Wombat

Another thought came to mind... you must also remember that a sports league is dependent on the other teams to be able to put out a product. It is in the Wings best interests that a strong majority of other teams in the league are strong as it will drive up fan interest. It is not like a bunch of car dealerships in the same town that are trying to be the best and wouldn't mind if the other guys folded... sports leagues are cooperatives. In my mind, it behooves the Wings to have everyone be limited in spending so that everyone gets a chance to compete.

For the most part yes, but you still get examples like the 3 former Sabres (Drury, Briere, and Campbell) that are being vastly overpaid with huge contracts. Each are good players but not worth these salaries. To me, it still comes down to organ-EYE-zations that develop well from within and sign reasonable contracts to players (both home grown and acquired) will still succeed. That is why I've been worried about a long-term Hossa contract hurting the Wings because unless it's a super paycut, it just doesn't seem to be a reasonable thing to do within the current salary structure of the team. The whole thread to me goes to Detroit fans wanting to still be able to spend 3 times as much as other teams to ice another team with "Nine future Hall of Famers" on it.

Soft or hard cap, cap or no cap, it is still the teams that draft and develop players the best that win. Since the Yankees' exploded their salaries going after pricey FA, how many championships have they won? Zero. Those 90's Yankees teams were built mostly from within with some nicely placed trades and FA acquisitions. The Wings win with mostly home grown talent and a couple nice trades/FA signings. The Rangers in pre-cap days just bought every player they could and did not develop within. They missed the playoffs with high payrolls! It really does not matter if there is a cap or not for rich teams... teams that draft poorly but can buy a lot of FA's will not succeed and have very rarely ever succeeded in North American sports. Teams that have a ton of money but still develop from within like the Wings will win. What a cap does though is help the poorer teams compete for some FA signings. A poorer revenue team that drafts well and develops well now has the wherewithal to sign that ONE free agent to put them over the top, or make that ONE trade for a guy to do the same. In an uncapped sport, the big teams can horde all the big FA and make all the big trades because they can afford to. In a capped sport, every team has a chance to make that move. I like the cap even if it costs the Wings a guy or two some years. They Wings will keep winning as long as they sign reasonable contracts and develop their own talent. When they stop doing that, they stop winning, no matter how much money they throw at the team.

All the talk about shot blocking and how it correlates with winning... it doesn't! Of the 11 metrics this writer compared with Point %, shot blocking had the lowest correlation (using last season's data). also, if you follow the covariance table on that webpage, shot blocking isn't even moderately correlated with any of the other stats. Shot blocking does not improve the PK or keep goals against down, among others. The writer attributes this to many of the causes mentioned by HofH and I agree with both. As it pertains to Lilja... he needs to do what he can best do, and if that means blocking shots, he should do it. Not every player can be Lidstrom and it's really unfair to compare all but a handful of defensemen in the league to him. What I like about Lilja is that he fills a role on the team that no other player does - solid defensively, good PKer, good shot blocker, can be physical. THAT is what makes a great team... not 20 Lidstrom clones but 20 guys that all fill a nice role on the team and make one, cohesive TEAM.

"NHL on thin economic ice" from thestar.com (12-2-08) What I like about the last quote is that I think some aspects of the NHL are really strong right now. There are a lot of great, young players. The talent level is high. With parity, the talent is spread around the league and most teams have at least one really good player, if not a handful. But I see the big problem being that the NHL envisions itself as being bigger than it is. NHL players should not be making as much money as they do because the sport does not earn enough money like the NFL and MLB to be at least somewhat sustainable.

I wanted to post this article in another thread but I didn't want to derail the original topic completely. So here is a brand new thread, and perhaps a place we can discuss how the economic situation for the US and Canada is affecting the NHL or hockey in general. Here is an article from Street & Smith's Sports Business Journal about ticket revenue projections for next year. S&S SBJ uses a paid subscription to read most of it's articles but this one is up for free as This Week's News, so it will probably be blocked soon. Here are a couple pertinent quotes: I've been stating a few different threads recently that I worry that the economy is going to have a big effect on the NHL in terms of player salaries and the salary cap. We have not seen a recession of this magnitude during the Age of Salary Caps in sports and especially with a gate-driven league like the NHL, any big hit to discretionary money to the citizens will affect the overall league revenues. Revenues are not down yet this year because sales were made before the economy went sour. Next year, revenues will probably drop one way or the other, either through lower ticket/merch prices, lower attendance, or both.

I just threw out the $50 cap number as an example. I've read various reports (don't recall where) that say the cap could drop into the mid to high $40's in two years. Much of the cap gains recently were thanks to a strong Canadian dollar, which has now fallen again. Coupled with the recession, there can be some big effects on the horizon.

I agree, there needs to be more salary cap flexibility built into the Wings' payroll for next year.

Ticket sales for the most part were done before the economy crap hit the fan... much of that money is from season tickets and many individual tickets are also sold before the season begins. If the economy keeps going how it is, there will be far less season ticket holders league-wide and fewer people buying individual tickets as well. I don't know when the TV contract expires but even if it doubles, it won't account to a significant trickle down to all the teams. This isn't the NFL where TV deals almost get every team to break even. The third portion of your response could come into play, however I don't know how many teams will truly be screwed by such a drop in two years time because I don't know how many teams have significant long term contracts. Rangers, Flyers, and Wings come to mind, but some teams might love having that cap lower back down to retain their cost certainty. Plus, the big boys would have to buy out a few players that could then be had for cheap by the other teams, so maybe they do allow it to happen. It is true that Lidstrom is a UFA after next season but I did not include his cost into any of my totals. I don't expect him to make $7.4 million again next contract, but if he's still a great player he will still deserve a $2-$4 million contract. If he's holding on as a less significant player like Yzerman did, then he will get that less significant $1 million-ish salary but I think he'll still be a top pairing guy in two years. My basic point is that if you know that bad times are coming, re-signing the most expensive piece that is coming free might not be the wisest choice, especially when that piece came in as sort of a mercenary anyways.

Ugh, it's situations like this that make the Wings cap situation so bad. It'd probably be best to send Ericsson down for a game to bring up Helm/Leino/Downey so that they don't have to play 2 defensemen as forwards, but it might be too late.

I guess we'll just have to do with Ken and Mickey celebrating Draper's 1001 game as a Wing. It's a palindrome, let's celebrate it!

I hope St. Louis makes it if it means the Wings get to play them instead of CBJ, NSH, or DAL. I'd really like to see the Wings/Blues rivalry heat back up and a 1st round playoff matchup would be nice. The home/road schedule breakdown for the contending teams: Columbus - 6 H, 6 R Nashville - 5 H, 7 R Dallas - 5 H, 8 R Edmonton - 8 H, 6 R St. Louis - 4 H, 9 R Minnesota - 6 H, 7 R Anaheim - 6 H, 7 R Los Angeles - 3 H, 10 R Anaheim is about the same at home or on the road, and EDM has more road wins than losses (not counting OT/SO losses). I think looking at the H/R breakdown, LA has no shot to make a big run to the playoffs and STL probably doesn't have a chance either with so many road games left. It does give me hope that Dallas will also miss the playoffs and the Oilers will make it in.

It's too bad tonight is a Versus game... I really wanted to hear Ken and Mickey talk about this during the broadcast.

This may be true when the cap is around $56.7 million... what happens when/if the cap goes down significantly over the next two years and the Wings still have 4 players with cap hits around $25 million plus the 4 core players at $12.5? Can the Wings afford Lidstrom if he wants to come back? If the cap drops to only $50 million in 2 years, the Wings (barring trades and assuming a nice Hossa deal most people seem to want) will have that $37.5 million for 8 players, leaving $12.5 for the remaining 13-15 players needed. Even if one of the 4 "core" players steps up to the "key" tier, then the Wings still need to afford 2 more "core" players (under your above model), leaving little room for filling out a deep team. I think it would be most prudent to let Hossa walk and concentrate on keeping a deep team with some salary cap flexibility to address mid season trades and more importantly, injury call-ups from Grand Rapids.

If true, kudos to Mr. Crosby. He did step up nicely against Washington a week or so ago. Hopefully this will be him turning the page towards being a much more respectful hockey player.

To me it looks like even under prior rules, the Wings would still have the streak of 100 point seasons: 99/00 - 48 Wins and 10 ties = 106 points (didn't need the 2 loser points) 00/01 - 49 wins and 9 ties = 107 points (didn't need the 4 loser points) 01/02 - 51 wins and 10 ties = 112 points (didn't need the 4 loser points) 02/03 - 48 wins and 10 ties = 106 points (didn't need the 4 loser points) 03/04 - 48 wins and 11 ties = 107 points (didn't need the 2 loser points) 05/06 - 54 reg/OT wins and 7 SO games (would be ties in old system) = 115 points 06/07 - 48 reg/OT wins and 10 SO games = 106 points 07/08 - 49 reg/OT wins and 10 SO games = 108 points and so far this season - 40 reg/OT wins and 9 SO games = 89 points. With 12 games left, they just need to win 5 games and go to the shootout 1 to get to 100 points under the old system. I think it is quite remarkable what the Wings have been able to do. We'll see if other teams get on a run of 100 point seasons but even with loser points being available for the whole run, no other team has come close to sniffing such a streak (I noticed that NJ and Ottawa had 4 season streaks but I didn't see anyone else up there). All we can ask of our favorite sports teams is be a good team that has a chance to win the championship. You cannot ask a team to win a championship every year. The Wings have been a model franchise for almost 2 decades now, and almost the last decade of that have achieved 100 point seasons consecutively. I am quite proud of this as a Red Wings fan.

I really like Babcock and I think a lot of Detroit fans would love him to coach the team "his way" ie: more physical and aggressive. It made me a bit nervous though that his tone on the last answer was sort of, "They give me players that make me coach in a way I don't want to" or otherwise implying that he's not happy with the team/style. I do hope they bring in more muckers next year and keep Babcock as long as possible.

Yes, but there are far more years when the Wings don't play great to start the playoffs and don't have the time/luck to step their game up. I'm not panicking either, and really less than a year off of a Cup win, I don't feel like I can really be too upset about the team regardless what happens... I'm still so happy they won last year and I can't expect them to win every year.

I definitely think that they have to rearrange the defensive pairs. Kronwall and Stuart are just brutal together. -2 and -3 last night, respectively. Babcock HAS to separate those guys.

It's not just about taking the best players, but the best players for the best value. The Wings must be prudent for the financial future of the team. I fear that giving another big contract to a forward is going to Lightning-ize the team. To guarantee cap flexibility I would take Franzen at $3 - 3.5, let Hossa walk, and let Hudler sign elsewhere and receive draft pick compensation. I understand I may be in the minority with this thought process but I truly worry about where the economics of the game is heading. A recession of this magnitude has never occurred in a time with salary capped sports and I would like to see the Wings prepare for a tumultuous time.

I'm definitely not happy with the game but overall it was just a really strange game. The Wings hit about 4 goalposts and still scored 5 goals. All that PP time in the beginning really broke up the flow for line changes for the rest of the game, and with the Wings being older, I think it hurts them more than the Flames. Conklin gave up a couple bad goals and a couple other were weird bounces. It's frustrating to watch the team fall asleep in the 3rd like that, but I think they can still play well when the roster is all the way back (Hossa, Lilja, and Helm).

Yes, but the general direction of the economy is up. As revenues increase, each player's paycheck would also increase, from the richest players all the way to the lowest paid players. This economic downturn aside, I think the players would win because each salary is guaranteed to rise yearly with the cap. The owners win because they have true cost certainty with payroll for the occasional dip in league profits (or major recession).

For a while, I agreed with your sentiment, but as the economic future of the NHL is looking bleaker by the day, I just don't think it will be prudent to have another big money, long term deal on the books. It is true that a few players will be leaving in a couple years... I think Homer/Draper/Maltby you mentioned add up to about a $4.7 million cap hit, and really we don't know if those guys might go on playing for another 3 or 4 years (at reduced salary after these current contracts). Lidstrom's big contract will give a lot of cap relief, but a good chunk of that money will have to be spent on shoring up the D after he does leave. I hate to think next year will be his last year and he will still demand a solid salary should he re-sign. Factoring in Hossa money, the cost of replacing every player that retires/leaves, and the near guarantee of a drop in the cap, it still leaves the team with little to no wiggle room. We've seen this season how tough it can be with no wiggle room. The Wings have been forced to play Meech at forward because they could not afford to bring up other players. They couldn't bring up young guys to test out or sit down players that were not playing effectively because of cap constraints. No additions could be made at the trade deadline. Sometimes you've got to let a great player walk to be able to keep a great team together, especially since the future of the finances are so in doubt. I would rather the Wings play it safe than be stuck in a situation where they let solid role players leave to keep stars that they then need to trade for 30 cents on the dollar in a salary dump... and that's if any team can truly afford to take on the extra salary.

A great idea that I saw from a member of a Buffalo Sabres' board was to link each player's salary directly with a proportion of the cap. That way, as revenue goes up, salaries rise, and as it drops, salaries drop without teams needing to do buyouts/trades to get under a lower cap. So you could sign Hossa to a deal guaranteeing 10% of the salary cap. When the cap is $57 million, he makes $5.7 million. If it drops to $50 million, he makes $5 million. I think that would be a great way to do salaries but we'd have to wait for them to put it into the next CBA. Unless I'm mistaken, it really would not be that much different from the escrow account, but this way everyone would know before the season started how much money they would be making.

Brodeur is going to hold some major records in goaltending and will definitely be in the argument for greatest goaltender of all time in the NHL. It will be nice to see him grab these records soon.