Jump to content

SueNJ97

Members
  • Content Count

    6,320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SueNJ97

  1. So true...

    "The Yankee captain does have the edge in one area -- his championships resulted in parades through the Canyon of Heroes. Mr. Brodeur's were celebrated in a parking lot."

    Please tell me what that has to do with ANYTHING???????????? :noclue:

    I'm not thrilled with that either. But Marty was given space in a publication that rarely gives any notice to hockey and his career was compared favorably - in fact was lauded compared to Jeter's. But, if you guys are going to get this upset about the parking lot metnion, can someone remove the post, please???? I put it up, can one of the site moderators remove it?

  2. You may need a subscription to get at this. But, I'll link to it in any case.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123690411827214083.html

    Key quotes from beginning of the piece:

    "Ask New Yorkers to name the greatest local sportsman of the current generation and they'll inevitably put Derek Jeter's name at, or at least near, the top of the list.

    But by numbers alone, the charismatic Yankee captain isn't the greatest New York-area athlete of his generation. That honor belongs to a guy who probably wouldn't even be recognized if he showed up at Le Cirque in full pads: New Jersey Devils goalie Martin Brodeur."

    The article notes that while their careers have mirrored each other interms of rookie of the year honors, years played for the same team, titles in their respective sports, the way they have won other individual awards, etc., Jeter isn't set to smash key records and Marty is.

    The Journal doesn't sit up and take notice of hockey in general that often so this is interesting.

  3. There is far too much emotionality in this thread for this argument to be rational.

    ESPN is not my favorite channel, but it is the hub of sports. If the NHL can get a better contract out of them (when games are played, how they are presented, ancillary coverage), it will be better for the sport which has grown DESPITE Versus, the student film of sports channels.

    The NHL returning to ESPN will be a benefit to the sport. Anyone who believes that it's better off on channel six-hundred-and-fvcking-four needs to pour themselves another drink.

    They were promised this before and ESPN broke almost every promise. But, I will admit, ESPN did it for a reason. The way ESPN used to justify their coverage of the NHL was that it delivered one key demographic. Despite the continual low ratings (and they were always low, they just became lower as it went along) the sport used to attract a solid, coveted demo in decent numbers: white men 18-29. Around the year 2000, this demo started to watch less and less TV, inlcuding cable (if it wasn't movie channels, basiaclly, anything that had commercials) and, if they did watch it, they were early adapters to TiVo. ESPN lost any reason to carry the sport. It lost the only reason it had to sell the sport to advertisers.

    You will recall the last campaign ESPN used to try to attract viewers. It certainly wasn't trying to attract 'casual' sports fans. No casual sports fan was going to see the 'Hockey Falls' ad execution, which portrayed hockey's rabid fans (and their own ESPN announcers) as hicks and idiots and basically said - "look everyone, here's our core audience and the people who announce our games, join us, why don't you - watch the NHL" and go anywhere near the sport. Yep, that was the way ESPN decided to go out and sell the NHL to the casual fan near the end of the contract. That, and not giving the game a regular night. And laughing at it - when they discussed it at all - on any other ESPN programming.

    ESPN now has Monday Night Football, the NBA (and, as part of that contract, they have contractual obligations that they cannot break to the WNBA and believe me, they give a damn about not breaking the NBA contract - they don't give a sh*t about not breaking an NHL contract), MLB, men's college baskeball, women's college basketball (and thus, at some level, both tournaments, which is they have it), college football, plus a sh*t-load of other stuff. Where are they going to program the NHL? Oh, right, they'll do what they did before. Shove it in wherever they can fit it, which was part of the problem, and it will die, just like it did before.

    And, if you really think ESPN is going to give up a college bowl game on News Years day just because this year the Winter Classic outdrew some of the bowl games, it isn't happening. If, somehow, this were to wind up on ESPN, I guarantee you, it suddenly wouldn't be what it is now, good alternative programming for people who are bored by the lackluster bowl games now on New Year's day, ESPN will make them move the game, and ruin it.

  4. Maxpower, you said you don't trust Martin. Is it that you don't think he'll stay healthy, or you just don't think a team with Martin as the top defender (and he is the best D-man we have) is going to win anything?

  5. another complete annihilation. i don't know if we're that good or if the flyers were just that bad. you'd like to think it's a little of both and you'd like to think it's trade deadline anxiety - knuble, jones, carle, lupul, upshall, even hartnell could all be heading out.

    but one thing the flyers are is cheap. alberts flying leap at pandolfo, hartnell always does something awful - very surprised something ugly didn't happen at the end of the game, as it so often does. refs just didn't feel like calling penalties on them because they'd already called enough, i guess they thought.

    all 4 lines work. the defense was fine. i don't know that this team needs a major upgrade. i know TG claimed that islanders' scouts were at CAA again today, but that could be for the flyers and panthers as much as it is new jersey.

    How close to the end of the season is the last NJ/Philly game. I was thinking about 1997 (or 1998?), when NJ played them the last game of the season, couldn't sit everyone and wound up with Andreychuck with a broken ankle and at least one other injury. I don't want to play them the last week or two of the season. It wouldn't surprise me to see the same thing happen.

  6. Interesting you say that. I just heard an interview with Fleury yesterday saying pretty much the same thing. He called that contract the downfall of his career. Just a little guy from Western Canada being told by everyone to take all this cash that he didn't even have much interest in taking, and especially going to New York.

    For anyone cares, he seems to be doing really well now. One of the most exciting players to watch.

    That means both Fleury and Smith are in agreement that it should never have happened, but he never would have had a chance to accept the offer if Checketts hadn't made Smith get back on the plane.

    I'm not a St. Louis Blues fan, but I hope for the sake of fans of that club that Checketts is staying out of the decision making process regarding players.

  7. I'd say that Dolan would be the worse of the two, because for all that Neil Smith assembled a Cup winning team, they went nigh on a decade after that as a bottom feeder and Smith kept doing exactly what Sather's doing now: buying old talent hoping they meshed well then buying some more when they didn't. The MO is the same, the GM is different. That tells you its more than the GM, its an ownership thing.

    That is slightly unfair to Smith. He did strip the team to win that Cup. However, some of the free agent signings were not his call. For example, he walked away from Theo Fleury. He knew Fleury was a bad fit who had no interest in being in NY other than for the money - and that it was not the right place for Fleury. His boss, Dave Checketts, forced him to get back on the plane and make the offer to Fleury, who accepted, even though he knew he was doing it for the money and was dreading going to NY.

    I'm not sure what Smith should have done in that situation - maybe he should have quit - maybe that's why you saw him quit in Long Island.

  8. Sue, I've never said the Bruins suck, they are a good team, but IMO they are nowhere near as good as their record suggests, that's what I'm getting at.

    I don't take the Bruins lightly, you have to be careful playing against them because at some point or the other they will get a BS penalty (Rupp/Savard faceoff) and get away with murder (Colin White speared in the neck)

    That game should never have reached OT, the Bruins scored very shortly after White got speared and they also scored on the BS powerplay where Rupp got called when Savard dived. All things being equal the Devils win that game 2-1 in regulation.

    These extra points (even in losses) inflate the Bruins record, and it's transparent, similar to the Rangers SO record (bring back ties-eliminate the skills game, aka SO)

    NJ has had 14 games decided in OT or the SO this year, one more than Boston. If what you are saying is, NJ has won more of those games, whether by SO or OT, then you are correct. Boston has won 6 and lost 7, NJ has won 11 and lost 3. However, some of NJ's win's are still by the SO. We still aren't pure, either. Under your rules, NJ would give back 4 points from the wins by SO, and all 3 of the points from the losses. That's 7 points. Boston would give back the 7 points from the losses and 3 points from the wins in the SO, that's 10 points. They would still be ahead of NJ. I don't really see that that would change.

    I love that in your version of the game in Boston, you seem to think that the first Boston goal just magically appeared, and wasn't caused by our own goalie's stupidity. Also, I don't recall that their getting away with spearing Colin White actually caused them to score a goal. Yes, they should have gotten a penalty for it. But, it didn't actually put the puck in the net for them.

    I read the Boston boards after that game. You want to know what they were saying? Their goalie cost them the game. It's amazing how the two sides can look at it. They think Thomas was a sieve on both the 3rd NJ goal and the winning OT goal.

    Please, you know what your post would sound like if you read it? Joe Micheletti doing color commentary on a Ranger game (if you substituted NY for NJ). According to him, the refs pretty much cost NY most of their games.

  9. I just want to see that whole line keep scoring. Parise has an outside chance at 100 pts...and so does Elias though it never gets talked about.

    I would be more interested in this as well, as it would break Elias' team points record.

  10. I've always hated the term "to draw a penalty" IMO that means to deceive the ref by embellishing/diving to get a penalty called against the opposition.

    A classic example of this in years past, see Forsberg-Peter. In this modern era, see Savard-Mark. Datsyuk-Pavel. there are many more.

    I will take pride that the Devils IMO have never been a team that "draws" penalties. If I was a ref, I would call diving and punish it with a 5 minute major and a game misconduct. I hate diving=cheating.

    This goes back to my theory (the evidence is overwhelming IMO) that the 2001 SCF was rigged. The Devils had 29 powerplays to the Avs 47, at the time the Devils had been the least penalized team in the NHL for a good 6-7 years.

    Think about it, Like Triumph said, it's all about ratings. Why do you think Detroit has been such a force over the years? sure they are a good team, but when you get powerplays given to you on phantom calls, it helps you. Look at the Bruins, how many times this season have we seen them trailing by a goal with 2 mins or less remaining in the third and they get a phantom powerplay to enable them to tie the game ?

    A Bruins-Wings SCF would be a ratings blockbuster for Bettman. The trouble is that there are better teams than those two in each conference that are far more deserving of a SCF matchup, if those two teams are allowed to get a level playing field as far as officiating goes and the Wings/Bruins are not aided by the league with phantom powerplays we'll see who the real (legit) best teams are in the NHL.

    It's pretty sad and it's accross all sports, even college football.

    Lakers always get the calls, Yankees always get the calls. NE used to but now the Steelers get the calls. In college football USC always gets the calls.

    Actually, I think the Bruins have been very, very good this year. Although NJ played very well against them and won in OT the last game, do you think the lead they have on the rest of the conference is some sort of a mirage? I agree, there are better teams in the West than the Wings this year, but you make it sound like Bruins suck. They don't. Savard can't possibly dive his way to enough calls to explain this season. I hope if NJ faces them in the playoffs (which would require that both teams win a round or two if things keep up the way they are going) that the Devils don't take the Bruins as lightly as you do.

    Has the officiating often been perplexing? Yes. But NJ has at or near the bottom of the league in PP awarded for years now. You somehow thought this would change? The difference may be that they also used to be among the least penalized teams, you rarely saw a period like the second period last night where there was just one after another. However, there was also one after another for the Kings at one point, it was NJ penalty, then an LA penatly, they would switch off and there would be 4-on-4 and it was only a matter of time before somebody connected. Essentially, it was insane - and whichever side connected first, the fans on the other side were bound to be extremely unhappy.

    Even Chico - who was sputtering about the officiating - admitted between the 2nd and 3rd that NJ wasn't exactly playing their best. Blame the officiating all you want. The team wasn't all that great.

  11. 4-2 going into the 3rd, but yea late in the 2nd it was 3-2. 8 different goal scorers for the stars, impressive.

    I saw the third and they completely fell apart, including the goaltender. I didn't know that Lundqvist had the flu and was backing Valiquette up only in theory - they couldn't pull the goalie once things got bad. What I wonder and we'll never know is whether more guys were out there with the flu and they just stopped skating because they couldn't do it anymore. The organization at least didn't try to say we gave up because we were sick. And the coach certainly didn't act like that was the problem after the game, he closed the door to the room for about 10 minutes to the press and I guess let them have it.

  12. Not Pronger, I suspect that at this point, he's better than Nieds (at least more interested in playing a full season) but that's the reason he wouldn't be landing here. More bidders. Plus, I can see it, as soon as he lands in NJ, Campbell actually starts suspending him for the cr*p on the ice (which he does deserve).

    I doubt Nieds is going anywhere either and he seems to really like the West coast (when he wants to play) however, I could live with a short reunion. It would absolutely be an upgrade. Although he's not what he was when he was here, even "older, lesser Nieds" is better than some of our d-men.

  13. He has been so much better than I thought he was going to be. I really hope he can keep it up for another 50+ games.

    To be fair, Shanahan doesn't have to do as much as Sundin in Vancouver in order to make the team win.

    I wasn't sure whether he had anything left and I definitely wasn't sure whether bringing someone on board why had been openly waiting for an offer from the team accross the river was a good idea. Also, since you don't play in NJ as just a PP specialist, the idea that some people in the media had that he wouldn't be taking a regular shift and would stay 'fresh' that way seemed ridiculous. However, so far, it has been fine. He does have to take a regular shift, but, as you point out, he didn't sign as a top six forward - only one of the significant PP pieces.

  14. Winning is always exciting, no matter how boring the journey there is, haha.

    Not all fans always feel that way. There is a serious discussion going on among Ranger fans about the direction the team has taken. They are actually using the dreaded 'T' word and acknowledging that yes, their team does use the trap and that, in fact, their coach has turned them into a clone of some of the NJ teams with the least offensive power (not this year or the ones around 1999-2001 - those aren't the examples they are choosing). Many are complaining that, even when the teams does win, it is putting them to sleep. However, probably an equal number are saying that as long as you win, it's interesting. So there is a split.

    Regarding the Bruins and the article, the game was interesting, and I've seen the Bruins trap with the best of them. He was definitely watching something else, American Idol, maybe?

  15. yeah but you can't beat the ubiquity. espn is on in every bar remotely interested in sports, every casino television, etc. plus now that hockey is sporta non grata to espn, they mercilessly mock it when they cover it at all.

    the problem with espn's coverage of hockey is that they didn't dedicate a night to it - hockey was basically on whenever espn wanted it to be on.

    They pretty much mocked it when they were covering it (except for they guys who were doing the game itself) and you never knew when it was going to be on. I can't imagine it would be different now if they took it back because the network (not the people who do the games, but the network) has no respect for the sport or its fans. Unless the sport is actually much stronger before it went back to the netwrok (and, in that case, why would they need to), ESPN will continue to treat it as a joke. If what happens is that you are being mocked while you are being exposed, the exposure doesn't really help you. In this case, "bad publicity" isn't good publicity.

  16. I think you might be thinking of Paul Cavellini. I remember his name being mentioned in potential packages:

    http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=864

    That may be it. The whole thing was re-visited around the time of Stevens' retirement and HOF induction and NJ was clear that they would have gone for RB and the one other player that they were asking for but StL wouldn't switch CuJo and they knew CuJo not only had an injury history but was injured at that time. That's when they told the Blues they were definitely asking for Stevens and going to arbitration and the Blues never believed they would win.

  17. Do you mean former Devil Joe Cirella? If you do he was playing for the Nordiques at the time.

    Then I have the name wrong, but the asked the Blues to substitute a player for Joseph and to keep Brind'Amour in the deal and it was only when the Blues refused that they went to arbitration and asked for Stevens. They didn't start out with Stevens.

  18. Both players really turned out to be surprises. No one at the time thought Brind'Amour would become that kind of offensive player, and no one thought Curtis Joseph would ever be able to stay healthy enough to be a true #1. Lou pointed out Joseph's injury history when making his case.

    I believe they pointed out his injury history but hadn't originally asked StL for Stevens, they were willing to take Brind'Amour and Joe Cirilla. It was only when the Blues refused to budge off of their offer and it, seems, didn't think that NJ would find out that Joseph was injured at the time (he had knee problems and wouldn't have been able to play for a while - how they thought NJ wouldn't find that out is beyond me but they weren't exactly brilliant strategists) that NJ decided to ask for Stevens in arbitration.

  19. Why didn't the jerk say "It wasn't like I was free agent looking to get away from a team like they had a scabies infestation" I hate him and it's got NOTHING to do with the Rangers - sure, I think he was happy to be a Rag primarily because he wanted to stick it to Jersey. He's an ass - to me that was a loaded response - he's defending his stance with the Rangers and basically IS aluding to the fact he YEARNED to get away from the Devils back in the day and is thankful he did.

    Don't get me wrong, I too, AM thankful he got away. I just wish he'd stayed away. I HATE his quotes -- I HATE the crap he spews. He's so smarmy in such a gross matter-of-fact "nothing but the truth" way. His actions bespeak his feeling. His full-out vocal support of Avery -- it's just so clear how this a$$hole feels about the team and the organization. He wasn't being a chippy competitor supporting his team -- he was being a big jackass. I hate his hockey. i hate what he obviously thinks hockey is. He's dangerous because it seems like he loves the game -- but it's warped. he loves himself -- and he makes it all work out just over that line... I hate him. I just do....

    PK, I don't want him back, but, if he hadn't left for St. Louis in the first place, there would have been no compensation owing and, since they had no draft picks to give, no hearing and no Stevens.

  20. Kessel doesn't get your average injuries like other players, he winds up with either potentially deadly diseases or ones that can at least have you on bed rest for weeks. Well, he's keeping the medical profession busy.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.