Frozen-Man

I don't like what the NHL is doing and hope that the tradition continues and even happens more just to rub it in their faces however it is not like what you stated: You stated "had no interest in the city at all" - - The NHL does have an interest in what happens in an NHL rink, to NHL players, during an NHL game. They may be (and I fully think that they are) wrong in what they are wanting to do but to state that they have no interest in what happens is just completely inaccurate. This didn't happen on some random street and so the NHL wants people fined, it happened at an NHL event. Additionally, people ask the police to enforce the law all the time (including laws that are rarely enforced) and almost always the police will have to do it. My wife is a Deputy District Attorney and has to deal with it all the time, the police have to enforce something the "victim" wants them punished, she has some prosecutorial discretion but only to an extent. That is the way that it works a lot. For example the City may not enforce an ordinance that weeds be kept below 6" on residential property but if a neighbor calls and complains they will almost always enforce the ordinance as it relates to the property about which the complaint was made. Again, please don't interpret this to mean that I like what the NHL did or is doing, I don't at all, but mischaracterizing and distorting what did/is happening isn't necessary when the whole argument is we have been doing this for 60 years, and it is a great tradition and has never been a problem.

Well, I'm not certain that it would even be considered speech under the 1st Amendment. The seminal flag burning case stated that "[t]he First Amendment literally forbids the abridgment only of 'speech,' but we have long recognized that its protection does not end at the spoken or written word. While we have rejected 'the view that an apparently limitless variety of conduct can be labeled `speech' whenever the person engaging in the conduct intends thereby to express an idea,' United States v. O'Brien, supra, at 376, we have acknowledged that conduct may be 'sufficiently imbued with elements of communication to fall within the scope of the First and Fourteenth Amendments,'" Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 404 (1989) Based upon the factors listed thereafter in the case I'm not sure the conduct would reach the level required for speech. If however, it were determined speech the question would then be "whether the State's regulation is related to the suppression of free expression." Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397, 403 (1989); see also United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367, 377 (1968). The key issues would be that it is likely not even considered speech and if it is speech is not prohibited because of the State is attempting to suppress speech but rather the ordinance is for safety purposes. Similar to the fact that while burning a flag may be protected free speech and a law prohibiting burning flags would be a violation of the 1st Amendment a law that prohibits burning flags in a public building (while having no prohibition against burning flags in other places) would not be a violation of the 1st Amendment. Partially because as you stated time, place, manner restrictions but also largely because the law is not to suppress speech but rather for public safety concerns.

As a Constitutional lawyer I can assure you that while that is a colorful argument it almost assuredly is not a violation.

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't get arrested (as police enforce laws and ordinances not an organization's code of conduct). They could be removed from the premises probably but the police would have absolutely no authority to arrest them for violating NHL rules unless there was a city, county, state, federal law/statute/ordinance that they were also violating and that officer was an agent of the entity law/statute/ordinance. It really is amazing. You would think that the Pledge of Allegiance would help "and to the republic for which it stands" (emphasis added) - - or perhaps Article IV Section 4 of the US Constitution "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" (emphasis added) - - and while sadly it is rarely taught in public schools today all throughout the Federalist Papers, especially Federalist No. 10.

It always cracks me up when they say they are going to penalize the home team for this, I always thought it would be a good tactic to throw stuff on the ice at every away game the Wings have, just rack up penalties against the home team, basically just free power plays for the Wings when they are on the road. Stupid NHL, how do they know which team's fans threw what ever was thrown.

Round 1 : VAN/CHI: 4-2 SJS/LAK: 4-1 DET/PHX: 4-2 ANA/NSH: 4-3 WAS/NYR: 4-1 PHI/BUF: 4-3 BOS/MTL: 4-2 PIT/TBL: 4-3 WC Champion: DET EC Champion: WAS SCF Champion: DET 4-2 *Thanks for doing this again Mac. I know it is a lot of work and really appreciate the effort you put into it. :clap: ________________________________

A little more info from Detroit Free Press:

Great scrap. Thanks.

I gotta agree, and ultimately a loss is a loss points wise. As much as this game hurt to watch I would rather a 10-3 loss that might wake the players up than a 3-2 loss where the team might go along like everything is fine and chalk it up to Dats being gone and having a 3rd string goalie in. At least this has the potential to shake them up.

I couldn't agree more. If this kid ever wears a sweater other than for the Wings I will be deeply saddened. His desire and play are incredible.

Yeah I wasn't sure how the buyout affected the cap until I looked it up. However, the Islanders are so far from the cap (roughly $19M I think) that even if it were a $7M cap hit it wouldn't affect them at all presently. Still a horrible contact though.

Actually there is a lot more to be said: Yashin is only being paid $2,204,000 per year through the 2014-15 season. I think there is some difference The big difference is that the Islanders bought out Yashin therefore they only have to pay 2/3 of his remaining salary (which equals $17,632,000) and it gets to be paid out over double the years remaining on the contract. There were 4 years left thus an 8 year payout. The downside (and the reason the Hawks couldn't do it with Huet) is that there is still a cap hit. The cap hit fluctuates as explained here. That doesn't however, really matter to the Islanders as even with Yashin taking up cap space they only have about $40M of the cap used (about $19M in cap space). Yeah it is costing the Islanders although only $2.2M this year for Yashin as opposed to $5.6M this year for Huet and the Blackhawks could afford the cap hit of a buy out like the Islanders can so to me it is a much worse contract.

Brian Campbell/Cristobal Huet $7,142,875 + $5,625,000 = $12,767,875 Additionally, $5,625,000 for Huet not to play in the NHL and $7,142,875 to Campbell through 2015/16

I thought there was extreme lack of effort on both ends of the ice. It was more visible and evident on the defensive side but most of the time on the offensive end I only saw the effort if there was a clear scoring chance, there was no great effort to actually create that chance from nothing.

I don't blame Leino for not performing well when he played with the Wings, perhaps his style didn't/couldn't mesh with this team or the role he was asked to play or whatever. What I do blame him for is playing lazy and as if he didn't care. If he had worked his butt off and not produced, been traded, and then become a great player I would be happy for him -- it is his lack of effort not his lack of production that creates the problem for me.

I have no dislike for Chara at all. I think he is a good player and generally not a dirty player. That being said I disagree with some here who said he didn't know the stantion was there/coming up because of the speed of the game etc. While we may never know for sure, these guys are professional athletes who have spent the majority of their lives on similar rinks, the things that they can do on the ice come from an insane amount of time spent at the rink and I think they know every inch of their field in a way we can't really imagine. The stick control, instincts, handling, etc. that these guys have is something that we can't even grasp. It is nothing like our pickup/beer league games. I imagine that Chara knew exactly where he was on the ice as he I think he does almost all the time. I doubt he intended Pacioretty to be injured the way that he was but at minimum I think it was a reckless action where he disregarded the potential that such an impact/injury could occur.

A lot of players have difficulty in their contract year, it is not a matter of motivation but rather of letting the contract get in his head, trying to do too much or taking it too hard when he makes a mistake.

My bet is Kenny and Co. are hoping getting this distraction out of Howard's way will help his consistency.

Especially since the Leafs managed to lock Lebda up on a MULTI-year contract.

But Flip offers a lot more in areas other than pure offense that help justify his salary. (FYI however, I think Huds has played great lately and the last month and a half has really earned his contract).

I gotta agree. I told my wife that I really wanted to go because it was a once in a life time chance to get to see the Wings play in the winter classic (or at least once a decade).

Huh, I didn't know that. Learn something new every day. Thanks!

Just commenting on someone saying Mickey calls him Paddy.

I think he is calling him Patty for Patrick.

Seriously? Yes and they would also like a few more guys like Steve Yzerman and Sergei Federov. I understand wanting some tough players but honestly what team wouldn't want any of those guys on their team. Interesting that those guys played here in the no cap day. I would like to have a tough player who would drop the gloves but I don't think a future HOFer Shanny fits in the cap structure.