It's about that point in the summer where the NHL goes into hibernation; yes, it's cottage season. With the dust (mostly) settled on the draft and free agency, here's our rundown of where things stand a little more than two months before the 2019-20 season.

How we rank: The ESPN hockey editorial staff submits polls ranking teams 1-31, and those results are tabulated to the list featured here. For this edition, we're projecting how we think the teams will be rated heading into next season, taking into account recent success and other factors, such as the players added via the draft, free agency and trades. The "previous ranking" for each team refers to the club's spot in our way-too-early power rankings published right after the Stanley Cup Final.

Note: Stanley Cup odds are courtesy of Caesar's.

1. Tampa Bay Lightning

Previous ranking: 1
Stanley Cup odds: 7-1

The Lightning were a regular-season juggernaut who flamed out in the playoffs. They're banking on not letting that mistake happen again, returning with essentially the same roster for 2019-20. Before the season, they need to ink ascending star forward Brayden Point, a restricted free agent, to a new deal, though.

2. Boston Bruins

Previous ranking: 2
Stanley Cup odds: 12-1

Boston's big focus right now is working on new deals for their young RFA defensemen: Brandon Carlo and Charlie McAvoy. There hasn't been much change to last year's Stanley Cup runner-up roster. That said, GM Don Sweeney is still poised to make in-season adjustments, especially around the trade deadline.

3. Toronto Maple Leafs

Previous ranking: 5
Stanley Cup odds: 10-1

Do things ever go quiet in the Maple Leafs world these days? The offseason so far included a massive trade with the Avs (Nazem Kadri is out, while Alexander Kerfoot and Tyson Barrie are in) plus a defenseman swap with the Senators. But the big summer drama revolves RFA Mitch Marner. By all accounts, negotiations are tense -- and the sides are quite far apart.

4. Vegas Golden Knights

Previous ranking: 11
Stanley Cup odds: 10-1

The Golden Knights said goodbye to some regulars (penalty-killing extraordinaire Pierre-Edouard Bellemare, fourth-liner Ryan Carpenter, defensemen Colin Miller and middle-six winger Erik Haula) to shed cap space for their now-pricey roster. The big question hovering: do they unload Nikita Gusev before the season begins?

5. Nashville Predators

Previous ranking: 12
Stanley Cup odds: 20-1

The Preds needed a shakeup after back-to-back years of playoff disappointment. So they took from an area of surplus (the blue line) and added to their biggest area of need (talented forwards outside the top line). The offseason could be summed up as thus: P.K. Subban is out, Matt Duchene is in.

6. St. Louis Blues

Previous ranking: 6
Stanley Cup odds: 14-1

The defending Stanley Cup champs are probably getting a bit disrespected because we all know how hard it is to repeat. With a bunch of RFAs to take care of, St. Louis hasn't made any seismic (or really any) changes to the roster so far this summer. Should be essentially the same cast returning, including coach Craig Berube, who finally shed the interim tag.

7. Washington Capitals

Previous ranking: 4
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

After spending the summer of 2018 partying and keeping the band together, the Capitals finally had to say goodbye to five regulars from their Stanley Cup-winning team. The Caps are in maintenance mode, knowing they need to shell out big new contracts for Braden Holtby and Nicklas Backstrom next summer.

8. San Jose Sharks

Previous ranking: 8
Stanley Cup odds: 15-1

San Jose leaned into its bet on Erik Karlsson, inking the defenseman to an expensive, long-term deal. GM Doug Wilson better be right about him. The collateral damage for the signing wasn't insignificant: Captain Joe Pavelski is gone, getting the term and money he wanted in Dallas.

9. Calgary Flames

Previous ranking: 3
Stanley Cup odds: 25-1

Everything was status quo for the Flames, a very good regular-season team in 2018-19. Then they made the curious move of swapping James Neal for Milan Lucic, one-for-one. Sure, Neal had a rough go during his first campaign in Calgary (buoyed by a very low shooting percentage), but this trade just felt drastic.

10. Colorado Avalanche

Previous ranking: 14
Stanley Cup odds: 10-1

It feels like the Avs can do no wrong these days. Their loaded defensive prospect pool means they could part with Tyson Barrie to land a terrific second-line center in Nazem Kadri. Trade acquisition Andre Burakovsky and free-agent signing Pierre Edouard-Bellemare fortify the bottom nine.

11. Winnipeg Jets

Previous ranking: 10
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

It's been an interesting offseason for the Jets, who are strapped by the cap and have to sign to big RFAs to new deals: Patrik Laine and Kyle Connor. In the process, Winnipeg's blue line got worse, as it parted with defensemen Jacob Trouba via trade and Tyler Myers via free agency.

12. Carolina Hurricanes

Previous ranking: 15
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

After a surprise run to the Eastern Conference final, the Canes inked franchise player Sebastian Aho to a new deal -- thanks, Montreal, for setting the terms! -- then doubled down on middle-six depth with Ryan Dzingel and Erik Haula.

13. Dallas Stars

Previous ranking: 13
Stanley Cup odds: 14-1

It was a sneaky-good offseason for the Stars. Signing Corey Perry (who was bought out by Anaheim) is a low-risk, high-reward move. Adding Joe Pavelski -- who'll potentially skate on the first line alongside Jamie Benn and Tyler Seguin -- could be what transforms this team into a true contender.

14. New York Rangers

Previous ranking: 25
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

Everyone in the NHL is gushing about the Rangers, who entered and exited rebuild mode in record time. Star Artemi Panarin changes the complexion of the franchise (and he's now the highest-paid winger in the league), but Kappo Kakko and Jacob Trouba will also make huge impacts. New York just needs to clear a little more cap space before October.

15. Pittsburgh Penguins

Previous ranking: 9
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

Ever since Pittsburgh won back-to-back Cups, it feels like GM Jim Rutherford has been constantly tweaking his roster. The Phil Kessel era (and saga) is over. Alex Galchenyuk, Dominik Kahun and Brandon Tanev (with a questionably long contract term) are the newest depth forwards who get a chance to shine on Sidney Crosby's roster.

16. Florida Panthers

Previous ranking: 18
Stanley Cup odds: 22-1

The Panthers enter 2018-19 with two new faces of the franchise: coach Joel Quenneville and goalie Sergei Bobrovsky. Although they didn't land Artemi Panarin, GM Dale Tallon spent the rest of his ample cap space adding role players who could help make the Panthers a playoff team: That list includes Brett Connolly, Noel Acciari and Anton Stralman.

17. Montreal Canadiens

Previous ranking: 17
Stanley Cup odds: 40-1

This was supposed to be the summer of the offer sheet; thankfully (for fans, at least) Habs GM Marc Bergevin delivered. Not thankfully (for the Canadiens) his bid for Sebastian Aho was easily matched by the Hurricanes. But Bergevin might have been doing the rest of the league a favor, testing the limits of Canes owner (and new league wild card) Tom Dundon.

18. New York Islanders

Previous ranking: 7
Stanley Cup odds: 40-1

The Isles took a swing for Artemi Panarin and Sergei Bobrovsky and whiffed on both. Lou Lamoriello's contingency plan: tapping Semyon Varlamov as their new goalie (over Robin Lehner, a 2019 Vezina Trophy finalist) and re-signing captain Anders Lee. In fairness, we were skeptical of Lamirello's offseason moves in 2018 also, and it all turned out OK.

19. Arizona Coyotes

Previous ranking: 20
Stanley Cup odds: 25-1

The Yotes almost made the playoffs last season, after a boatload of injuries and a strong late push. They'll look for a better start in 2019-20, and have reinforcements to do so. The big addition is top-line winger Phil Kessel, who gets to reunite with one of his favorite coaches, Rick Tocchet, and should boost the scoring at both even strength and on the power play.

20. Philadelphia Flyers

Previous ranking: 19
Stanley Cup odds: 30-1

Now that Philly has its goaltending solidified (the Carter Hart era is here, in earnest!) GM Chuck Fletcher is beginning to put his stamp on the roster. The big move was a mega contract for second-line forward Kevin Hayes. Fletcher made adjustments to the defense too, adding Matt Niskanen and Justin Braun.

21. Chicago Blackhawks

Previous ranking: 22
Stanley Cup odds: 35-1

The Blackhawks' biggest issues last season involved a leaky defense. Chicago made improvements, adding Calvin de Haan and Olli Maatta (while also parting with a top defensive prospect, Henri Jokiharju). Chicago also made one of the best free agency signings of the summer: goalie Robin Lehner on a one-year, $5 million deal.

22. Columbus Blue Jackets

Previous ranking: 16
Stanley Cup odds: 65-1

We knew the Blue Jackets would have a rough offseason since Artemi Panarin and Sergei Bobrovsky -- two of the best players in franchise history -- telegraphed their exit months ago. Adding Gustav Nyquist (new top-line winger?) is the consolation, and we'll likely get a healthy look at many of the Blue Jackets' young prospects this season as well.

23. New Jersey Devils

Previous ranking: 30
Stanley Cup odds: 28-1

After winning the draft lottery and selecting top American center Jack Hughes, the Devils accelerated their build. They made a splash acquiring new franchise defenseman P.K. Subban, added veteran leader Wayne Simmonds for a year, and are making their best case to 2018 MVP Taylor Hall to sign long term. The Trans-Hudson rivalry is back!

24. Vancouver Canucks

Previous ranking: 24
Stanley Cup odds: 60-1

With Elias Pettersson changing the complexion of the franchise, the Canucks filled a big area of need (right side defense) with an expensive contact for Tyler Myers. Vancouver also paid a big price to get J.T. Miller to supplement the top six.

25. Minnesota Wild

Previous ranking: 21
Stanley Cup odds: 70-1

GM Paul Fenton inherited a roster saddled with big, aging contracts. He added one more, inking soon-to-be 32-year-old Mats Zuccarello to a five-year deal. The speedy Norwegian will help right away, but in the long range? That term raises eyebrows.

26. Edmonton Oilers

Previous ranking: 23
Stanley Cup odds: 40-1

GM Ken Holland is in charge now, meaning the Oilers' long-term prospects are already looking up. The priority for Edmonton is still drafting and developing players, although the James Neal addition instantly makes the top six better.

27. Buffalo Sabres

Previous ranking: 29
Stanley Cup odds: 75-1

The Sabres have a new coach in Ralph Krueger, and they desperately needed more roster depth heading into free agency. They sure got it, adding Marcus Johansson, Jimmy Vesey, Colin Miller and Henri Jokiharju. Adding Mike Bales (formerly of the Canes) as goaltending coach is a sneaky big hire.

28. Anaheim Ducks

Previous ranking: 26
Stanley Cup odds: 75-1

The Big Three era is officially over, with Corey Perry being bought out, and Ryan Kesler likely missing the entire 2019-20 season. After a prolonged search, Dallas Eakins was finally tabbed as the new coach. Anaheim will still try to get younger and faster. Perhaps their most interesting offseason addition: Darryl Sutter as a "consultant."

29. Detroit Red Wings

Previous ranking: 27
Stanley Cup odds: 150-1

After months of speculation, the Steve Yzerman era has begun in the Red Wings' front office. But he'll need to wait a little longer to truly shape this roster into a contender. The Red Wings are still shedding bad contracts and waiting for their prospect system to develop.

30. Los Angeles Kings

Previous ranking: 28
Stanley Cup odds: 125-1

The Kings are stuck in rebuild purgatory. They'd like to get younger and faster -- much like the rival Ducks -- but they're strapped by big contracts still on the books. And thus, it's probably another long season for the Kings.

31. Ottawa Senators

Previous ranking: 31
Stanley Cup odds: 400-1

There's no other way to put this: It's going to be another long season in Ottawa. This roster could use an injection of talent. The Senators' summer plan including snatching up a bunch of extraneous Maple Leafs: assistant DJ Smith (the Sens new coach), defenesemen Ron Hainsey and Nikita Zaitseve, plus fourth-liner Tyler Ennis.

Manchester United have slipped from second to sixth in the Forbes list of the world's most valuable sports clubs released on Tuesday.

United saw their value drop from $4.12 billion to $3.81bn and fell behind La Liga giants Real Madrid and Barcelona who retained their respective positions of third and fourth from last year.

- ESPN fantasy: Sign up now!
- Man United season ruined my holiday - Shaw
- De Gea eager to take Man United captaincy

The Old Trafford club endured a miserable 2018-19 campaign, finishing sixth in the Premier League and missing out on a place in the Champions League for 2019-20.

NFL team Dallas Cowboys topped the list of 50 clubs for a fourth consecutive year, with MLB side New York Yankees, Madrid, Barca and NBA giants New York Knicks completing the top five.

Bayern Munich, Manchester City, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool were the only other football clubs who made the top 50.

Champions League winners Liverpool made the list after missing out last year while Premier League champions City climbed five places to 25th with a value of $2.69bn.

Chelsea jumped 14 places to 32nd on the list after winning the Europa League and Arsenal slipped down three places to 42nd after missing out on Champions League football for a third consecutive season.

The 10 most valuable clubs:

1. Dallas Cowboys ($5bn)

2. New York Yankees ($4.6bn)

3. Real Madrid ($4.24bn)

4. Barcelona ($4.02bn)

5. New York Knicks ($4bn)

6. Manchester United ($3.81bn)

7. New England Patriots ($3.8bn)

8. Los Angeles Lakers ($3.7bn)

9. Golden State Warriors ($3.5bn)

10. Los Angeles Dodgers/New York Giants ($3.3bn)

You usually only see Mino Raiola as an extra in photographs: a fat little man with owlish glasses dressed in slobby leisurewear, pictured talking into one of his phones while an overdressed footballer loafs behind him. Yet Juventus fans waiting outside their team's medical centre last Wednesday, hoping for a glimpse of new signing Matthijs de Ligt, understood the superagent's importance.

When Raiola showed up, they chanted "Mino!" You could see why, too: with several of Europe's biggest clubs vying to sign the 19-year-old Ajax captain, the decision to join Juve was arguably made as much by Raiola as by his client.

To understand this transfer, you need to understand Raiola's thinking, which isn't all about money despite what some people might think.

- Miller: Bold predictions for the future in soccer
- Transfer window grades: Rating every big summer move
- Transfer to-do lists: What every big club needs to do
- 30 Under 21: The best young men's players in soccer

As an infant, Raiola moved with his family from southern Italy to the Netherlands, where his family opened pizzerias. One afternoon in his quiet hometown of Haarlem in 2016, he explained his transfer strategy to me. Instead of waiting for a club to approach his player, he decides which club is right for the player and then tries to engineer the transfer.

How to identify the right club? "You have go to the club that needs you." And, of course, the player has to need the club in return. In short, Juve didn't choose De Ligt; he chose Juve. Straight after last month's European Nations League in Portugal, the end of his 11-month season, he told Raiola that that's where he wanted to go.

To say James Pattinson has unfinished business in Ashes cricket in England would be quite an understatement. It's six years since he played the first two matches of the 2013 encounter at Trent Bridge and Lord's, tearfully withdrawing in the middle of the second match with a side strain that was to be only an early instance of the litany of injuries that would follow.

Foot, back, side, shin, stomach. All were areas where Pattinson experienced the pain of injury, though it was recurring back stress fractures that caused the most grief. It was something of a final gamble when Pattinson traveled to New Zealand in November 2017 for surgery previously undergone by Shane Bond, among others, a procedure he underwent with one goal in mind - to be in England for this Ashes series.

"I knew that if I was up and running, string a few on the pitch, that I would have every chance of getting picked in an Ashes team," Pattinson said. "Going back to a year-and-a-half ago when I was contemplating whether to get back surgery and whether it was going to work. There was a month there where there was a bit of unknown and conjecture around whether I would get back to playing cricket. Sitting here now after going through all that is quite pleasing that I am here and bowling and putting myself in position to get picked in an Ashes series.

"You go through your career, you try different things, you get setbacks, you go through strategies and theories and you work out what's best for you. You have to try things in cricket, some things don't work and some things do. For me it worked in a way, with my action it's sort of somewhere in between when I first started and when I tried to remodel it.

"I tried to let that evolve over the last few years and I am happy with where that is, my body is feeling good and more than anything I can relax and run in and bowl and not worry about where my back foot's landing and if the front arm is high and that stuff. When you are trying to play Test cricket and you are doing that it is hard work, I'm in a good spot at the moment and I have come off a bit of cricket and that's a bonus for me."

Now Pattinson is here, and by dint of his proven ability to be highly destructive when fit and in rhythm, he appears certain to be one of the members of the final Ashes squad to be named later this week. And as those who have seen him bowl for Nottinghamshire know well, Pattinson has the ability to claim a lot of wickets in a hurry.

"If my body holds up I think I can challenge them over here," Pattinson said in Southampton. "It's pretty simple, you get wickets that can assist you and you get wickets that are quite flat so, to have the ability to bowl on a flat wicket or a wicket that's seaming around hopefully I can do that. It's pretty simple over here you try to hit the same area. You look at Stuart Broad and Jimmy Anderson, they are always challenging the batsman, challenging the defence.

"If we can take something out of the series before is to be trying to always challenge the front foot, challenging the knee roll and trying to stay in one spot in the wicket and not release too many boundary balls. Over here you see a lot of boundaries hit, the run rate is often a lot higher if we can try and cut that down. Over the years we have managed to try and take wickets but a bit more expensive than what it would be in other places, so I think that's a big push from bowlers."

Since his debut in 2011 when he razed New Zealand at the Gabba, there has been nothing in Australian cricket quite like seeing Pattinson in full flight. It was a sight most recently glimpsed in this year's Sheffield Shield final at Junction Oval, where New South Wales' challenge was brought undone by a fiery Pattinson, screeching in aggressive delight at each one of his seven victims. Taking wickets "in clumps" is part of Pattinson's gift, now allied to a more mature understanding of the pace bowler's craft in England.

"Over the years I have been able to come on and take wickets in clumps so I suppose the selectors are looking for bowlers who can do a bit of that and bowlers who can bowl economically as well," he said. "I've played enough cricket, I've been over here three months with Nottingham which is fantastic for someone like me who hasn't had a great load of cricket over the last few years. I managed to play a fair few Shield games this year and obviously moved on into the summer here and the good thing is I've come off plenty of cricket.

"They've shown over here they can play swing bowling quite well, if it swings big and you're not getting the right areas, it doesn't really matter. So it's about trying to get the ball in the right area, i think it'll hopefully do it off the pitch. And obviously if the conditions are right it'll swing. The hard thing over here is if the sun does come out it's quite challenging to bowl, because your margin for error is quite low.

"So all off a sudden you've got to be on the spot, that's when you try to work with training your positions on the crease and all that sort of thing, to try and work with it. I think it'll be about thinking on our feet over here and during this next game as well, working together and bowling in partnerships. Hopefully that'll bring some good success."

Pattinson's aggressive, unbridled approach to fast bowling is epitomised by how he talks about bowling in the nets to Australia's leading players. In an era of workload management and careful preparation, Pattinson cannot help but admit that he always bowls a little faster to the likes of Ricky Ponting, Michael Clarke and now the returned Steven Smith.

"Throughout my career I've always tried to crank it up a little bit to the best batter," he said. "I know when I first came into a Test match, in 2010 in India, and Ricky Ponting was there. I always made a conscious effort to bowl a bit faster to him then always to Michael Clarke too. You always try to get in with the best batters and bowl well against them, I think the selectors like that."

Kevin Roberts, the Cricket Australia chief executive, has conceded that club cricket is in "gradual decline" and admitted that there is widespread disaffection in the game's grassroots following numerous signs of anger manifest in reports in the nation's two major newspaper groups.

In May, News Corp published a story revealing an old internal document in which Cricket Australia had called for a generational change in the leadership of clubs, spun to suggest that the governing body had "appealed for the dismissal of thousands of long-serving club volunteers".

This week, following the publication of CA's annual cricket census figures that habitually trumpet an overall increase in participation, the journalist and columnist Malcolm Knox wrote reports suggesting that the governing body vastly over-inflated its figures, making the contention that registered club cricketers number only about 250,000.

Roberts, who had declined to be interviewed by Knox before the publication of the story in the Sun-Herald on Sunday and instead asked to speak this week after his return home from the UK, conceded a problem area though disputing the precise nature of the figures. He did so in an open letter to all registered club players and volunteers around the country.

"Whilst I disagree with the conclusions reached and the figures provided by Malcolm, what came through clearly to me was the sense that some within the cricket community don't feel they are being heard," Roberts wrote. "We acknowledge that the number of registered players in traditional club environments has experienced a gradual decline over the past few years, even though total cricket participation continues to grow at a healthy rate.

"Cricket clubs, like all club sport, face retention challenges in an increasingly time-poor society. As a volunteer, I also appreciate that leading a cricket club is becoming harder and new volunteers are not always lining up to help the club stalwarts. The commitment to supporting volunteers and making sure the game has a successful and sustainable future is one of Australian cricket's top priorities under my leadership.

"I understand it will take more than a letter from me to make everything better. It's on me to lead ongoing consultation and action from all of us at Cricket Australia and the State & Territory Cricket Associations who serve their communities. We need to maximise the impact of the millions of dollars we've committed to improving community cricket facilities and the 68 new community cricket staff employed by State & Territory Cricket Associations to support clubs and volunteers."

ALSO READ: How many cricketers does Australia really have?

Following the announcement of the census results, ESPNcricinfo published a detailed breakdown of CA's club participation figures, reflecting three consecutive years of decline in club cricket numbers - from 392,812 male and female, senior and junior players in 2016 to 365,076 this year.

There has been a renewed focus within CA upon making its own participation numbers more accurate so that funding and resources can be better directed towards problem areas. At the same time, CA's community cricket chiefs Belinda Clark (currently acting as the head of team performance) and Kieran McMillan have openly acknowledged that more needs to be done to bridge the gap between burgeoning school programs and clubs.

"In recent years, we introduced modified junior formats to improve recruitment and retention, started offering free community cricket coaching programs and invested in growing cricket for girls," Roberts wrote. "These commitments are starting to bear fruit. Providing improved digital support to reduce volunteer workload is another key focus into the future.

"Having spent most of my life in cricket clubs as a player, coach, volunteer and parent, I'm passionate about clubs being the heart and soul of their communities. The initiatives I mentioned above are a positive step in the right direction, and we will continue to engage and listen to cricket communities, even if we don't like what we hear."

Roberts also conceded that some players were counted twice on the way to reaching CA's overall census participation figures - something he admitted was true even of his own daughter for the fact she plays both club and indoor cricket - but defended the wider methodology used.

"When combining school participation programs and registered players, we reach the total participation figure of 1.65 million. Whilst this does include some players more than once, like my daughter who plays club and indoor cricket, it's simply not true to suggest that total participation is inflated by double-counting most or all registered players," Roberts said. "We are proud of cricket's deep connection with local communities and the fact that cricket plays a part in the lives of so many participants across the country.

"Like most organisations, we are working to improve our data. Junior clubs will have noticed this with all registrations being managed online this season, a process which makes it much easier for parents and players to register anytime, anywhere. I have had the privilege of meeting many of cricket's employees, players and volunteers throughout my lifetime of involvement in cricket.

"Cricket has helped shape who we are, and in some cases, has seen us become friends for life. Your passion and commitment to the game are key reasons why cricket is such a strong part of our nation's fabric."

The ICC has appointed Ehsan Mani, the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) chairman, as the head of one of its most powerful committees - Finance & Commercial Affairs.

Mani's appointment brings to an end the stranglehold that the Indian, English and Australian cricket boards had for more than a decade over the F&CA, which is responsible for designing budgets for ICC events and distributing money to its member countries.

The other members of this committee are Indra Nooyi (independent director), Amitabh Choudhury (BCCI acting secretary), Chris Nenzani (CSA president), Imran Khawaja (ICC vice-chairman), Earl Eddings (CA chairman) and Colin Graves (ECB chairman). ICC chairman Shashank Manohar and ICC chief executive officer Manu Sawhney will also sit on the F&CA as ex-officio members.

This will be Mani's second time as F&CA chairman. He had held the post between 1996 and 2002 and negotiated the ICC's first ever broadcast rights deal then worth approximately USD 550 million. Mani, then, moved on to become ICC president until 2006 and was also instrumental in helping the ICC seal a USD 1.1 billion media rights deal with ESPN Star Sports for the 2007-15 cycle.

It is understood that Manohar had recommended Mani to the F&CA chair during the ICC annual conference held in London last week.

This committee holds significant power within the ICC. Back in 2014, when its working group comprising N Srinivasan, Wally Edwards and Giles Clarke (heads of the BCCI, CA and ECB respectively) put forward a revenue distribution model that allowed India, Australia and England to take home a greater share of the ICC's profits on the argument that they brought in the most money anyway. The model broke down in 2017 when Manohar took charge and said it amounted to bullying by cricket's Big Three countries.

In the last 10 years only one person outside the Big Three has led the F&CA - Alan Issac, former head of New Zealand Cricket, in 2011-12. Interestingly, when the ICC Board approved the Big Three revamp in 2014, Issac was the governing body's president.

Leading the F&CA, Mani, who also sits on the ICC Audit Committee, will be taking some major decisions, including identifying the events the ICC will host in its next cycle (post 2023 World Cup) and negotiating the media rights deal for that period.

Shubman Gill has admitted to being disappointed at not being selected for India's tour of the West Indies, saying he expected to be there in at least one of the squads.

India will play three T20Is, three ODIs and two Tests against West Indies, with the first T20I on August 3.

Gill, who is with the India A squad in the Caribbean, finished the one-day series as the top run-getter with 218 runs in four matches, averaging 54.50 with a strike rate of 98.19. He hit three half-centuries and was named the Man of the Series.

Gill had earned a call-up to the India squad for the New Zealand tour earlier this year, and played two ODIs, though he didn't get into double digits in either game.

"I was waiting for the Indian senior team to be announced on Sunday and I expected to be selected for at least one of the squads," Gill told CricketNext. "It was disappointing not to get picked but I am not going to spend time thinking over it. I'll keep scoring runs and performing to the best of my ability to impress the selectors.

"It was a fantastic series for me and team as well since we won with a 4-1 margin," Gill said. "Personally, I would have liked to carry on and score at least a couple of hundreds in those fifties. But I will learn from this experience. The biggest lesson that I have learned from my first West Indies tour is to try to curb my natural game depending on the match condition."

But while he didn't make it to the squad, Gill was discussed at the selection meeting, with chief selector MSK Prasad saying, "He went to New Zealand when KL Rahul was suspended and now Rahul has come back so he (Gill) is in the waiting list. Definitely he will be considered in the future."

In his brief career, Gill has shown he has the game to adapt to different formats, and found success at almost every level he has played at. His first-class career is only nine games old but he's already amassed more than 1000 runs, and has hit at least a half-century in each of those matches. His List A numbers are also good. In 47 matches, including 17 for India A, Gill has 1942 runs at an average of 47.36 and a strike rate of 87.51.

Most of his T20 career has come in the IPL for Kolkata Knight Riders, having batted at different numbers from 1 to 7. Despite that, Gill's average (32.31) and strike rate (132.90) have been impressive.

Gill's next assignment is the three four-dayers in the Caribbean, with the first match starting on Wednesday in North Sound.

Bangladesh 285 for 5 (Mithun 91, Mushfiqur 50, Kumara 2-26) beat Sri Lanka Board President's XI 282 for 8 (Shanaka 86, Shehan 56, Soumya 2-29, Rubel 2-31) by five wickets

Mohammad Mithun and Mushfiqur Rahim steered Bangladesh to a five-wicket win in their only warm-up match against Sri Lanka Board President's XI at the P Sara Oval in Colombo.

Mithun fell nine short of a hundred, having struck 11 fours and a six in his 100-ball knock in a 283-run chase. Mushfiqur, meanwhile, peppered seven boundaries en route to his 46-ball 50. Mahmudullah and Sabbir Rahman complemented the half-centurions with breezy thirties to help take Bangladesh home with 11 balls to spare. The touring side lost only five wickets, Lahiru Kumara the pick of Board President XI's attack with 2 for 26 off his six overs.

Earlier, Dasun Shanaka's 63-ball 86 took the home side to 282 for 8 in 50 overs after they opted to bat. He struck six sixes and as many fours, while Shehan Jayasuriya made 56 off 78 balls.

For the visitors, Rubel Hossain and Soumya Sarkar took two wickets each. Rubel struck with his third ball, trapping opposition captain Niroshan Dickwella in front for a duck, and his second strike - Oshada Fernando - preceded Taskin Ahmed's dismissal of Danushka Gunathilaka that left the hosts reeling at 3 for 32 in the eighth over. An 82-run stand between Bhanuka Rajapaksa and Shehan then helped steer Board President's XI past 100, but it eventually proved insufficient to edge past Bangladesh ahead of the ODI series proper.

Bangladesh will take on Sri Lanka in the first ODI in Colombo on June 26.

A pair of key Detroit Lions defenders will be in attendance when the team opens training camp this week.

A source told ESPN's Adam Schefter that cornerback Darius Slay and defensive tackle Damon Harrison will report for the start of training camp.

Both players had skipped the Lions' mandatory minicamp last month as they sought reworked contracts.

Slay has been a constant in the secondary for the Lions since earning a full-time starting role in 2014, his second season in the league. He has made two Pro Bowls and was a first-team All-Pro in 2017. With Glover Quin being cut by Detroit, Slay is also one of the senior players in the secondary.

He has two years left on the four-year extension he signed in 2016 and is scheduled to make $12.55 million in base salary this season and $10 million next season. By skipping offseason workouts, Slay has already forfeited much of the $250,000 bonus that was worked into his deal.

Harrison was traded to the Lions from the New York Giants last season and has two years left on his contract. He is scheduled to make $6.75 million in base salary this season and $9 million next season. Like Slay, Harrison has forfeited almost all of his $250,000 workout bonus by skipping the voluntary offseason workouts.

During his time as Detroit general manager, Bob Quinn has never extended a player or given him a new contract with two years remaining on his deal. Slay will be 30 years old when his current deal expires, and Harrison will be 32.

Both Slay and Harrison are represented by agent Drew Rosenhaus.

ESPN's Michael Rothstein contributed to this report.

Kawhi Leonard nudging Paul George out of Oklahoma City with two years remaining on George's contract will go down as a watershed moment in the NBA -- for the teams it built and tore apart; for the bounty the Thunder received; but mostly for what it signified about the degree to which superstars now control roster-building.

Leonard lending George leverage is a new extension of player empowerment. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar demanded a trade in 1974. LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh synchronized their free agencies to build their own team in a city of their choosing.

Nine years later, James publicly lusted after Anthony Davis -- a player under contract to another team who soon requested a trade. Rich Paul, the agent James and Davis share, cooled some of the broader market in a way that ended up favoring James' Los Angeles Lakers. Leonard's ploy with George to join forces on the LA Clippers was essentially a stealth, sped-up version of that -- though with George under contract for at least one season longer than Davis.

Under the terms of an NBA contract, a team agrees to pay a player in exchange for basketball services -- with the understanding that the team can trade that player whenever it wants. The best players trading themselves reverses that dynamic. Trade requests don't tilt the playing field out of balance. They even it.

Some officials -- and even some agents -- argue players put teams at an unfair disadvantage when requests come with short destination lists intended to chill the market. That is unpersuasive. Suitors understand their odds of re-signing traded stars. A lot of teams cornered into dealing stars have done well despite such lists becoming public.

The best players have few ways to leverage their stature. They get drafted and sign four-year contracts. After four seasons, they enter restricted free agency; their team has a right to match any offer. It takes at least seven years before the world's best players have total freedom in choosing where to play.

All along, the NBA's maximum contract limits their salary to something below what they would earn in an open market. They have few levers to pull. A trade request is the most potent.

In theory, trade requests grow more effective as a player approaches free agency: I can leave soon, so you might as well trade me now. The NBA and the players' union accelerated that process by agreeing to reduce contract lengths. Players are bolder about taking two- and three-year deals if doing so means reentering free agency after their 10th season -- when most become eligible for the largest possible contract.

The NBA knew shorter deals would generate more player movement, if only because players would cycle in and out of free agency more often. I'm not sure they expected something like what transpired with Leonard and George.

The Thunder could have said no to George. His contract runs through at least the 2020-21 season. George is somewhere between the league's eighth- and 11th-best player. No matter the return, losing a player that good in his prime hurts. You get only so many chances to acquire one.

But acting with so much time left on George's deal juiced that return. Agents defend trade requests by pointing out it is better for the jilted team than having a superstar walk for nothing. They are inarguably right. The Thunder and New Orleans Pelicans -- after their trade of Davis to the Lakers -- have futures that were otherwise closed off to them. They might end up the ultimate "winners" of their respective trades.

But this is basketball, not asset-ball. The point is to build actual teams. The combination of shorter contracts and more frequent trade requests probably compresses the window to build and replenish teams, executives say.

I wonder if we are losing something -- from the perspectives of team-building, basketball style and fan engagement. It probably is harder now to build great teams that can sustain for six, eight, even 10 seasons. The apex of basketball happens when great players stay together for a long time -- when they develop chemistry and mutual understanding so deep that they almost act as one shape-shifting entity. They communicate in winks and nods. They anticipate where each teammate will be before he gets there. It is almost as if they can pass and cut blindfolded.

Are we losing that? Some executives have speculated for years that coaches might simplify schemes as a way of adapting to roster churn. Others find this concern a little naive. One executive from a team with a fairly intricate offense noted his team hasn't had trouble finding free agents with the feel and smarts to pick it up fast.

But that same executive -- and several others -- cited the "beautiful game" of the 2013 and 2014 San Antonio Spurs as the sort of stylistic achievement, almost a basketball euphoria, that will be harder to reach if the league trends toward more superstar player movement. San Antonio coaches and executives were adamant they needed years to master the style that obliterated LeBron's last Miami Heat team into abject, shoulder-sagging surrender. Even San Antonio's role players -- Patty Mills, Tiago Splitter, Boris Diaw, Danny Green, Cory Joseph -- were in at least their third seasons with the Spurs when they found nirvana in 2014.

The counterpoint, of course, is the Golden State Warriors. They redefined basketball style. Their core players stuck together for a half-decade, and their three founding superstars remain. They just made five straight NBA Finals. They might not have made all five without the fluky cap spike that allowed them to add Kevin Durant, but they are damned good without him.

The Warriors drafted those three stars, including one all-time great player in Stephen Curry. They rose to prominence with all three still on rookie contracts, leaving flexibility to dot the roster with win-now veterans. They re-signed Curry and Draymond Green to extensions below their respective maximum salaries -- way below in Curry's case. Teams rearranging entire rosters to add multiple max-salaried veteran stars cannot replicate that model.

Those kinds of microwaved teams might just have a limited shelf life. Veteran superstars are about 30, or older. Upending rosters to fit them often leaves little depth or means of adding any. Great teams draft at the bottom of the first round. Most one-and-done prospects selected in that range will not be ready to play real postseason minutes until the core superstars have aged.

Teams deal picks in acquiring stars anyway. After years of teams hoarding first-round picks like gold, the Lakers, Clippers, Warriors, Utah Jazz and Houston Rockets tossed away at least two apiece this summer. Most did so in pursuit of legitimate stars, and for the L.A. teams, three of the top 12 players in the league -- and two of the best half-dozen. You gather picks precisely to get those sorts of players when you have a window to win big. The difference is you used to get them for longer.

The Clippers traded an unprecedented bounty -- five picks, two swaps, Danilo Gallinari and one good young player in Shai Gilgeous-Alexander who might be more valuable than all that stuff -- to effectively acquire both George and Leonard. Leonard ended up signing for only two guaranteed seasons; he and George can both hit free agency in two years.

Two years is nothing. If one star tweaks a knee in May, Year 1 is toast, and they are instantly on expiring contracts. Maybe George and Leonard -- natives of the L.A. area -- have indicated a willingness to re-sign in 2021; Leonard might have insisted on the two-year deal to get back into free agency after his 10th season. But things can change. If Year 1 goes sideways, the noise about the future of the George-Leonard partnership will intensify.

As one rival executive put it, the Thunder-Clippers trade could go down as "one of the two or three most lopsided deals ever, and also one the Clippers were right to do anyway."

Elsewhere in the league, continuity lives. The Milwaukee Bucks, Denver Nuggets and Portland Trail Blazers are banking on it. They have to. An underplayed subplot of this summer is that five superstars relocated to New York and Los Angeles. You can gloss over it by pointing out that the Nets and Clippers were never free-agent destinations and that the Knicks whiffed again. Fair.

But the photo negative almost never happens. Multiple top-10 players do not conspire to get to Indiana, Milwaukee, Charlotte, Oklahoma City, Portland, Detroit, Minnesota. It has rarely happened other than (kind of) in LeBron's second Cleveland stint, and waiting for a generational player to be born near your non-glamour market -- and to feel the pull of home -- is not a replicable plan.

Teams in those markets can't afford to hemorrhage picks the way Houston, Golden State and the L.A. teams just did.

Those teams -- and the league office -- are reckoning post-Kawhi with what the endgame of player empowerment might look like. When will a superstar coming off his rookie deal sign the one-year qualifying offer -- allowing him to enter unrestricted free agency after his fifth season and signaling his intention to leave?

Qualifying offers are getting huge now -- into the $15 million-plus range for top draft picks. That is about half of what those players could earn in that one season by signing new long-term max contracts, but it's life-changing money. What if a player really wants out? What if he has a huge shoe deal?

What if the players' union pushes for the abolition of restricted free agency in the next round of collective bargaining agreement talks?

"We have always strove to loosen the restrictions in free agency," says Michele Roberts, executive director of the National Basketball Players Association. "We will do that again in the next CBA negotiations."

On the Bill Simmons podcast last week, Simmons and I discussed what Gersson Rosas, Minnesota's new president of basketball operations, might say if Karl-Anthony Towns requested a trade tomorrow. My response: Remind Towns he is under contract through 2023-24 and reassure him the Timberwolves will build a better team around him.

That would probably work. Time is on Minnesota's side. But what if a player in Towns' position pouts in practice and decides to play at three-quarters speed until his request is granted? What if he complains of general soreness -- back, knee, whatever -- and asks to sit out for maintenance?

Vince Carter mailed it in until the Toronto Raptors traded him to the Nets in 2004. Joe Vardon, then of Cleveland.com, reported Kyrie Irving threatened to undergo knee surgery before training camp in 2017 if the Cavaliers did not move him. (Irving later denied that. ESPN's Dave McMenamin reported Irving threatened to skip training camp. Irving eventually had knee surgery while with the Boston Celtics.) Could the Spurs have brought Leonard back into the fold for the final year of his contract in 2018-19 had they refused to trade him? Jimmy Butler -- General Soreness himself -- threw a one-man rebellion until the Wolves caved.

Requesting a trade does not (to me) amount to breach of contract; teams trade players all the time. But some of the above scenarios at least approach that territory. Teams can fine players for sitting out without good cause. They never will, because they know doing so will alienate other stars.

These kinds of doomsday scenarios sound far-fetched. In the aggregate, that is probably correct. Few players are prepared to toss away entire seasons and stain their reputations. Teams with time on their side can wait players out. But basketball is a sport of stars. It takes only one or two veering into this area every decade for it to be something that matters. People around the league are absolutely scared of it becoming a thing.

As for the nuts and bolts of it all, there are some tweaks under discussion, including returning to longer contracts or providing incumbent teams even more of a years-and-money advantage. Not long ago, a lot of teams agitated for a move away from longer deals; bad six- and seven-year contracts locked them in cap prison.

But one key variable has changed: The cap goes up every season. From 2005 through 2014 -- almost a full decade -- the cap rose only from $49.5 million to $58.6 million. It stayed at almost exactly $58 million for six consecutive seasons. It has almost doubled to $109 million over the five seasons since. A bad long-term deal is a little less damaging now.

(A bad max deal starting at 35% of the cap is still crippling. Ask the Washington Wizards. I proposed a few cap-related remedies for that here: tax relief; one-time-only supermax amnesty provisions; small cap exceptions for teams that sign players to supermax deals; making deals that start at 35% of the cap count for exactly that much in every season, even if the cap holds flat; and more.)

The union might push back on any move to lengthen contracts that chips away at any of the short-term flexibility stars currently enjoy.

"We have heard the grumblings about players 'running the league' and how the league might try to rein things in by further modifying and restricting free agency," Roberts says. "We will fight any effort by the governors to revert back to the olden days."

The league could broaden access to contract extensions. Boston would have offered Irving an extension last fall, sources say, but rules capped Irving's first-year salary in such a deal at 120% of his 2018-19 salary -- well short of what he stood to make by entering unrestricted free agency.

Right now, players who sign new contracts in free agency cannot be traded until Dec. 15 of the following season at the earliest. A few team executives proposed extending that no-trade period to two full years after a player signs a four- or five-year contract. I suspect a lot of teams and stars would object.

It's too early for anything so drastic. Leonard coaxing George into a very early trade request is not indicative of any widespread problem. But it was a remarkable moment in NBA history and one that has insiders of all stripes -- players, agents, team executives, the league office -- wondering what comes next.