Thrashers

By J.B.

November 27, 2007 2:38 PM | Link to this

We’ve got to get Kovy up to 3rd. Y’all go back and vote some more!

oh, and FIRST!!!

By Hockeyfan

November 27, 2007 2:43 PM | Link to this

Happy Birthday.

By d

November 27, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

Is there a risk that allowing clubs to “eat salaries” to promote trading would create a disadvantage for small market and low revenue generating teams such as Raleigh, Nashville, and Atlanta?

As I understand Scott’s plan, the club’s are still on the hook to pay the salaries negotiated in the players contract - but they are not fully counted against the club’s cap. Kinda reminds me of acconting at Enron and Citicorp.

By Hockeyfan

November 27, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this

If I had known it was your birthday I would have at least said something at practice today…

By J.B.

November 27, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this

If Kari’s lost it, I think we’d be fine to keep on going with Moose and Opie.

Don’t know enough about the visor or salary debates to weigh in…

Craig, what do the asterisks (*) indicate next to Kovalev and Richards’ names?

By Sara

November 27, 2007 2:58 PM | Link to this

Hey, don’t blame me - I voted for Kovy 10 times today already. I have been voting for Ovechkin too but that’s going to stop right here right now. Not voting for anybody ahead of Kovy in the standings here. I’d be curious to know how many votes Enstrom has, just for poots and giggles. Burnside had the numbers for some of the other write-ins.

As for the GM meeting - I’m all for changing the schedules back the way they were. It won’t kill the East to travel out West more and I think every fan really wants to be able to see every other team at least once. Visors - I’ve always been for it. The owners are the ones ponying up all this money - they have a right to protect their investments/assets. I haven’t made up my mind on the salary issue, but I’m leaning toward yes. As long as whatever a team eats still hits their cap numbers, it won’t really prove to be a huge advantage for other clubs. And yeah, since I’d like to see Zhitnik on his way out the door (barring him tripping and falling into the fountain of youth), it would help this club out.

Happy belated b-day Craig. No worries, in another week I’ll have you by a year. Time flies, huh?

By Rawhide

November 27, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

Happy Birthday Craig!!!

And now, a special song written just for you on your special day!

(ahem)….

This is your birthday song And it’s not very long…

Thank you, thank you very much!

By Craig Custance

November 27, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

d - I think that’s a fair concern. There’d be talks of limiting that so big-market teams couldn’t take advantage of it too much.

JB — Those are write-in votes. Pretty impressive, ain’t it?

Rawhide - Thanks, and fantastic blog blog from the Blueland U. Do I get to teach a class?

Sara — I’ll see if I can dig up the Enstrom numbers. They’re not enough to register on the latest results though.

Sara — Yeah, there’s a lot of strategy there. If you guys are stuffing the ballots for Kovy, but voting for Ovechkin or Briere in the other spot, you’re kind of defeating the purpose.

By Rawhide

November 27, 2007 4:03 PM | Link to this

Sure, you can teach a class at Blueland U. But I warn you….it can be a tough crowd.

By GSU-Lee

November 27, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this

Craig, if it makes a difference, you don’t look a day over 29…

By Sara

November 27, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this

Sure, you can teach a class at Blueland U. But I warn you….it can be a tough crowd.

Craig don’t listen to him ~ you remember how school works - the substitute is always waayyyy more popular than the regular prof.

(I am sooo getting an F on my next assignment.)

By Craig Custance

November 27, 2007 4:47 PM | Link to this

Just got an e-mail from the Wolves - if you’re interested in watching Kari tonight, log on to http://www.chicagowolves.com/main and there’s a link to watch the game. It’s six bucks.

By Thrasher Ryan

November 27, 2007 4:48 PM | Link to this

CC—When I got back in town, I grabbed the AJC Print edition on Sunday to catch up on everything I had missed and I gotta say that your article on Tobias Enstrom was top-notch. Keep up the good work, buddy.

By Thrasher_Ed

November 27, 2007 5:05 PM | Link to this

Craig C. and others, Please other than his salary explain why Bryan McCabe would not be an attractive player to the Thrash. Here is a player with great numbers and a booming heavy shoot from the point. Since the lock-out McCabe has 34 Goals & 91 Assists for 125 points and he is a +2. Yeah, he is not presently having a great year by his standards, but he also is not being played in the situations he is used to playing in most games. If you could get him and Toronto paid half his salary! Why not? I know! What do you give up in return?

By pw

November 27, 2007 5:06 PM | Link to this

Kari will come back strong. I think his problem was that he was criticized in public for not being a Patrick Roy personality. No telling what was said to him otherwise. Kari came out strong last year. I think his problem is gone and you will see his spririt and Moxie back.

By ranallo10

November 27, 2007 5:13 PM | Link to this

I’ve said it already Sara, STOP KISSING UP!!! Now you’re doing it towards the future substitute…it’s pitiful.

Salary Issue — With the proposed cap on dollars swapped per transaction set at $2M max, the annual cap per team at $4M, and the added incentive of one-way contracts counting towards the cap even if the player is in the minors, I’m all for it.

Without the cap per transaction and per team the whole idea is too unbalanced. The one-way contracts is only a benefit, so that teams like NJ cannot wiggle out of a contract by moving a player to the AHL.

So, I’d vote YES depending on the limits per transaction and team.

Visor Issue — If a player wants to be stupid and get hit in the eye with a puck because he’s not wearing a visor, that’s his problem. Many players don’t like the visors, and feel as if it limits their vision. I’d say that the current insurance policies protect owners and teams from any drastic injuries, so the business end is safe. Creating a grandfather transition by allowing current professional-league (including AHL and Europe) players to wear what they want, but requiring all rookies and minor league (OHL, WHL, etc) players to have a visor will slowly introduce this form of protection into the game in wider usage. After a number of NHL caliber years (let’s just say 5) veterans should be given the option to remove the visor if they feel it necessary…they’ve learned enough about the game to know if it’s a wise career move to remove the visor.

With tweaking, I’d vote YES for league mandated visors.

Schedule Issue — I’m fine with the games now, but would love to see more teams more often. Travel schedules are hectic but the teams will need to get used to it for when the NHL Europe opens up interleague competition in 2020.

YES to schedule changes.

By Tony C.

November 27, 2007 5:25 PM | Link to this

CC-Many happy returns!

I’ve been voting a straight “Thrashers Platform” (#17, Hoss & Slava-Matic), with Bouwemester & Enstrom @ D and DiPietro or Lundqvist for G (I alternate those two).

People why on earth would you vote for Crosby or A-O??? You have to know that those guys are going to get their votes. If you have to vote for “bona-fide” All-Stars, vote for somebody who’s been bringing the mail but isn’t on the “hype list” say Brad Richards, for example. Hey write-in rory if you have to, but for the love of BBQ, DO NOT VOTE FOR CROSBY!!!

Look forward to hearing about what’s going on @ practice.

GO BLUE !!!

By Tony C.

November 27, 2007 5:27 PM | Link to this

oh yah, I forgot: VOTE

By Tony C.

November 27, 2007 6:17 PM | Link to this

Sorry, I know I should’ve done this all in one post but…

Schedule=Crap. I shouldn’t have to wait three years and/or cross the continent to see Iginla. The fellas from Vancouver that I spoke to also indicated that they’d like to see Crosby before he turns 25. Weird guys huh?

Visor=Grandfather it in with cut-off dates-do it just like they did helmets. I notice that many players who did not use visors prior to injury seem to play just fine with them after injury…

GO BLUE !!!

By Kiril Safronov

November 27, 2007 6:19 PM | Link to this

Step it up or get out!

Zhitnik 23GP 0G 2A -10 22PIM

Slater 23GP 0G 1A -6

Klee 22GP 0G 3A 0 24PIM

Larsen 19GP 1G 2A -7

Holik 23GP 2G 5A -8 34PIM

By Big_Bill

November 27, 2007 7:37 PM | Link to this

The above post say’s it ALL.

All those players need to be traded,released,let go whatever, they are KILLING this team.

We need MORE scoring,we need a hitter on defense and a couple more wingers who can put the puck in the net.

Would be nice to see Hayder in Slater’s place thursday night…

By kracker

November 27, 2007 7:40 PM | Link to this

The salary gimmick seems to favor the big market teams and will guarantee salaries will increase as much as the current CBA will allow. VOTE NO.

Visors: OK make it the same for all but it’s moving that direction already.

Schedule: Keep it 7 games for division foes, I like the familiarity and as they say, it breeds contempt - and lots of bad blood. I don’t need or want to see every Western team each year.

VOTE! VOTE! VOTE! Then vote come more!

By Brian

November 27, 2007 7:42 PM | Link to this

Craig - thanks for the link to the Wolves game. I just tried clicking on it now. It said I needed an ActiveX control that wasn’t available and the link on the page doesn’t seem to help either.

By Sara

November 27, 2007 7:57 PM | Link to this

ranallo while yes the insurance will pick up a player with a major long-term/career ending injury, it cannot replace that player. What happens when it’s a Crosby or a Cammelleri or Phaneuf that gets taken out? Those calibre players don’t grow on trees and replacing one of them could be near impossible for a team. Unfortunately it gets into the touchy area of business of treating people like property. In some ways they are, even though they are individuals too.

Kiril Safronov - snicker - there’s a name I haven’t seen in a long time. I’m ok with Klee and Larsen’s numbers because they are doing other things well (see Craig’s article today refreneced below). How much of those numbers were influenced just by the last two games - 8 GA, 0 GF? Holik does need to step it up as does Zhitnik - their PIMs (typically) have been a result of getting caught flat-footed or just getting run over by younger guys. Ungood! Slater - I don’t know what the deal is there - he’s been getting some good looks, but can’t finish it off.

BTW - Craig another fantastic article - shot blocking is such an underappreciated aspect of the game IMO. I can remember Doug Weight getting his ankle broken in the ASG by a MacInnis slapper a few years back - OUCH.

By Liza

November 27, 2007 8:46 PM | Link to this

I think its really great that Kovy is getting all these votes but what about Marian Hossa? I think he should go just as much as Kovy. I vote for both!

By Liza

November 27, 2007 8:49 PM | Link to this

I think its really great that Kovy is getting all these votes but what about Marian Hossa? I think he should go just as much as Kovy. I vote for both!

By Hanson Brothers

November 27, 2007 11:25 PM | Link to this

Did anyone watch the Wolves game on the net? Wondering how Kari looked, so if you watched please give us a report.

By LAC

November 27, 2007 11:34 PM | Link to this

FYI, Wolves won tonight 4-1.

Kari 28 saves on 29 shots with only goal coming in final minute of game.

Goals By Sterling & Krog highlighted the offense.

By ranallo10

November 28, 2007 3:28 AM | Link to this

Since the Wolves have 2 regulation losses, I’d say that result is par for the course. Let’s see how Lehtonen does over a stretch of games. With 27 saves on 28 shots, he was the 2nd star of the night on the AHL website.

Sara — It’s not like they’re missing helmets or goalie masks, but it is important. Insurance is there for a reason, to financially protect the team in the event of the relatively inevitable…be it a puck in the mouth, a stick to the eye, a shoulder to the back of the neck, a punch to the side of your face as you’re skating away from the player, etc. A player is more likely to get a broken leg, bum knee, or a career ending concussion than get a career ending shot/stick to the face. Just ask Steve Rucchin or Kevin Jones. The long term IR gives the team a place to put an injured player to alleviate CAP stress, while insurance reimburses them for serious (season ending or worse) injuries.

I think it’s worrying too much if you’re implementing a visor mandate to protect the owners. The absence of a visor is not as dangerous as the absence of a helmet or goalie mask. A visor should be mandatory for young and inexperienced players, optional for old and veteran players. Well, at least in my opinion.

But of course, Brian Berard is the sole example of why a player SHOULD wear a visor. The lack of that type of injury in the NHL is why players should be allowed the option.

If a visor is mandated, goalie throat protectors should be mandated. A fractured larynx is scary…trust me.

(For the record, I envoked the 3am rambling clause in the Posting Laws as outlined by Brian and Hokie — also known as the Sara Rule)

By ranallo10

November 28, 2007 3:43 AM | Link to this

Andy Sutton blocked shots…there’s more to hockey than doing JUST that. That’s why Larsen is continually in my nonverbal doghouse. But since Vigier is gone, I don’t think I’m allowed to verbally chastise anybody with the vigor I gave towards JP.

Good article though Craig. The players perspective on the minutia of hockey skills is beat writer gold.

By Brendan

November 28, 2007 3:48 AM | Link to this

I’d vote “No” on eating salaries to promote trading. It’s about accountability. If you’re a GM and you make a bad contract signing, who did that? Fred, the guy waiting for the bus? Or you, The GM!! The GM’s must live with the consequences of their actions. “Accountability.” Letting them “wriggle out of it” just encourages more of these bozo contracts. It just seems like it would hurt the small revenue clubs. And if that’s the case, I cannot support it.

As for visors, I’d vote “Yes,” with the grandfather provisions. Do it just like they did with helmets.

As for scheduling, I’d vote “Yes.” As much as those Western Conference games are essentially meaningless, in terms of climbing over a divisional opponent in head-to-head competition, it is nice to see all the teams in the league, every single year.

From a business perspective, however, doesn’t this drastically increase the travel budget? I would think 32 games within the division (geographic region) costs less than 15 trips out West, sometimes at 2,000 or more miles away.

NHL Europe - Is this for real? What is the purpose of this league? There are already leagues ALL OVER Europe and Scandanavia. NFL Europe works, to a degree, because the American version of football didn’t exist over there. But hockey does already exist in Europe. The Europeans would argue that their version of hockey is ever purer and better than the North American game.

If the NHL actually wants to branch out into Europe for the purposes of having the NHL Europe Champion taking on the NHL North American Champion, at what point do we say, “This is crazy.” We have all sorts of International competitions. World Juniors. World Cup. Olympics. There are plenty of games played EVERY YEAR on the International Stage.

Is the NHL “fearful” that it’s Stanley Cup trophy is losing some of its luster?? Or that they want to rename it, “The World’s Stanley Cup?” What is the impetus driving this idea??? Somebody help me to understand it. The NHL already has 30 teams. That’s a good amount of teams. And every team has players from just about every country that plays hockey, in the ENTIRE WORLD, on them. Very truly, the NHL is an “international” league already. What is the goal/objective of NHL Europe????

By PuckedUP

November 28, 2007 7:30 AM | Link to this

Brendan, do you have a link to more information about this NHL Europe? I agree with your thoughts, but I’m curious about it.

By Brendan

November 28, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this

Brendan you raise a good point with the travel budgets but I imagine that’s one issue the Western Conference teams are complaining about. Unfair competitive advantage to the East because they don’t have to travel as far/as much therefore don’t have to spend as much. Never mind the arguments they are making about the travel effects on players.

ranallo I agree the incidents of career-ending injuries are few and far between - in fact I’m not sure of a player that has actually had his career ended via eye injury, etc. But just because it hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t. I look at this as purely a business decision from the owners’ point of view. What I find interesting is that so many players want to fight over the visor issue, but I bet most, if not all, have extreme sport exemptions in their contracts - put there by teams for the same reasons. That’s a much bigger limit on personal choices and freedoms to me because it stipulates what you can/cannot (or should not at least) do on your own time, whereas the visor issue is about what players should be doing on the owners’ time.

I guess it’s those five years of business school doing me in here. Although I actually went through an argument and presentation in an accounting class over this kind of issue - people as assets, yadda yadda. Fascinating area of accounting - although I’m sure most would consider that statement an oxymoron. ;)

By kracker

November 28, 2007 8:54 AM | Link to this

Links for the google challenged. NHL Europe? Why stop there? They play hockey in Japan. And Australia. There’s tons of ice in Antarctica.

NHL Europe

NHL Europe

NHL Europe

NHL vs Euro Tourney

By Sara

November 28, 2007 8:57 AM | Link to this

Well it’s official - I have not had nearly enough coffee this morning. I’ve caught myself doing that before - I’m responding to someone and type their name in for the ID instead of mine - although usually I manage to catch it before I post it.

Sheesh! Sorry Brendan - didn’t mean for people to think you go around talking to yourself.

Anyway, I know I’m not the only business/accounting nerd around here (Brendan comes to mind again actually). I found an IRS segment while doing some research once that looks into how sports teams are run, what revenues they generate along with expenses, and other issues. Now granted, this is from the perspective of tax (mainly it is meant as a reference for agents conducting audits of sports franchises so they can understand the nature of the business). However, it does provide some very good information about the business structuring of sports franchises, so if you are a total hockey geek like me, you might find it an interesting read. Or not.

By Chris

November 28, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this

On the salary issue, I’d vote no. Keep it the way it is. I love the fact that there is something in place to make teams accountable for bad contracts such as Brian McCabe; you signed him, you’re stuck with him. Allowing teams to eat salary in a trade would, as Scott alluded to, favor large-market teams, even while capping dead money each team can have. This idea pushes the salary structure back, ever so slightly, to a system that provides a safety net to large market teams and allows them to be more liberated in their spending, and we missed a whole year of hockey in order to get away from that.

On the schedule issue, they need to get away from this unbalanced schedule. It is so unfair on so many levels. It’s unfair to the players. I would love to see a comparison of travel time throughout the season between the Vancouver Canucks and the Philadelphia Flyers. The Canucks have a lengthy flight to every road game that they play, whereas for the Flyers, and virtually everyone else in the Atlantic division, it’s a bus ride to at least 12 of their 41 road games. For the Devils, Islanders and Rangers, their trips to play each other…. you see my point. (Should they even get a per diem for that???) It’s unfair to the owners. How many times should owners have to sell us the same product? A Panthers/Capitals game only sells itself so many times. Pretty soon, it just becomes boring. And Craig Leipold has enough problems. Should he really have to try to sell a Predators/Blue Jackets game four times every year? I’m sure he’d rather advertise Sidney Crosby a little more often. It’s unfair to the competitive balance. While the Hurricanes get to beat up on Tampa, Washington, Atlanta and Florida for 32 games, Ottawa has to play Toronto, Buffalo, Boston and Montreal.

On the visor issue, I believe they should have put this in place in 2001, after Bryan Berard was injured. That should have brought to light the dangers, and since then there have been numerous eye injuries that may have been prevented. Phase it in with the new players. They have no excuse for not wearing one. Every junior and college league mandates the use of visors (or full cages), so they don’t need to stop wearing it when they get to the NHL. Another rule change I’d love to see is the touch-up icing being abolished. I’d hate to see a player break his leg in his attempt to what, gain an offensive zone face-off?? It’s a simple rule change that has the potential to save a career.

-Chris

By AL

November 28, 2007 9:28 AM | Link to this

ranallo10 speaking of Andy Sutton, is there any chance we can sign him just for Thursday nights game? I’d love to see him break Darcy Tucker’s face against the glass one more time. Does any one remember that game, back in 2005/06? Darcy is a PUNKA$$ B*H!

By Brian

November 28, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this

Brendan - I agree wholeheartedly on the salary issue. The bonehead in Boston who gave Zdeno Chara all the dough must live with that. But that’s the Bruins for you. However, if Scott Gomez doesn’t live up to his dollars (and the verdict is still out on that) why should the NYR be allowed to continually escalate the salaries if they know they can always gamble like that when other teams can’t afford to?

As for NHL Europe, it is all about increasing revenue. More tv revenue, what if all those current Euro teams were paying royalties to the comissioner here? How much more merchandise would be sold with NHL logos?

By kracker

November 28, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this

Sorry folks, the blog software inserted “http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/thrashers/entries/2007/11/27/” at the beginning of my NHL Europe links. Why I don’t know. But I assure you, I didn’t do it. If anyone wants them the links are:

www.thescoreboards.com/forums/toronto-maple-leafs/29579-nhl-europe.html

www.eurohockey.net/news/story.html?id=20070302161056nhlcomingtoeurope

sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/allan_muir/09/28/nhl.europe.notes/index.html

sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2007/05/07/nhl-vs-europe-exhibition-series-good-to-go/

By Brian

November 28, 2007 9:38 AM | Link to this

kracker - I have had that problem too as of lately with them insering the blog address in front of the link that I typed in…

By Brian

November 28, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

Yes, I know that I also just had the problem of not inserting a “t” in “inserting“…

By ranallo10

November 28, 2007 11:32 AM | Link to this

AL — I’d be down for that, so long as he was only on the ice for such a situation (breaking Tucker on the glass).

Sara — Insurances and worries of injuries aside, I guess we agree on this topic. I’m for grandfathering it in, but I really would like the option to allow a player to/not to wear the visor once they’ve reached a certain level or professional hockey experience. Visors can be bulky for some people, inconveniencing for others, and necessary for some. Fighters don’t wear visors for the reason that it’s considered bad etiquette to fight while having facial protection (remember Avery’s tactless rant? It was poorly delivered, but had a fine point). Some players don’t wear them because of the feeling of claustrophobia, or the perceived vison adjustment (I don’t buy that excuse). But whatever, give the grandfather clause a try, see how it pans out and what the overwhelming reaction is.

kracker/Brendan/others mentioning NHL Europe — The term “NHL Europe” in my post above was meant in jest, made up off the top of my head with some previous knowledge of the wishes for Bettman to continue playing games in different venues. I had no idea this was such a debated topic, that’s hilarious to me. But here’s my take…

The NHL is extremely popular in Europe because of the quality of players, but the accessibility of those players to the fans is limited to any Olympic Games, World Cups, etc, and are dependent upon the location of those tournaments. Those tournaments are also limited to the number of teams based on countries who play hockey…all 15 of them (an obvious understatement).

Watching the Kings in Salzburg this past offseason was an extremely interesting experience for me. I got to witness the amount of love people have for Kopitar and Visnovsky, and the relative anonymity Blake, Bernier, Johnson, Cammalleri, Calder, Nagy, etc. received from the crowd of non-North Americans. The best player in the tournament? Kopitar. The best team? LA. But the next best team was from Sweden, and they kept the game competitive. LA actually gave up a several goal lead to the Austrian team before finally clawing back into the game, and winning it. My point? The field is competitive in Europe, and the teams might want the opportunity to show it. MODO could hold it’s own against most NHL teams. Farjestaads or HC Davos wouldn’t be any worse than Phoenix or Florida.

I don’t think an NHL Europe is necessary, but I think it’d be nice to see a true world championship tournament where the top two teams from each league meet up for a tournament style playoff, to determine a true world championship.

And Brendan, I know no Europeans who feel their version of hockey is “purer”. They have advertisements on uniforms, American and Canadian ringers, and their top talent is oft recruited by NHL scouts and plucked from the teams. If anything Europeans feel their version of hockey is exploited by both marketing and the NHL.

By Ovechkin

November 28, 2007 11:55 AM | Link to this

On a side note: Russian web site reported negotiations on Ovechkin’s contract extension.It says that the owner will offer league max Bold:10.3 mill per year. Wondering how it’s going to affect Hossa…

By Alan

November 28, 2007 12:55 PM | Link to this

I really, really like the scheduling idea the Red Wings came up with:

• six games vs. each of four divisional opponents (24)
• three games vs. each of 10 conference opponents (30)
• two games vs. each of 15 out of conference opponents (30)

I heard Bettman shot it down, because it increases the number of games to 84. But it makes a lot of sense. It eliminates the “wild card” games, and gives fans in other regions of the country an opportunity to see stars they would only see on highlight reels. It also opens up the prospect of more frequent home-and-home matches against out-of-conference teams.

By Brendan

November 28, 2007 1:51 PM | Link to this

Actually, the last time I heard a Euro trash the NHL is was prior to the lockout. So, Ranallo may have a good point there. But I really don’t want to see “home continent advantage” type situations. I realize that all sports are businesses. And that the goal is to make money, etc.

But there are those who feel the NHL product is already “watered down enough” without adding another 30 teams into the mix. Even if it is simply “stealing” existing teams from existing leagues.

Stop and imagine the salary cap impact. You’ve got the Euro vs. the American Dollar and the Canadian dollar. Would be cap be set in Euros? Dollars? How would revenue-sharing work? What about the TV deals? Would the Euro club insist that its Euro TV revenue stay in its Conference? Etc. It’s silly to even be discussing these things. I think Bettman needs to focus on keeping his existing franchises “healthy” and “solvent.”

Before you laugh, the “floor” of the salary cap is $34.3 million, and some teams struggle to stay about that.

By ranallo10

November 28, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

Alan — How’d you do bullet points?? Some of us could use a crash course on what language you just used for formatting.

Brendan — I’d love to see the day the Stanley Cup Champion takes on the Russian Super League Champion, the Swedish Elite League Champion, etc. Who wouldn’t want to see that tournament?? It’s the ultimate proving ground for saying your team is the best in the world. Pride is important to hockey nations, that’s why the Summit Series gets much publicity in Canada. Imagine Anaheim facing off against Salavat Yulaev Ufa for boasting rights as “Best Professional Hockey Franchise in the World”.

I’d fly to Europe to watch that best of 7 series.

By Alan

November 28, 2007 3:20 PM | Link to this

ranallo10 - To be honest, I haven’t the slightest idea. When I pasted that text from a TSN.ca blog post, it displayed in the text box as asterisks.

• Testing bullet points
• More testing
• Again

If this didn’t display as bullet points, then I don’t know what happened.

By Brendan

November 28, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this

I admit there’s some appeal there, but to put it all under one NHL roof would be to water down the competition.

Could Phoenix really take on some Moscow-based team? Economically. Even with a cap? And would the team in Riga, Latvia, really ever get a fair shake?

But, there’s nothing preventing the NHL from changing its policies to allow its Stanley Cup Champions, post playoffs, from issuing or accepting such challenges to and from other leagues, if they wanted it. Okay, the Player’s Union might say something. And the owners might not want to cover that event, insurance-wise.

And then … there’s “other” factors. Such as? The Anaheim Ducks are a team born of a salary cap. Are they the best team the NHL can assemble? Or merely the best team operating within the confines of the salary cap. Are the Russian Super Elite or Swedish Elite leagues under such constraints? Or can they simply hire, TAX FREE, the best available players that Europe and Scandanavia have to offer? Without restriction?

And, another thought occurs to me. Would Ilya Kovalchuk have ever left Russia if he could play in the NHL in his native land? Hmmn, maybe that’s the root of the Canadian enthusiasm about “Project NHL Europe.” The North American teams would be filled with even more CANADIANS. The Swedes would play for the team in Stockholm. Finns would play for Helsinki. Norwegians would play for Oslo and Danes for Copenhagen. Why would they come here, to North America? If the pay is the same, or better, in their native land. Imagine a “lockout” and having to deal with not only the labor laws of the Canadian provinces of Quebec, British Columbia, and Alberta. Now you’ll have to deal with these countries’ laws as well. Imagine the passport/Visa restrictions/requirements. What a pain.