joshy207

You can't use up all your cap space 8-10 years down the road with all these old guys' cap hits. What happens if they don't retire but are quickly fading? Do you want to lose your next-generation Datsyuk or Lidstrom because Hossa, Zetterberg, and Franzen are eating up $15M or more in cap space but producing less than 100 points between the three of them? I wouldn't. Front-loading a really long-term contract is a good idea for one player, but not for two or three.

Can't. Guys who have been in the league a certain amount of time would have to clear waivers in order to be sent down. Pretty much anyone on the Wings' roster would be claimed by a team looking for a playoff-experienced player, and the Wings would get nothing in return. How about getting some QUALITY shots on net when you're 6-on-3 for over a minute and trailing by 2 goals???!?!?!?!?!? Holy crap. Every shot was into traffic, I think only one (maybe 2) found its way to Theodore. Instead of quickly moving the puck and getting someone open on the back door, they waited and waited, then forced bad shots from the point. BRUTAL. Looks like they have something to work on in practice this week...

I'd have to say that the majority of Detroit-area hockey fans have trouble relating to the Wings' style of play. The fact that there are so many Europeans on the team isn't the problem in itself, but it does add to it. Those who can remember, think back to the players that were most popular in the mid- to late-80s when the Wings were climbing out of the league cellar. Probert. Kocur. Gerard Gallant. Harold Snepsts. Not because they were great hockey players--they really weren't--but because they were honest, hardworking, blue-collar guys. The teams of that era would work their tails off, bust some heads when needed, and occasionally win a few games. Without really knowing them, they seemed to be the kind of guys you might have grown up with or you might see at your local watering hole. Similar to the people you were friends with. This team doesn't play that style at all. They do work hard, but in different ways. They're immensely talented. Maybe too talented, maybe fans expect them to win every game 10-0, maybe they're expecting the Harlem Globetrotters and get frustrated when the Wings don't dominate every minute. Also, they aren't the guys we grew up with. They aren't the guys I'd expect to see at my neighborhood bar. They aren't like the people I hang out with or work with. It's not that the fans don't love and admire the European and skilled Wings, but they don't have that feeling of personal connection with those guys, or with the team's style of play. That's why guys like McCarty, Draper, Drake, and Helm are so popular here. They're "us". That's why fans go haywire when the game gets rough like the end of the 2nd against Dallas. If the Wings played like that all the time, the Joe would be ROCKING, all game, every game. That's "Detroit". That's what gets the fans really fired up.

There's a reason the cap is going to drop next year... the same reason the cap has risen for the past few years. The salary cap is (I believe) 54% of the league's total revenues. That number is guaranteed to the players... nothing more and nothing less. So, the more money the league makes, the more the players get, but if revenues drop, so does the cap. Always the same 54% of total revenues though. (From my post, 2 before yours.)

Correct, the first round of the WCOH has half the games in North America and half in Europe. I think what the OP meant was that the league and the PA agreed to continue scheduling exhibition and regular-season games in Europe.

Dude, you can kiss the whole NHL goodbye then. Had the lockout gone on longer than it did, or if the cap had not been put in place, the league would be on the verge of falling apart if it wasn't already dead. The teams and the league are businesses, and businesses can't survive if they are not profitable. Look at the WHA in the 70s if you think a league can survive with some of its franchises hemmorhaging money.

There's a reason the cap is going to drop next year... the same reason the cap has risen for the past few years. The salary cap is (I believe) 54% of the league's total revenues. That number is guaranteed to the players... nothing more and nothing less. So, the more money the league makes, the more the players get, but if revenues drop, so does the cap. Always the same 54% of total revenues though. It's something that the league's GMs need to think about when they're dropping big bucks on players, especially over long-term contracts. YoungGuns--I agree with most of your post, specifically on Phoenix and the value in having the cap. However, to your point about Campbell and Kane, GMs have to learn that they can't afford to overpay any players because it'll cost them other assets in the long run. Detroit, for example, is in a potential jam this summer with Zetterberg, Franzen, and Hossa all reaching UFA status. If one of these guys is lost--Franzen or especially Zetterberg--for a million or two per year, some people might look at Filppula's $3M, Cleary at $2.8M, and Stuart getting $3.75M and say "these guys might be getting a little more than they should be. Had they been signed for less, he'd still be here." That's just a small example, other teams are way more guilty than Detroit. Also, I think if the owners went to the table and asked for another rollback, the PA would have a conniption. They'll say it's not the players' fault that the owners have been fiscally irresponsible AGAIN. And I'd have to agree with them...

Right, but you'll have 50 broken hands before you have one broken head.

Harold's right, a shield like that is virtually impossible to create. Also, the whole point of guys removing their helmets before a fight is so that they don't break their hands on each other's helmets.

I'd rather see the league go back to 4 divisions and have divisional playoffs like they did in the mid-80s thru early-90s. Divisional playoff hockey was the best, and that's where the best rivalries were cemented. Plus, what's the point of even having divisions if you can go through the whole playoff without seeing a divisional opponent? Here are my 4 divisions: Smythe: Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix, Colorado. Norris: Minnesota, Chicago, Detroit, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Toronto. Patrick: Ottawa, Montreal, Boston, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Washington. Adams: Florida, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, St Louis, Dallas. The format for the Norris and Adams would be: 6x vs. own division (36 games) 2x vs. all other divisions (46 games) 82 game total The format for the Smythe and Patrick would be: 2x vs. all other divisions (44 games) 5x vs. own division, plus 3 additional games inside division* (38 games) 82 game total *Opponents for extra 3 games would be rotated evenly over a 7-year period. Playoffs would then consist of, within each division, 1st vs. 4th and 2nd vs. 3rd, with the winners advancing to the Division Finals. Division winners would then be seeded 1-4 for Cup semifinal, winners advancing to the final.

It's too damn cold out to be shaving!

Heaton pretty much summed it up. If you're not drafting in the top 5 (top 10 in a really deep year), you take the best available player. Guys drafted after #10 RARELY step in and play in the NHL right away, they're usually a year or two away at least. So your team's needs are different from draft day '09 until your late first-rounder is ready to play... If you're short on prospects at a position, you can always narrow your list down, but it's hard to draft specific types of players. That's much easier done through free agency.

The biggest reason that you see more composite sticks break--especially at very bad times--is that, with wood sticks, you knew when they were getting ready to break. Composite sticks don't generally give off the same warnings. Players could check their wood sticks on the bench and swap it out if there was a crack. It's much harder to tell with composites, the weak spots don't show up until *BAM* you've just exploded your shaft trying to take a shot.

Still not a deal... $32 per game... figure $22 per ticket (top half of upper bowl)... the dog or slice and pop are what, $6?... the leftover money pays for the knit hat. The Wings' marketing and PR departments haven't had to work at all, really, since the early 90s. Tickets sold themselves. Now that it's a different story, the club doesn't know what to do to promote itself. After last year's empty-building games and all the signs saying "Economy Worsening Ahead", ticket prices should have come down... way down... for this year. Didn't happen. Maybe Mr. Ilitch should start raffling off one car per game again?

Not bad. I do like the youth movement. A young roster like this won't tear up the world in 2010, but it would do wonders for our medal hopes in 2014!

Sometimes just a change of scenery does wonders for a player. Pulling on a different jersey, having new teammates and coaches to impress, can spark production. Had Quincey stayed here and wound up in a similar position (injuries force Babcock to play him 20 minutes a night) he may not have put up the same numbers. I, too, was disappointed to see Chelios and Lilja, both on the downside of their careers, retained at the cost of losing Quincey, who is still developing. But it happened, nothing we can do about it now. Hindsight is 20-20 and in cases like this, it can be somewhat distorted, too.

I think RBK/CCM bought Roger Edwards a couple years ago...

There's a rule (or guideline, not sure how specific it is) that goes along with the "customer confusion" that Johnny Law brought up. A logo should be 30% different than something it's copied from... the wings without the wheel is about 30% different and, stuck to a sock, isn't confusing. Look at Western Michigan's Bronco logo compared to Denver's... it's flipped over and the colors are different. Nobody's going to confuse the WMU Broncos and the Denver Broncos.

Nice find Jack! The Hockey News just came out with one of their special-edition magazines, dedicated solely to the goalie mask. It shows pictures from every era of the mask, different styles and paint jobs, and discusses in-depth the history and evolution of goalie masks. Very cool magazine...

True. But, if nobody can come to his defense, maybe the pitcher won't throw at the batter (intentionally).

Fighting should not be banned in the NHL, ever. Maybe "banned" isn't the right word, you can't completely prevent someone from throwing a punch... but the penalties should not be made more severe. The more you punish fighting, the more it opens the door for pain-in-the-ass guys to run around and take cheap shots, because they don't fear the retailation. A good, toe-to-toe, purposeful fight is quite often harmless and is good for the game as a whole. The league has done much to get rid of the 70s-era brawls that involved both benches and sometimes fans. That was a black mark on the sport. Baseball might be wise to make a similar move... if a batter wants to go after a pitcher for throwing at him, that's all fine and good, but the altercation should only involve those two players. Bench-clearing brawls in baseball are stupid. The relief pitchers from the bullpen and the stinkin' bench coaches don't need to get involved. I'd like to see anyone who leaves his position in the field or the dugout/bullpen get tossed, fined, and/or suspended.

Kokanee... good stuff! I've been drinking more wheats than lagers lately... usually Oberon or Blue Moon when I go out, my post-hockey game bar has Shock Top on tap now, or when I'm buying for home I'll try any other smaller brewery wheats I can find.

Oh god... most of the Nike stuff was BRUTAL! Especially in their early days (late 90s). Gloves were uncomfortable, skates were far too stiff, wood blades had no feel... some of their stuff got a lot better (Flexlite skates) and some got worse (Quest skates, helmets). On the business side of things, Nike helped screw up the market. Most products (especially successful ones) would have a 3, 4, maybe even 5-year run before the manufacturer would make changes. Nowadays, products are in the line for 2 years max, and usually only 1 year. So much product has been sold on closeout. In trying to make money, these companies can't make any money!

Draper doesn't have any financial stake in Warrior. Warrior is owned by the shoe company New Balance. Draper used to use Innovative sticks... when Warrior (a Lacrosse company) got into the hockey business, they bought Inno, so they inherited Draper as a user. Warrior spends a lot of time and money servicing NHL players, and they turn sticks around quicker than most companies, so Warrior gets a lot of usage in the league. Their retail sticks are a different story. Nike, the first shoe company to purchase a hockey equipment company, has also become the first one to sell off its hockey division. Bauer is now separate from Nike and all NikeBauer-branded product will be changed to Bauer. Hespeler has been out of business for several years now. Too bad, they always had excellent gloves. Lots of shake-ups going on in the equipment business these days... Sherwood had declared bankruptcy but was recently purchased; TPS (which is separate from Louisville Slugger) is currently in bankruptcy protection and is in the process of being bought; Warrior bought glove maker MIA and also Montreal (Teppo Numminen's company); Bauer bought Mission-Itech; skate maker Kor shut its doors (made a great product but did not market it well)... uncertain times in that industry for sure.

Haha, gotta love spellcheck. Hockey players are rarely smack-talkers off the ice. They aren't brought up that way, the locker room culture isn't that way. I think part of that stems from the way the youth hockey system operates--it's much more family-oriented than most other sports. Parents generally have to drive the kids to practice and games (whether it's 5 minutes or 5 hours) rather than the kids simply staying after school or being able to walk to the neighborhood park. That time in the car, as well as on weekend road trips, can bond the player and his parents, contributing to a more solid family upbringing. Also, the youth and junior hockey development systems are much different than the high school and college systems that football and basketball use. The kid who's the "big dog" on a high-school football or basketball team usually gets the royal treatment. Gets his butt kissed and is never in trouble, no matter what he does. Now he's off to college, where he may or may not be any good, but the inflated ego is there. Compare that to hockey, where a kid who's good in house league makes the travel team. The best travel players make AAA. From AAA, in the mid- to late-teens, there are various levels of junior to move up to. When a hockey player is 16-17 years old, there are at least 6 or 7 different levels he can play at, all depending on how good he is. The "big fish in a little pond" situation isn't nearly as common as in football or basketball. Now, I know these are generalizations and there are obviously exceptions to the rule. And most athletes in other sports are very nice, well-grounded people as well. You just don't see the cocky personas in hockey that you do in other sports.