Learn2LuvIt

Most likely will. Speed is 100% related to back strength. And so all we can hope is they find what the back issue is and fix it. If it's never diagnosed, it's going to be a risky game.

 

Respectfully, I 100% disagree with your statement above.  Are you saying leg strength, leg drive, push technique, abdominal/core strength, etc... don't have anything to do with speed??  Back strength is certainly a factor, but not THE 100% factor!

One of my favorite post game interviews by a coach.  Best moment at 0:47...."Tha Sof"

 

Confirmed:

The Windy City Blows

Kane vs. Abel (...and Howe, Yzerman, Lindsay,Delvecchio, and Sawchuck) 

Feeling okay today.  Expecting a game 1 victory on away ice (and to that degree...Chicago in the UC) against the President's Trophy winners was a very, very tall order.  Our job is to split and get back to the Joe. 

 

For my captain obvious statement of the day: Not the single reason we lost last night, but I do believe we lost our legs in the late 2nd and 3rd.  IMO..there is no doubt the boys went out in Anaheim and have a few "pops" after the game 7 win.  Jimmy even eluded to this fact (with a wry smile) in post game interview.  Next day, long flight back to the D.  Players go home and scramble to make up quality time with family/friends for a half day since they've virtually been preoccupied for the last two weeks with beating the Ducks.  Next day, onto Chicago and flight to windy city and back in a hotel room.  Players bodies probably still adjusting to not being on PST time.  It got to them.  Ran on adrenaline for the first half of the game, then nothing.  It happens.  That's why playing the in West has/had been such a disadvantage to us.

 

One other observation: I can't stand the light feather chip pass/shot when we are trying desperately to clear our own zone.  We do this A LOT!  When guys have been on the ice for 50 seconds and are dead tired, and the other team is all over us (I mean hornets nest ALL OVER US!) , we go for the soft chip up the boards.  I don't get it??  In those situations, you have to hard around or hard out, and take the icing if it happens.  I know we can't change lines in that case, but at the very least you'll get a 30 second breather to regroup.  Last night the Hawks had two forwards standing atop at blue line, just waiting to intercept these attempts.  They'd prevent our clearing attempt, long pass along blue line to other side of ice, and their in business with a good set up.  It drives me crazy!!!! 

 

Lastly, Quincy needs to sit.  His transition game in our own zone is slow, predictable, and pathetic.  Just bad.

 

Our job is to split and get back home.  Let's do this.

The only thing I don't agree with in this situation is no call being made at the time, by a ref who was three feet away.

 

Besides that, I'm okay with the rest.  A lot of speculation around the rule(s) and interpretation of this hit.  Doesn't really matter.  He clearly lined him up from at least 20 feet, drilled him at full speed, made contact with his head, and left his feet during the hit (like Michael Jordon type air).  The reality is that it doesn't really matter if he left his feet before hit, during, after...if he made contact with head or shoulder first, or how many strides he took before the hit.....whatever.  The fact that three elements potentially happened and debatable for a single play/hit....charging, contact with the head, and his feet leaving the ice, you're done.  Any of these three happened alone on one hit, he may have avoided suspension, but together it really a easy to see how he got suspended.  It's been like this for a while now in hockey, and all the players are very aware of what the league is trying to crack down on.  Is it better now than when players could absolutely destroy other players without recourse?...I don't think so.  But it IS REALITY.  Weber hit??....geez- ancient history.  What is Shanny going to give us a mulligan on that one.  For our mental health sake, get over it.

 

Abby should know better.  I give him an A+ on willingness to be physical.  F for execution.  D for intelligence on particular play at that particular time .  Full speed, contact with head, leaving your feet....You do that in the playoffs and a guy gets helped off the ice injured....the punishment will be heavy in today's NHL. 

 

Anyhow, I don't want to turn into Ducks fans who only talk about how they get screwed by the refs year-after-year and how they could have 8 Stanley Cups if it weren't for the league and the refs wanting them to lose.  As Wings fans, we're so many levels above that.  It's done.  He nailed a guy.  He's out for two.  Playoff hockey.  Let's tie this beeeaaatttttch up and win it in six.

Ummmm...of course you should.  The real question is are you Verlander or Valverde?

Wrong. You havent thought this out. You add more glass seats and more seats up to the last x amount of rows that need to be removed in the lower section. So if you have 25 rows around the lower section and you need to remove 3 of them to get the bigger ice, you are not losing rows 1, 2, and 3 as far as tickets and ticket prices are concerned. Youre losing rows 23, 24, and 25. That is lost revenue that needs to be made up, but im sure they could make it up with ticket price increases.

I would propose to make it mandatory for a rink thats 15 feet wider and 30 feet longer for every NEW NHL arena from this point forward. Then give existing teams/arenas the option for upgrade. Fast teams with skill would probably change their rinks. Slow teams with muckers would probably stick to what they have.

Respectfully....I don't think you read my post thoroughly.  I never mentioned losing premium seats (other posters did), I simply stated that you would be loosing three rows at ice level.  Which you would be....I don't care how you want to number the rows and what you charge per that row....really not that relevant. 

But for argument sake; let's take your assertion that an arena would loose three rows.  That's at least 300-400 seats!! (and that's a very conservative number....look at a map of The Joe and start counting).  So let's take your theory and follow it through (at least try)....the top seats of the lower bowl at the Joe go for $80 a seat (that's actually low as I did my research and three of the major ticket venue's have the average price of these top lower bowl rows a bit higher than $80 per seat).

= Math (using low numbers and averages to give you a break make sure there is no doubt you have no clue):

300 seats x $80 per seat = $24,000 per game in lost revenue

$24,000 in lost revenue per game x 41 home games per year = $984,000 in lost revenue per year!!!

 

Also things any owner/business minded person would consider:

300 people per game that are NOT buying your food, pop, beer, jersey's/swag, and parking!!!!  A survey conducted by HockeyBroad 65.7% of hockey fans claimed they spent more than $26 above ticket price when attending an NHL game.  Link to article and survey http://www.hockeybroad.com/

= Math

300 fans per game x $26 = $7800 in lost revenue per game.

41 home games per year x $7800 = $319,800 in lost revenue per year!!!!

 

So now we are up to $1,303,800 in lost revenue per year!!!!

 

Lastly:

Construction cost remove these 3 rows!!  (Again, I'm no builder or architect...but this sounds like a couple million at least).

 

In your statement about adding more premium glass seats....maybe some, but not that many.  Having 100 more seats that you can charge $30 more per seat (again...Math: 100 more premium seats x $30 more per seat...$3000 per game....$123,000 season....this doesn't offset the $1,303,800 you lost in achieving this + building costs!!!).  Hell, you could add 200 more premium seats and the economics STILL don't work.  Any why, because the fans want it.  I'm not sure if you were around the last 6 months of the lockout, but the owners don't have a huge respect for "what the fans want".  They are business owners first, hockey people second.  Dude...I'm no Bill Gates....but you're the one who might want to think this out.  Booya.

After reading/watching/following (twitter/facebook/etc...) everything that I possibly can get access to, I'm siding with the owners.  I guess more specifically, I'm siding against the Fehr brothers.  I think they are doing a disservice to the NHLPA by giving them a false sense of bargaining power in this negotiation.  Although both sides can say what they want, I believe the owners compromised on a few of the NHLPA "top priority" issues that they previously had refused to, in an effort to display some good will toward the players and get a deal done.  However, the owners did express that just as the players had "top priority issues", so did the owners.  The owners compromised and I truly believe the Fehr brothers took this not as good will, but weakness on the part of the owners....which led to them cheer lead to the players that there is an even better deal to be had...."we've got em on the ropes boys!!"

These owners have put millions and billions of THEIR OWN MONEY into purchasing/maintaining their respective clubs.  Huge money that was made in another industries.  Do you think they are going to let the Fehr brothers "pull punches" in the waning hours when a deal was very likely headed to be signed??  I don't think Fehr have installed a true sense of reality into the players.  It may and should be construed as fear.  Fear of what?....Fear that they really are replaceable.  Fear that, in reality, a lot of these players don't have a lot of attractive options beyond the NHL.  You worked your whole life to play in the NHL and now....you play in AHL....you play in Europe?  Second rate league, half way around the world from your home...with sub par accommodations (some say dangerous accommodations...look at just the travel accommodations alone and the tragedy of the plane crash that took our former coach BC and so many other players lives).  A league that puts on average 1/2 of the people in the seats night after night.  Fear that for a lot of these guys without hockey they'd be back working the family farm in Manitoba.  How much does that pay??

So let's get real players.  You are paid a huge salary under the last CBA and any future agreement.  You are going to make a TON of money for playing a GAME.  Mr. Player, what did you contribute to make the whole Detroit Red Wings enterprise work??  Your 3rd line play and constant injuries after being left for dead by the entire NHL and given one last chance with the Wings?? (sorry Dan Cleary, but your tweets and rhetoric have gotten under my skin).  A big goal in a playoff game??  An NOW YOUR ENTITLED to the revenues and business compromising advantages of the entire business??  Get real. Players; we wear your jerseys and have unwavering support for you....and you can't even have our backs as fans?  "Well look at how much money the owners are making....we want some of it for ourselves"....I say...GET REAL, WHAT OTHER BUSINESS LETS YOU LOOK AT THE BALANCE SHEET AND START MAKING DEMANDS OF YOUR OWNER ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT!!  They paid hundreds of millions of their dollars to own the business and with that, the risk of owning and NHL team.  They earned that right to run their business.  You earn your right to wear the jersey (Winged Wheel) and you earn your right to more playing time and potentially a salary raise.  You don't do anything but play hockey and know nothing to very little about running a business.  So Dan Cleary....go back to Newfoundland and earn your living back there...go play in Europe year after year if you don't like it...maybe try real estate.  I realize that might screw up your 3 golf rounds a week at Oakland HIlls (true), but hey, we should be falling all over you right....YOUR DAN CLEARY!!!

A bit aggravated this morning.  As a fan who loves this game and have supported this game and players for 35 years...players need to fire Fehr and start making rational/reality for themselves.  Decisions for the fairness of yourselves as millionaires playing a game, and for the fans who you all claim you "can't thank enough" (excerpt from any player interview regarding the fans).

Maybe we just had the plane circle his house at low altitude for an hour or so to make sure he's crystal clear on our desire to sign him.

Spolier Alert: sometimes, the best team doesn't always win.

This notion may have some merit if this were a one game-championship game..but even in this case, the best is the team that does what is required to advance/win at that particular point in time.  

However, in a best of seven series such as the NHL, I 100% completely disagree with you (respectfully).  The best team always wins.

I read your statement, I didn't and still don't understand it's relevance at all.

You don't understand comments/posts about different coaching styles/motivational styles in a thread about Calling the team out???

Awesome!!

Oh ok.  Well Torts isn't very successful and he inspires by being a hardass, and Bruce Boudreau isn't very successful and uses the other approach.  My guess is, either method could be successful depending on the way the coach and the team interact.

I completely agree.

Thinking about Babs in this regard, my gut is that he uses the hardass with the lower performing and younger players, and the other approach with the likes of Lids, Dats, Z, etc...  It's hard to tell with Babs though, he's so composed in the media that I never know what the interaction is 'behind the scene".

I'm joining this conversation late.  What was your point about the differing methods of inspiration?

Poster "Chunky Lover" posted about two ways in which to inspire; through love or fear.  I simply made the comment about thinking of which of those two ways, as pure example, which one of those I thought John Tortorella subscribed to.  I just picked Torts as an example not based on any winning/success that he's has or hasn't had...just picked him.  Frozen-Man didn't read my statement that I chose Tort's as pure example, which lead to him making comments about how Tort's is a not a successful coach and who cares.