weren't there, you have no facts, no expertise whatsoever, and you didn't know the guy), when it comes to what you choose to post as though it's an established fact, you should stick to what you know. Which, in this case, is nothing. You're just repeating your own gossip and besmirching someone who died, again, two years later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, stackem30 said:

Coop, read it again. I said you don't feel bad about suggesting that Ray Emery was responsible for his own death because he's a celebrity—which you stated plainly with your "lack of empathy for a celebrity".

There's a difference between: "I don't feel bad about his death because he's a celebrity" and "I don't feel bad for a celebrity's death".

And your sentence vs mine:

Quote

and it's fine if you don't feel bad suggesting that Ray Emery was responsible for his own death because "he's a celebrity"

Quote

'm fine with you calling me out on my "laissez-fare" attitude when it comes to my lack of empathy towards a celebrity's death,

Wildly different sentences.

Quote

Regardless of what you believe on the subject of this person's death (and who cares what you believe? You weren't there, you have no facts, no expertise whatsoever, and you didn't know the guy), when it comes to what you choose to post as though it's an established fact, you should stick to what you know. Which, in this case, is nothing. You're just repeating your own gossip and besmirching someone who died, again, two years later.

It's like we're on a public forum where we can share our thoughts or something... It's not like I really care if you buy into my beliefs.

And I never stated it was an established fact that cocaine was the contributing factor, but that it could be a high possibility to have factored into his death. Why can't we read between the lines and discuss how cocaine could have been a major contributor towards him dying early? Just because it's not explicitly stated as a fact doesn't mean we can't come up with our own deductions.

Ultimately I do see where you're coming from, it's just that I don't fully buy in that it can't be a possible avenue of discussion.

I'm just going to leave it at that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's what the final looks like I like the amount of color zones and how the texture comes through.

Would love to see what ends up being different. I'd guess stabilislide will become a staple of all future lines until it's determined it's not ideal or some there's something else that could/should be used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...