Forget the numbers. Just watch the kid play. He is so much faster and more confident than last season. He's stronger on the puck and is playing much better positionally. He's developing fine, luck or no luck.
Whether some want to admit it or not, there is a line that shouldn't be crossed. I for 1 am appreciative of the noise being brought by the Diablos (the "kill" chant is growing and catching on throughout the arena), love the Baumann chant from my days growing up, and am happy that there is some sort of atmosphere at most games now. But the "Flyers swallows" part of the Rangers suck chant is beyond low class and has to stop.
As far as the other teams fans go, if they are respectful and just rooting for their team, then so be it. But if they come in to the Rock acting like an a$$, then give them hell for all I care so long as it doesn't get physical and profanities aren't thrown around every other word. You know, or should know, what you are getting into going into another teams arena and should act accordingly. Every time I've gone to MSG or the FU/WF Center wearing my Devils jersey, I root for the team and never make a comment back to anyone else. Usually those nit-wits have something stupid to say, but as long as you don't feed the beast, you'll be fine. I expect the same from visiting fans in our arena.
Love CamJan for his personality and willingness to give everything he has in a fight. However, there is no need in today's NHL to have 2 goons on this roster, and Barch is just a better overall player (that's not saying much). Wish the best to Janssen going forward.
Overall, I'm not on the side of the owners or the player (although I tend to side with the players in these CBA negotiations after siding with the owners last time around). I just want to watch NHL hockey. However, extorting money from local, state and federal government bodies to keep a business in a current place through the real or imaginary threat of relocation goes far beyond sports. Large businesses do it all the time, and often receive huge tax credits from the state and municipality to stay and, in some cases, move. Why do you think Panasonic is moving from Secaucus to Newark? They are getting a tax break to move even though its only a few miles away. Every state offers large tax breaks to get corporations to move to their state, which often mean the locality where that company is presently housed must make huge concessions in order to keep the jobs there. The owners run these large corporations, therefore it is logical that they would use the tactics they use in business in running their sports franchises and, frankly, who can blame them since it works (rightly or wrongly) each and every time.
Ultimately, the state or local government has a choice to make regarding what the value of retaining that professional sports franchise really is because they all KNOW, without a doubt, that they will NEVER recover their initial investment in the new arena or stadium during its ~30 year lifespan. Nobody forces the state or city to fund the construction of the arena but, for political and socioeconomic reasons, they choose to do so more often than not.
Collective bargaining is a result of the players unionizing, and probably was something the owners heavily resisted when the NHLPA was first being formed. I don't think you can definitively say that players would be making more money without collective bargaining. Maybe guys like Crosby would, but others like the 3rd and 4th line grinders likely wouldn't. Plus, without collective bargaining, each player could conceivable have a different set of contractual working conditions, which would be a complete nightmare. Moreover, the owners don't steal anything. People like you and I willingly pay thousands of dollars each season to watch the team play, purchase concessions, and buy merchandise. Nobody forces us to do it. If you don't want to pay $ to see the team play, don't go to the games. And if you don't want to pay money to Cablevision to get MSG+ on your TV, then listen to the radio broadcast or go to a bar.
That being said, I hope the players accept this proposal and we finally see hockey for the first time since June.
I just can't believe any GM would be desperate enough to give a 40 year old Brodeur $8 million per season over 2 years. If that is true, then its just another example of why I'm in the NHLPA's corner during this lockout.
Anyone else have a feeling the Devils will make a push to get Malkin when/if he becomes a FA (I think at the end of this season)? Definitely wishful thinking on my part, but Malkin seems to be good friends with Kovy and I think they put on the Lokomotiv benefit game together a few weeks ago. Now (apparently) they're DP'ing some nasty chick that looks like she belongs in the Russian version of Robert Palmer's "Addicted to Love" video.
In my dreams I can see Kovy trying to recruit him over to the Devils.
If he goes to Pitt, he will be playing on a line with Crosby and put up ridiculous numbers. Then they will have another line with Malkin and Neal. Couldn't ask for a better 1-2 line combo in the NHL. However, their problem has been defense and goaltending and signing Zach fails to address those issues. They'd be better served with signing Suter than Parise.
According to some around here, take the total number of letters in the alphabet and multiply it by 10. I don't know, but I always get a chuckle when a player signs or is traded and a poster on here or another board is all up in arms because he/she feels that a potential backup plan for the Devils is out of play.
See I'd love to see Zach back in jersey but after we made him captain and he wanted a cup contender team( I believe we were pretty damn close) the fact that he's even thinking about leaving us kinda upsets me . Don't you think?
Can you really blame him? He has probably 1 shot in his career to take advantage of this system and get as much money as possible. He has all of the leverage in these negotiations, especially with such a weak FA class. We would all do the same thing if we were in his shoes right now (and if anyone says they would have taken a $20-30 million "hometown discount" to stay here, they're lying - that's a sh!tload of money to anyone, including Zach).
I believe that it's taking this long because he is trying to stay with the Devils and is trying to squeeze every last penny out of them before they say enough is enough and he has to choose between the only professional organization he's ever known and, likely, more money in another city. The upfront money is a huge problem for us. Clearly, these players are hedging against a potential lockout (Marty and Moose with the guaranteed 2nd year), and Zach wants a signing bonus to soften or erase the blow of losing 1/2 to all of his salary for this upcoming season should there be a lockout. I can't see us paying him much by way of a signing bonus with our current financial state.
I understand the moral arguments from both sides of this issue. I really do. However, 70+% of all Americans already heave health insurance through an employer provided program. That doesn't count the large numbers of Medicare and Medicaid, as well as those with individual policies.
I am sick and tired of the governement telling me what I can and cannot do, especially with my money. I mean, where does it end? The long term effects of this ruling can be rather scary when taken to the extreme. Pretty soon, the government will mandate that everyone in America must buy a car made by an American owned company and mfg'd in the US or face a penalty at the time of purchase of a foreign car of $x because it is in America's interests to keep manufacturing jobs in the US. This ruling basically says the government can mandate anything they want against individual citizens if the penalty they attach to non-compliance can be considered a tax and there is a legitimate government concern as a basis for the legislation.
I have health insurance through my employer. But if they were smart (and cared only about the bottom line), they would force all 1000+ employees to go and get their health insurance through the public exchanges as the company would save money by paying the penalty rather than the premiums for each employee (I work for a good company with a very good health insurance plan). Ironically, it would then be cheaper for me to pay the 1% of salary max. penalty for individuals provided in the law than it would be for me to buy comparable insurance to what I have now. So, therefore, in theory, this law could burden the system even further by making people like me go without insurance when I already have it.