Ice Man

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 1:08 AM | Link to this

Or you could just go by win/loss record, similar to the other major sports in the United States.

I know, it’s a novel concept, but beyond “tradition”, what’s the reason not to??

A 14 inning loss is still a loss in the MLB. A 2 OT loss is a loss in the NFL. A 3 OT loss is a loss in the NBA.

This isn’t soccer, there are enough games to make a difference between win/loss records, and proper seeding in the playoffs.

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 1:51 AM | Link to this

Oops, you can only go 1 OT in the NFL before a tie, right?

Whatever, you got the point.

By LAC

April 21, 2008 3:23 AM | Link to this

Rawhide, interesting point…

5 for a win would be too much, just think of it 50 wins = 250 points, would the Hockey Gods be able to adjust to that ?

A loss is a loss, I would rather see it revert back to 2 points for the winner period. Then say they go 5 or 6 rounds in the shootout, barring OT goal, get a point.

Maybe 10 minute OT. First same as now 4-4, but at five minutes make go to 3-3. If penalty send them off, could be 3-2 3-1 or 3-0. That would be a bit too much to have a 3-0 powerplay… would sure be WIDE open for sure.

I’d like to see divisions changed.

Have a Southern Division, Us, Nashville, Dallas and TB/Fla.

Would throw off the East-West thing, but it was like that in the days of the Patrick/Campbell divisions…

Maybe we could have The Bettman division HUMMMMMM…..?????

Would really like us & Nashville to be in same… short drive up for out of town games.

Heck, could run a special Thrashers Train… load at Philips, and unload 3 blocks away in Nashville… Would be REAL neat, plus some RARE passenger train miles in all freight terriory on the former L&N.

Again Rawhide…Thanks for simply an outstand season on being BLOGMASTER par excellence !!!!You should be commended by ALL of us regardless of which side of the ice you sit on regarding specific issues, you have been FIRST-CLASS let’s hope we have a better season next year so we can all be taking about Winning/Goals Rookies/Shutouts and Playoffs… This season has taken a toll on us ALL, Thanks to Brenden as well for his ALWAYS great points of view and EXPERT comments… Also Kudos to Sage/NascarDave/Bob who share their throughts on a regular basis.

Thanks for a GREAT Blog season !!!!!

By Bob

April 21, 2008 8:48 AM | Link to this

2 pts for regulation or OT win, 0 pts for loser.

1 pts for shootout win, 0 pts for loser.

Losing team should never get a point and a shootout winner shouldn’t get the same pts as a regulation or OT winner.

The shootout is like having a field goal kicking contest to decide a NFL game. Shouldn’t be worth more points (3) than a regulation win.

By kracker

April 21, 2008 8:51 AM | Link to this

I am probably #10 or 20 to say this: RH You got way too much sun at the Big Shanty Festival in Kennesaw. 3 point games are quite enough and I favor awarding the regulation winner 3 points. Now back to finish reading your column….

By Archie

April 21, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

Here’s a different take on the OT scenarios. Why not take away the sudden death aspect of OT in hockey? IMO, the reason so many OT games go so long in the playoffs, or that we get so few OT winners in the regular season, is that teams go into a defensive shell not wanting to make a game-losing mistake. If you play 5 minutes of OT regardless (at 4 on 4), teams would theoretically open it up more. Though I’d prefer 10 minutes. I also love the idea of 3 on 3, like the Young Stars game over the All Star weekend. Granted I think it would take about 12 seconds for NHL stars to score in 3 on 3, I’d also make that NOT sudden death. I think the 3 on 3 action would be every bit as exciting as a shootout, if not more so, and it’ll last longer too. Shootouts last a couple minutes, but 5 or 10 full minutes of open ice action is more entertaining, and more legit hockey instead of a single man skills showcase.

So in a nutshell, here’s my proposoal- 5 minutes of non-sudden death 4 on 4, if it’s still tied 5 minute increments of 3 of 3 until a winner takes it. All points to the winner. Then in the playoffs, 4 on 4 with no sudden death, 10 minute OT periods.

By Thrasher Ryan

April 21, 2008 11:26 AM | Link to this

If I remember correctly, Rawhide has the Habs and Sharks in the Finals… How’s that looking now, RH? ;-)

And I was the only one to pick the Bruins. They’re still in it for me, along with the Craps, and our long lost Flames. My other pick, the Preds, have been eliminated.

The only other people I remember other than me that also picked the Flames were Brendan and Nix. There might be others to, but I can’t remember.

See Rawhide, this is why I don’t like the bracket system. I like to pick on a round by round basis.

We’ll see tonight if the Bruins can knock off their Arch-Rivals and if Ovechkin and crew can keep the Caps afloat.

LAC—I like your ideas. I would like to kick the Craps out of the Southeast Division, put them in the Atlantic Division. Then we add Nashville in the SouthEast.

If Las Vegas and Kansas City get teams, they would be in the West, so the NHL could afford to move 2 Western teams into the Eastern Conference. I would think it would be Nashville and Columbus. I guess Coulmubus would go into the Northeast Division?

So, the “New” Southeast Division would be:

Atlanta
Carolina
Florida
Nashville
Tampa Bay

All cities that are easily accessible to from ATL via a road trip. Besides, Washington is NOWHERE near the Southeast. This must be changed eventually.

GO FLAMES!!!

By Rawhide

April 21, 2008 1:32 PM | Link to this

LAC -Your kind words are very generous indeed. Thank you.

Archie - You have put some thought into this…haven’t you? I think the NHL wants to avoid the possibility of prolonged OTs in the regular season because of possible back-to-back schedules. That’s why the cut OT periods to 5 minutes then implemented a shootout. Not saying I agree with the thought process, just stating it.

The NBA has some OTs that go 2 or 3 rounds and sometimes they play back to backers, so it isn’t like its not being done elswhere.

But there is also the issue of ice resurfacing and the time needed for that.

Playoffs…I would leave them just as they are now…”real” hockey ‘til someone scores.

Thrasher Ryan - yes, I went with the Sharks & Montreal in the finals…how do I feel about that? Ask me in 36 hours.

Don’t worry, later in the week when the round 2 matchups are set, we’ll discuss those as well and regardless of how you set your brackets, you can repick in that round.

The “bracketing” will be revisited in June just to see if anyone was able to come close to predicting the entire playoff scenario.

So…who suspects the league office is PRAYING to the hockey gods for Washington to win these next two games and Montreal to win tonight in order to set up a Crosby/Ovechkin series????

By Alan

April 21, 2008 2:47 PM | Link to this

I would think it would be Nashville and Columbus.

Columbus and Detroit would move east, geographically speaking, since Nashville is farther west than Detroit. What teams move east or west would remain to be seen, though.

The talk is that Seattle is pursuing a hockey team as well. Which would suit me just fine, since I’m planning on moving to Olympia in the near future anyway. It would be nice to see Seattle with a NHL team again, too. I’m not really sure why an area that is saturated with junior teams doesn’t have a NHL team. Hell, I’m not sure why a city whose team won the first Stanley Cup to come to the US doesn’t have a NHL team.

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this

LAC and Thrasher Ryan — There is a one-hour time difference between Nashville and Atlanta. I’d be willing to wager that time difference (and the impact upon television viewing times) would be one of the first reasons they (the NHL) does not align Atlanta and Nashville in the same division. Proximity doesn’t matter AS MUCH as viewer ease, traditional rivalries (Detroit-Nashville is a budding rivalry) and potential draw. One of three would not be enough, in my opinion, for the NHL to re-align Nasville with Atlanta’s division.

Rawhide — Can you have Trixie go through the archive and find my post earlier this calendar year when we discussed the re-alignment of divisions? If you remember, I had an interesting idea regarding the renaming of the divisions/conferences. Get her on that, from what I hear she’s not too busy nowadays.

By Brendan

April 21, 2008 3:44 PM | Link to this

I’m used to points, Rawhide. It’s all I’ve ever known. But if the NHL adopted strict “won-loss” standings, I’d stand and applaud.

Why not?

Games are either won or lost. That’s the outcome. The standings should reflect the actual outcome of the games. Does this not make sense? And yes, this means that losers get nothing. Which is the same concept that Bob advances with 1-point for a shootout win and nothing to the loser for an OT loss or shootout loss.

Yeah, but then sub .500 teams might make the playoffs? Well, that happens in the NBA. Look no farther than our own 8th seeded Atlanta Hawks. I can’t remember how many losses they had. I’m guessing 44. Bygones.

Is it “wrong” that I’m pulling for the Capitals in this series with Philly? The Capitals are the “Cinderella” of these playoffs. I can’t help but admire them a little bit. Great stretch run. Locked up Ovechkin for 13 years. Found a capable coach in mid-season to reverse their fortunes. They won 11 of the last 12 games to get in, including the last seven (7) in a row. I guess if the Flyers win, they and Colorado become the “Cinderellas” by default. Well, unless Calgary pulls off the upset of San Jose.

Stop for a minute. If you’re a Sharks fan, this would DEVASTATING. Your team has been “knockin’ on the door” since the Conference Finals of 2004. With Anaheim gone, a major obstacle is out of the way. Not that Dallas is some “push-over” team. But the Sharks should beat them, if the Sharks advance past Calgary. Head Coach Ron Wilson’s reputation is on the line here.

By Brendan

April 21, 2008 4:23 PM | Link to this

I want to wish good luck to the Gwinnett Gladiators tonight. They play Game Three of their series with the South Carolina Stingrays. The Glads lost Game Two in overtime, 5-4. Gwinnett trails the series, 2-0. Hopefully, they can get it back on track. It’s a best-of-seven series, so they can’t be eliminated tonight. They play again Wednesday night at 7:05 PM.

Go Glads!

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 4:33 PM | Link to this

The Chicago Wolves are up 2-1 over the Milwaukee Admirals, and are playing at home Thursday the 24th for game 4. Two of the three games have gone to OT, with all three being 1 point games.

Go Chicago (or more importantly, go Atlanta Thrashers’ prospects)!

By glovesave29

April 21, 2008 5:08 PM | Link to this

I can’t imagine the NHL expanding again. There are too many unstable franchises now. KC, has a nice new arena, but there have been too many failures there - the NHL Scouts, the IHL Blades, the CHL Outlaws among others. Las Vegas - maybe - but I have to figure that the league MUST think about Canadian cities like Hamilton, Winnipeg and Quebec before Vegas gets any consideration. Seattle? They just lost their NBA team because the arena is old and delapidated…plus this city has embraced the WHL. Both Portland and Seattle do well in the juniors, plus it is not that far to go to Vancouver if you need an NHL fix. Either way, I just don’t see it happening any time soon.

Bit, if the NHL does expand out west with 2 teams, does that not mean that only ONE would move to the east? That is what would be balanced. Nashville is more logical as Detroit, although being further east, has more Western teams in the proximity that then Preds do.

I say the NHL drop the one point OTL. I like the 10 minute 4-on-4. After that, it’s a tie. After 10 minutes of OT, how many ties do you really think each team may have over the course of a season - 4 or 5? I can live with that.

As for the playoffs…what do you think about going back to the format of the early 80’s? Seed the teams 1 through 16 reagardless of conference affiliation and play hockey. 1 vs 16, 2 vs. 15, etc…

By R. Stroz

April 21, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

Has anyone told Dung Fuddell (a cross between Elmer Fudd, a pile of crap, and Don E-Fing Waddell) that only one team from the Southeastern division made the playoffs?

I remember dear dumb Don (think of D to the negative third power) mentioning he thought two teams from the Southeastern division would make the playoffs this season.

Wrong again Dung Fuddell.

By glovesave29

April 21, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

oh, btw - Seattle never had an NHL team. The Millionaires were members of the PCHL, a rival league to the NHA. The Stanley Cup charter said it went to the best team, and at the time, the Cup was not yest owned by the NHL.

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

Stroz — Has anyone told you that you remind them of Barry Strotz?

By glovesave29

April 21, 2008 5:28 PM | Link to this

…great…the Seattle METROPOLITANS…the Millionaires were in Vancouver. See what happens after a full day of work after a late game last night?

By R. Stroz

April 21, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this

ranallo10 - No, not Barry, Bruce Boudreau, on the other hand, yes.

By Alan

April 21, 2008 5:36 PM | Link to this

Seattle never had an NHL team.

Indeed it was not. It was indeed a PCHL (Pacific Coast Hockey League) team at the time. That still doesn’t change the fact that the Seattle Metropolitans were the first US hockey team in the history of the Stanley Cup to win the prized trophy.

(The Millionaires were in Vancouver, btw.)

Seattle’s arena is old, but it was completely rebuilt in 1994-1995. So it’s not nearly as old as they make it out to be. The Sonics new owners just want to move to Oklahoma City that badly. Furthermore, the Seattle Thunderbirds (Western Hockey League) also play there, but will be moving into a new venue in 2009.

Seattle is pushing hard for a NHL team, which is one likely motive for the Thunderbirds moving to the Kent Events Center. Another could be that the team doesn’t draw enough fans for hockey at KeyArena. The Kent Events Center will have fewer seats.

I see another expansion of the NHL in as little as five years. You know that Balsille won’t stop circling teams like a buzzard until he gets one. One more in the east, one more in the west.

By HookyBob

April 21, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this

Yee-hah…serious hockey on slate tonight.

By Tony C.

April 21, 2008 6:33 PM | Link to this

So what? Seattle was the first U.S. city to have a club bring The Cup home.

I mean if you want to get picky, The Stanley Cup is still listed as a “Challenge Cup”, meaning that theoretically the champion of saaay Russian Superleague could come over after their season and challenge the NHL’s Stanley Cup Champion to a 7-game series for the right to hold The Cup. Now, while that would be pretty cool, think of the logistics-we’re talking about the NHL Stanley Cup Champion playing games well into July-in order to defend The Cup from all challengers.

I wouldn’t mind if the IIHF came up with a similar circuit to what FIFA has done with the UEFA Championship. I would envision this with the division winners of the NHL as well as divionsonal champs from Russia, Sweden, Finland as well as league champions from some of the smaller national circuits (Germany say), all competing for a “World Club Champion” title. I think you could work this in during an extended holiday break and then a final round after the All-Star break. Because of the logistical nightmares this would produce, I would envision this tournament to occur every two years. Now, this would be a tremendous pain in the neck for all concerned, and the NHL would dominate (at least until the current contracts expire)-but it’s a cool idea to think on.

As far as the points system goes, I think they should be 3-point games with a 2-point MUST system.

To explain: regulation win=3points Reg.loss=0points OT win=2points
OT loss=1point SO win=2points SO loss=0points

I would keep the period times and personnel the same. If there were an increase to a 10-min OT session, then I would like to see normal lineups for OT. But honestly I think the 5-min 4-vs.-4 is exciting and keeps the TV schedule relatively neat (which IS important-trying to grow the brand remember?).

GO BLUE !!!

By ranallo10

April 21, 2008 6:45 PM | Link to this

Tony C. — You forget to mention the additional games added to all clubs involved, not just meaning the “playoffs”. Seeding in the tournament can’t be done based on your placement in your respective league, so the IIHF would have to sanction club “league” games, qualifying each team for the actual championship playoff.

There’s a ton of logistics and hurdles, but I’ve been a proponent of pitting the best of the best against each other. I have no issues with watching the NHL on international hockey rinks, and vice versa…and I’d definitely ponder buying a ticket to Europe to watch several of those games.

And my proposed qualifications for such a league would be the top two teams from each league: either the conference champions (winner and runner up abroad), or the winner and regular season leader (President’s Cup from the NHL, regular season points leader abroad).

I think you’d be surprised how many of those international teams give the NHL teams a run for their money. In a 3 game series (my proposal for the tournament, one “home”, one “away”, one “neutral”), I’d bargain Russian and Swedish teams could take the Stanley Cup finalists.

Man, that’d all be sweet, but I doubt I’ll ever see such a tournament that has true meaning to it (non-invitational tournament).

By Thrasher Ryan

April 21, 2008 9:53 PM | Link to this

RH—Those guys from Bah-Ston sure gave you a run for your money, eh’? I don’t think anybody thought that series would go to 7 games. Another classic Boston/Montreal series for the record books.

Hey RH, did anybody pick Philly? I don’t recall it, but I don’t have the time to look it up.

Gotta add 1 thing to my 11:26 post - I forgot to add one person. Somewhere out there, stendec is probably also rooting for the Flames tomorrow night. Sorry I forgot you buddy.

GO FLAMES!!!

By The Right Direction

April 21, 2008 11:28 PM | Link to this

Does Bruce Levenson think the Capitals are moving in the wrong direction?

By The Right Direction

April 21, 2008 11:54 PM | Link to this

What other current NHL teams (moved teams count as current) have never won a playoff game besides Atlanta?

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 12:40 AM | Link to this

Columbus has never played, much less won, a playoff game.

I can’t believe it, if the Capitals win, I’ll be 4-0 in the Eastern Conference for the 2nd time in 15 years of making picks. A tell-tale sign Philly will take Game Seven. What will the “experts” say when the Southeast Division advances to Round II? Wasn’t the goal to finish 6th for the past month of the season? That’s what they said.

Somethings will never change, however. Like my ability to project a Stanley Cup Champion who gets eliminated in the 1st round. Thank you, Anaheim! My pick in the East was Pittsburgh. At least that one’s still alive.

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 1:04 AM | Link to this

With 7:25 left in the 2nd period, Phil Kessel fed a perfect pass to Marco Sturm, who was stopped by Carey Price on a fine save. At the time it was, 2-0, Montreal. Had that gone in, the whole complexion of that game could have changed. In spite of the 5-0 loss, Boston fans will feel much better about this loss in about two weeks. That’s when it will occur to them that their team was projected 13th in the Conference and made the playoffs, pushing the #1 seed all the way to seven games. That’s a good season, all things considered.

For Flyers fans, they’ve also come a long ways since DEAD LAST in 2007. But if they don’t close out Washington, after a 3-1 series lead, it will seem like a huge disappointment for a little longer than two weeks. Philly made the kind of offseason moves that had their fans thinking division title and a nice playoff run.

By The Right Direction

April 22, 2008 1:08 AM | Link to this

And what happened to the Columbus GM for failing to make the playoffs?

He was FIRED.

By The Right Direction

April 22, 2008 1:20 AM | Link to this

Maybe the drug/substance abuse problem DW was talking about was Bruce Levenson’s drinking problem.

What DW meant to say was, “Our players are on the straight and narrow but one of our owners is drunk out of his mind, how else do you think I keep this job.”

By LAC

April 22, 2008 3:31 AM | Link to this

Thanks Rawhide… Sometimes the TRUTH feels GOOOOOOD !!!!!!

Ranallo, one hour is no big deal to sports teams, would not be an issue with Nashville in the SE…

If KC, and The Sprint Center, got a team, and LV yes Nashville & Columbus would likely move east.

But Boy O Boy would Detroit squak like crazy, as they are in the eastern time zone and want in the East in the worst way.

I like Atlanta, Dallas, Tampa,Florida,Nashville just a nice Southern flair. Besides there is a LOT of commerce between Big D and here so would be nice…

Still Nashville our CLOSEST NHL team 240 miles up I-75/24 and bet we’ve played what 7-8 times since we came into the NHL ?

Oh well just a few thoughts to kick around… Oh…waddell still HERE ?!#

By Alan

April 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

An Atlanta-Nashville rivalry would be interesting. But seriously, even Atlanta is farther west than Detroit. It currently doesn’t make any geographical sense for Detroit or Columbus to be in the Western conference. Even if just one team was added to either conference, I think the league would go back and do one of two things:

1. Fix the placement of teams in respective conferences. This would mean that teams like Detroit and Columbus move east.

2. Do something similar to baseball with the “national league” and “american league.” Sort of like they used to have with the Clarence Campbell conference and Prince Of Wales conference. That would actually be better, I think, as it could conceivably restore some of the old rivalries that were inevitably dissolved when Bettman started screwing things up.

Just my two cents.

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

LAC — I know the single hour is no big deal for the team itself, I was meaning it’s a big deal for television scheduling. It’s 28 (7 per division rival) games per season in which the NHL would need to televise games at 8pm EST or at 6PM CST to accomadate the typical 7pm (local time zone) start.

I know, 28 games doesn’t seem like much, but it’s not the sole point I was making.

Nashville has a strong developing “history” with Detroit. Moving Nashville, an already struggling franchise, to a division devoid of any rivals for their franchise, could dramatically impact their attendance negatively. And what for?

To me, it works as it is, so why change it? Unless a team is moved or expansion occurs, I highly doubt the NHL will change anything up.

And if you really want to see a Nashville game, do what Thrasher Ryan did and make the 3 hour drive up there. To me, I don’t care if they play the Thrashers in Philips, it’s just another opponent I want to see lose. 7 times a season against Nashville would become just as meaningless as the relatively emotionless “rivalry” with Washington.

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

Alan — But just like the MLB, conferences or divisions aren’t perfect. There is an uneven amount of teams in the NL due to Selig moving his daughter’s team to the NL Central. Now the NL has two more teams than the AL, and a division of 6 teams, while the AL has one of only 4 teams.

I’d wager that current ticket generating rivalries, television viewing, and the desire to not create a division/conference upheaval are the three reasons we’ll not see any teams switch division (unless one or more is moved, contracted, or expanded).

The whole Detroit thing makes little sense, especially since expansion gave them an “out” to even up the conferences. But, since it’s working now (Detroit still draws the 7th most attendees in the NHL), why change it?

By Alan

April 22, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

ranallo - What I said:

Even if just one team was added to either conference, I think the league would go back and do one of two things:

And what you said:

Unless a team is moved or expansion occurs, I highly doubt the NHL will change anything up.

Thusly we are in agreement, are we not?

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Alan — You’re right, we agree.

And if expansion or movement does happen, I hope it’s to a west coast Canadian market, so they stop complaining.

By Thrasher Ryan

April 22, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

So, would everyone then agree that Washington Crapitals need to be moved out of the Southeast Division?

They belong more in the Atlantic Division, IMO.

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

If Nashville is moved into this division, yes, otherwise I have no issue with them being in the Southeast. It matches baseball.

By Alan

April 22, 2008 12:18 PM | Link to this

ranallo - West coast Canadian market? There’s really no other city you can put a team in out there, except maybe Victoria, BC or Kamloops, BC. I don’t think either of those cities are large enough to support one. Seattle, WA or Portland, OR would be the only place big enough on the West Coast of N. America that doesn’t already have one …and neither of them are Canadian markets.

On the east, you could put a team back in Quebec City. You could also put one in Halifax, NS. But even there, you run into size issues.

And down the middle, you have Winnipeg, MB (size issues) and Kansas City, MO (not Canadian).

By Thrasher Ryan

April 22, 2008 1:18 PM | Link to this

Ranallo—I would love it. Move out the Craps and welcome in the Preds.

Sounds very simple, but the problem is how do you adjust all the other divisions to compensate?

I don’t have the time to look it up, but it seems like the only way that happens is if 2 new teams are added in the West?

For Canada - Winnipeg or Kitchener seem like likely targets, but Quebec City could work too. I still have an old Nordiques jersey. What an ugly piece of s*.

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 1:28 PM | Link to this

Alan — I meant West of the Mississippi, my apologies. Winnipeg would do. Anything to get the Canadians to stop complaining about the NHL being USA Centric…it gets old, quick.

By Alan

April 22, 2008 1:51 PM | Link to this

ranallo - Indeed, the complaining of people in a country where hockey is life does get old pretty quick. But the league has made it clear that it’s about marketing the team to the locals. It’s about making money. Winnipeg couldn’t survive in a traditional hockey market.

By Thrasher Ryan

April 22, 2008 2:25 PM | Link to this

What about the Livonia Lugnuts?

GO FLAMES!!!

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

Click here for team valuations.

For all of you that continue to speculate and be negative, spend to the cap ,etc., please keep in mind that the NHL is a business and you may want to check out the economic realities of the marketplace.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

Click here for team valuations.

Click here for team valuations.

You can click on each team for detail.

By Tony C.

April 22, 2008 3:12 PM | Link to this

In the words of Venetian Snares and most other people I’ve met/know from Winnipeg-well it’s retardedly cold, and only maniacs will move there-unless they’re from Manitoba already. I know that frostbacks all clamor for more franchise opportunities-Winnipeg? Really? isn’t this the same town they say if you live on the outskirts of town, you can watch your dog run away for a week?

I think Quebec City would be a more viable candidate-except they’ve got the rest of the country PO’d at them (and what’s wrong with the Nordiques sweaters? The Home white sweaters look great check out this Sakic jersey)…..I dunno

I like having AO in our division-it will serve to light #17’s fire-seriously #17 has to be p!ssed watching the Philly-Wash series.

By Rawhide

April 22, 2008 3:14 PM | Link to this

Bob (other) - There, I think I fixed the links for you…

Tony C - Think how pissed he’ll be waching AO and Crosby if the caps win tonight…

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

Thanks for correcting those. Pasteing in created an issue.

By Tony C.

April 22, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

It’s the Fleur-de-Lis…always looks good.

By The Right Direction

April 22, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this

bob (other) - Yes, the Atlanta Spirit are a business. Point made.

Here are a few points for you:

1) You have not invested a dime in the Atlanta Thrashers. You have purchased a product with your discretionary income (whether earned or inherited). As you tell everyone else, didn’t you learn anything in business school? The Atlanta Spirit invest in their product in order to sell the product to consumers. You are consumer, and unless you plan to purchase your tickets and later sell said tickets for a higher price, you are only a consumer of, not an investor in, the Atlanta Spirit.

2) The Atlanta Thrashers division of the Atlanta Spirit sell a product. In order to sell said product, the product must be priced correctly. Since the Atlanta Spirit had to discount their product incessantly this season, the Atlanta Spirit did not properly price their product.

3) If the Atlanta Thrasher management had produced a product worth the price they were asking, the product would have sold at full price, which it didn’t.

4) Therefore, the Atlanta Thrashers management failed. Furthermore, this management team has failed to produce a team better than .500 for all but two years of their existence.

5) As a result, the Thrashers franchise is in the bottom 25% of all NHL franchises as is the team’s historical performance. Are you starting to see the correlation?

6) The Atlanta Spirit businessmen aren’t as smart as you seem to think. Several married into money, several inherited money, several are leftovers from the Turner years.

You can continue to spend, not invest, your money on this NHL franchise to the tune of 10 million dollars if you so desire. Buy all the tickets you want at the highest ticket rate charged, but, in the end, you are just a consumer, nothing special.

In fact you are a foolish consumer who continues to espouse the idea that the owners are smart businessmen in order to rationalize your discretionary spending habits.

Here’s one for you bob(other), two famalies are going to their child’s college graduation, one family is driving a Lincoln Towne Car and a Corvette, the other family packs into an old station wagon. Which family is wealthier? The second family. How do I know, the second family’s station wagon was driven by none other than Ted Turner to watch his daughter Laura graduate from Oglethorpe University in 1986.

It’s not about how much you spend bob (other), it’s about spending and investing your resources correctly.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 4:24 PM | Link to this

Right Direction… Did you have a point somewhere?

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 4:27 PM | Link to this

The issue I worry about far more than relocation, which I think is absurd, is the popularity of the sport of hockey in metro Atlanta.

I have no doubt there there is substantial “potential” hockey interest in this market. Otherwise, in the inaugural season, the team couldn’t have sold our 38 of 41 home games. No, the issue now, as I see it, is maintaining an interest in hockey.

Everyone still following along?

In other words, if this team is mediocre or below, the fan interest level could, and probably will, decline. And it’s a long, hard road to get it back. Especially when the organization will likely have to convince free agents to come play here. (They won’t call us, we’ll have to call them—and sell them on the “possibilities.”)

Stop. In this market, college football gets most of the discretionary sports entertainment dollars. GA Tech and UGA are well supported. Then there’s still the Falcons (NFL), the Braves (MLB), and the Hawks (NBA). Hockey, they “say,” is a niche sport. I’ve always thought it could go mainstream and be as popular as other sports. I may be “wrong” about that, however. But I’m an optimistic hockey fan. That said, aside from corporate sponsors who get tax benefits from their season ticket purchases and luxury boxes, what’s going to compel the “average family” to spend whatever discretionary sports entertainment dollars are available … on the Atlanta Thrashers?

Ahh, stay tuned! Right? Waddell will “fix” things, won’t he? This team’s just a few players away, in theory. Right? Well, I wish the ASG all the luck in the world as they try to hold on to a fan base and cultivate new fans, with the 27th-best product that they’ve put forth on the ice.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

Brendan, you might check out the individual team financials across the league. We do not lose as much momey as several others and obviously went neagtive with inflated payroll to gate receipts post lockout.

Right Direction- I did not realize that intelligence might be absent due to inheritance, etc. I would submit that ASG purchasing a franchise for $80 M in 2004 and now valued at $148M…. we should all be so inept.

We have a solid fan base, manageable economics and increasing value, better than about a third of the team in the league. Wnat to complain about mismanagement..Toronto would be case study A. Clearly more resources than any other team.

I want to win as much as anyone and get ticked when we lose and are not successful on the ice as we can be, but we are not mismanaged, by ASG or DW. Underperforming this past season…that would be a yes.

By The Right Direction

April 22, 2008 5:07 PM | Link to this

bob (other) - The Atlanta Thrashers ahve underperformed for 7 of 9 seasons. Some would consider the two good seasons an anomoly.

Also, I would be willing to bet the team “value” has decreased since the last Forbes estimate.

The Hawks can’t even sell out playoff games against the Celtics due to fan alienation.

The Atlanta Spirit have managed to devalue their fan base in two sports, at least they are consistent.

By the way, who actually ownes the Atlanta Spirit, Belkin or the non-Belkin owners? No one knows yet.

The Atlanta Spirit owners would never have been able to purchase the Hawks, Thrashers, and rights to Philips Arena under the terms offered except for the Turner clan relationship with AOL/Time Warner. That’s not intelligence, that’s being born into the right family, best known as inheritance.

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 5:14 PM | Link to this

I don’t think the ASG is “stupid.” I should clarify. That is, I think “buying low” and “selling high” is a time-tested strategy, with glorious results. The business of business is to MAKE MONEY. I have no doubt, Zero actually, that the ASG will see a tremendous return on their investment ($131 million at time of purchase) whenever it is that they should to sell it (Somewhere between $181 million to well over $200 million), after a period of “caretaker” ownership.

In the “caretaker ownership years,” (which I’m sad to say we are now in,) they could take on more “temporary loss.” They’ll SURELY RECOUP it on the backend, at the time of sale. Jim Balsillie attempted to purchase the Nashville Predators for WHOPPING $238 million last Fall. The Preds, at that time, were the LEAST VALUED team in the NHL, at $143 million. A substantial mark up, to be sure. I believe the Predators entered the NHL in 1998, valued around $98 million. Ted Turner, in 1999, paid $99 million for the Atlanta Thrashers.

So, a “reasonable” person can see the value that comes with the eventual SALE of the franchise. When one considers this aspect, in the “big scheme of things,” perhaps the high payroll to maintain the fan base, isn’t such a horrible idea.

Let’s say that the Thrashers cannot attract such an overzealous investor as Jim Balsillie. Instead, they get a modest offer of $181 million. That’s still $50 million profit, for what? Five years of ownership? That’s a profit margin of $10 million a year. Losers??? I wouldn’t think so. Most of us would like our investments to “average” $10 million-a-year. I know I would.

The longer they hold onto the product, they more money they make. But in meanwhile, they should not have to endure 8,000 to 11,000 fans a night, in an arena that seats 18,545. Especially considering … that simply by making BETTER DECISIONS, they could a field a more competitive team. Even if NO FREE AGENTS were willing to come to Atlanta, and I do mean ZERO, the Thrashers still could improve simply by having better scouting and a better GM doing the drafting. It can acquire “veteran players” via waiver claims. Atlanta, in this capacity, could have 3rd crack at a player like Ilya Bryzgalov, in a “hypothetical.” And with the vast majority of a “drafted only” player roster, the payroll would be very low, as rookie contracts are capped. (1) Don’t overpay players. (2) Don’t make stupid trades. (3) Make “wise” waiver claims. And most importantly, (4) draft well. Do these four things … and I don’t see how a team could not succeed or put themselves into a situation where they could not succeed. Over a period of years, the roster would be among the youngest, quickest, most-skilled, perhaps most FEARED in the league. The payroll would have LOTS of room for spending. And FREE AGENTS would call YOU, instead of the other way around.

Think about it. Think HARDER. It has to start with the GM position. Admitting that there’s a problem is “Step number ONE” on the road to recovery.

By R. Stroz

April 22, 2008 5:16 PM | Link to this

If the Thrashers aren’t underperforming, why are they one of only two teams in the NHL to NEVER win a playoff game?

By NASCAR Dave

April 22, 2008 5:27 PM | Link to this

but we are not mismanaged, by ASG or DW.

Hey Dummy, 60% of respondents to the AJC poll would disagree with you…

What do you think about THAT, smart guy???

By Alan

April 22, 2008 5:33 PM | Link to this

Brendan, the interest in hockey in this town will only flourish. People move here from other hockey markets all the time. And undoubtedly, some of those people are fans of their old teams. They will buy tickets to see their old team play Atlanta. Some of them will buy tickets just to see some hockey.

Remember that while this is a non-traditional market, is also a destination for people to move to.

By R. Stroz

April 22, 2008 5:46 PM | Link to this

Alan - Many moons ago, before the influx of transplants, the Atlanta Flames did very well.

Impossible, hockey in a none traditional market in 1970’s Atlanta. No, entirely possible.

The Flames won and made the playoffs six of eight seasons.

So why was the team sold? Tom Cousins was in financial trouble and monetized the only asset he could get full asking price for, the Atlanta Flames.

By R. Stroz

April 22, 2008 5:56 PM | Link to this

From a Jeff Schultz article

Don Waddell says the Thrashers are “a couple of players away” from being a competitor. And I agree: Sidney Crosby and Nicklas Lidstrom. Other than that, I would say the team is one general manager away.

Schultz shoots, he scores!

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 6:02 PM | Link to this

Stroz, you just made my point, that ultimately what matters is the business. P & L and asset value. Winning should be a driver to the result but is not always the case. Toronto had an operating profit in excess of $50M but they did not win. Our total revenue is not much more than that.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 6:25 PM | Link to this

Nascar dave, Name calling really isn’t necessary. I would argue that 15,000 plus fans each game (avg attendance) far outweigh the few hundred poll hits you reference.Nice emotion though. I prefer facts.

By Gary

April 22, 2008 6:51 PM | Link to this

bob (other) - The decision on DW, Billy Knight, and Mike Woodson has NOT been made yet. The Atlanta Spirit’s full attention right now is on Your Atlanta Hawks.

When their season is over, then you will see the decisions made on the afforementioned employees. But the decision on DW will be made BEFORE the draft, but AFTER the Hawks’ season is over.

www.2008hawksplayoffs.com

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 6:55 PM | Link to this

At 15,830, the Atlanta Thrashers’ average attendance surpassed four playoff bound clubs, and finished directly behind the second worst (record wise) team in the NHL, Los Angeles…ranking Atlanta 22nd overall.

With the worst regular season record in in 2007-2008, Tampa Bay finished 8th in the league in average attendance (18,692).

Buffalo (2nd), Toronto (5th), Vancouver (9th), and St. Louis (13th) all finished the season out of the playoffs.

I’d say that’s sufficient evidence that winning isn’t the only component involved in good attendance.

By Gary

April 22, 2008 6:56 PM | Link to this

http://www.2008hawksplayoffs.com/offers/april08/intro_flash.html

By ranallo10

April 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

Interesting to note, Pittsburgh had a 105.5% attendance for their away games, 100.7% for home games, yet ranked 16th in the league for average attendance. They were also the only team to post 100+% at home and away games.

Calgary (6th overall) had 112.4% home attendance, highest home percentage in the league.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

Gary, DW is not going anywhere. He will continue as EVP and GM.

Ranallo, you are right, business first, wins second. Most owners invest to make money. Even at the STH Town hall Bruce Levenson said “I am a businessman”. The business results will hopefully also improve with winning, but facst are this farnchise made money until post lockout.

By R. Stroz

April 22, 2008 7:36 PM | Link to this

ranallo10 - I wonder how many of those seats were sold as a direct result of half price ticket discounting?

The discounted tickets had to skew the numbers, and, if so, the product price point should 1/2 of the original ticket price.

The Spirit can’t run the Big Lots retail hockey franchise at full price, maybe half price. The question is will the fans stand for a sorry @$$ product?

By Rawhide

April 22, 2008 7:48 PM | Link to this

Bob (other) - First, thank you for the links…very informative and relavent to the dicussion.

Yes, it is a sports business. But it doesn’t end with the business aspect of it. Ultimately, it is indeed a sport…and Ws and Ls are paramount.

While I completely appriciate the fact that the ASG is running a profitable business….I do not agree that DW is has not mismanaged the team.

Part of a GM’s job is to put a winning product on the ice given the finincial cercumstances, whatever they may be. DW has not done that. And to the fans…that is failure.

Again, I’ll post my countdown from Bradley’s column…

10 - years DW has been the GM

9 - season of play in the NHL

8 - seasons failing to make the playoffs

7 - years with losing records

5 & 6 - as in ?05-?06, the only season we have a goal differential greater than +1

4 - The +/- rating that lead the team this past season, (Haydar & Armstrong tied for +4)

3 - Coaches, (we will be hiring our third head coach)

2 - times we have had winning records

1 - playoff appearence

ZERO - playoff wins

I could have placed next to the 1 “the number of people who have been in a decision making role since for the entirerty of the team’s existence, Don Waddell”.

Financials aside…DW has been an abismal failure. If BL didn’t have the C.O. Jones to let him go after last season, he probably will never have them ever to do it!

A change is needed at GM. To me, and most people who understand the situation, this is not even an arguable point, it’s crystal clear. Unfortunatley, one will not be forthcoming. And that is a shame because the people who pay to see the games, by the jersey’s, eat at the food court, drink the beers…..those who have MADE the finincials numbers for this team what they are….deserve better.

Oh…and Gary, yeah…congrats on the Hawks making the playoffs…as a sub .500 team. I sure hope they can sell out their first playoff game in Philips the way the Thrashers did last year.

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 8:52 PM | Link to this

Rawhide, Thanks for your comments and I appreciate the records. The point I was trying to make, while oversimplified is that most NHL teams are businesses first and run that way. It is also important to point out that the franchise made money until after the lockout. What the facts show is that under prior ownership, before ASG, that Don’s hands were indeed tied to turning a profit first. Although this ownership has accepted losses during the past three years, they do want to win as it is most likely needed to sustain success financially, although not always the case. The facts show that under ASG, payroll has gone up and financial losses begun, even with winning the first two years and climbing attendance. That was not the case under prior ownership. In addition, under this ownership, we missed the playoffs by 2 points with all the goaltender injuries, then won the division, but lost in the first round and now, this past year a big dissapointment. So for the three years of this ownership, not exactly horrible. What is concerning is the performance this past year and those have been articulated in detail, both fact and opinion. A major consideration is we have never been in the economic position as now, money to spend and ownership willing to spend it. I believe there is a plan to win and make money and this summer will be critical to that end. I do think that if we do not make noise next spring that we will see organizational changes at that point. I think you really have to start the clock with the ASG ownership as the financial parameters clearly changed. Those are unarguable facts.

I believe we wiil spend and frankly have more resources available this summer than most other teams. That is a good position to be in.

By Rawhide

April 22, 2008 9:12 PM | Link to this

Bob (other) - Points well made and taken. I guess we are just attacking this from differing sides of the isle. You have made some very good points about the business end…I still am emphasising the Ws and Ls.

We also disagree that DW should or should not lose his GM job. Reasonable minds can do that, ya know. Regardless, the fact is that it seems as though he will be the one making the roster decisions this summer. So we will see how he manages the roster given the amount of money he has at his disposal.

It’s interesting, though that you mention 2 seasons ago and how we just missed the playoffs due to the early season goalie problems. This is very true, but…IMHO…it also displays one of my major beefs against him. That year he needed to make some deals to address the goalie problem, but didn’t. Instead he decided to go on the cheap with uys from Gwinnett and Chicago… and some other guy I can’t even remember his name. Also, I feel BH did an outstanding job at getting the team back into contention. (I feel the ‘05-‘06 team was the best ever, even though they just missed the playoffs).

Anyway, my point is that BH more than showed his worth as a coach that year. Last year, DW should have waited longer before he pulled the trigger but instead do so too soon on Hartley, (again, my opinion)…but how the season played out boulsters my feelings about that.

I could go on and on about trades and such…but I don’t wanna rehash old news, (besides…I gotta new blog to write tonight).

Again, your points are valid and I share your hopes that this summer will yield some great roster moves.

But, I have nothing I can point to with DW to make be have any faith that he will do just that.

Here’s hoping I eat a ton of crow over that!

By bob (other)

April 22, 2008 9:22 PM | Link to this

Thanks Rawhide. I appreciate the comments. Hopefully we will have a good summer and a big year next. Good Lord willing, I plan to be in my seats ready to go ,come fall.I think DW will either make or break it over the next 6 months or so, then we’ll all know for sure, one way or another.

By HookyBob

April 22, 2008 9:30 PM | Link to this

Spot-on Rawhide.

With most businesses you need to take risks (ie spend money). I’d say that is more the case for a hockey team in a non-traditonal market. Here, you need to put a good product on the ice to bring in the revenue.

I fear ownership and the GM have put us in a catch 22 where we need to outbid (spend money in a cap environment) other teams to get talent. If you were Brian Campbell would you sign in San Jose for $5.5 M (and have a realistic chance for a cup run) or here for $6.5 M? (Is San Jose’s cap hit really less than the Thrashers?)

The fans deserve better.

It’ll be interesting to see what the Thrashers get in the way of free agents this summer. Like you,… I’ll be happy to eat crow to get some defence.

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 9:51 PM | Link to this

Caps and Flyers are in OVERTIME in Game Seven. Does it get more exciting than this???

By Jameson

April 22, 2008 9:55 PM | Link to this

Rawhide bringing up BH just made me think of a crazy, but possibly successful scenario. I know it was never likely, and probably wouldn’t work, but given how teams tend to really ramp it up for about 15 games when a new coach is in place, do you think we would’ve come away with more wins had DW stepped down and promoted BM once his 15 game run was up, and then canned him to bring someone else in after that? I know it’s completely unrealistic and unsustainable, but it would’ve been an interesting experiment to watch.

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 10:37 PM | Link to this

I agree with you, Alan. But I want share a story from the “Curt Fraser Years.” (Wiggly lines appear across your monitors, indicating a DREAM sequence.) Our baby Thrashers were taking the necessary “baby steps” that a young organization does. Brendan sits at Philips Arena and notices some Red Wing fans down the row and up in front of him. Now, these were “kind-hearted” Red Wing fans. Hardly the “you suck, Thrashers” variety. We strike up a conversation. I believe they were from East Lansing and Huntington Woods, MI. A very pleasant Aunt and Uncle had brought their nieces and nephews, siblings and cousins out to see their beloved Red Wings.

But, pretty much, every ABLE-BODIED Michigander in the metro-area was in attendance. (This goes to Alan’s point about relo’s and how hockey should do nothing but flourish in this market.) The game, however, was an utter mismatch. I think it was 5-0, Detroit, after two periods. And with every Red Wing goal, Philips Arena exploded in jubilation. As chants of “Let’s go Red Wings!” reverberated throughout the arena. As we exchanged buying rounds of beers, the topic of conversation turned to how they were “happy” to be seeing their beloved Red Wings, but truly had not been “entertained.” The final score was 7-1. I asked if the Aunt and Uncle, residents of Lawrenceville, GA, would be returning for the next Thrashers game? They said, “No, but we’ll probably come out for next year’s game with the Wings.” So I said, “Even if the Thrashers are still THIS BAD?” And they said, “Well, we only go to one game a year, so we’ll probably be back. But we ARE HOPING that the next time around, the game will be a little bit more competitive.” And, in the back of my mind I thought, “Yeah, well. What if it isn’t? And what if your relatives aren’t visiting again next year?” Now, I’d wager that they did come out again the next year to support their beloved Red Wings. But what if they didn’t? And what if the reason they didn’t … resided principally in that they figured it would be another “blowout”—and they could just as easily watch the game on TV. Or … maybe they just had BETTER THINGS TO DO. These Red Wings fans decided that they were sufficiently bored, mid-way through the 3rd period, and left to beat traffic.

This HARDLY makes them “bad Red Wing fans” or “bad hockey fans.” But they didn’t have fun. Not like they hoped. It wasn’t a hard-hitting game. It wasn’t a close game. And without the beer, it would have been about as much fun as a pitcher’s dual in baseball. That’s the danger. Even in this market, chock full o’relocations.

By Rawhide

April 22, 2008 11:03 PM | Link to this

Jameson - Interesting question regarding McCrimmon and if the team would have gotten a “boost” had he been named head coach. I guess we’ll never know.

However, in retrospect, I have to say I’m happy DW did not name him as coach. It’s one of the things I can look back on and give Waddell props for.

My reasoning? Simple. From what I gather, McCrimmon has been the man in charge of the defense. Well, if that is the case…the way this defense performed last season…I don’t want him running the show.

I was all in favor of giving him the job last winter, now…not so much.

By PJ

April 22, 2008 11:23 PM | Link to this

Rawhide Refresh my memory, but didn’t Waddell say just recently, perhaps to Bradley, that he plans to hire someone who is currently involved in a playoff run? That would eliminate the Beast from the running as well as Nonis and the other previously fired coaches from this season. No?

By Brendan

April 22, 2008 11:25 PM | Link to this

Rawhide, I agree that the 2005-06 version of the Thrashers was the best team Waddell ever assembled. It featured Holik, at his youngest point as a Thrashers, Peter Bondra, the newly acquired Marian Hossa and Greg deVries. Ilya Kovalchuk and Marc Savard were a tandem. I believe the blueline had Modry and Havelid on the top pairing. Exelby and Hnidy, (later McCarthy) I think, were another. Then Sutton and deVries. Waddell acquired Steve McCarthy at the trade deadline, “for a song.” And in net, Kari Lehtonen was the #1 guy, with Mike Dunham as the #2.

In the 1st period, or the 1st game, Lehtonen pulled his groin. Michael Garnett was called up to be the new backup. Shortly thereafter, Mike Dunham pulled his groin. Waddell, flush pressed against the cap, signed Steve Shields, for the league minimum. Within a few games, Steve Shields pulled his groin. That left Michael Garnett and Adam Berkhoel to carry the load until well past Christmas. Garnett started to make serious improvement in his game. Then Lehtonen came back. And Dunham returned. But not before Michael Garnett … (Say it with me) pulled his groin. And then, you guessed it, Lehtonen reinjured his groin, leaving Dunham to be our #1 guy, down the stretch-run to the playoffs. And, Dunham suffered the knockout blow, in a game vs. the Capitals, where the Thrashers led, 4-3, but lost 6-4. Six (6) goals in a must-win game was enough for Waddell to not renew Dunham. Garnett didn’t return, however, amidst some raised eyebrows. Garnett’s win-percentage (points) was EQUAL to that of Kari Lehtonen. And more surprising, Dunham’s was the best of all.

That team, had it stayed healthy, had potential. Bondra, Savard, Hossa, Kovalchuk, Holik, S. Kozlov, S. Mellanby, and P.Stefan. On defense, Havelid, Modry, Hnidy, Exelby, deVries, and Mandy. The role players were Boulton, Slater, J.S. Aubin, Ronald Petrovicky, Brad Larsen, and Ranallo’s favorite, J.P. Vigier. Auditioning were the very young Mark Popovic, Braydon Coburn, Francis Lessard, Karl Stewart, Scott Barney, Derek MacKenzie, Ramzi Abid, and Tomas Kloucek.

By R. Stroz

April 22, 2008 11:45 PM | Link to this

bob(other)

Stroz, you just made my point, that ultimately what matters is the business. P & L and asset value. Winning should be a driver to the result but is not always the case.

What matters is whether the product sells at the desired price point. What matters is will consumers purchase the product. If consumers refuse to purchase a product due to inferior quality, the price of the product must be decreased in order to move the inventory.

This year, according to Bruce Levenson, the Atlanta Thrashers had to discount the product in order to meet league required attendence numbers. So the attendence were met by employing a ticket fire sale.

In an inelastic market a company can get away with selling crap because there is no substitute (think Toronto Maple Leafs). However most markets are elastic and as such the product must meet the standards of the consumer. The Atlanta Thrashers failed to meet those standards, and, as a result, a ticket fire sale revenue management system was utilized.

In this case failing to properly invest in the product (not getting any real D-men or top tier centers in the offseason), resulted in lower revenues and the Thrashers management threw most STH ticket stratum customers under the bus.

The individual put in charge of putting the proper assets on the balance sheet (and on the ice) in order to generate revenue, and hopefully a profit, is none other than Don Waddell.

Don has had nine years as GM without a playoff win, consistently one of the worst defenses in the league, an inability to acquire top tier UFA’s, has had players leave because they want to play on a winning team, and yet in the one of the most pivotal off seasons in team history, you still want to leave him in charge?

If Don screws up this off season, this team may be history. Based on Don’s prior accomplishments (sarcasm), that’s a risk I wouldn’t take with the asset value of my business.

By Bob

April 23, 2008 12:26 AM | Link to this

Don has had nine years as GM without a playoff win, consistently one of the worst defenses in the league, an inability to acquire top tier UFA’s, has had players leave because they want to play on a winning team, and yet in the one of the most pivotal off seasons in team history, you still want to leave him in charge?

Amazing, ain’t it? The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Anyone expecting any significant improvement from Waddell’s ability to build this club, is just plain nuts.

It’ll be interesting to see the attendance figures next year. I figure I’ll be getting lower bowl seats for $25 max for any game I want to go to, when I feel like it.

Caps got hosed tonite! But my Sharks-Pens final is intact.

By LAC

April 23, 2008 3:14 AM | Link to this

The “other bob” speaking FACTS HERE !!!???? No Way !

other bob, hey’s get the FACTS straight.

I am a businessman like the thrasher owners, in the sports world these two teams are an investment, I have a number, however not sports teams.

But I, like many, want investments to grow. I do not know how much the two teams cost, but I want to see a profit, so do they.

But if investments do not grow,then I look elsewhere to invest or see what can be done to improve my current ones.

These guys have not tried to improve their product one bit. The product that I see on the ice is in shambles to say THE very least. At some point other bob… the ship will start to take on water, this is what is taking place right now.

The owners do not want to improve on their investment to ensure growth and stability for said investment The Thrashers… and the basketball team.

They cannot continue to go on the cheap, at some point SIR, it will backfire. It may well be in the early stages as we speak.

99% of the fans could care less about the owners making money, I understand it, but frankly do not care as they are not MY responsibility, but as a paying fan, I am sick of the product and the people running it, it shows me the owners have little or NO respect for the fans, and I DO believe that.

The owners are business owners, NOT sports owners and it shows real bad.

They hire the wrong people and allow them to remain despite terrible results.

Lastly other bob, change is good no change and your business or product gets stale, The Thrashers are avery STALE team very much in need of a complete new direction. Keeping the current GM is a poor business decision that will catch up with them sooner rather than later, and with several solid choices out there in the GM world, I believe now is the CORRECT time for change.

Remember a GOOD GM can keep the bottomline intact while making the correct roster moves, something the current GM has failed at time after time and year after year, we need a change NOW !

By LAC

April 23, 2008 3:24 AM | Link to this

Forgot… glovesave29, right about Knasas City, Scouts there 74-75/75-76. Then to Denver for 8 years then on to New Jersey…

Rockies were losers and fans did not support a constant loser… aka Thrashers.

Blades were sucessful, drawing over 10K many nights, but the League folded and AHL has enough teams so they went by the wayside, Outlaws was lost from the start.

New arena going up in Independence,Mo ina couple years for a Gwinnett type franchise.

NHL in KC, hard to say with all the KU Big 12 Basketball fever, but Mayor Mark Funfhouser keeps talking like something might happen…we’ll see, could Thrashers be at The Sprint Center in a couple years following a collaspe of the franchise ???

By Alan

April 23, 2008 7:09 AM | Link to this

could Thrashers be at The Sprint Center in a couple years

No. Next question.

By glovesave29

April 23, 2008 8:44 AM | Link to this

Don’t think there is a chance the NHL will allow the Thrashers to KC. Atlanta is the 8th largest TV market in the US and KC is 31. They don’t want to have egg on their faces being a two time loser here. If anyone is getting an expansion team, my guess is Winnipeg and Houston. KC would be a good spot for an AHL team.

By d

April 23, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this

This from THN. Much has been written about the shallow talent pool available in unrestricted free agency on July 1 and the numbers back up that assertion.

On the blueline, only six of the top 13 potential UFA defensemen as ranked by minutes per game remain on the market with the other seven having already signed contract extensions. The only potential UFA defensemen who topped 35 points and 22 minutes per game in 2007-08 are Brian Campbell, Michal Rozsival and Wade Redden.

Up front, there were 36 forwards who averaged at least half a point per game (minimum 40 games played) in 2007-08 who were potential Group 3 free agents. Of those 36, 14 have already signed contract extensions, taking them off the market.

Included in that group were the top four players ranked by points per game, leaving Mats Sundin as the only potential UFA forward to average better than a point per game this season.

So, what’s left? Well, for teams looking for goal-scoring, only Sundin, Vaclav Prospal, Daymond Langkow and Brian Rolston were 30-goal scorers this season. The list of forwards to average at least 0.75 of a point per game runs only nine deep: Sundin, Prospal, Langkow, Marian Hossa, Joe Sakic, Jason Williams (the youngest player in the group) Cory Stillman, Kristian Huselius and Pavol Demitra.

Finally, for teams looking for a combination of toughness and scoring, only two forwards – Sean Avery and Ryan Malone – topped half a point per game and 100 PIMs in 2007-08.

By R. Stroz

April 23, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

In order to improve the Thrashers win/loss percentage next season, the schedule maker should make sure the Thrashers only play teams on the back end of back to back games.

Furthermore, the schedule maker should avoid the Thrashers playing back to back games at all costs.

This simple logistical task should result in a considerably better record next season.

On a serious note, Stats can you find out where the Thrashers ranked as far the quantity of back to back series played last season in comparison to the other teams in the league?