Scott Niedermayer has begun skating

[Wings3:16 324]

So one important question remains: When should one pick him up in fantasy hockey?

[timothy1997 0]

Yeah...this shouldn't be allowed. If a player can't produce a valid reason for not playing (such as an injury) they shouldn't be able to just decide to show up several months into the season. That's just weasel city.

I recall a certain Red Wing named Fedorov who in 97-98 ended his holdout and returned late in the season and led the wings to the cup that year.

So one important question remains: When should one pick him up in fantasy hockey?

Very interesting question. I picked him up and put him on the bench in my league. I am winning big time so I can take a gamble with a bench slot.

[Turkey 0]

This is getting absurd now. What's a "valid" reason? Who decides what a valid reason is. You haven't even begun to think about the possible ramifications of what you're suggesting.

Like anything else, what constitutes a valid reason would be negotiable between the NHL and the NHLPA. I have thought about it. If a player is not obliged to have a reason for doing this other than their own personal whim, the salary cap becomes a farce.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Like anything else, what constitutes a valid reason would be negotiable between the NHL and the NHLPA. I have thought about it. If a player is not obliged to have a reason for doing this other than their own personal whim, the salary cap becomes a farce.

Why would the NHLPA negotiate anything the could prevent its players from not being able to play?

[Turkey 0]

Simply put, the players have agreed to the salary cap. If that cap is going to mean anything, loop holes that enable teams to get around it need to be closed. Otherwise the cap itself becomes laughable. Frankly, I think the league should simply come down on this practice like a ton of bricks.

Why should a player be free to "decide" if the want to play for months? The player needs to make their decision by the beginning of the regular season. Grown ups don't get to say "I'm not sure if I want to go to work or not".

If you want to participate, participate. If you don't, you don't get to until next year. None of this sneak in half way through and dodge the cap bullet garbage.

Now, I'm not saying that's what Scott is doing. But what he's doing opens the door to that kind of abuse.

[timothy1997 0]

Simply put, the players have agreed to the salary cap. If that cap is going to mean anything, loop holes that enable teams to get around it need to be closed. Otherwise the cap itself becomes laughable. Frankly, I think the league should simply come down on this practice like a ton of bricks.

Why should a player be free to "decide" if the want to play for months? The player needs to make their decision by the beginning of the regular season. Grown ups don't get to say "I'm not sure if I want to go to work or not".

If you want to participate, participate. If you don't, you don't get to until next year. None of this sneak in half way through and dodge the cap bullet garbage.

Now, I'm not saying that's what Scott is doing. But what he's doing opens the door to that kind of abuse.

I can see your point. Maybe a cutoff date like MLB has where playoff rosters have to be set by this date. The San Diego Padres of this baseball season were a good example of the positives and negatives of that playoff roster set date. They were fighting for the final playoff spot and in a span of a few days they lost both outfielders cameron and bradley. They could acquire another outfielder (which they did in lane) but had they made the playoffs, Lane would have been ineligable due to his acquistion date. The Padres didn't make the playoffs and now of that mattered, but you can see the positives and negatives. Do you want something similar in the NHL?

[Learn2LuvIt 252]

Why would the NHLPA negotiate anything the could prevent its players from not being able to play?

Cause of greater good and purposeful intent.

If the league comes down hard and creates rules that prevents this type of situation happening again (as a direct result of situations like this...trying too avoid a huge hit against the salary cap)....then this ruins it for the players that this rule/technicalitly was originally intended for.

[Rice 42]

I recall a certain Red Wing named Fedorov who in 97-98 ended his holdout and returned late in the season and led the wings to the cup that year.

Fedorov was a free agent. Niedermayer isn't.

[Opie 308]

GS&T you think Neidermayer is more important than Teemu, I use my quote from about 3 other threads on this topic.

Selanne and Penner being gone means the loss of the #1 & #2 goal scorers, they both ranked top 3 in most offensive categories. Neidermayer, while a talented offensive defensman, he will not be able to create the offense that Selanne could. Selanne had 94 points last year and 90 the year before. If Neidermayer can replace that then we have just found the best defenseman to ever play the game!

Selanne and Penner are going to be considered - numbers and Bertuzzi and Schneids will be +

Anaheim's gains from Bert and Schneids=

Goals

+ 13 -77 = loss of 64

Assists

+ 43 - 62 loss of 19

Points

+ 56 - 139 loss of 83

PPG

+ 2 - 34 loss of 32

PPA

+ 30 - 30 Even (thanks solely to Schneids)

GP

+ 76 - 164 Loss of 98 (both players played in all 82 and were #1 and #2 scorers goal wise)

They will have to find a way to make up 64 goals included in that are 25 ppg.

This team is not the same team without Teemu, I would venture that his return is more important than Neids.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

GS&T you think Neidermayer is more important than Teemu, I use my quote from about 3 other threads on this topic.

Selanne and Penner being gone means the loss of the #1 & #2 goal scorers, they both ranked top 3 in most offensive categories. Neidermayer, while a talented offensive defensman, he will not be able to create the offense that Selanne could. Selanne had 94 points last year and 90 the year before. If Neidermayer can replace that then we have just found the best defenseman to ever play the game!

Well, seeing as they have 6 guys on their roster who have scored 20+ goals in the NHL and Pronger, Schnieder and Niedermayer on the blueline. I wouldn't be laughing them off as unable to score.

They're 9th in the West in offense. That's without Niedermayer, Schnieder, Selanne, Penner and Bertuzzi (1/2 the games).

9th out of 15 almost puts them in the middle of the pack. You throw a healthy Schnieder and Niedermayer into that mix, what's to keep them from jumping up into the top 5? I'm taking them very seriously.

Simply put, the players have agreed to the salary cap. If that cap is going to mean anything, loop holes that enable teams to get around it need to be closed. Otherwise the cap itself becomes laughable. Frankly, I think the league should simply come down on this practice like a ton of bricks.

Why should a player be free to "decide" if the want to play for months? The player needs to make their decision by the beginning of the regular season. Grown ups don't get to say "I'm not sure if I want to go to work or not".

If you want to participate, participate. If you don't, you don't get to until next year. None of this sneak in half way through and dodge the cap bullet garbage.

Now, I'm not saying that's what Scott is doing. But what he's doing opens the door to that kind of abuse.

Why is it a loophole? It isn't a loophole for the player. The player isn't getting paid to not play is he? If this were to become the epidemic some think it will, you'd have to find many players, likely at the end of their careers, who'd be willing to sit and not get paid rather than play and get paid. You'd essentially have to find players that would take one for the team and sit out, not do what they love and earn no income until some predetermined time that the team can fit them into the salary structure. Sounds like a lot of conspiracy theory to me.

[Zion 93]

Big deal, their defense is not their biggest problem right now.

Yeah he makes their D better, BFD, they need scoring.

They have managed >3 goals in 5 times and 2 of them are against the yotes and 2 times (once against the yotes) it was in a loss.

If they got Selanne back then I would be more worried, but with Neidermayer back maybe they only give up 4 to the Yotes, I guess that would give them one more W.

He is much more offensive than defensive.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Cause of greater good and purposeful intent.

If the league comes down hard and creates rules that prevents this type of situation happening again (as a direct result of situations like this...trying too avoid a huge hit against the salary cap)....then this ruins it for the players that this rule/technicalitly was originally intended for.

You are insinuating all of this was done intentionally to circumvent the system. To my knowledge there's no evidence Burke and Niedermayer intended to do anything. The facts, as they known are:

1. Niedermayer had not decided his future nor had he decided to honor the remainder of his contract after the Cup finals.

2. The Ducks, facing the dilemma of losing him sign Schnieder as a REPLACEMENT.

3. The Ducks suspend Niedermayer in their own best interests to which Niedermayer publicly stated he understood.

4. He is still property of the Ducks and within his rights to decide to play or not.

5. The rules as they are allow that portion of his salary not to count as it should as the team was not able to utilize his services so why should they have to pay for them.

All the other innuendo and accusations, which is all people have now, are being used to insinuate a wanton disregard for fair play and that the Ducks as a franchise and Scott Niedermayer are of poor morale character.

I think you have a guy who won everything and couldn't decide if he should go out on top with nothing to prove against the desire to do what he's loved doing his entire life. Its not an easy decision to make i'm sure. I personally think the last thing on the Ducks or Scott's mind was trying to dick over the league and screw the salary cap.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

You are insinuating all of this was done intentionally to circumvent the system. To my knowledge there's no evidence Burke and Niedermayer intended to do anything. The facts, as they known are:

1. Niedermayer had not decided his future nor had he decided to honor the remainder of his contract after the Cup finals.

2. The Ducks, facing the dilemma of losing him sign Schnieder as a REPLACEMENT.

3. The Ducks suspend Niedermayer in their own best interests to which Niedermayer publicly stated he understood.

4. He is still property of the Ducks and within his rights to decide to play or not.

5. The rules as they are allow that portion of his salary not to count as it should as the team was not able to utilize his services so why should they have to pay for them.

All the other innuendo and accusations, which is all people have now, are being used to insinuate a wanton disregard for fair play and that the Ducks as a franchise and Scott Niedermayer are of poor morale character.

I think you have a guy who won everything and couldn't decide if he should go out on top with nothing to prove against the desire to do what he's loved doing his entire life. Its not an easy decision to make i'm sure. I personally think the last thing on the Ducks or Scott's mind was trying to dick over the league and screw the salary cap.

At first maybe, but then I think Burke saw a golden opportunity. Niedermayer, in spite of being under contract, gets a nice long vacation while Burke gets much needed cap relief. Sure they have to keep that space open until he returns, but when he returns, they're only on the hook for the remainder of the season. It's almost like they're getting a top defenseman at the trade deadline, PLUS they've saved all this cap space to throw at other players.

No one is saying it isn't legal. Or at least I haven't been. But it doesn't come anywhere close to passing the smell test.

I can see him not knowing earlier on so Burke grabs Schneider, but still delaying his answer this long into the season with the Ducks "suspending" him while not having to pay his salary, then whaddayaknow, he's skating again and thinking about returning. As I said in another thread, we're not talking about some ill-behaved player not showing up for camp, or holding out for a contract. This is a seasoned veteran, an otherwise stand-up player, and the captain of the team.

It's naive to think Burke didn't know Scott's intentions around the start of the season when he "suspended" him. While within the rules, it is still a total manipulation of the supsension and against the spirit of those rules.

And just to be clear, I am not among those here who hate everything Ducks. I hate Pronger, but I like their style of play and I like a lot of guys on that team. And I don't think the Wings were somehow robbed of the Cup because of a few lucky bounces Anaheim got. But this whole Niedermayer thing is a bad joke.

Edited November 8, 2007 by haroldsnepsts

[Learn2LuvIt 252]

You are insinuating all of this was done intentionally to circumvent the system. To my knowledge there's no evidence Burke and Niedermayer intended to do anything. The facts, as they known are:

1. Niedermayer had not decided his future nor had he decided to honor the remainder of his contract after the Cup finals.

2. The Ducks, facing the dilemma of losing him sign Schnieder as a REPLACEMENT.

3. The Ducks suspend Niedermayer in their own best interests to which Niedermayer publicly stated he understood.

4. He is still property of the Ducks and within his rights to decide to play or not.

5. The rules as they are allow that portion of his salary not to count as it should as the team was not able to utilize his services so why should they have to pay for them.

All the other innuendo and accusations, which is all people have now, are being used to insinuate a wanton disregard for fair play and that the Ducks as a franchise and Scott Niedermayer are of poor morale character.

I think you have a guy who won everything and couldn't decide if he should go out on top with nothing to prove against the desire to do what he's loved doing his entire life. Its not an easy decision to make i'm sure. I personally think the last thing on the Ducks or Scott's mind was trying to dick over the league and screw the salary cap.

I see your point.

But, if a portion of people who follow hockey think that this may have been a pre-concieved plan from the beginning...than it's not out of the realm of possibility that league officials are saying..."oh, oh....what if this starts happening on a regular basis!!!!??!!!!.....we should probably make a rule that prevents this from becoming a "unfair tactic" that is used to circumvent the salary cap."

If a few people are thinking it....then you better believe the league is thinking it....and thinking about how to not have this as a unfair tactic in the future.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

At first maybe, but then I think Burke saw a golden opportunity. Niedermayer, in spite of being under contract, gets a nice long vacation while Burke gets much needed cap relief. Sure they have to keep that space open until he returns, but when he returns, they're only on the hook for the remainder of the season. It's almost like they're getting a top defenseman at the trade deadline, PLUS they've saved all this cap space to throw at other players.

No one is saying it isn't legal. Or at least I haven't been. But it doesn't come anywhere close to passing the smell test.

I can see him not knowing earlier on so Burke grabs Schneider, but still delaying his answer this long into the season with the Ducks "suspending" him while not having to pay his salary, then whaddayaknow, he's skating again and thinking about returning. As I said in another thread, we're not talking about some ill-behaved player not showing up for camp, or holding out for a contract. This is a seasoned veteran, an otherwise stand-up player, and the captain of the team.

It's naive to think Burke didn't know Scott's intentions around the start of the season when he "suspended" him. While within the rules, it is still a total manipulation of the supsension and against the spirit of those rules.

And just to be clear, I am not among those here who hate everything Ducks. I hate Pronger, but I like their style of play and I like a lot of guys on that team. And I don't think the Wings were somehow robbed of the Cup because of a few lucky bounces Anaheim got. But this whole Niedermayer thing is a bad joke.

Again, its possible Burke realized at some point that he could turn this lemon into lemonade. However, that doesn't prove he deliberately tried to bend the rules. As for him knowing about Niedermayer's intentions. C'mon Harold. You think anybody knew Roger Clemens intentions when he retired for the 1st, 2nd and now possibly 3rd time?

I think people are reading way too much into this.

Somebody did mention having a cutoff limit where you couldn't add to your roster except within your own system or via trade. I could definitely go along with that. The bottom line here, and why I don't think this is a big deal is that if Niedermayer were a free agent, there's nothing to stop him from up and deciding to unretire and sign for whatever the hell he wants. And since he could do that, why is this such a big deal?

Edited November 8, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Again, its possible Burke realized at some point that he could turn this lemon into lemonade. However, that doesn't prove he deliberately tried to bend the rules. As for him knowing about Niedermayer's intentions. C'mon Harold. You think anybody knew Roger Clemens intentions when he retired for the 1st, 2nd and now possibly 3rd time?

I think people are reading way too much into this.

Somebody did mention having a cutoff limit where you couldn't add to your roster except within your own system or via trade. I could definitely go along with that. The bottom line here, and why I don't think this is a big deal is that if Niedermayer were a free agent, there's nothing to stop him from up and deciding to unretire and sign for whatever the hell he wants. And since he could do that, why is this such a big deal?

Early on, I'm sure he didn't know what Niedermayer's intentions were. But in spite of his ridiculous indecision, I'm sure Niedermayer felt some obligation to his team. It may not prove it in a court of a law, but it seems pretty friggin obvious to me.

This is a different situation than Clemens. Niedermayer hasn't said he's retired and then come back. He's still "deciding."

What information does he have now that he didn't two weeks into the season?

Burke definitely turned lemons into lemonade by running this scam, and it wouldn't surprised me if there was a rule change to prevent other players from doing it after this season.

Why not have Lidstrom think about "retiring" for a while this season. The Wings are on a tear so they could probably afford to do without him and still be in decent playoff position. Then once he's taken a few months being suspended without pay, he miraculously decides to come back for the second half of the season.

I bet Holland would love to have that cap space it'd save come the trade deadline.

The bottom line here, and why I don't think this is a big deal is that if Niedermayer were a free agent, there's nothing to stop him from up and deciding to unretire and sign for whatever the hell he wants. And since he could do that, why is this such a big deal?

But he's not a free agent. Not even an RFA. He's under contract with the Ducks for this season and next season.

If he comes back to play for them this year, the Ducks should be on the hook for the whole season. It's an abuse of the CBA.

Edited November 8, 2007 by haroldsnepsts

[Kp-Wings 3]

This whole situation is crap.

I don't know how Burke get's away this stuff. I could make a conspiracy theory and say Bettman had this planned in order for Anaheim to win the Cup again so hockey would grow in s***ty markets where it doesn't belong in the first place, but I doubt that's the reason.

But... it's really strange that Burke got away with this. What is the salary cap even here for if he can do stuff like that?

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Early on, I'm sure he didn't know what Niedermayer's intentions were. But in spite of his ridiculous indecision, I'm sure Niedermayer felt some obligation to his team. It may not prove it in a court of a law, but it seems pretty friggin obvious to me.

This is a different situation than Clemens. Niedermayer hasn't said he's retired and then come back. He's still "deciding."

What information does he have now that he didn't two weeks into the season?

Burke definitely turned lemons into lemonade by running this scam, and it wouldn't surprised me if there was a rule change to prevent other players from doing it after this season.

Why not have Lidstrom think about "retiring" for a while this season. The Wings are on a tear so they could probably afford to do without him and still be in decent playoff position. Then once he's taken a few months being suspended without pay, he miraculously decides to come back for the second half of the season.

I bet Holland would love to have that cap space it'd save come the trade deadline.

But he's not a free agent. Not even an RFA. He's under contract with the Ducks for this season and next season.

If he comes back to play for them this year, the Ducks should be on the hook for the whole season. It's an abuse of the CBA.

What information does he have now? My guess would be that he misses the game. Sounds reasonable enough to me.

As for the Lidstrom example. I think a scenario where a player "retired" after the season started would be pretty obvious that it was a scam and below board. I doubt Lidstrom or Holland would stump to such a low. Furthermore, you are suggesting Lidstrom would be just hunky dory not getting paid. If my boss said "hey, do me a favor, take some time off for the benefit of the team and i'll NOT PAY YOU FOR IT! How about that!" .....I think i'd say, "go f*** yourself"

Also, what could you possibly do with that cap space? It isn't like you can bring on a player equal to Lidstrom's abilities. Would it be worth sacrificing Nick, our Captain and best Dman to bring in somebody who isn't half the player and potential cost us in the standings? I don't know but I'd rather be a 1 seed and a 2 or 3 seed as tight as things are these days.

I've seen people freak about stuff like this before. let's see where have I heard it? Oh yeah, "iraq has WMD's", "beware of West Nile", "Killer bees are invading through Mexico"....

People are freaking for no reason. No GM is going to intentionally do this. The benefits from having a Lidstrom or Niedermayer not play in place of somebody less talented are zero. Furthermore, the benefits to the player who isn't getting paid are zero. good luck finding players who'll take an unpaid leave of absence and then have their names dragged through the mud as being accomplice to shady undertakings and trying to disrespect the CBA and the sport itself.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Well, seeing as they have 6 guys on their roster who have scored 20+ goals in the NHL and Pronger, Schnieder and Niedermayer on the blueline. I wouldn't be laughing them off as unable to score.

Cleary, Draper, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Holmstrom, Samuelsson have all scored 20+ goals in the NHL. Doesnt mean theyll do it every year.

As for Niedermayer, if you think he just "couldnt make up his mind", then youre not very privy to Burke's ways. Its not like Niedermayer is a classless *******. He wouldnt have screwed over his team just because he couldnt make up his mind.

Edited November 8, 2007 by YoungGuns1340

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

What information does he have now? My guess would be that he misses the game. Sounds reasonable enough to me.

As for the Lidstrom example. I think a scenario where a player "retired" after the season started would be pretty obvious that it was a scam and below board. I doubt Lidstrom or Holland would stump to such a low. Furthermore, you are suggesting Lidstrom would be just hunky dory not getting paid. If my boss said "hey, do me a favor, take some time off for the benefit of the team and i'll NOT PAY YOU FOR IT! How about that!" .....I think i'd say, "go f*** yourself"

Also, what could you possibly do with that cap space? It isn't like you can bring on a player equal to Lidstrom's abilities. Would it be worth sacrificing Nick, our Captain and best Dman to bring in somebody who isn't half the player and potential cost us in the standings? I don't know but I'd rather be a 1 seed and a 2 or 3 seed as tight as things are these days.

I've seen people freak about stuff like this before. let's see where have I heard it? Oh yeah, "iraq has WMD's", "beware of West Nile", "Killer bees are invading through Mexico"....

People are freaking for no reason. No GM is going to intentionally do this. The benefits from having a Lidstrom or Niedermayer not play in place of somebody less talented are zero. Furthermore, the benefits to the player who isn't getting paid are zero. good luck finding players who'll take an unpaid leave of absence and then have their names dragged through the mud as being accomplice to shady undertakings and trying to disrespect the CBA and the sport itself.

I think maybe you misunderstood me when I talked about the cap space with the Lidstrom example.

I didn't mean using that cap space to bring in someone during Lidstrom's "retirement." I meant you do without Nick for half the season, then bring him back but only have to pay half of his salary because he was suspended, so now you have more cap room to sign a better player at the trade deadline. The second half of the season you get your star defenseman back AND you can afford to rent a big name player at the deadline.

In a situation for someone like Niedermayer, and to a lesser degree Lidstrom, it's not unreasonable. They've played for years. They've made tons of money. They've won Cups. But they also have families. It'd be nice to only play half a season and still gear up for the playoffs, even if it means you only make a measly $3 million instead of 6.75.

This is not a conspiracy. I'm sure it started innocently enough, but come on. This stinks to high heaven.

Of course I don't think approached Niedermayer and told him to fake retiring (like in my Lidstrom example) but if the guy wants a break from hockey after a long year, has made a ton of money in the past and is willing to go without for half a season, then it's a win-win. Scott gets a vacation, Burke gets cap relief. I think this opportunity presented itself and Burke figured out how to make the most of it.

Even if no other GM did this, it's an abuse of the suspension rules. Those are for some non-cooperative player, not for a captain who can't make up his mind. And I don't think it's out of the question to see it happen in the future with another star veteran. They still want to play, but the season is a grind. And their team will probably be okay without them. Plust they've made enough money over the years that the loss of salary is worth the time off to rest and recuperate.

Niedermayer will come back and play the second half of the season, and Burke will have saved himself a big chunk of his highest paid-player's salary. Just as several people predicted it when this season started.

Edited November 8, 2007 by haroldsnepsts

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Cleary, Draper, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Holmstrom, Samuelsson have all scored 20+ goals in the NHL. Doesnt mean theyll do it every year.

As for Niedermayer, if you think he just "couldnt make up his mind", then youre not very privy to Burke's ways. Its not like Niedermayer is a classless *******. He wouldnt have screwed over his team just because he couldnt make up his mind.

Ahh, very true grasshopper. So its a good thing for me that i'm not nor did I ever insinuate that they would. I guess I should labeled cuckoo for respecting the Ducks ability to score goals given the talent they still have. Silly me, I should just discard them like the rubbish they are. Yes, definitely, they suck. Underestimating them and scoffing at them because they haven't scored nearly as many goals as they should (sans Niedermayer, Schnieder and Bertuzzi of course) is the right way to go. I should've never spoken up and defended them. They blow donkey nuts and we should look down upon them like the vile, filthy, impotent hacks they are. The bottom line is without key players they are struggling and still find themselves in the middle of the pack in the WC as far as goals scored. I hope they continue to have problems all season but i'm not banking on it and i'm not going to discount them like some people here because they've had a not so steller first 18 games of the season.

Edited November 8, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[Turkey 0]

I agree that if this were going to happen in the future, the team should be on the hook for the full salary. I'm interested in this idea of having rosters finalized by a certain point, like in baseball. What would be the reason not to do that?

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I recall a certain Red Wing named Fedorov who in 97-98 ended his holdout and returned late in the season and led the wings to the cup that year.

Very interesting question. I picked him up and put him on the bench in my league. I am winning big time so I can take a gamble with a bench slot.

Tim, you're not winning big time and you're gloating is showing off how new you are to this whole thing. You will have a week or 2 where you'll got 2-11 and bam, you'll drop down. Look how many teams are below .500. Its very tight and anybody who has a good week will jump 4 spots. 2 good weeks in a row and you'll jump into the top 3. Just wait rookie, you'll get yours eventually. Happens to everyone.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Ahh, very true grasshopper. So its a good thing for me that i'm not nor did I ever insinuate that they would. I guess I should labeled cuckoo for respecting the Ducks ability to score goals given the talent they still have. Silly me, I should just discard them like the rubbish they are. Yes, definitely, they suck. Underestimating them and scoffing at them because they haven't scored nearly as many goals as they should (sans Niedermayer, Schnieder and Bertuzzi of course) is the right way to go. I should've never spoken up and defended them. They blow donkey nuts and we should look down upon them like the vile, filthy, impotent hacks they are. The bottom line is without key players they are struggling and still find themselves in the middle of the pack in the WC as far as goals scored. I hope they continue to have problems all season but i'm not banking on it and i'm not going to discount them like some people here because they've had a not so steller first 18 games of the season.

Jesus, step off the soapbox, *******. No need to go on a rant in response to my ONE SENTENCE.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Ok, lets follow some logic here:

Burke is a whiner. He ******* and complains to the media all the time. When somebody does him wrong, he goes after them in the spotlight. Regardless of whether or not he previously had a healthy relationship with that person. Case in point: Kevin Lowe steals Penner from the Ducks. Prior to this, Kevin Lowe and Brian Burke are self-proclaimed "good friends." Burke loses out on Penner, and Burke claims Lowe has "run his team into the sewer."

So where is this criticism for Niedermayer?? Should it not follow and can it not be said that Niedermayers absence is "running the Ducks into the sewer" even more so than any other injury or absent player? What do we hear from Burke on the front? Nothing.

Now lets compile this with the facts that:

1) Niedermayer has always been all about winning, and a very competitive player

2) He loves playing with his brother

3) He is entirely healthy, has no chronic injuries, and is still in his prime as a defenseman

4) Has 2 years left on his contract

5) Can make at least a million dollars playing for just a fraction of the season

6) Has always been a classy, dedicated hockey player.

So my question for everyone is, what happened between the Ducks winning the Stanley Cup and now that 1) suddenly turned Burke into a compassionate GM who uses punity only through the system (i.e the formal suspension) and not by running his mouth/personal attacks through the media and 2) suddenly turned Niedermayer into an indecisive, classless guy who is unsure about his dedication and passion for the game enough to make his organization and fellow teammates suffer?