cjeder

Hemorrhoids.

As best I can tell, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, there is no rule that states the ref must blow the whistle after the goalkeeper freezes the puck. Instead, two rules govern the situation, an intentional Rule 85.2 "puck out of bounds" and Rule 85.3* "puck out of sight." The latter rule requires the ref to blow the whistle to stop play if the puck "be out of sight of the referee." Be out of sight is something different than loose sight. A ref might loose sight of the puck, for instance, if he were momentarily looking at his reflection in the glass to groom his moustache. The puck remains in sight of the referee, but he doesn't see it because he isn't looking. *85.3 Puck Out of Sight - Should a scramble take place or a player accidentally fall on the puck and the puck be out of sight of the Referee, he shall immediately blow his whistle and stop the play. The puck shall then be faced-off at the nearest face-off spot in the zone where the play was stopped unless otherwise provided for in the rules.

Of course Crosby is a disappointment. He was, after all, supposed to break all Gretzky's records, become the new, young face of the NHL, and his piss was rumored to cure cancer. His failure to deliver in any of these areas wouldn't be a big deal if Bettman wasn't personally engraving his name on the cup for the next 10 seasons.

Good call. You need proof your alternate keeper can win games not just stop the bleeding. In this case the wager is Theo's save percentage can go up more than Budaj's will go down when having to play a full 60 against the Wings. Seems like a pretty safe bet. Moreover, staying with Theodore is as much a testament to the teams belief in what he can do, as it is a recognition that the loss in game 2 was on the team's shoulders, not the keeper's. In either case, it is unlikely their choice of keeper will make a difference in game 3: 3-2 Wings

Not quite sure Franzen will be the first (Sundin perhaps) but he is pretty sweet either way.

After Sundin refused to waive his NTC and Forsberg returned to the Avs, despite both teams questionable prospects of making the playoffs, one must wonder, is there something about Swedes? Both Sundin and Forsberg mentioned their loyalty to their clubs as major factors in their decisions. No one can argue that Lidstrom has stayed in Detroit for less money than he might be worth on the Free Agent market. After a quick review of key Swede NHL players, almost none of them change teams after spending more than three years in one place. (Forsberg being the primary exception) Looking at what Pittsburgh will have to do to retain Malkin, the frequency that Jagr has bounced around the league, and even Gretzky's late career status as a journeyman superstar, is there added value in Swedish loyalty?

Praise Him

Actually Columbus has three professional sports teams, the Blue Jackets, the Columbus Crew of the MLS, and the Destroyers (Arena Football). Before you say that Hockey is a "major" professional sport, ask yourself, "what makes hockey a major sport?"

I've got a buddy whose a huge Flyers fan and he's loving the new team for these exact reasons. Me, not so much. What really gets under my skin is the way the league is playing it off like a bunch of separate "stupid" mistakes. There are good clean hits, there's finishing your check, and then there putting on the sauce, the little extra something that makes a crappy, poorly timed hit more effective. The Flyer's are experts at the later, and you can be sure it is because they are being told to bring a "physical" game. While on the topic of dirty hits, allow me to vent on the whole respect issue. Enough about the ol' bygone days! To say that Hockey was safer in the old days because of mutual respect is BS. Could it be that players today are 1) protected better, so they can carry more speed into the glass without fear of getting hurt and 2) just bigger and faster than they used to be?

This brings up a good point. One of the arguments against the new CBA was that it would harm Hockey in it top, and most competitive markets. While it hasn't harmed the ability to go find great talent and field a winning team, it has certainly hurt our ability to sign players that sell well in Detroit.

Obviously the attendance problems in Detroit cannot be explained by any sinlge factor, but the economic analysis by itself is still strained. Even when the economy in Detroit was doing well the Wings were too expensive for most to afford. Moreover the other three teams in Detroit are not having the same troubles. A better way to look at the issue is whether the product the wings are selling is better than that of the Pistons, Lions or Tigers My thoughts are not necessarily that a team of Europeans can't succeed in Detroit because of racial bias, they clearly have in the past, but simply that the story behind the European product doesn't really jive with the Detroit market. People will pay 700 bucks a ticket to go see Crosby play in Edmunton, they will pack the house to see two of the Staal brothers play together. To someone unfamilar with Datsyuk and Zetterberg, Euro-twin action sounds more like porn than hockey. lfd250 metioned "Blue Collar" sells in Detroit, my point is that convincing someone that Franzen grew up working class in Sweden is considerably more difficult than convincing that someone [else] did the same in Ontario. I don't doubt that there are plenty of working class in Europe, nor do I doubt European dedication to hockey, I am just saying its a hard sell

ESPNs recap of last nights game against Nashville is telling. The commentator (not sure who but I think it was a guest) mocks Kopecky and Fillpula with a drunken tone, reading their names like they are just words on a script, with no person, no story behind them. At first I thought it unfair, but is it? For a sport that strains to know where Moose Factory, ON is, imagining a kid in a backyard rink in Vantaa or Ilava just seems too much to ask. People have floated plenty of options to explain the Wing's attendance problem. The economy, competition from other teams, the departure of Yzerman. To throw some fuel on the fire I thought I'd see what you all think about another option, people in Detroit do not relate well to Europeans. In a land that prides itself the idea that domestic production is a virtue, a team based on the premise that 4th round picks from halfway across the globe can compete against the best thing North America can offer doesn't seem like a good fit. Few can doubt that Zetterberg and Datsyuk are doing a great job filling the shoes of Shannahan and Yzerman when it comes to the scorecard. But when it comes to filling the seats, are they just to foreign for people to relate to?

Well said. If people in Atlanta can't figure out sports that don't take place on a numbered grid or involve driving in circles until an explosion happens, so be it.

I am less concerned with Hasek's stats by themselves than the reason they are so bad. As I can see so far this year Hasek has had three problems. First, he is playing deeper in the crease than any keeper, even Hasek, should. Second, his rebound control is abysmal. Third, he has been sluggish to respond to plays originating behind the net. It is unclear what one of these shortcomings might be causing the other, but the fact that he is having trouble with so many areas of his game at once points to an age related slowdown rather than a slump. Whether he will emerge from his poor play is less a question of when and more a question of if. The Hasek of last season relied on his experience, anticipation and confidence to make up for his slowing reflexes. If the confidence goes down the tube, it is reasonable to say Hasek has lost his ability to make up for it through acrobatics. This was true even last season when Hasek's performance was commendable but not remarkable provided the minuscule amount of work he faced. Moreover, while he came up big in the first two rounds of the playoffs, he looked tired against Anaheim: begging the question that even if he can resume his level of play, can he keep it up through the playoffs? I have been a huge Hasek fan for several years, but at some point realism has to kick in. He is arguably the greatest goaltender of all time, but at this point of his career it seems clear his next ring will say Hall of Fame rather than Stanley Cup.

Does anybody know what the portion of the empty seats reflect unsold tickets vs people who just didn't show up?