I think the Rangers were more like the Yankees than Detroit. I refer to the Wings as "Team Sweden".
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
The Official 2012 NHL Stanely Cup Finals Thread
- Thread starter warwick.hoy
- Start date
- Status
I think the Rangers were more like the Yankees than Detroit. I refer to the Wings as "Team Sweden".
Burk and DH......the Coyotes and Panthers don't deserve to be in the SCF because they don't have a fan base you approve? That's elitist baloney if I ever heard it. But perhaps you prefer the small market teams stay that way and flounder around the league while your team continues to dominate....well not this year.
I'm glad Nashville won, it's good to see fresh faces in the league. I like Datsyuk, Holmstrom, and Z, but even I got tired of them over and over and over.
-Mike
I'm glad Nashville won, it's good to see fresh faces in the league. I like Datsyuk, Holmstrom, and Z, but even I got tired of them over and over and over.
-Mike
I remember reading; prior to the lockout, that the Red Wings had consistently the highest payroll. Somewhere around $230 Million in salary a year. Not the the Flyers were any better at around $216 Million. I don't remember where I read it but those numbers I specifically remember.
The Red Wings were able to win 3 Stanley Cups in the Bowman/Pre Cap era. So while you gave yourself a good chance if you stocked you team with quality players,...there was no guarantee that there will be a return on investment. That was then.
I approve of the Cap,....I think it levels the playing field and forces GMs to work at managing their clubs. Has it been successfully managed with regards to inflation and the economy? That's not for me to judge cause I'm not an expert on money. I just want to watch some hockey. Are there some negative side effects? But at what point are we just over analyzing and being over critical. Not that I'd give Buttman the time of day if I bumped into him on the street.
Do I expect every player on this Flyers team to return next year? Of course not. Do I expect the young players that they are developing or have developed; Coots,...Read,...Wellwood,...JVR,...or Giroux for that matter to be career Flyers? Not at all (look at Ritchie and Carter). That's not how it works anymore and that's why I think it's important for teams to seize the moment and capitalize on opportunity when they put themselves in a position to be successful. That's why I think even Toronto will have an opportunity in the coming years. That's why Florida has an opportunity this year.
The cap era is only 7 seasons old,....a toddler in hockey years IMO.
I'll definitely agree with the sentiment that teams are no longer able to have all the right pieces. At best they will have a few pieces dialed in as well as weaknesses to compensate for. So it behooves the coaches to work and role players to step up and be better. I will always have mass respect for any player that comes through the Flyers organization and makes an impact,...whether they move on or not. I still appreciate Richards, Carter, Gagne, Biron, Boucher.
The reason I say the NYR were more like the Yankees than the Wings is b/c the Wings actually grew the team through its own development system, not through FA signings, which is what the Rangers became infamous for.
Yeah,...I can see that. Messier, Graves, Gretzky, Kovalev, Jagr, Holik. Still the only team that they had SC success with was the 1994 team and that one was missing 4 of the 6 players I mention,...which goes to show that there is often times little return on investment.
I'm jumping on that bandwagon too (until the finals)
+1 Nothing would make me happier than a Kings-Flyers SCF.
I'm totally against the salary cap in professional sports. Why should big-market teams with rich owners get to buy talent, while small-market teams have to rely on luck and surprising success from low-budget guys to compete? If we wanted to have the same teams competing every single year, we should just go back to the Original Six.
I must be really tired since it looks like you are arguing FOR a salary cap, not against it.
-Mike
-Mike
I agree, they should drop the 1st round. Would make the regular season really count if only 8 teams went to the playoffs. Also, hockey in June seems wrong.
As a Vancouver resident, I am so glad the 'nucks are dusting off the golf clubs, sparing the city the expense and humiliation of another riot.
Later
Rob
Yeah, Hollow has gotten into the sauce, too. First we got Mike asking for a Coyote-Panther final, and now Hollow is arguing against his own statement. Rough weekend, guys, or what?
rob2966 said:
Hmmm. Now why would a Vancouver resident want the regular season to mean more.....hmmmmm, the mind quails......
I read a link on the Examiner that read the same way. Said something along the lines that the Preds, Panthers, and Coyotes had no place in the SC Finals.
Personally, I like the 8-teams-per-Conference format.*
* Note - This statement has been made by a fan of an 8th-seeded team.
IIRC, the same things were said about the Florida Marlins shortly before they won the World Series.
I like the 16 teams. As a fan of hockey I would like to make the season longer not shorter. Not to mention half is about the norm for professional sports to get in to the playoffs.
The only thing I would like is to do is make the divisions mean nothing. Why should a worse team get in before a better team because thier division sucks. Just because you won a horrible division, shouldn't be a reason to get in before a better team.
The only thing I would like is to do is make the divisions mean nothing. Why should a worse team get in before a better team because thier division sucks. Just because you won a horrible division, shouldn't be a reason to get in before a better team.
The Rangers actually consistently had higher salaries during the pre-cap era than the Wings proving that money alone wasn't enough, but management mattered.
My beef with the cap isn't that there is one, ii's that its a hard cap that discourages teams keeping players they develop. Its actually punitive against teams that do a good job of developing players. The cap should be more like the NBA's where you can go over the cap to keep your own players, but not to sign free agents. Perhaps something like a soft cap for your own draft choices and a hard cap for free agents.
- Status
