Ice Man

By Alan

September 2, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Moving forward, which of the four has the better chance at playing above .500 over the course of the coming year?

Thrashers, I think. Yeah, I know, the Thrashers are building (like I said back in May, after nine years, they’ve never stopped “building”), but with the pieces we do have in place right now, it will be hard for me to say this team will be below .500 at the end of the season.

By Brian

September 2, 2008 10:01 AM | Link to this

Rawhide - well, I got my hockey fix this weekend as I am waiting for the season to start. I was back home for Labor Day and ended up going over to Canada and catching one of the opening games in the OHL. My first shot to see John Tavares. Unfortunately, he didn’t dress. But I did though get to see defenseman Alex Pietroangelo (picked #4 overall one spot behind #3 overall pick Zach Bogosian). The kid constantly pushed the puck up, really good passer (threaded one right up the middle that lead to a great chance), played the body well. The one thing I didn’t see him do well was have a good shot from the point. I am looking forward to seeing Bogosian and comparing the two. I am going to have to plan a return trip and see Tavares again (see if he lives up to the hype) along with some other future/current picks. From what I am hearing he may not end up being the #1 overall pick. Great fix though.

By Corey

September 2, 2008 10:20 AM | Link to this

Not to mention college football is finally back… Go Jackets!

I can’t wait for the hockey season to start up again. I think we may be able to surprise people once Anderson gets this team to mesh… I’m still waiting for this trade though… Its frustrating to see the team have a list of things to do this summer and not complete it. We have made some good steps, but we need to get some scoring back. I like the guys we have, but we still need something more i think.

By GaVaHokie

September 2, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

My college football season was over before the opening weekend was even finished… man, I can’t wait for Sean Glennon to graduate from VT. They better keep Tyrod Taylor red-shirted the rest of the season.

Moving forward, which of the four has the better chance at playing above .500 over the course of the coming year?

I’d say the Thrashers, if only for the amount of games they play, and the fact that it’s a game of inches anyway.

By Sara

September 2, 2008 11:09 AM | Link to this

Rawhide I think realistically you have to go with the Thrashers. I think the Falcons are headed in the right direction but it will take more than this year to get them up to .500 (not that I wouldn’t mind being proven wrong). I don’t think the Hawks have done anything to improve their team, and actually weakened it via the loss of Childress and the bad vibes to Smith. As for the Braves, well who knows. I guess it depends on what they do in the off-season but it looks like their dominating years are behind them for at least a little while.

Btw, I would be one of those people who “gagged on their grits,” or perhaps more accurately, sprayed my screen with coffee. What a sad declaration about the horror of Atlanta sports. I gotta second Corey here - thank gawd for college football otherwise Georgians would really be hurting (although Corey needs better taste in teams…ahem woof woof). ;)

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

(although Corey needs better taste in teams…ahem woof woof)

Yeah, well at least the fans of Corey’s college can spell their mascot correctly. I would think it’s a rather sad day when a college brings in students who can’t get past first grade spelling…

D-O-G

Got it? :)

RH — It’s sad that the Atlanta Thrashers are the best professional sports team in town, based on winning percentage. To be fair, the Hawks were the only playoff caliber team of the bunch…it was to the Hawks advantage that though they were bad, they were the best of the worst and were allowed to play a few extra home games.

I’m glad to be out of town during this time, as I can imagine the only topic on 790 and 680 was of the Bulldogs (notice the spelling) and/or Falcons. Buck and Kincaide talking college football (shudder)…that’s one thing I don’t miss at all.

By Tony C.

September 2, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

Maybe you have to be from here to properly appreciate the difference between a Dawg and a Dog.

(and yes it is similar to the difference between hossa and Hoss)

By Sara

September 2, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

*D-O-G

Got it? :)*

Hey, it’s not MY fault that Webster’s Dictionary has a typo. :p

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 12:11 PM | Link to this

Perhaps you’re correct. The fact that I cannot properly appreciate “Dawg” doesn’t bother me in the least bit.

By Tony C.

September 2, 2008 12:24 PM | Link to this

Hey how many of y’all would beinterested in doing a fantasy league?

TheWorldWideLeader is doing their stuff for free

If interested, let’s get it together this week?

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

So…who’s going to volunteer to record the preseason games and upload them somewhere for me to watch??

By GaVaHokie

September 2, 2008 12:44 PM | Link to this

Maybe you have to be from here to properly appreciate the difference between a Dawg and a Dog.

Yeah, you’re probably right… most people outside Georgia generally like to appear smart. :)

Of course I can’t say much, we shake turkey gobblers during our games. :)

By NASCAR Dave

September 2, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Hey GAVA…

What happened to the Virginia Tech CHOKIES???

LMAO… East Carolina???

GO DAWGS!

Love, NASCAR Dave

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this

“Chokies”…how clever.

By GaVaHokie

September 2, 2008 1:42 PM | Link to this

Yo Dave… Go Sun Devils!! Sept. 20th, get ready!

By NASCAR Dave

September 2, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Yo Dave… Go Sun Devils!! Sept. 20th, get ready!

I am… Got the hotel/tickets/plane tickets ready… LOL

The CHOKIES are like the TRASH — Just NOT as good as YOU think they are…

And, you have the wrong QB playing…

Aren’t you glad the FALCONS cut all the THUGS from VA TECH??? LOL, I am…

NUFF SAID.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 2:26 PM | Link to this

I thought it was unfair to pick on collegiate athletes because all schools had issues. But if you want to call VT players thugs, what do you think about the UGA players that didn’t start this season?

There’s enough players suspended that they could start a UGA-2 team.

By Brendan

September 2, 2008 3:07 PM | Link to this

Although I think the Thrashers can be a .500 team next season, “NHL style,” my guess is that, as the roster stands now, on Sept. 2, 2008, the Thrashers will be 3-5 games under .500. My best NFL speculation has the Falcons at 6-10. I have no idea what’s in the Braves farm system or any way of knowing what the Braves might attempt, in terms of offseason moves to improve the team, but if that roster stayed relatively unchanged, I don’t think the Braves are a .500 club either.

That leaves the Atlanta Hawks. I don’t know what the Hawks will do to fill the void left by Childress. But they did get Josh Smith back. On a multi-year deal. So, I don’t think he’s going anywhere. Nor do I think he’ll purposefully flop in hopes of being traded.

Atlanta’s 7-game series with the NBA World Champs was a memorable thing. I think the Hawks still carry some momentum from that. I think the Hawks can be a 42-40 club this season. The difference there is five games, from 37-45. I think that’s “doable” for the Hawks. The winning percentage would be .512 for such a hypothetical record. However, what I don’t know about basketball could fill a warehouse. I don’t really follow the Hawks so much as I follow their ownership, since that has the potential to affect the Thrashers.

What I hope for the Thrashers is this: They really try the youth movement. That players like Colin Stuart, Brett Sterling, and Ondrej Pavelec be given a fair chance at making this roster. And if Chad Denny, or Grant Lewis or Boris Valabik should shine in camp, GREAT!

This season is not one in which I particularly plan on banging some drum about wins and losses. For me, it’s about “player development.” And player retention. Guys like Christenson, Armstrong and Enstrom are all eligible to be re-signed, but haven’t been. I have forgotten when Pavelec is eligible to be re-signed. Nic Havelid, I believe, is also eligible to be re-signed, if Atlanta is thinking that way. Other vets in a contract year include Klee, Larsen, and Slater. One thing a player truly appreciates is an early contract extension, so that they don’t have to sweat it out. Eric Perrin is such a player. Unless Don Waddell extends him this offseason, or before July 1, 2009, he’ll hit the Open Market and field the best offers he can. Waddell doesn’t renegotiate during the season, by policy. So if an offer isn’t extended soon, the pending unrestricted Thrashers, in their “contract year,” may not necessarily be thinking that they’ll be playing for the Thrashers beyond the February trade deadline.

I hope the mood in the lockerroom isn’t one of “Looks like I’m just playing out my contract, then putting the house up for sale.”

By GaVaHokie

September 2, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

And, you have the wrong QB playing…

And for good reason… Sean Glennon will be the sacrificial lamb during the rebuilding year. We’ll have 2-3 solid years with Tyrod Taylor.

Aren’t you glad the FALCONS cut all the THUGS from VA TECH??? LOL, I am…

Actually, I am… I don’t have to watch the s** Falcons anymore! Looks like they’re going to be blacked out all season anyway! ENJOY!!

By Jenny

September 2, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

Hockey and college football. It’s the best time of the year!

As for your question, I know nothing about the other teams, but I think the Thrashers look promising. We all know a playoff berth would be awesome, but that discussion will be left for another month. As it stands, I think the Thrashers have a chance at making .500. I really do. Really. Honest.

By Thrashy Thrashy

September 2, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

Didn’t see anyone else post this:

Ross McKeon’s Yahoo! Thrashers Preview

By Bob

September 2, 2008 4:11 PM | Link to this

Hawks will have the best record, followed by the Thrashers, Braves, and Falcons. Oof, looks like another rough year for the local clubs.

By Midfield

September 2, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

Brendan,

unfortunately, odds are that the mood in the lockeroom is exactly like that, and will be at least until ownership situation begins to clear up, hopefully sometime next year. I hate to be a pessimist, but it could be another wasted year for the franchise.

By NASCAR Dave

September 2, 2008 4:42 PM | Link to this

FALCONS will go 8-8 (NO playoffs)

HAWKS will make the Playoffs… THRASHERS will not…

Can those NERDS on North Avenue win the ACC??? Chances look good… LOL

By Tony C.

September 2, 2008 5:03 PM | Link to this

I basically agree with McKeon’s conclusions. I think they might squeek into 8th place, but honestly, I’ll look at anything above .500 as a successful season.

I also would love to see DW prove to me he’s as respected and connected as McKeon says he is.

By Brendan

September 2, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

Midfield, I wish I could be a fly on the wall to know for sure. But how can we blame players for feeling disappointed that they didn’t get contracts when they were eligible to receive them? I know. I know. They’re professionals. And if they don’t get renewed, they still have to wake up in the morning and brush their teeth and go face the day. And next offseason, if they do get renewed, it’ll be at a higher salary, more than likely. Which, in theory, should pleeease the player. That is, “same job, more pay.”

But, it’s a whole year between now and then. And attitudes are what they are. And can still be shaped. I’d much prefer that this organization, as a matter of policy, commit to keeping the players they have than attempting to pluck free agents from the Open Market. I’m looking at Kovalchuk, Lethonen, Pavelec, Enstrom, Little, etc. These are all players Waddell drafted. And with some luck, they’ll all actually get developed.

Call me crazy, but I think the players want to feel wanted and to feel like they belong. Maybe the best way to do that is (1) to draft the player … then (2) to re-sign the player, preferably a year AHEAD of schedule. Do this on a much larger scale … and you have a room full of “wanted players” who “feel like they belong.” And always have, since Day One … when they were drafted. Then again, I’m just one voice on a blog. What do I know?

By glovesave29

September 2, 2008 5:37 PM | Link to this

Hey, Rawhide - I hate to pee in the cornflakes, but the Thrash won 34 of 82 games last year. That’s a winning percentage of .414. If you take the points earned vs. points available, your numbers are correct. But those 8 points were “earned” in an OT loss, so you really cannot count those as wins, even though you earned a point, can you?

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 5:38 PM | Link to this

And if they don’t get renewed, they still have to wake up in the morning and brush their teeth and go face the day.

This is hockey…they don’t have teeth.

By Brendan

September 2, 2008 5:52 PM | Link to this

Ranallo, I stand corrected. :)

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 6:20 PM | Link to this

Brendan — No worries, perhaps you could reword it to “tooth”.

Hokie — Bad news/good news from Beamer recently…sorry bud. It’s good for the present, but not so good for the future. To be fair to Glennon he’s a fine QB, but the OL just can’t protect him well enough. They should’ve packed it in for the seasons and let the team take the lumps, in my opinion.

By NASCAR Dave

September 2, 2008 6:29 PM | Link to this

RANALLO - What I found amusing was that East Carolina beat them by playing “BEAMER Ball”, LOL…

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 6:37 PM | Link to this

That is ironic, very true. The sure know which team to emulate in order to succeed…

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

McCabe is officially a Florida Panther…finally. What’s sad is that Toronto traded him and a fourth round pick for Mike Van Ryn…a player that some think may not have fully recovered from the injuries that made him miss a lot of last season.

Florida made out like bandits with this trade, especially if McCabe reverts back to his old form. If not, he still is an improvement. I’m curious if this’ll help convince Bouwmeester to re-sign.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 7:11 PM | Link to this

I’m the king of links today:

Hockey Future’s top 20 Atlanta Thrashers prospects.

By Rawhide

September 2, 2008 8:19 PM | Link to this

glovesave29 - Here is the NHL’s stat page that shows the .463 that I am referring to.

While you do make a very good point that an OT loss is…well, a loss, the way the NHL deals with the standings with 2 points per wins and 1 point per OT loss, then the “winning” percentage is based upon what percentage of the 164 total points are available to a team.

That’s the way we have to deal with this unless and until the NHL moves to simply go with Ws and Ls regardless of overtime or not.

However, you point is taken and I’ve made a notation to it up top in the post.

By glovesave29

September 2, 2008 8:31 PM | Link to this

Rawhide - not questioning the numbers, but percentageof points and winning percentage are two different things. As I said before, we did earn .463 of the points available to us over the course of the season. That is not debatable. But if you are going to use it as winning percentage, and then use it against sports that do not give any credit to losing in OT - that puts the Thrashers at a considerable advantage over the Braves, Falcons and Hawks. My point is only that you are not using the numbers correctly if your intention is to compare hockey to other sports…that’s all.

That being said, I DO think the NHL needs to move away from giving points in an OTL. You lost, pure and simple, getting a point for the “tie” artificially inflates team point totals.

By Rawhide

September 2, 2008 8:42 PM | Link to this

glovesave29 - I do agree with you regarding the OT losses. I’d like to see the league move toward either Ws or Ls, period or give 3 points for a reulation win and then do a 2-1 split in OT, (or if it goes to a shootout).

However, I disagree with you in regards to the comparisons of the sports. A team has 164 total points that they can win. Of course, 82-0-0 would be a tall order even for the Wings.

If a team gains half of them…82 points…the are a .500 team. That could be done by going 41-41-0 or 40-40-2.

Again…I’d rather the league go to Ws or Ls…but until they do, that’s what we have to work with.

By glovesave29

September 2, 2008 9:01 PM | Link to this

Rawhide - that’s my point exactly. The point system will always be favorable over the w/l winning percentage as long as OTL’s are given single points or if the league allows ties. The .500 percentage is the only one I can think of where winning percentage and percentage of points is the same if the parameters are the same as my previous statement. The NHL chooses this system, and I have no problem with the point system the league employs, I just do not feel it works in comparison to other leagues unless you plan on giving the Braves half credit for a loss in extra innings or the Hawks if they lose in OT.

As for the Wings getting 164…there is a better chance of Norm McDonald getting me to laugh at the Roast of Bob Saget (and there is little chance of that - he was brutal) than the Wings going undefeated!! LOL

By Rawhide

September 2, 2008 9:11 PM | Link to this

I’ve never really “gotten” Norm McDonald.

Again, your points are well taken.

Now…while we are on the subject, if you were given a choice, would you rather the league a). Keep the points system the way it is…b). Go strickly with Ws and Ls and scrap the points system…or c). go with a system that has each game worth the same amount of points, 3. Three for regulation wins and splitting it 2-1 for shootouts?

By glovesave29

September 2, 2008 9:19 PM | Link to this

I could live with the points system if they get the 3 for a regulation victory. Sure would make the playoff push more exciting! And no more going into the defensive shell to make it to OT.

But the best to me is just good ol’ wins and losses. I’d go to OT 4-on-4…then after 5 minutes go to 3-on-3. Never really liked the shootout (an individual skill) winning a team game. But again, I am speaking as a goalie of 30+ years, so to say I am biased here is an understatement!!!

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 2, 2008 9:24 PM | Link to this

Points work for soccer, why worry about the system? The issue is with OTL simply because there is a shootout (thus necessitating a winner of every game, and a bonus for the losers for the gimmicky loss). If the OT was only one period of 4v4 and then considered a tie if no winner emerged, the points problem wouldn’t matter (just like soccer). I’d even be willing to watch non-sudden death hockey in the OT, just to keep it a little more fair.

However, I don’t anticipate the NHL doing that, as it would slow down the game for the newer fans, and potentially lose that audience. The shootout is for us fans, and the OTL points is the fallout.

Anyways, W/L/T is a legitimate system in my opinion, but it makes it harder for comparisons across sports.

By Rawhide

September 2, 2008 9:29 PM | Link to this

I have advocted the 3 point system before and even though I think it would be better than the current system, the more and more I look at it, I tend to agree with you regarding just going to wins and losses. I also think the shootout is a gimmick…but the fact is that the fans love it, so it stays.

By glovesave29

September 2, 2008 9:40 PM | Link to this

I think that OVERTIME is here to stay. Fans love the shootout - true. But if you got to 10 minutes of great action in the 4-on-4, or perhaps 5 minutes of 3-on-3 - do you think people could buy that and forget the shootout?

By Tony C.

September 2, 2008 9:46 PM | Link to this

I love the fact that nobody has voted for Crosby or Heater yet.

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 12:21 AM | Link to this

Tony C., don’t expect that to last for long. I voted for Ovechkin. The Capitals have built their hopes around this player for the next 13 years. I suspect he’ll get a system that allows him to seriously contend for the Art Ross Scoring Trophy year in and year out.

Rawhide, I agree that if points have to remain, 3 for a regulation win is an interesting idea. And I suppose the next fairest thing to do is to split the points after an OT or SO win, with a point to the loser. I’m sure, mathemically, there’s a problem with that. Someone once broke that down for me, to the decimal point, about why that’s inequitable. Shrugs. But math isn’t my strong suit. Moving right along.

I suppose, also, that the possibility of zero points to the loser is another option. That is, 3-points for a regulation win and two-points for an overtime win or shootout win. Naggin at me is the idea of 3 for a regulation win, two for an OT win, and one-point for the “skills competition” victory. I am not sure, and haven’t looked it up in some time, but I believe something like 137-points is the record for a season. Imagine if a team won 50 regulation time games? That’s not out of the question in an 82-game schedule. Well, that’s a new NHL record, right there! That’s 150-points. I think the purests would SCREAM BLOODY MURDER!

But truthfully, you know my stance. Points needlessly complicate things. They served a valid purpose when the NHL allowed ties. Again, ties weren’t ‘evil, sinister things’ to be avoided at all costs. It was a perfectly valid outcome to a game. But we now have definitive results to games. They are either won or lost. It’s that simple. And considering that … well … that ISSSS the reality, it’s a little bit of curiosity as to why the NHL allows it, when MLB and the NBA do not award “half-losses” in their standings for extra time failures.

From a financial standpoint, issuing points for post-regulation time losses certainly prolongs the playoff aspirations for some of the weaker clubs. From that perspective, I can see how and why the NHL doesn’t want to cease abandoning those “gratuitous” points. And from an economic standpoint, that is, to address the financial INEQUITY that DOES EXIST in the league, I can see the need for the “charity” point.

Stop. (Like you didn’t see that coming.) If you’re Columbus and you have to face Detroit, the financial aspect of that might be expressed by the score, 2-0, Red Wings, before the Opening faceoff. So if, by chance, the Blue Jackets actually get this thing to Overtime … they NEED that point. Badly. They fought all game long with the ice tilted downward, towards their net. And skating uphill isn’t fun. Or easy. Especially against Detroit.

Okay. Let’s move on from that for a moment. If the NHL gets away from the points-based system, it’s still going to be compelling for the weaker clubs. We may see, in certain years, what we saw from the Atlanta Hawks last season. Namely, a 37-45 team that makes the playoffs. While that’s embarrassing, it is what it is. If a team can make the playoffs in this fashion, then so be it. The results are what they are. And the top 8 teams make it in. Or, the top 7 make it in, and the weakest division champion gets a “pity berth” into the playoffs.

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 12:51 AM | Link to this

I’d support a 20-minute, “sudden death” overtime, played 4-on-4. And if there were no winner, then the game is a tie.

It won’t happen. It won’t. The goal, as I understand it, is to get folks out of the arena before the arena employee can claim more overtime money. Plus, parents say they want to get their kids to bed at a decent hour. And that’s tough enough to do, if the game ended at 9:30 PM. By the time you drive home, take a shower, brush your teeth, say your prayers, etc., it’s pretty late, for a school night.

I don’t think we’d see a lot of ties, playing 4-on-4, for 20-minutes. I think the idea would achieve the objective of settling the outcome of a game, without a “skills competition” gimmick. But the reality is … shootouts generate highlights for the league. They end games as quickly as possible after 65-minutes of play. We do see the odd, occasional 15-round shootout. But that is the exception that proves the rule.

By five_hole

September 3, 2008 7:21 AM | Link to this

The Thrashers will end up having the best winning percentage of the four pro teams over the past year. Not only that, but the top two performers over the past 12 months, the Thrashers and the Hawks, are the pair owned and operated by the Atlanta Spirit, LLC. Considering the record of Atlanta teams in the last year, that really isn’t saying much.

I am looking forward to the new season. Who knows? We could go 82-0. Hey, until we lose our 1st game, it could happen. Well, it might. Well, we could make the playoffs. .500? Yeah, OK, we’re looking at a lottery pick next year. But just wait till next year!

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 8:47 AM | Link to this

I’m sorry, I like Norm MacDonald, he cracks me up. Check this out… this was two days after Steve Irwin was killed.

By glovesave29

September 3, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Sorry GaVa - just dont see the humor there. If you get a chance, check out the Saget roast…he is so bad, you can tell the other comedians are uncomfortable as he bombs.

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

Glovesave… he was bombing on purpose… it just didn’t go over well. :) Here’s the video of that too.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this

Ah…he was being horrible ON PURPOSE. That’s comedic brilliance!

(note the sarcasm)

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

Ah…he was being horrible ON PURPOSE. That’s comedic brilliance!

(note the sarcasm)

Yes, kind of like tanking a season on purpose to get the #1 draft pick… brilliance. :)

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

True, something that makes sense in your mind doesn’t always make sense in practice.

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Ah…he was being horrible ON PURPOSE. That’s comedic brilliance!

It’s actually been getting rave reviews as being the only original and funny part of the entire roast. One person put it perfectly, “We don’t know if you’ll find Norm Macdonald’s bit from last night’s Comedy Central Roast of Bob Saget as funny as we did, but one thing’s for certain—this guy put in exactly the amount of effort that a Bob Saget Roast demands. No more, no less.”

By Alan

September 3, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

I don’t see it posted, but I didn’t look very hard.

Thrashers 2008-2009 Season Preview from NHL.com

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

In other words…one bad comedian roasts a so-so comedian with little effort.

By glovesave29

September 3, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

I dunno GaVa - if you are TRULY brilliant, you would see that your “act” is not working and you should be able to think on your feet and work in some better material. I think of guys like Sam Kinison or George Carlin, who could work under such pressures and situations and react to what the audience was giving them. Sam used to get people out of the audience and call their ex-girlfriends and boy-friends. He could go on for 10 to 15 minutes berating these people and be hysterical…totally unscripted. THAT is genious!!!

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

In other words…one bad comedian roasts a so-so comedian with little effort.

Exactly! :)

Glovesave… no one compares to George Carlin in my book.

I feel the same about Sam Kinison as you do about Norm MacDonald. :)

By NASCAR Dave

September 3, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

My favorite comedian is WADDELL…

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Hmmm, I always figured you to be a Larry the Cable Guy and Jeff Foxworthy fan.

By Brice

September 3, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

A .500 Team will not get you into the playoffs. What the heck are some you people smoking?

By Alan

September 3, 2008 2:03 PM | Link to this

What the heck are some you people smoking?

You’ll have to ask the people who think the Hawks will actually be a playoff team.

By Bob

September 3, 2008 2:59 PM | Link to this

I also would love to see DW prove to me he’s as respected and connected as McKeon says he is

He can’t, because he’s just dead wrong on that one. Connected? Sure, all the GMs know his phone number and he’s GM of our club, the league knows who he is, but respected? I think someone in the know here said that even USA Hockey had dumped him.

I too wondered how Rawhide came up with that winning % after the Thrash only won 34 of their 82 games, but I figured it was just more of that new math confusing me.

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 3:07 PM | Link to this

I’ve been told that Brian Burke is the GM and David Poile is the Assistant GM of Team USA Hockey. Anyone else hear that, too?

By Tony C.

September 3, 2008 3:57 PM | Link to this

I dunno about Poile, but I remember seeing that Burke is taking over USAHockey…

Let’s just hope he leaves it in better shape than he left Vancouver.

By Sara

September 3, 2008 4:12 PM | Link to this

*A .500 Team will not get you into the playoffs. What the heck are some you people smoking? *

In ‘98-‘99, the Edmonton Oilers snagged the 8th play-off spot with a record of 33-37-12 for 78 pts. That’s under .500 no matter what kind of math you use.

So while granted it is a rare occurence, it can in fact be done.

By GaVaHokie

September 3, 2008 4:22 PM | Link to this

A .500 Team will not get you into the playoffs. What the heck are some you people smoking?

It took a .573 average this year to make the last playoff spot.

By Tony

September 3, 2008 4:28 PM | Link to this

Thrashers will be lucky to even get to .500 this year.

Playoffs? Not happening, sorry to burst your bubbles.

By DAN

September 3, 2008 4:30 PM | Link to this

I’m glad Team USA dumped DW !

Just wish the freaking Trashers would !!

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 4:35 PM | Link to this

Let’s just hope he leaves it in better shape than he left Vancouver.

Very true…Nonis wont be around to save his butt on the national level, he’s Canadian.

By Bob

September 3, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

but I remember seeing that Burke is taking over USAHockey

Understandable, he is after all the best GM in the league. Which is precisely the reason why Toronto went for a build year and is in waiting and fawning for Burke mode until they bring him in next summer.

Let’s just hope he leaves it in better shape than he left Vancouver

Please explain why it’s a good move for a GM to leave a competing club (his old club) in great shape while he’s going to the competition?

I find it hi-larious how jealous someone gets of the best GM in the league and consistently tries to tear him down (methinks he wouldn’t notice such tripe over that big ring on his finger), while defending the most incompetent GM in the league. Takes all kinds I guess…me, I prefer and highly respect winners and guys that get the job done.

Just win, baby

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 5:22 PM | Link to this

So thus you should have much more respect the best GM in the sport, Ken Holland.

Kevin Lowe has more rings than Burke, does that make him better?

Sorry, one Stanley Cup and overpriced aging teams with no drafted depth does not make a GM “the best”. Better than Waddell, sure, but better than Ken Holland…you’re high if you believe that.

By Alan

September 3, 2008 5:49 PM | Link to this

Understandable, he is after all the best GM in the league.

Puff puff pass! Quit hogging it and pass the damn thing already!

By Josh

September 3, 2008 6:16 PM | Link to this

Puff puff pass! Quit hogging it and pass the damn thing already!

I think you people do too much of that already, lol. Hey genius, who is your choice for best GM?

By Alan

September 3, 2008 6:31 PM | Link to this

The implication I was making, Josh, is that he has to be smoking some good s** if he thinks Burke is the best GM in the NHL. So you might be right in that some people here do “too much of that already.”

Ken Holland, of course, is the answer to your question. Burke is an average GM who only looks good because because of a cup win with a roster full of talent. Sort of like coach Hartley’s cup run with Colorado. But that didn’t make him the best coach in the NHL a season after his win, did it?

And in closing, thanks for the compliment.

By Josh

September 3, 2008 6:41 PM | Link to this

Ken Holland, of course, is the answer to your question.

Alan, what makes Kenny Holland the “best” GM in the league? I’m looking for specifics here.

By Tony

September 3, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

me, I prefer and highly respect winners and guys that get the job done.

Excellent point by Bob there. Why can’t we ever have that here?

By glovesave29

September 3, 2008 6:52 PM | Link to this

While I would not argue against either Holland or Burke, as they are both excellent GM’s, the best has to be David Poile of the Predators. The Wings and Ducks throw around plenty of money that makes the GM’s job a bit easier (I said EASIER, not EASY)…but to work with a lesser budget, in a “non-hockey” smaller market city and produce like he has…well Poile gets my vote for the best GM, hands down.

By Rawhide

September 3, 2008 7:02 PM | Link to this

sniff… sniff…sniff

Hey, what’s that funky smell? Who’s been smoking…sniff…

Alan!!…Josh!!

Hand it over!

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 7:09 PM | Link to this

glovesave29 — I would agree that he’s in the top 3, but I don’t agree he’s BETTER than Holland. True, he’s done quite well with less, but it’s hard to ignore the pure quantity of rings Holland brings to the table, no matter what team it’s for.

Poille is my number 2.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 7:24 PM | Link to this

If you cared:

Holland

Poile

Lamoriello (close 3rd)

Gainey

Risebrough

That’s my top 5 NHL GMs.

By Sara

September 3, 2008 7:31 PM | Link to this

glovesave I have to agree what Poile has done in Nashville is most impressive. They still have their first GM and coach, and for good reasons.

BTW, bit of trivia from some research I did today…Poile was the GM in Washington during its most impressive stretch. His first season as GM (‘82-‘83) saw the beginning of a fourteen year run of consecutive play-off appearances, with somewhat better results than those yielded thus far in Nashville: 8 first round exits, 5 second round exits, one Conference Final appearance, plus the year after he left the team made it to the SCF (swept by the Wings). So ultimately, I would say there is no question he is a successful GM.

By Tony C.

September 3, 2008 7:45 PM | Link to this

I’d have to agree with Poile as being the “best”.

I mean look at how much they gave up for Foppa, and yet their team this past season was even better than the year before (to me-I realize others will disagree). That’s with loosing Hartnell, Foppa and Kariya (among others) off previous’ season’s roster.

That the Preds pushed Detroit as far as anyone else they[deadwings] met in the playoffs (without Arnott to boot) speaks very highly of the club Poile’s put together.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 8:10 PM | Link to this

Tony C. — Agreed, but the lack of success beyond the first round is disheartening. He’d be cemented atop my list if his teams could figure out how to win a series in the playoffs.

By Sara

September 3, 2008 10:23 PM | Link to this

Ranallo I think Nashville has struggled with a consistent lack of star power. They work very hard and play sound hockey which does them credit in the regular season, but in the play-offs teams have to step it up a notch and I don’t think there is another level for them to step to.

They are a lot like Carolina in that regard - the Canes’ success has come from working their tails off (coupled with the timely emergence of a hot goalie). However that roster has lacked a truly elite player overall (though Staal is darn good).

It’s what frustrates me about the Thrashers so much. Other teams have accomplished more with less talent…this team has just never worked hard enough in the right ways on a consistent basis. Some guys have stepped it up in some seasons (Kovy, Hossa, Savy, Toby), and some games and some stretches we’ve seen some spectacular hockey from this club (DET and CAL last season, the beginning part of the ‘06’07 season), but they have not been able to sustain that for an entire 82 game season. If Anderson can solve that problem, I firmly believe the sky’s the limit for this team (after a couple years of seasoning for our emerging youngsters).

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 10:33 PM | Link to this

They are all upper echelon GM’s. I include Jim Rutherford in my Top Five. Although, I haven’t agreed with a few of his recent moves over the past two seasons, particularly the Jack Johnson trade. But generally-speaking, he manages to add at least one meaningful piece to his future rosters with almost every draft. Including a handful from the 3rd round and beyond. And he’s intelligently assembled squads good enough to win the Conference on two occasions, in ‘02 and ‘06, including one that won the Cup. In the OHL, he was “Executive of the Year” in back-to-back seasons (‘87 and ‘88) before eventually making it to the bigs in 1994, with the Hartford Whalers. He’s a former player who, I think, has an excellent strategy and command of hockey operations that was well-earned through years of sacrifice and experience in youth hockey and juniors programs.

Aside from a truly regrettable loss down the stretch to Florida last season, Carolina would have won the Southeast Division for the 4th time since 1999, under Rutherford. He is one of the most tenured NHL GM’s (active since 1994 with Hartford/Carolina). His Head Coaching selections include Paul Holmgren, who is thought to be principally responsible for the Flyers resurrection from WORST to Conference Finalist, Paul Maurice and Peter Laviolette.

And yes, he was also at the helm in 2003, when the ‘Canes finished DEAD LAST in the league. Obviously, that’s not a great thing to have on your resume, but the fact that he was retained as GM and led Carolina to the Cup in 2006 should speak to his acumen.

By Sara

September 3, 2008 10:49 PM | Link to this

Brendan good call - I hadn’t thought about Rutherford. He’s also pretty slick with trades generally - has ways of pulling of win-win trades.

Regier in Buffalo is also someone who has generally done well - the team has made the playoffs 7 out of his 11 seasons at the helm, with 4 Conference Finals appearances and one trip to the big dance. He royally botched it with Drury and Briere but otherwise has been pretty solid.

And of course, there have been some clunkers. Btw, if you all haven’t seen the stuff I posted on Mike’s blog about GM changes, go check it out.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 3, 2008 10:50 PM | Link to this

Brendan — I agree regarding Rutherford. He’s got a nack for getting a fair trade with every move he makes. While giving up Jack Johnson was rough, he was able to get Gleason in return (in his own right a solid young defensive prospect, more developed than Johnson, but with a lower ceiling) and Belanger (who eventually was moved for Vasicek). Look at every trade he’s made recently, and it seems that he always got the better side of the trade. For those few instances that he didn’t (like the Johnson trade), he still managed to get a quality return to somewhat compensate for the loss of talent.

Risebrough took him over on my top 5 simply because of his approach towards resigning Gaborik this offseason. I love hearing a GM travels to the player’s home (in Europe no less), brings his number 1 with, and gives the player nearly full disclosure about his plan/direction of the franchise, and how he sees the player utilitzed in their system.

That was an impressive move in my opinion.

Rutherford is quality though, and I’d take him over Burke too. Perhaps I’m discounting Burke too much due to his pomp and bombast, but I don’t see his successes outshining the successes of his colleagues to the point that he’s glaringly better than the 6 I’ve mentioned before him. He has his good side (spearheading the debate about sending money in trades as cap relief) and his bad side (that embarrassing tirade towards Lowe where he acted more like a pouting schoolkid than a former NHL executive), but as a GM I don’t see him as the best out there.

But hey, that’s just my opinion.

Sara — I somewhat agree, but I think that the “star power” can be beaten by a solid fundamental team, even in the playoffs. Carolina did it, Edmonton nearly did it, Anaheim did it…I think the problem for Nashville rests solely on the division competition. Put them in the Eastern Conference and I bet you they’d be a lot more successful.

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 11:36 PM | Link to this

Poile faced many uphill battles while with the Washington Capitals from 1982-1997. In 1989, Poile was GM when the Capitals won the Patrick Division. In 1986, Poile’s Capitals finished with still a franchise-best 107-points, including a franchise-best 50 wins. It was only good enough for 2nd place in the Patrick Division. In the playoffs, Washington lost in the 2nd round to the NY Rangers, 4-2. That proved to be particularly disappointing for the Caps, as 1986 turned out to be a year when the heavy favored Edmonton Oilers, in the midst of the dynasty years, were temporarily derailed by the Calgary Flames. With the door SWUNG WIDE OPEN, it was the Rangers and Canadiens who met in the Prince of Wales Conference Finals, instead of the Capitals. Of course, the Habs won the Cup that year, over Calgary, with a weaker team than the one that lost the 1989 Cup Finals to Calgary. If it were possible to make the 1989 Habs face the 1986 Habs, the ‘89 club might have won in a sweep. In 1986, the Capitals swept the Islanders, 3-0, in the Patrick Division Semi-Finals.

But I digress, I mention this only insofaras I’d like to show that Poile’s clubs can and have won playoff series. But as Ranallo points out, in the Central Division, they’re constantly facing the Red Wings as the favorite to win the division, forcing them into the 4th spot, at best. Unfortunately for Nashville, they kept running into San Jose in the 1st round. And when that didn’t happen, they drew Detroit. In other words, the “hockey gods” never really tossed this Predators club a bone in the form of a weak 1st round opponent. Different Division, different results.

The Atlanta Thrashers were the 1st of the most recent NHL expansion clubs to win its division, with 97-points. The Predators put up 106-points in 2006 and 110-points, including 51 wins, in 2007. That’s a credit to David Poile, the team architect.

In his tenure with the Capitals as GM, David Poile’s clubs won six playoff series, but reached the Conference Finals only once, in 1990. They were swept by Boston. Poile selected Head Coaches Bryan and Terry Murray, Jim Schoenfeld, and Ron Wilson.

By Brendan

September 3, 2008 11:55 PM | Link to this

Forgive me for this, but that ‘86 series between the Rangers and Capitals was a dandy. The Rangers took games One and Four in overtime, to essentially “extend” the series. For the middle games, Two and Three, saw the Capitals outscore the Rangers, 14-4, including a 8-1 shellacking in Game Two. Had the Capitals scored those OT winners in Games One and Four, it would have been a sweep for Washington. Instead, the Broadway Blueshirts got them, and won Game Five, 4-2, and Game Six, 2-1.

I remembered feeling particularly sad for the Capitals, 12-years removed from their horrendous NHL debut in 1974. It finally appeared that the club might start to compete seriously for the Stanley Cup. The closest they’ve come was a 1998 sweep in the Finals at the hands of the Detroit Red Wings.

Okay. Carry on.

By Bill

September 4, 2008 12:45 AM | Link to this

For the record….the Sun Devils WILL BEAT UGA…dropping out of the #1 spot despite winning last week proves the DOGS are OVERRATED!!!! I’ll enjoy seeing them fall out of the top 10 when they lose to ASU!!!!!!

By GaVaHokie

September 4, 2008 8:11 AM | Link to this

I put Jim Rutherford right behind Ken Holland… a very close 2nd.

What I like about Rutherford is his T** for Tat moves like Andrew Ladd for Tuomo Ruuto, just to get the right chemistry going.

Holland, Rutherford, Lamoriello… all better than Burke. The fact that Toronto DOES want Burke says to me he’s overrated… that team can’t make a good decision to save their lives.

By Alan

September 4, 2008 11:00 AM | Link to this

Josh - The fact that under Ken Holland’s leadership of the Detroit Red Wings, the Red Wings have won their division eight times, clinched the President’s Trophy four times, and won the Stanley three times.

Furthermore, one of the unintended effects of the Salary Cap was to neuter the Red Wings, Avs, Rangers, and some of the other teams who consistently “bought talent.” As recent history can show you, it’s done nothing to stop the Wings, and this is thanks to Holland’s scouting department.

Rawhide - It’s not my reefer, Bob and Josh just refused to pass it!

By glovesave29

September 4, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this

Alan - I certainly do not think that Holland is not an elite GM. He does a great job, especially finding gems in the latter rounds of the draft. But to say he is working on equal footing with the other GM’s is just not true. According to nhlnumbers.com, the Wings cap hit is $56.665M, the NHL Average is $50.748M and to use my preffered GM - Poile of the Preds…well they spend $42.873M.

While the winning is the ULTIMATE judge of a team, a player or a coach, it cannot be the ONLY one. If that is the case, Joe DiPenta and Mark Hartigan are better players that Ilya Kovalchuk as each of them has won the cup.

I cannot say that any other GM, if plugged into the spot in Detroit would have similar success…his style fits with his team. But the reverse is true too…if you take Holland away from DET, he may not work in FLA,PHX or ATL (although it must be said that I would certainly be willing to give him a try!!!)

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 4, 2008 11:49 AM | Link to this

glovesave — While your point is true, it cannot be used against Holland due to the fact that winning and high team salary do not go hand-in-hand.

There are plenty of examples of high-priced teams who haven’t won The Cup since the turn of the millennium (PHI, NYR, DAL). I think it is a testament to the quality of Poile as a GM, but unfortunately winning often times is a deciding factor between two individuals of equal talent.

Poile is definitely good, I agree. Holland definitely has one of the best owners in the NHL, I agree with that too. However, there’s no guarantee that Poile would do well in Detroit just because he has more salary at his disposal.

Some people excel under a tighter budget, than they do when they can spend freely. Holland has exhibited that he can spend relatively freely while still maintaining a core to his team, often from home grown talent.

By glovesave29

September 4, 2008 11:58 AM | Link to this

oops - hit send too soon.

But I do not understand this comment…Furthermore, one of the unintended effects of the Salary Cap was to neuter the Red Wings, Avs, Rangers, and some of the other teams who consistently “bought talent.”

The salary cap WAS INTENDED to exactly just that. Too keep spending a bit more in line than say the MLB, where some teams outspend the competition by up to 10X (NYY - $208M to FLA - $21M).

By Alan

September 4, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

glovesave - The intent of the cap was to create parity, not necessarily to neuter teams. A great many people thought Detroit would suffer under the cap, and referred to them specifically as being neutered.

Didn’t happen, did it?

By glovesave29

September 4, 2008 12:09 PM |