Nicomo Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 Lighting resigned Palat 5 yrs $26.5 million. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RizzMB30 Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 1 hour ago, Daniel said: Then he should say, buy me out, you owe me $1.25 million and I'll play in Europe anyway. You still have to concede that he did them a favor by retiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted July 15, 2017 Share Posted July 15, 2017 11 hours ago, RizzMB30 said: You still have to concede that he did them a favor by retiring. Oh no doubt. There's nothing wrong with it though unless they're somehow paying him under the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 7/13/2017 at 7:30 PM, MadDog2020 said: This sport has a fvcking lockout literally every 7-10 years. It's beyond the point of absurdity now. But guess what? This sh!t will keep happening over and over because we keep coming back. This is the NHL's and NHLPA's attitude towards the fans: Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk The CBA after the 95 lockout was seen as a huge victory for the owners and a few years later they were complaining. Same in 2005, same in 2013. It has been the same pattern. They agree to a deal, Bettman is yapping about great this will be for the owners and players. Sings this tune and then in the final season of the CBA we start to hear about how all of a sudden they need things to change. For 9 years, the CBA was great and everyone was profitable and financially healthy. Then, in year 10 it is a complete disaster. The owners get almost everything they want, and then still expect the players to give more. I haven't looked at them closely, but apparently the big thing now is players are getting signing bonuses linked to 2020-21. So, they will get a huge payday on July 1st with the lockout starting September 15th. Supposedly, McDavid's deal is almost completely lockout protected. It makes sense as when I was looking at the buyout calculator for a few players, seems most would cause the team to take their biggest cap hit in 2020-21. If the players are getting paid most of their money on July 1st, much less desperation on their part when they start missing paychecks come October. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 7/13/2017 at 7:46 PM, Daniel said: Reading this article, it seems to me that the players are pretty delusional about how much more the sport can really grow in terms of popularity, and thus, how much more the revenue pie can really grow so salaries can really increase faster. They honestly think that NHLers going to the Olympics will somehow create this explosion in interest in Asian countries? The 2008 Olympics, where the US almost won and was played right next door didn't increase fan interest that much in the US. I doubt that, all of the sudden, millions of people in China are going to start loving hockey and somehow paying money to watch NHL games by seeing Canada, the US, Russia or Sweden win gold. So I do place more blame on the players than the owners for the NHL lockouts than the owners. Hockey barely qualifies as a major sport in the US (where most of the revenue has to come from), yet the players probably make more money on average than NFL players, the contracts are fully guaranteed for the most part, and careers in the NHL are much longer than the NFL. While it might hurt the pride of the players that there are a lot of crappy NBA and MLB players that make a lot more money than Connor McDavid will, that's just the way it has to be for there to be an NHL that has more than ten or twelve teams that could pay players whatever they wanted if there were no salary cap. If the players want to take a stand on escrow or fight over the revenue sharing percentage, that's one thing. But if the players really think the salary cap is going anywhere or that the league has to tho out of its way to go after the Asian market, they're out of their minds. Spot on. There has been no benefit to the NHL by going to the Olympics. No spike in ticket sales, no spike in tv ratings, no spike in merchandise sales. There motivation for going was to expose those who watch the Olympics to the players, and it didn't matter. People get a sense of patriotism around the Olympics. Everyone knows about Michael Phelps in the Olympics. Can anyone tell me how he did at the 2010 World Championships? Same for the female gymnasts. Can anyone tell me who won the women's all-around and the last major International competition? Everyone one of us know a few people who watch Olympic hockey, but when it is over do not bother watching the NHL, they just wait 4 years for it to happen again. Having the games in Asia means nothing. A VERY small percentage of the Asian population will attend the games. Most will watch on tv just like me and you. Is this going to be the first time they watch hockey? Were they not able to watch in 2002? 2010? Will more Koreans watch in 2018? More Chinese watch in 2022 just because it is in their backyard? Doubt it. They'll watch just the same, they'll watch just because it is a worldwide event. But after, those who watch sports will continue to watch the sports they have already watched and the sports where their countries are strong. On 7/14/2017 at 10:46 PM, RizzMB30 said: You still have to concede that he did them a favor by retiring. That I will concede. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicomo Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 This list is way off, imo. Not suprising considering it's The Hockey News though. http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/who-are-the-top-50-russian-nhl-players-of-all-time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Long Island legislators are making noise about the Islanders going back to Nassau County. Good luck with that, sincerely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 4 hours ago, thecoffeecake said: Long Island legislators are making noise about the Islanders going back to Nassau County. Good luck with that, sincerely. I'm pretty out of the loop on this, but thought I heard that hearings commenced last week about them submitting proposals to move to Belmont Park -- know if there's any truth to that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 17 hours ago, NJDfan1711 said: I'm pretty out of the loop on this, but thought I heard that hearings commenced last week about them submitting proposals to move to Belmont Park -- know if there's any truth to that? Yes. But haven't looked up what has happened. They also supposedly had talks with Wilpon about buidling at shea, speicifically Willet's Point. They have torn down a lot of the chop shops there, could post pics later. While there was some speculation it was to make room for an arena, right now it is for long-term parking for Laguardia while it is getting it's facelift. What they will do after, is anyone's guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 The problem with them going back to Nassau is the local politics. You have the County and then townships. For example, the Coliseum is within the Town of Hempstead, which is a consortium of a few towns (bellmore, merrick, east meadow, baldwin, elmont, Hicksville, I believe Wantagh and maybe a few more). There are also places that are incorporated villages or cities. Lynbrook, Freeport, Hempstead (that's right HEMPSTEAD is not part of the Town of Hempstead, confused yet?) If you meet someone from Bellmore, they are not going to say they are from the Town of Hempstead, they are going to say Bellmore. If they say "Hempstead", it is an entirely different place. Anyways, the Town of Hempstead and Nassau County have their own repsonsibilities. The County provides the police, the town takes care of Sanitation. Things like that. Roads are split, I believe. Town is responsible for maintenance of the smaller streets, County for the busier streets and some even the state. Neither has jurisdiction over the other. So, for the Coliseum, there are things for which the County is responsible and things for which the Town is responsible. Both have to be satisified with any deal and the two generally don't play nice with each other. This is the problem the Isles will run into if they want to build anywhere in Nassau. There is also the Town of Oyster Bay, which includes a few different "towns" such as Syosset, Massapequa, Seaford. In Queens or Brooklyn, they would have other challenges, but you don't have to deal with this division of power amongst the politicians like they do in Nassau. Well, you may have the city and state to deal with, but the "queens" government is basically a non-factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colorado Rockies 1976 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 On 7/14/2017 at 10:36 AM, '7' said: Loktionov showed some flashes here. And it looked like he was establishing some solid chemistry with Kovalchuk as well. Never put it all together though. Small and not physical. Got pushed around on the ice. Effort seemed to be an issue at times as well. Hasn't been tearing it up in the KHL either. Yeah, he's never really scored much in the NHL, AHL, or KHL. One of those guys who might tease in short bursts, but just seems destined to never be all that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 2 hours ago, Matteau#32 said: The problem with them going back to Nassau is the local politics. You have the County and then townships. For example, the Coliseum is within the Town of Hempstead, which is a consortium of a few towns (bellmore, merrick, east meadow, baldwin, elmont, Hicksville, I believe Wantagh and maybe a few more). There are also places that are incorporated villages or cities. Lynbrook, Freeport, Hempstead (that's right HEMPSTEAD is not part of the Town of Hempstead, confused yet?) If you meet someone from Bellmore, they are not going to say they are from the Town of Hempstead, they are going to say Bellmore. If they say "Hempstead", it is an entirely different place. Anyways, the Town of Hempstead and Nassau County have their own repsonsibilities. The County provides the police, the town takes care of Sanitation. Things like that. Roads are split, I believe. Town is responsible for maintenance of the smaller streets, County for the busier streets and some even the state. Neither has jurisdiction over the other. So, for the Coliseum, there are things for which the County is responsible and things for which the Town is responsible. Both have to be satisified with any deal and the two generally don't play nice with each other. This is the problem the Isles will run into if they want to build anywhere in Nassau. There is also the Town of Oyster Bay, which includes a few different "towns" such as Syosset, Massapequa, Seaford. In Queens or Brooklyn, they would have other challenges, but you don't have to deal with this division of power amongst the politicians like they do in Nassau. Well, you may have the city and state to deal with, but the "queens" government is basically a non-factor. Most places deal with this kind of city/township, county, state political division, so I would say that's not close to the reason they won't go back. The Coliseum, right from Bettman's mouth, is not a suitable venue for the NHL. But the Islanders have as much a chance of staying in the 5 boroughs, because Barclays is just as inappropriate for the league as the Coliseum, and the idea that the area can support another major arena seems a little ridiculous. I hate to say it, but I don't see a long term solution for the Isles around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted July 20, 2017 Author Share Posted July 20, 2017 Have the Islanders ever looked at Suffolk? Why is it always Nassau or bust seemingly? Suffolk is Long Island too, so is it just that there isn't suitable land availability there, or is it more complicated than that? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoffeecake Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Just now, MadDog2020 said: Have the Islanders ever looked at Suffolk? Why is it always Nassau or bust seemingly? Suffolk is Long Island too, so is it just that there isn't suitable land availability there, or is it more complicated than that? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I was gonna say because of the population, but as it turns out a million and a half people live out there. I bet it has more to do with the desire to keep the brand as closely associated with New York City as possible, because it's more about the value of the brand than the viability of hockey. Probably the same reason the Devils will never consider a location outside of NJ's urban northeast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) New Nassau basically had a renovation on the cheap. It only seats 13,900 for hockey now. I don't think they really even expanded the footprint of the arena to expand concourses. Doesn't look like any new luxury boxes were installed either. Basically other than the occasional homecoming game the place was never renovated for NHL hockey. And Barclays was such a poorly designed disaster for the Islanders. Honestly it looks worse and more out of place than the Jets playing at Giants Stadium or when the Yankees played at Shea. To get the Isles back into the Coliseum and make it bare minimum NHL standards then they have to pump several hundred million more into it and soon. It needs a re-renovation. Edited July 20, 2017 by '7' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 Biggest complaint with Barclays (other than terrible seating arrangement) is the ice. That is due to the team using PVC piping under the floor instead of metal piping. Is replacement of that really that difficult? I am legit asking because to me it seems that it could be done in about 2-3 weeks including ripping up floor and removing old system and replacing with new one. I know Barclays would effectively be shut down during that time but it might be worth it as that is often mentioned as the biggest problem the team has with the arena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matteau#32 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 (edited) The problem in Suffolk is the traffic getting out there for a game on a weeknight and you would likely have to go out very east to find a place to put an arena. The LI Ducks stadium is at the end of the Southern State, which isn't that bad. But if they were going to put an arena, it would likely be out towards Stony Brook. Can't think of anywhere else to put it Without having to tear stuff down. Traffic from Suffolk into Nassau is not a breeze at that time, but it is not nearly as bad as heading East. It was hard enough for people in Nassau to get to games at coliseum on weeknight. Secondly, I have never heard Suffolk even mentioned. Not familiar with the politics out there, so not sure if it something the politicians would even be interested in entertaining. I know most places have multiple jurisdictions, but I do not think you realize how bad the relations are between the County and the towns. Secondly, if you even hint at any kind of tax increase, it will get shot down. Property taxes in Nassau and Suffolk are ridiculous. I do think the area can support another arena. Decent size acts could easily have a show at Prudential Center, MSG, Barclay's, and the new place and sell them all out. How many people from Jersey will go to Nassau Coliseum for a concert? Obviously some, but that is if you are a huge fan of the band and it is the same for LI people going to Prudential. The really big acts that can fill up Giants Stadium for a few nights (U2, Springsteen for example) are a different animal. People will travel from all over for them. For years acts like Metallica, Motley Crue, the boy bands, spice girls, would do a night at Meadowlands, a night at MSG, and then a night at the Coliseum and if they added 4th night in the area, it would have sold out. Edited July 20, 2017 by Matteau#32 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDog2020 Posted July 20, 2017 Author Share Posted July 20, 2017 Biggest complaint with Barclays (other than terrible seating arrangement) is the ice. That is due to the team using PVC piping under the floor instead of metal piping. Is replacement of that really that difficult? I am legit asking because to me it seems that it could be done in about 2-3 weeks including ripping up floor and removing old system and replacing with new one. I know Barclays would effectively be shut down during that time but it might be worth it as that is often mentioned as the biggest problem the team has with the arena. Whatever piping they use, the Islanders need to get the hell out of that place ASAP. They belong on LI and I hope a solution to bring them back to LI can be worked out. The whole 'market ourselves as a NYC team' thing would absolutely ENRAGE me if I was an Isles fan from LI. They aren't a NYC team, they're a LI team from the suburbs. Embrace your identity and stop projecting a phony image that probably makes your core fanbase wanna throw up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck the Duck Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 1 hour ago, DevsMan84 said: Biggest complaint with Barclays (other than terrible seating arrangement) is the ice. That is due to the team using PVC piping under the floor instead of metal piping. Is replacement of that really that difficult? I am legit asking because to me it seems that it could be done in about 2-3 weeks including ripping up floor and removing old system and replacing with new one. I know Barclays would effectively be shut down during that time but it might be worth it as that is often mentioned as the biggest problem the team has with the arena. It's a big undertaking which would require the demolition of the entire concrete slab. I'm sure they could do it in a few weeks if they worked OT like they did during the Garden's renovation, but the bigger problem is that Barclays doesn't want the Isles there anymore and are not willing to invest the money to make necessary renovations to the arena which would help make the Isles a viable tenant, rather than an afterthought which they are now. The deal the arena made with the team is bad as they can't recoup the money they have guaranteed annually and are currently paying. That's why the arena is opting out and hoping the Isles are forced into a situation where they have no viable alternatives and must take a revised deal that favor the arena better than the current one. The Isles are in a really bad spot as they are basically hoping that the City and State governments in NY can push another arena deal through with the use of public financing. Not sure how much appetite there is for that after the Barclays fiasco. If they don't get that arena in Queens, they are basically stuck at Barclays for the foreseeable future (provided they can work out a new deal with the arena), or will have to move out of the area. I hope it works out for them, although we definitely don't need a 5th active arena in the greater NYC area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilsfan118 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 2 hours ago, DevsMan84 said: Biggest complaint with Barclays (other than terrible seating arrangement) is the ice. That is due to the team using PVC piping under the floor instead of metal piping. Is replacement of that really that difficult? I am legit asking because to me it seems that it could be done in about 2-3 weeks including ripping up floor and removing old system and replacing with new one. I know Barclays would effectively be shut down during that time but it might be worth it as that is often mentioned as the biggest problem the team has with the arena. I mean, while the work itself would probably not be too involved, you're looking at: 1) Union labor rates. 2) Opportunity cost of completely shutting down the facility for at least a month. 3) Minimal returns from the investment, as far as strictly $$$ is concerned. It would never happen, unless the NHL forced the ownership to do it.. but even then, what authority does the NHL have to try and do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDfan1711 Posted July 20, 2017 Share Posted July 20, 2017 45 minutes ago, Devilsfan118 said: It would never happen, unless the NHL forced the ownership to do it.. but even then, what authority does the NHL have to try and do that? I'm really surprised that the NHL doesn't mandate how the rinks are constructed, at least in terms of the way the ice and playing surface is expected to operate. Obviously there's dimensions and things like that which are required, but it seems like the underlying infrastructure is a free for all and fair game. It's always struck me as odd when players and people would say "Oh that ice is the worst, the puck bounces all over the place" and things like that. I always wondered, how the hell can that be? I've played on my fair share of different types of surfaces before, everything from ice, to asphalt, concrete, sport court, and even polished surfaces, but when it comes to ice, and a surface that's used in a professional multi-million dollar league, I don't get how all 30 arenas can't have near-identical setups. Obviously it comes down to things like temperate control as well, but again, how is that something that can't be regulated to the point where we get consistent results? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleBallofHate Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 (edited) Wow they made this kid sit through Arbitration - probably not the smartest idea... Forward Tomas Tatar and the Detroit Red Wings agreed to terms on a four-year contract Friday. It has an average annual value of $5.3 million, according to Sportsnet. Tatar had an arbitration hearing in Toronto on Thursday but the sides agreed to a contract prior to the arbitrator's ruling. Edited July 21, 2017 by LittleBallofHate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted July 21, 2017 Share Posted July 21, 2017 Instead of wasting all that money fixing up the dump that is the coliseum they should have just demolished the whole thing and built a new arena right there. There is no reason that yet another arena should be built in this area unless they are paying for the entire thing themselves. No taxpayers money should be spent on this. I don't care about the Islanders and honestly don't care if they move out of the area at this point. NYCFC of the MLS wants their own soccer specific stadium as well. Another thing that I don't see happening any time soon, if ever unless they are paying for it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleBallofHate Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 I don't even know what to say about this BS any more... it really shouldn't bother me but it's really F*ckin Annoying! From NHL.com: Headline: Gaudreau says playing for Flyers someday 'would be sweet' Snippet: Forward Johnny Gaudreau is happy playing for the Calgary Flames but said Friday he would someday welcome a chance to play for the Philadelphia Flyers. Gaudreau, who grew up a Flyers fan in Salem, New Jersey, about 40 miles south of Philadelphia, said so during an interview with WIP radio in Philadelphia. "I have a ton of family here, all my friends," the 23-year-old said. "I actually have a wedding this weekend in South Jersey, and all my friends come back here. All my good friends and kids who I have played with all my life are from South Jersey, so it would be sweet to play here someday. Gaudreau has five years remaining on a six-year contract he signed with the Flames on Oct. 10, 2016. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Hockey Posted July 22, 2017 Share Posted July 22, 2017 (edited) It shouldn't surprise you, Salem is almost a 2 hour drive to get to a Devils game. Being a Devils fan down in that whole area is not the norm when the Flyers are way closer. It's just how it is. Edited July 22, 2017 by Satans Hockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.