With it being summer, everyone on the usual hockey sites are all bitching about the usual topics- relocation/ contraction of southern market teams. Here's my response to everyone in general-
The problem with contraction/ relocation is it doesn't make all that much sense.
Hockey has NEVER been a popular sport in the U.S. All this "dilution of talent" argument is crap. I've been watching hockey for nearly 20 years now and the sport, from my point of view anyway, isn't any bigger or smaller than it ever has been in the U.S. You could contract half the damn league and turn the remaining teams into all-star caliber teams and it still wouldn't be watched or carried by most media markets.
Relocation, frankly, is just as stupid. Fans, largely Canadian ones, love to point at teams like Nashville or Florida or Tampa and whine about how there is no team in Winniquehamiltonbecpeg. Like it hurts the league. Honestly, people. Do you really thinking moving the Preds to wherever is going to make any kind of real difference other than piss off the people in Nashville who actually do like hockey and make Jimmy RIM happy? Explain it to me, because from here it's a wash.
The problem with the NHL is it doesn't know how to market itself. There's no reason why a regional niche sport like NASCAR can be this national phenomenon in the U.S. and NHL hockey can't.
Showing posts with label NHL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NHL. Show all posts
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Hockey.Kings.2008_Draft
So the draft is tonight.
Lots of speculation surrounding my beloved L.A. Kings. Tampa has already pretty well come out and said they're taking Stamkos with the number 1, but no one is quite sure who the Kings are looking at.
There are several schools of thought here, but they all pretty much boil down to...
1) Play it safe, possibly waste the 2nd overall pick and take Zach Bogosian or Drew Doughty?
2) Trade down a couple of slots and take Filatov?
3) Figure you're pretty well set up at the farm level for the immediate future and trade down a bunch (in a relatively shallow draft) and get what you can?
1 is a really boring option, but it's got the least likely chance of not paying off, which things being what the are in L.A., is why I think they should do it. By all accounts, Doughty and Bogosian are both blue-chip prospect defensemen that are as unlikely to be busts as anyone. Defensemen typically take longer to mature, but you've got an insurance policy in Jack Johnson that is already starting to pay off, so why not wait a couple of years for Doughty/ Bogosian to mature and learn the big game? Assuming they reach their potential along with Johnson, it'd be akin to having a couple of Prongers- good size, offensive upside, responsible play- on your team without all the dirty hits.
And for what it's worth, I'd pick Bogosian over Doughty. They're both great and very similar, but Bogo is from the U.S. and he ought to get on well with The Jack.
2 is the sexy option. Filatov has seen his stock rise a bunch the past year and he's starting to get mentioned in the same breath as some of the other recent Russian arrivals- Ovechkin, Malkin, and Kovalchuk.
I think it's unlikely that he'll make as big of an immediate impact as any of those guys, but it's possible he could be an Alexander Semin type who will take a little longer to mature but be a really solid player in a couple of years. This option isn't bad, but it does have a chance of missing and is somewhat unnecessary. For all of their flaws, one thing the Kings actually did do well last year was put the puck in the net. Scoring isn't a problem for this team, so adding somebody like Filatov isn't all that necessary when you keep in mind there are much more severe problems to be addressed- like defense and goaltending. However, if Mike Cammalleri does end up being traded this weekend, you can make more of a case for this line of thinking.
3 I think is a bad idea unless the Kings are being offered some solid prospect talent or young players in exchange for the number 2. This draft, according to most "experts" is a fairly shallow draft- there's a lot of talent in the first seven picks or so, then some decent talent down to the middle of the draft, but after 15 or so, it's all pretty relative. There's no point in trading the number 2 for multiple deeper picks unless you end up snaring multiple top 15 picks which probably won't happen.
The Kings still need to address holes in their team. This draft could go a long way towards doing that assuming Lombardi and Co. are smart about it.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Hockey.Penguins.Free_Agency
I said back at the trade deadline that I was a little unsure about Pittsburgh going into "win-now" mode with the Hossa trade where they gave up blue chip prospect Angelo Esposito.
(Forget my prediction about Feds not working out in Washington)
Now Ray Shero is doing the FA shuffle.
Being a Kings fan who is quite knowledgeable about the Pens, here's the major players and what I'd do with them. Take it for what it's worth.
1) Marian Hossa
Why you sign him: Big time, consistent offensive numbers.
Why you don't: Will be super expensive, already have a lot of scoring depth
Hossa stepped up big time in the post season netting 26 points. That's great, but you don't make these kinds of deals to sign the guy later, especially not when you know you've got to sign/ lock up half the damn team in a couple of months. Hossa was brought in to help Pitts win a Cup. It didn't happen. Does that make it a failure? Ah, sorta-kinda.
Here's the thing you have to ask yourself- if the Pens would've won the cup, do you resign Hossa? Probably not. You appreciate what he did for you, mourn for what you gave up, and enjoy the Cup. That's the very reason you don't resign him now. He's going to be too expensive. If the Pens sign Hossa, not only did they give up Armstrong and Esposito, they net gave up whoever else they can't sign. Hossa's great, but he's not worth that much to a team who already was averaging just over three goals a game in the regular season.
I tell ya though, if the rumors are true and Hossa really does want to stay in Pittsburgh, go with the "win-now" and offer him a two year contract at like say 10 million total. It's less money than he'd get on the open market, but it's also less time. Hossa will still be commanding huge stacks of cash in two years and if he's serious about winning a Cup with the Pens, he'll take it then move on for the long dough.
2) Ryan Malone
Why you sign him: Fan favorite, MUCH needed physical presence with offensive skills
Why you don't: Might ask more than he's really worth
Malone is great on the Pens. He's got B line (sometimes A line) hands but a big frame and a nose for the net. He doesn't mind standing in front of goalies and he sure as hell can take abuse. Take all that into account and also realize he's a fan favorite and has some family history with the Pens Org.
The only reason I can think of you don't sign him is he asks too much. In the post-lockout NHL, there isn't enough room for guys like Malone. When you compare his salary to the stars of the league who are making around 8-10 million a season, you can't really honestly expect Malone to ask for much more than 3 or 4 million over a relatively short contract. He had a nice playoff and he's still probably not yet lived up to his young potential, but keep in mind he also played for an extremely talented team on one of the most skilled lines in the league. I really hope Ottawa or some other team desperate for a forward with Malone's pedigree doesn't do a redux on the Boston Martin Lapointe contract and pay him a bunch because he really isn't worth it.
3) Marc-Andre Fleury
Why you sign him: One of the best young goaltenders in the game
Why you don't: Big contract, goalies are flaky by nature
The Pens were lucky enough to actually have a 1st round goalie pick work out, they need to make hay while the sun shines and sign this kid. Not signing him, from where I sit, isn't even an option. Fleury is definitely the kind of player that would make you regret signing him when he ends up on another team and wins a Cup in two seasons. It's unusual to see a kid this icy in net at such a young age. Unless he's just asking for insane money, you sign him- he's a cornerstone of your franchise, even more so now that the Pens have committed to "win-now."
4) Jordan Staal
Why you sign him: Big F'in Kid, adds to team toughness, solid defense
Why you don't: Offense?
Staal is a bit of a head scratcher to me. I'm not sure if he's so good on defense that Therrien didn't want to put him on one of the top two lines or if the kid just doesn't have hands at the NHL level. In any case, as he currently sits, he's a valuable part of the Penguins PK and defense.
If Malone walks, signing Staal becomes a priority. If he doesn't, it isn't so much. Throw the kid a 3 or 4 year deal for around 2.5 with some bonuses and see if he bites. If he doesn't, you can find other big third liners for cheaper (probably a few in Wilkes-Barre).
5) Evgeni Malkin
Why you sign him: He's one of the top five players in the league. Period.
Why you don't: Because you want to be fired as GM
Seriously, unless this kid asks for 20 million a year for 13 years or something, there is no reason you don't sign Malkin. Forget the playoffs and remember the way this kid stepped up when Sid went down. Why? Because Sid is going to go down. He plays more physical than his body allows. He's going to get hurt for 10-20 games every year. When that happens, you need somebody to pick up the battle standard and become the new go to guy. That guy is Malkin. How anyone who calls themself a hockey fan can look at this kid and say he isn't worth the money is absolutely nuts. And stop with the Jagr comparisions- this kid is light years away from where Jagr was back in the day.
Honest to God, if you made me a GM and said you can build your team around Crosby or Malkin, I'd take Malkin. That's not a slight to Crosby, I just think this kid has an offensive upside to rival Crosby and one important thing Sid doesn't have- size. Once Malkin figures out he's 6'3 and about 200 pounds and can throw his body around and forecheck as hard as Malone and Staal? The other team's forwards are going to be like Bill Paxton in Aliens: game over, man. The only player in the friggin' league with more upside than this kid is Ovechkin. Don't believe me? Save this post and show it to me in 10 years. We'll see who had the crystal ball.
(Forget my prediction about Feds not working out in Washington)
Now Ray Shero is doing the FA shuffle.
Being a Kings fan who is quite knowledgeable about the Pens, here's the major players and what I'd do with them. Take it for what it's worth.
1) Marian Hossa
Why you sign him: Big time, consistent offensive numbers.
Why you don't: Will be super expensive, already have a lot of scoring depth
Hossa stepped up big time in the post season netting 26 points. That's great, but you don't make these kinds of deals to sign the guy later, especially not when you know you've got to sign/ lock up half the damn team in a couple of months. Hossa was brought in to help Pitts win a Cup. It didn't happen. Does that make it a failure? Ah, sorta-kinda.
Here's the thing you have to ask yourself- if the Pens would've won the cup, do you resign Hossa? Probably not. You appreciate what he did for you, mourn for what you gave up, and enjoy the Cup. That's the very reason you don't resign him now. He's going to be too expensive. If the Pens sign Hossa, not only did they give up Armstrong and Esposito, they net gave up whoever else they can't sign. Hossa's great, but he's not worth that much to a team who already was averaging just over three goals a game in the regular season.
I tell ya though, if the rumors are true and Hossa really does want to stay in Pittsburgh, go with the "win-now" and offer him a two year contract at like say 10 million total. It's less money than he'd get on the open market, but it's also less time. Hossa will still be commanding huge stacks of cash in two years and if he's serious about winning a Cup with the Pens, he'll take it then move on for the long dough.
2) Ryan Malone
Why you sign him: Fan favorite, MUCH needed physical presence with offensive skills
Why you don't: Might ask more than he's really worth
Malone is great on the Pens. He's got B line (sometimes A line) hands but a big frame and a nose for the net. He doesn't mind standing in front of goalies and he sure as hell can take abuse. Take all that into account and also realize he's a fan favorite and has some family history with the Pens Org.
The only reason I can think of you don't sign him is he asks too much. In the post-lockout NHL, there isn't enough room for guys like Malone. When you compare his salary to the stars of the league who are making around 8-10 million a season, you can't really honestly expect Malone to ask for much more than 3 or 4 million over a relatively short contract. He had a nice playoff and he's still probably not yet lived up to his young potential, but keep in mind he also played for an extremely talented team on one of the most skilled lines in the league. I really hope Ottawa or some other team desperate for a forward with Malone's pedigree doesn't do a redux on the Boston Martin Lapointe contract and pay him a bunch because he really isn't worth it.
3) Marc-Andre Fleury
Why you sign him: One of the best young goaltenders in the game
Why you don't: Big contract, goalies are flaky by nature
The Pens were lucky enough to actually have a 1st round goalie pick work out, they need to make hay while the sun shines and sign this kid. Not signing him, from where I sit, isn't even an option. Fleury is definitely the kind of player that would make you regret signing him when he ends up on another team and wins a Cup in two seasons. It's unusual to see a kid this icy in net at such a young age. Unless he's just asking for insane money, you sign him- he's a cornerstone of your franchise, even more so now that the Pens have committed to "win-now."
4) Jordan Staal
Why you sign him: Big F'in Kid, adds to team toughness, solid defense
Why you don't: Offense?
Staal is a bit of a head scratcher to me. I'm not sure if he's so good on defense that Therrien didn't want to put him on one of the top two lines or if the kid just doesn't have hands at the NHL level. In any case, as he currently sits, he's a valuable part of the Penguins PK and defense.
If Malone walks, signing Staal becomes a priority. If he doesn't, it isn't so much. Throw the kid a 3 or 4 year deal for around 2.5 with some bonuses and see if he bites. If he doesn't, you can find other big third liners for cheaper (probably a few in Wilkes-Barre).
5) Evgeni Malkin
Why you sign him: He's one of the top five players in the league. Period.
Why you don't: Because you want to be fired as GM
Seriously, unless this kid asks for 20 million a year for 13 years or something, there is no reason you don't sign Malkin. Forget the playoffs and remember the way this kid stepped up when Sid went down. Why? Because Sid is going to go down. He plays more physical than his body allows. He's going to get hurt for 10-20 games every year. When that happens, you need somebody to pick up the battle standard and become the new go to guy. That guy is Malkin. How anyone who calls themself a hockey fan can look at this kid and say he isn't worth the money is absolutely nuts. And stop with the Jagr comparisions- this kid is light years away from where Jagr was back in the day.
Honest to God, if you made me a GM and said you can build your team around Crosby or Malkin, I'd take Malkin. That's not a slight to Crosby, I just think this kid has an offensive upside to rival Crosby and one important thing Sid doesn't have- size. Once Malkin figures out he's 6'3 and about 200 pounds and can throw his body around and forecheck as hard as Malone and Staal? The other team's forwards are going to be like Bill Paxton in Aliens: game over, man. The only player in the friggin' league with more upside than this kid is Ovechkin. Don't believe me? Save this post and show it to me in 10 years. We'll see who had the crystal ball.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
fighting.hockey
I was commenting on a THN.com article, and found myself answering this Adam guy's question about fighting in the NHL. I kept going in this circuitous and off-topic route, so I figured I ought to save him the time and trouble and turn it into a blog post instead.
So the question is- does fighting belong in hockey?
Seems like we can't have a season go by without this question being asked by some sportswriter somewhere. You get your typical initial knee-jerk reaction posts or comments which are generally centered around a "for" standpoint- it's been there for years, it actually discourages dirty play, fans dig it- and an "against" standpoint- it's why the sport doesn't get on T.V. it's why the NHL will never be taken seriously, it's why my friends don't watch it, (and my personal favorite) think of the children!
I used to get lured in by the cheap thrills of making a holier-than-thou-NHL-fan-longer-than-you post and going off on the subject, but with a few more years on me, a whole lot more mileage, and a few more sweaters (that's jerseys for you non-hockey fans out there) in my closet, I've uncovered the real reasons we, as hockey fans, have to endure this question every... single... damn... year.
Me being the courteous guy I am, I've listed the REAL reasons we have to endure the "Does fighting belong in hockey" question below.
1) Invariably at some point during the year, you'll have some incident in the NHL that somehow manages to make national headlines. This is ALWAYS something along the lines of the Steve Moore incident and never something like Alex Ovechkin scoring four goals, five points, 1 broken nose, and an unknown amount of stitches in the same game.
Anyone with any sense at all, regardless of whether or not they're a card carrying NHL fan, should realize that something like the Steve Moore incident has absolutely nothing to do with fighting in the NHL (neither did McSorely tapping Don Brashear on the head with his stick back a few years ago). What it does pertain to is something else entirely and frequently differs between each situation, but the response is always the same.
They damn the sport and it's sideshow-esque nature. They feign disbelief that something like this could happen in a professionally regulated sport. They express sympathy for the families involved. In short, they work up more emotion talking about two random canucks playing a sport than a member of the U.S. service killed in Iraq.
What's the real motivation? Incidents like these are a great opportunity for a sportswriter covering a largely unnoticed sport like hockey in the U.S. to get their name and face out to a very large contingent of people who are inevitably stopping by to rubberneck for a few minutes before moving on. So they do what we all do in that kind of situation- they make hay while the sun shines. They cash in.
Hockey fans may be a small lot, comparatively, but they're a passionate lot. I'm sure sportswriters mailboxes, both of the real-life and E variety fill up, posts are submitted, blog entries are posted. It's a news event just like any other. It generates traffic to sites, buzz on the streets, and revenue in ad dollars.
Also, it's a great time for a frustrated sportswriter to last out at a sport with no big name, big money friends. I'm sure it's tough not to jump all over the NFL every time a player dies, but talking bad about the NFL just isn't good for business.
2) A lot of non-fans love to point at fighting as the reason hockey isn't popular in the U.S. This is also where the "think of the children" people love to get in on the act pointing at guys like Stu Grimson and saying they don't want their kids emulating that kind of behavior.
This is, of course, total... bunk? You thought I was going to curse there didn't ya- I'm trying to keep it clean on this blog, thankyouverymuch.
The truth is, Americans love violence. We invented action movies and violent video games. We organized the national boxing leagues that would later expand to encompass the rest of the world. We started extreme sports, emulated gladiatorial games on TV, and when the aforementioned boxing wasn't enough started up "no-holds-barred" type mixed martial arts leagues to say nothing of the pseudo-sport that is professional wrestling. Our country, unlike say, Canada, was started with a bloody revolution. Now somebody is going to say to me with a straight face that Canadians are more bloodthirsty than we are because they, for the most part, don't mind fighting in hockey? Come on... Again, it isn't like it doesn't happen in baseball, football, or basketball anyway.
So why the double standard when it comes to fighting in hockey?
Simple. Hockey is outside of most people's comfort zones.
90% of all American males know the important rules to baseball, football, and basketball by the time they're 10 years old. Hockey is this weird sport most people don't know the rules for, so instead of admitting ignorance and trying to figure out what the sport is all about, it's much easier on the ego to simply dismiss it. This also applies to more fringe sports like boxing because 90% of the people you will ever meet understand boxing or MMA fights or whatever on the same level other people like you do- beat the crap out of the other guy, try not to die.
I make a lot of assumption in my opinion pieces, and I'll make another one here- I'll bet you that the vast majority of American sportswriters didn't grow up playing hockey, professionally or otherwise, and did not dream of getting a job reporting hockey. I'll bet you they wanted to cover one of the other three major sports and had to take a job covering hockey. They do their job with robotic precision and parrot back stats and events just as they would a game in their chosen field, but without the passion or interest they'd show their favorite respective sport.
So while fighting in baseball builds camaraderie and there's just nothing quite like a baseball fight, hockey players are goons! Whatever. Pot meet kettle.
Lastly, for anyone out there who honestly think their 10-year-old wants to grow up to be Tiger Williams, I ask you to take the following quiz: show the following pictures to your 14 year-old hockey fan son and ask him who he wants to be- Sidney Crosby or Tiger Williams?
The defense rests, your honor.
Fighting belongs in hockey simply because it's already there, it's been there for years, and it ought to continue to be there. Hockey's long and storied history is one of the few things that could possibly set it aside from the other pro sports here in the U.S. Unfortunately, Commissioner Bettman has made some moves to make that unique and colorful history bland and faceless at the expense of some outstanding folks who were originally honored just to try and make the sport more popular.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did the most recent sports league turned media frenzy NASCAR change any rules to make their sport more appealing? Has MMA? No. They simply kept doing what they were doing and tried to put the word out as best they could with effective marketing.
It's what the NHL ought to try. Stop listening to the talking heads in the media, the moms against hockey violence, and all that other noise and start listening to your damn fans.
For the past few years, I've been signed up as a member of the NHL Fan Face Off. Every couple of weeks during the season, the NHL sends me a link in my email box that takes me to a survey where I'm asked a bunch of questions- have I attended a game this season, do I know who's playing this Saturday/ Sunday on NBC, do I live in a market that gets the VS. channel, do I support the proposed rule changes, stuff like that. I'd say over the years I must have filled out at least 100 of these surveys. Never once have I been asked the simplest, yet most important question the NHL should actually be concerning themselves with-
Why are you a hockey fan?
But I digress in an already way too long article.
The NHL could've survived without fighting, much like it could've survived without guys like Constantine Smythe (no, not the guy from American Idol) or Clarence Campbell ever contributing anything to the sport, but it's sure a lot more unique with it in there.
So the question is- does fighting belong in hockey?
Seems like we can't have a season go by without this question being asked by some sportswriter somewhere. You get your typical initial knee-jerk reaction posts or comments which are generally centered around a "for" standpoint- it's been there for years, it actually discourages dirty play, fans dig it- and an "against" standpoint- it's why the sport doesn't get on T.V. it's why the NHL will never be taken seriously, it's why my friends don't watch it, (and my personal favorite) think of the children!
I used to get lured in by the cheap thrills of making a holier-than-thou-NHL-fan-longer-than-you post and going off on the subject, but with a few more years on me, a whole lot more mileage, and a few more sweaters (that's jerseys for you non-hockey fans out there) in my closet, I've uncovered the real reasons we, as hockey fans, have to endure this question every... single... damn... year.
Me being the courteous guy I am, I've listed the REAL reasons we have to endure the "Does fighting belong in hockey" question below.
1) Invariably at some point during the year, you'll have some incident in the NHL that somehow manages to make national headlines. This is ALWAYS something along the lines of the Steve Moore incident and never something like Alex Ovechkin scoring four goals, five points, 1 broken nose, and an unknown amount of stitches in the same game.
Anyone with any sense at all, regardless of whether or not they're a card carrying NHL fan, should realize that something like the Steve Moore incident has absolutely nothing to do with fighting in the NHL (neither did McSorely tapping Don Brashear on the head with his stick back a few years ago). What it does pertain to is something else entirely and frequently differs between each situation, but the response is always the same.
They damn the sport and it's sideshow-esque nature. They feign disbelief that something like this could happen in a professionally regulated sport. They express sympathy for the families involved. In short, they work up more emotion talking about two random canucks playing a sport than a member of the U.S. service killed in Iraq.
What's the real motivation? Incidents like these are a great opportunity for a sportswriter covering a largely unnoticed sport like hockey in the U.S. to get their name and face out to a very large contingent of people who are inevitably stopping by to rubberneck for a few minutes before moving on. So they do what we all do in that kind of situation- they make hay while the sun shines. They cash in.
Hockey fans may be a small lot, comparatively, but they're a passionate lot. I'm sure sportswriters mailboxes, both of the real-life and E variety fill up, posts are submitted, blog entries are posted. It's a news event just like any other. It generates traffic to sites, buzz on the streets, and revenue in ad dollars.
Also, it's a great time for a frustrated sportswriter to last out at a sport with no big name, big money friends. I'm sure it's tough not to jump all over the NFL every time a player dies, but talking bad about the NFL just isn't good for business.
2) A lot of non-fans love to point at fighting as the reason hockey isn't popular in the U.S. This is also where the "think of the children" people love to get in on the act pointing at guys like Stu Grimson and saying they don't want their kids emulating that kind of behavior.
This is, of course, total... bunk? You thought I was going to curse there didn't ya- I'm trying to keep it clean on this blog, thankyouverymuch.
The truth is, Americans love violence. We invented action movies and violent video games. We organized the national boxing leagues that would later expand to encompass the rest of the world. We started extreme sports, emulated gladiatorial games on TV, and when the aforementioned boxing wasn't enough started up "no-holds-barred" type mixed martial arts leagues to say nothing of the pseudo-sport that is professional wrestling. Our country, unlike say, Canada, was started with a bloody revolution. Now somebody is going to say to me with a straight face that Canadians are more bloodthirsty than we are because they, for the most part, don't mind fighting in hockey? Come on... Again, it isn't like it doesn't happen in baseball, football, or basketball anyway.
So why the double standard when it comes to fighting in hockey?
Simple. Hockey is outside of most people's comfort zones.
90% of all American males know the important rules to baseball, football, and basketball by the time they're 10 years old. Hockey is this weird sport most people don't know the rules for, so instead of admitting ignorance and trying to figure out what the sport is all about, it's much easier on the ego to simply dismiss it. This also applies to more fringe sports like boxing because 90% of the people you will ever meet understand boxing or MMA fights or whatever on the same level other people like you do- beat the crap out of the other guy, try not to die.
I make a lot of assumption in my opinion pieces, and I'll make another one here- I'll bet you that the vast majority of American sportswriters didn't grow up playing hockey, professionally or otherwise, and did not dream of getting a job reporting hockey. I'll bet you they wanted to cover one of the other three major sports and had to take a job covering hockey. They do their job with robotic precision and parrot back stats and events just as they would a game in their chosen field, but without the passion or interest they'd show their favorite respective sport.
So while fighting in baseball builds camaraderie and there's just nothing quite like a baseball fight, hockey players are goons! Whatever. Pot meet kettle.
Lastly, for anyone out there who honestly think their 10-year-old wants to grow up to be Tiger Williams, I ask you to take the following quiz: show the following pictures to your 14 year-old hockey fan son and ask him who he wants to be- Sidney Crosby or Tiger Williams?
The defense rests, your honor.
Fighting belongs in hockey simply because it's already there, it's been there for years, and it ought to continue to be there. Hockey's long and storied history is one of the few things that could possibly set it aside from the other pro sports here in the U.S. Unfortunately, Commissioner Bettman has made some moves to make that unique and colorful history bland and faceless at the expense of some outstanding folks who were originally honored just to try and make the sport more popular.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did the most recent sports league turned media frenzy NASCAR change any rules to make their sport more appealing? Has MMA? No. They simply kept doing what they were doing and tried to put the word out as best they could with effective marketing.
It's what the NHL ought to try. Stop listening to the talking heads in the media, the moms against hockey violence, and all that other noise and start listening to your damn fans.
For the past few years, I've been signed up as a member of the NHL Fan Face Off. Every couple of weeks during the season, the NHL sends me a link in my email box that takes me to a survey where I'm asked a bunch of questions- have I attended a game this season, do I know who's playing this Saturday/ Sunday on NBC, do I live in a market that gets the VS. channel, do I support the proposed rule changes, stuff like that. I'd say over the years I must have filled out at least 100 of these surveys. Never once have I been asked the simplest, yet most important question the NHL should actually be concerning themselves with-
Why are you a hockey fan?
But I digress in an already way too long article.
The NHL could've survived without fighting, much like it could've survived without guys like Constantine Smythe (no, not the guy from American Idol) or Clarence Campbell ever contributing anything to the sport, but it's sure a lot more unique with it in there.
Friday, February 29, 2008
TradeDeadline2007.Hockey
My favorite hockey team, the Los Angeles Kings, have not been good for quite some time. We had a couple flashes of brilliance there in the early 00s (pronounced zeroes, you cretins) with those Deadmarsh and Palffy lineups, but for the most part, we've been crap since about 1994.
So while I had virtually no interest in this year's trade deals other than hoping the Kings would unload some of the overpaid overage talent, I still feel the need to comment on a few of the deals that went down earlier this week.
The Big Deal- Hossa goes to Pittsburgh
Reminding me phonetically of one of my favorite Ramones songs aside, this was unquestionably the biggest deal made this year, but to me, it's something of a head scratcher.
Hockey pundits will want to burn me for saying that, but that's ok. All, and yes, I mean all, American born hockey pundits are just guys doing time until a baseball job opens up. The Canadian pundits aren't much better with their blatant homerism towards players and teams north of the border. But enough stalling, why do I raise an eyebrow to the Hossa deal when all other hockey people in the universe are praising Penguins GM Ray Shero?
Making a move for a UFA like Hossa is essentially telling Sidney Crosby- nice job being an MVP and all, but we want a cup and we want it NOW. The Pens didn't give up too much- Colby Armstrong is the prototypical NHL underachiever and Erik Christensen is another one of those little too good to be a third liner, but not consistent enough to be second type of guys. Angelo Esposito is the real name departing from Pittsburgh in this deal- don't let anyone tell you any differently. By letting go of the prospect Esposito, the Penguins are, at least in my opinion, in "win now" mode officially.
The Pens have scoring to be sure, Malkin and Crosby are potent as either a 1-2 pairing at center with whoever playing on their respective wings, and playing on the same line, they're virtually unstoppable. Hossa would actually be the least talented guy on a Malkin-Crosby-Hossa line, and thinking about that statement too long should be enough to make most people's heads explode.
So what's the problem?
It's too much too soon for a kid like Sid. I know, I know, he's been groomed to be the poster boy of the NHL and all, but no matter how good The Kid is, he isn't ready for the responsibility of taking this extremely young team on his own, admittedly broad, shoulders. There's virtually no veteran leadership on this team outside of "Scary" Gary Roberts and (former King) Darryl Sydor. Ty Conklin has played over his head filling in for Marc-Andre Fleury, but goalies are a mercurial bunch and the Game 1 goal of the 2006 Cup Finals might still rattle the U.S. born goalie. The Penguin defense is largely provided by the entire team as the D corps is minus any real outstanding defensive talent (Sergei Gonchar being oustanding offensive talent in my book).
With the wheels falling off in Ottawa, it's possible, if not highly likely, the Penguins win the Eastern Conference, but what happens if they run up against Detroit, or as much as I hate to admit it, Anaheim in the finals? Youth and scoring very rarely win Cups.
I guess my concern is that so much pressure will be placed on Sid, and it will be pressure that he gladly accepts because that seems to be just the kind of player and person he already has become, that it will be too much and he'll be burned by it- thinking it's his fault they got swept in the finals and all, when really, it's just management pushing too hard and expecting too much out of a kid of even Sid's considerable talent. Don't forget, this time two years ago, the Pens were dead last. The turnaround happened much quicker than anyone expected. Me personally, I think management should've remembered that and given the Pens another year before pulling some blockbuster, future-mortgaging move.
I have been known to over-analyze, however.
A not quite as big deal, but still pretty big- Richards does Dallas
Everyone has known for quite awhile that Tampa Bay wouldn't be able to keep St. Louis, Richards, and Lecavalier together forever. Richards, while extremely capable was found to be the odd man out and was sent to Dallas.
It's a great move for Dallas, replacing an aging superstar like Mike Modano with a superstar like Richards who is really just entering his prime. The Stars also didn't really give up anything but cap space and a few odd parts by doing this deal. Speaking from the point of view of a Pacific Conference rival (can we PLEASE put the Stars in the Central for God's sake and let them beat up on STL or Chicago for a change?) I've been waiting for the Stars to get worse, not bad, but at least worse for years now and it just won't happen. I'm sure Canadians love to hate the Stars. They've been so solid for so long in the South...
Colorado rebuilding Cup winning team
Am I nuts or did I not read like two weeks ago that Forsberg was NOT coming back to the NHL this season? All of a sudden, he's signed by the Avs and for good measure, they went and traded for Adam Foote. I'm just wondering if any calls were made to Roy.
Forsberg is can't lose as even if he sucks after being off for a year they only gave up money. The thing Avs fans should be concerned about is the giving up of draft picks in their deadline dealings. I don't think any sane person would give you odds on the Avs making it to the Western Conference finals, let alone the Stanley Cup finals, so again, why mortgage the future? They've got a few outstanding kids- Stasny and Liles, but other than that, it seems slim. This kind of dealing gets you stuck in that black hole of not being a contender, yet not being bad enough to get good picks. The Avs need to be careful with stuff like this.
Capitals get Fedorov, Cooke, and Huet
Not the worst moves, but again, not sure if they were the smartest. Feds has been blah the past few seasons, but I understand the idea of trying to spread scoring across lines. I'd assume they'll pair him with Ovechkin rather than Semin, but who knows. Cooke adds some grit which is always good for an East team, and Huet is a competent backup (not that it means much playing behind an ironman like 'Zilla).
It's sort of like Colorado's moves though- I don't really get it. None of those guys are going to put a team over the top, let alone a borderline team like Washington. Ah well, I guess uncle Ted needed something to blog about.
Sharks and Sabres Deal
This is one of those surprisingly serendipitous deals that really does benefit both teams evenly. San Jose who has uncharacteristically underachived this year and relied HEAVILY on Evgeni Nabokov (who deserves an MVP in my opinion) gets an overachiver in Brian Campbell. Buffalo, who let the two guys who were really good go and kept the one who might be last summer, have played over their heads just to stay in contention get an underachiever in Steve Bernier. I also like this move because I have Bernier in my fantasy league and he's much better than he's played this season. Hopefully some of the famous Buffalo work ethic will rub off on him.
Those were the big ones. The rest were more or less inconsequential.
I do like that Columbus was able to hang on to their kids. I know they're an expansion team and a still relatively young one at that, but they've sucked for too long. I like the direction Ken Hitchcock has them heading in and I like the fact they didn't give up just yet on Zherdev. Somebody's going to look like a genius if that kid ever gets his head on straight.
I also like the fact that the Kings got rid of Modry and Stuart. Too bad Blake was on the IR or we might have been able to ship him back to the Avs...
So while I had virtually no interest in this year's trade deals other than hoping the Kings would unload some of the overpaid overage talent, I still feel the need to comment on a few of the deals that went down earlier this week.
The Big Deal- Hossa goes to Pittsburgh
Reminding me phonetically of one of my favorite Ramones songs aside, this was unquestionably the biggest deal made this year, but to me, it's something of a head scratcher.
Hockey pundits will want to burn me for saying that, but that's ok. All, and yes, I mean all, American born hockey pundits are just guys doing time until a baseball job opens up. The Canadian pundits aren't much better with their blatant homerism towards players and teams north of the border. But enough stalling, why do I raise an eyebrow to the Hossa deal when all other hockey people in the universe are praising Penguins GM Ray Shero?
Making a move for a UFA like Hossa is essentially telling Sidney Crosby- nice job being an MVP and all, but we want a cup and we want it NOW. The Pens didn't give up too much- Colby Armstrong is the prototypical NHL underachiever and Erik Christensen is another one of those little too good to be a third liner, but not consistent enough to be second type of guys. Angelo Esposito is the real name departing from Pittsburgh in this deal- don't let anyone tell you any differently. By letting go of the prospect Esposito, the Penguins are, at least in my opinion, in "win now" mode officially.
The Pens have scoring to be sure, Malkin and Crosby are potent as either a 1-2 pairing at center with whoever playing on their respective wings, and playing on the same line, they're virtually unstoppable. Hossa would actually be the least talented guy on a Malkin-Crosby-Hossa line, and thinking about that statement too long should be enough to make most people's heads explode.
So what's the problem?
It's too much too soon for a kid like Sid. I know, I know, he's been groomed to be the poster boy of the NHL and all, but no matter how good The Kid is, he isn't ready for the responsibility of taking this extremely young team on his own, admittedly broad, shoulders. There's virtually no veteran leadership on this team outside of "Scary" Gary Roberts and (former King) Darryl Sydor. Ty Conklin has played over his head filling in for Marc-Andre Fleury, but goalies are a mercurial bunch and the Game 1 goal of the 2006 Cup Finals might still rattle the U.S. born goalie. The Penguin defense is largely provided by the entire team as the D corps is minus any real outstanding defensive talent (Sergei Gonchar being oustanding offensive talent in my book).
With the wheels falling off in Ottawa, it's possible, if not highly likely, the Penguins win the Eastern Conference, but what happens if they run up against Detroit, or as much as I hate to admit it, Anaheim in the finals? Youth and scoring very rarely win Cups.
I guess my concern is that so much pressure will be placed on Sid, and it will be pressure that he gladly accepts because that seems to be just the kind of player and person he already has become, that it will be too much and he'll be burned by it- thinking it's his fault they got swept in the finals and all, when really, it's just management pushing too hard and expecting too much out of a kid of even Sid's considerable talent. Don't forget, this time two years ago, the Pens were dead last. The turnaround happened much quicker than anyone expected. Me personally, I think management should've remembered that and given the Pens another year before pulling some blockbuster, future-mortgaging move.
I have been known to over-analyze, however.
A not quite as big deal, but still pretty big- Richards does Dallas
Everyone has known for quite awhile that Tampa Bay wouldn't be able to keep St. Louis, Richards, and Lecavalier together forever. Richards, while extremely capable was found to be the odd man out and was sent to Dallas.
It's a great move for Dallas, replacing an aging superstar like Mike Modano with a superstar like Richards who is really just entering his prime. The Stars also didn't really give up anything but cap space and a few odd parts by doing this deal. Speaking from the point of view of a Pacific Conference rival (can we PLEASE put the Stars in the Central for God's sake and let them beat up on STL or Chicago for a change?) I've been waiting for the Stars to get worse, not bad, but at least worse for years now and it just won't happen. I'm sure Canadians love to hate the Stars. They've been so solid for so long in the South...
Colorado rebuilding Cup winning team
Am I nuts or did I not read like two weeks ago that Forsberg was NOT coming back to the NHL this season? All of a sudden, he's signed by the Avs and for good measure, they went and traded for Adam Foote. I'm just wondering if any calls were made to Roy.
Forsberg is can't lose as even if he sucks after being off for a year they only gave up money. The thing Avs fans should be concerned about is the giving up of draft picks in their deadline dealings. I don't think any sane person would give you odds on the Avs making it to the Western Conference finals, let alone the Stanley Cup finals, so again, why mortgage the future? They've got a few outstanding kids- Stasny and Liles, but other than that, it seems slim. This kind of dealing gets you stuck in that black hole of not being a contender, yet not being bad enough to get good picks. The Avs need to be careful with stuff like this.
Capitals get Fedorov, Cooke, and Huet
Not the worst moves, but again, not sure if they were the smartest. Feds has been blah the past few seasons, but I understand the idea of trying to spread scoring across lines. I'd assume they'll pair him with Ovechkin rather than Semin, but who knows. Cooke adds some grit which is always good for an East team, and Huet is a competent backup (not that it means much playing behind an ironman like 'Zilla).
It's sort of like Colorado's moves though- I don't really get it. None of those guys are going to put a team over the top, let alone a borderline team like Washington. Ah well, I guess uncle Ted needed something to blog about.
Sharks and Sabres Deal
This is one of those surprisingly serendipitous deals that really does benefit both teams evenly. San Jose who has uncharacteristically underachived this year and relied HEAVILY on Evgeni Nabokov (who deserves an MVP in my opinion) gets an overachiver in Brian Campbell. Buffalo, who let the two guys who were really good go and kept the one who might be last summer, have played over their heads just to stay in contention get an underachiever in Steve Bernier. I also like this move because I have Bernier in my fantasy league and he's much better than he's played this season. Hopefully some of the famous Buffalo work ethic will rub off on him.
Those were the big ones. The rest were more or less inconsequential.
I do like that Columbus was able to hang on to their kids. I know they're an expansion team and a still relatively young one at that, but they've sucked for too long. I like the direction Ken Hitchcock has them heading in and I like the fact they didn't give up just yet on Zherdev. Somebody's going to look like a genius if that kid ever gets his head on straight.
I also like the fact that the Kings got rid of Modry and Stuart. Too bad Blake was on the IR or we might have been able to ship him back to the Avs...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
