Official 2008-2009 NHL Season Thread

[justinsayne]

As just a casual hockey fan I don't have much authority when I say this. It appears that Boston and San Jose are the front runners for the finals and that to me isn't good for the NHL. Yet again it would be two random teams playing for the Cup. This happens nearly every year in the NHL and it seems that it's one of the biggest issues. Teams go from nothing to champions in an offseason. Boston and San Jose are both good if not great teams this season, but where were they last season? The Wings are good this year but not great. The parity in the NHL is insane and to me it hurts the game a lot.

What in the blue fucking hell are you talking about?!, first of all Boston and SJ are to fairly large hockey markets, Boston is an original six team with a massive fan base behind them, and SJ was close to being in the Stanley Cup finals last year, secondly it's about the half way point of the season, there are still roughly 40 games left in the season, a hell of a lot can change, thirdly new teams competing for the Cup each year makes the product more exciting, why the hell would people want to watch if the same team just dominates every fucking year, that would just get boring, and finally the Wings are good but not great?!?, WTF are you talking about, the Wings ARE a great team, for fuck sake they are 31-10-7, how do you get good but not great form that is beyond me, and finally the only thing "hurting" the game is the piss poor TV deal the NHL has, if they could get off Versus, a channel most people either don't get or don't know they even have, more people would prolly be watching, this past years Stanley Cup was the highest rated in years, last year the ratings of the Stanley cup had an increase of 157 percent over the previous year’s opener and a 100 percent increase over the first game two years ago.

 

[klunderbunker]

And if you'd read the rest you'd see that I say all of that. Of course they're big markets. Boston is an old power and San Jose is a huge city. Sure Detroit is a good team but they're miles behind in the standings. The tv deal they have sucks because they couldn't handle a more mainstream one. They cut off a hockey game for a horse race on NBC before. Sure it's exciting when there's new matchups every year, but you want two different teams in every finals? That's nuts.

 

[justinsayne]

Moving the teams would be fine. Seriously, do Columbus, Nashville and Orlando need hockey teams?

Orlando does not now nor has it ever had an NHL franchise, and Columbus and Nashville are still relatively new to the NHL they are still growing franchises given time they could become great franchises for the league down the road

Put them in cold climates where people like hockey.

You are aware that just becasue it's a warm climate doesn't mean the people living there don't like hockey right?

When the Kings came into the league they were put there because there were 800,000 Canadians in LA. When polled, the main reason they moved to LA: They were sick of hockey.

Alright you are gonna need to give me a source on this, casue I'm finding it hard to beleive that a bunch of canadiens moved from Canada to LA simply becasue they were sick of hockey

LA has a team because it's the second biggest city in America. Move some teams around, contract them, whatever. Either way there's too many teams that just don't make any money. Get rid of them. It would help things out.

The problem with this is that right now everything (division & conference wise) is balanced, why mess with shit that's not broken?

As far as the Montreal thing goes and Bettman wanting an American team, that would make sense.

Umm, since Hockey is so huge in Canada wouldn't it make more sense for there to me more if not just as many teams in Canada?

Canada is always going to be hockey crazy so they don't need it to get over.

Ok, we're talking about hockey here, not wrestling, getting over isn't the issue, it's making money, if there are more fans in Canada then having more teams for them to support, right now Canada has 6 teams spread over the entire country, the US has well more than double that

Americans simply aren't big fans of the game.

They'd prolly be fans of the game if they could watch it, you know maybe if it was on a network everyone got....

 

[justinsayne]

And if you'd read the rest you'd see that I say all of that. Of course they're big markets. Boston is an old power and San Jose is a huge city.

So then how could it possiably be a bad thing for them to be in the Cup Finals?!?

Sure Detroit is a good team but they're miles behind in the standings.

My god, this is the single most ridicurous thing you've posted yet, they are leading their divsion by 9 pts. and in second place in their conf., so where you're getting this miles behind shit is beyond me

The tv deal they have sucks because they couldn't handle a more mainstream one. They cut off a hockey game for a horse race on NBC before.

And in the past year things have drastically changed, the NHL is the best that it has ever been and last years Cup finals are show that people are starting to notice, if this trend continues then by the time the current TV deal ends in 2010-11 they should easily be able to land a better deal on a better network

Sure it's exciting when there's new matchups every year, but you want two different teams in every finals? That's nuts.

I want the playoffs to be unpredictable and competitive, if a new team ends up in the finals every year as a result than so be it, think of it this way do you want to see the same match headlining WM every year? no of course not, casue that would just get boring and thus make watching it pointless, so now tell me how is that nuts?

 

[klunderbunker]

Orlando was my mistake. For some reason I thought the Panters were based in Orlando.

Sure it doesn't mean that they'll like hockey more, but what sounds better for a hockey team: Phoenix, out in the desert, or Minnesota where it's freezing a good amount of the time?

It wasn't all of them that said that. I think i read that in SI once, but I could be totally wrong on it. If I am then I'll stand corrected.

The issue with that is that things are broken. The league was completely shut down a few years ago and for the most part no one missed it. Hockey is starting to pick itself back up and it's made great strides, but it's still got a long way to go. The conferences and divisions are balanced, but it wouldn't be that hard to take away say, a team per division?

Not necessecarily. Canada has far fewer major cities than America does and the distribution as far as media in America blows Canada away. Hockey is bigger in Canada, but the room for growth is here in America.

Wouldn't getting over with the fans as something that you want to see mean making more money? The more popular they are the more people would go to the games.

That's just it Justin. There was a major network deal for them with ESPN. It failed. Now with the changes that have been made if this and maybe the next season's ratings are up as high, then yes they should get a new major deal. Right now they need to prove that last year wasn't a flash in the pan though, which it seems that they're doing.

 

[klunderbunker]

It would be a great finals to see Boston and San Jose. What I said was that it's not good to have random teams year after year. If one of them becomes a consistent conference powerhouse then that's even better. They're good teams in major markets that could get an even bigger fan base going.

Detroit is a good distance behind San Jose. They're the second best team in the West but by a good distance. How can they be seen as great when there's another great team that far ahead of them?

I certainly hope you're right about the tv deal. It would be great to see the new NHL on tv. It's improved amazingly in the last just season or two and if things keep up they'll be back on major tv.

Of course I wouldn't want to see the same main event each year but I'd like to see maybe the same wrestler main eventing it on a somewhat consistent basis. I'm not saying I want a repeat matchup every year. I want some consistency from one or two teams and then some other teams to come up and challenge them.

 

[justinsayne]

Sure it doesn't mean that they'll like hockey more, but what sounds better for a hockey team: Phoenix, out in the desert, or Minnesota where it's freezing a good amount of the time?

Umm, you are aware Minny has a team already right?, and if Phx is selling tickets then why move?

The issue with that is that things are broken. The league was completely shut down a few years ago and for the most part no one missed it. Hockey is starting to pick itself back up and it's made great strides, but it's still got a long way to go. The conferences and divisions are balanced, but it wouldn't be that hard to take away say, a team per division?

Yeah except it would be a horriable move business wise, I mean why would you want to do something that would cost the league millions of dollars in revenue each year, not to mention piss of an alienate the fans of the franchises you're getting rid of

That's just it Justin. There was a major network deal for them with ESPN. It failed. Now with the changes that have been made if this and maybe the next season's ratings are up as high, then yes they should get a new major deal. Right now they need to prove that last year wasn't a flash in the pan though, which it seems that they're doing.

Versus had about 20 million fewer subscribers than ESPN when the NHL started on Versus, but Comcast switched Versus from a digital tier to basic cable to make NHL games available to more cable subscribers. For Versus the NHL coverage was a good addition as Versus' ratings grew by about 275% when it showed an NHL game.

ahem...read that^^^, now tell me they aren't proving themselves worthy of a better TV deal

 

[klunderbunker]

Yeah I know they have teams already. Just using them as examples for the geography.

Do all of the teams make that much? I wouldn't think so. The biggest issue that I always hear about is how there's too many teams and I haven't heard a single argument for why it's good to have that many. With so many teams the market is completely oversaturated. It kept expanding and expanding and finally it went too far and now it's in the place that it's in. The changes have helped but with so many teams, how is it getting better?

The NHL is good for ratings but not on a major network. It pales in comparison to the other three major sports. As I've said it's made huge steps in bridging the gap, but while they're still on Versus they're not where they could be. The next two years are critical. Can they keep those numbers up?

 

[justinsayne]

It would be a great finals to see Boston and San Jose. What I said was that it's not good to have random teams year after year. If one of them becomes a consistent conference powerhouse then that's even better. They're good teams in major markets that could get an even bigger fan base going.

But A.)SJ/Bos aren't "random" teams, that makes it sound as if they were shit last year, and both teams had great years last year, hell SJ finished second in the West adn B.) you're just contradicting yourself now, before you said it's not good for them to be in the Finals and now your saying it would be great to see them in the finals

Detroit is a good distance behind San Jose. They're the second best team in the West but by a good distance. How can they be seen as great when there's another great team that far ahead of them?

Detroit is 6 games behind SJ, that's hardly a good distance especially seeing as how the Wings still have 34 games left in the season, I'd say they have a good chance of playing catch up, not to mention when the playoffs start things are completly different, the team with the best record going into the playoffs doesn't mean they're gonna win it all, Arz going to the SB should be proof of that

 

[klunderbunker]

What I'm saying is that long term it's not good to have matchups like this in the finals. It's fine every few years to do it. I'd watch a finals between them anytime.

Sure they could. There's plenty of time left but as of right now they're a good distance back. There's no reason to think San Jose can't keep going at the rate they're going. Detroit likely will make up some ground though but I don't think they'll catch them. they'll get close but I don't think they'll get there.

 

[justinsayne]

Do all of the teams make that much? I wouldn't think so.

Do you honestly think that if a franchise that cost hundreds of millions of dollars wern't making Millions of dollars a year that they'd be able to stay in buisness?

The biggest issue that I always hear about is how there's too many teams and I haven't heard a single argument for why it's good to have that many. With so many teams the market is completely oversaturated. It kept expanding and expanding and finally it went too far and now it's in the place that it's in. The changes have helped but with so many teams, how is it getting better?

The NHL doesn't have anymore teams than the NBA, NFL, or MLB, and how the fuck has it gone to far, they added four teams a few years ago to balance out the divisions, how the fuck are you not getting this!?!?!

The NHL is good for ratings but not on a major network. It pales in comparison to the other three major sports.

You mean the three major sports that are gettign massive exposure on major networks, gee I wonder why that is, couldn't possiably have to do with the amount of exposure they get on those major networks could it?

As I've said it's made huge steps in bridging the gap, but while they're still on Versus they're not where they could be. The next two years are critical. Can they keep those numbers up?

I don't see why not

 

[RBH]

Klunderbunker, lemme repost something that I said to Slyfox and basically proved to him why the contraction idea is idiotic and ridiculous.

In the NHL aspect, getting rid of your teams COSTS YOU MONEY because you no longer have those teams that you got rid of to make a profit off of. Thats why I said that hockey and regular businesses were different in that aspect because regular businesses could cut some departments, but if you think that it is not high risk, high reward, then you are kidding yourself.

Baseball is not run in a proper way and does not allow compettive balance. Thats why many of those stadiums that I mentioned thatr barely fill half their stadiums are the way they are, they dont believe their team has a chance where the competition in the NHl makes sure a new team has a chance each year because there is a salary cap.

Name some of the teams that you believe are dead weight. Any teams from the Southeast division except for the Capitals. Thats all I am aware of, name a few more and we'll debate on whether those teams make a profit.

Different teams make the playofffs each year in the NHL with the eception of the Columbus Blue Jackets and Florida Panthers. Detroit and New Jersey have been the only mainstay in the last 15 years.

Like I said in an earlier post, there was a strike a few years back. Would you put all your money in a company that was just on strike? No! I wouldn't. Any business that comes back from a strike is a liability because you cant trust them.

I bet you any6thing that give it about a year or maybe two or three and the NHL will eventually strike a deal with an actual cable network that people give a shit about. Hell, maybe ESPN. The NFL has a network, the NHL could add one too and say no charge to people who want to add it. (dream world...haha)

Say you turn in your propsal to the guys in Toronto, they agree with everything but the downsizing part, how do you respond? I would say how about moving a couple of the teams back to Canada? You remember Quebec Nordiques and Winnepeg Jets? Canada needs at least 8 teams to ensure a little more profit.

The fact of the matter is that teams such as San Jose and Boston are really popular with their cities because their cities love hockey. I know a lot of LA Kings fans too so unless you live here, you cant really say anything. The Duck fanbase is growing too. We're getting more fans every year and it continues to rise. Granted, we are not going to get to the level of the Wings, Canadiens or Maple Leafs, but growth is growth.

NHL is getting better. Like Justin said, give them an actual tv network and people will come. Now you may (and Sly too) may say "hockey sucks because americans dont watch it" and I will say "BULLSHIT". You don't watch it. Does not mean that millions of other Americans don't watch it.

One more thing, the attendance figures for Wrigley Field January 1st-SOLD OUT...ratings-THROUGH THE ROOF. .....tell me after that...that people don't give a shit about hockey. Im a fucking Southern Californian and I love the game.

 

[klunderbunker]

With the way the economy is going and considering the attendance that some of the teams were having before we hit the brunt of this, I wouldn't be suprised if a lot of them were in serious financial trouble.

How the fuck are you not getting that the market for hockey in America isn't there like it is in the other main sports? Why is it that hockey has never been as popular as those? I don't know, you tell me. It never has been and it never will be. It's fine for say MLB to have the same number of teams as the NFL, because it can hold its own. The NHL has its fans, but at the end of the day it pales in comparison and you know it.

Of course they get more viewers on bigger networks. The NHL was on there too and they got bad ratings so they were dropped. It made sense to drop them especially after the strike. The strike happened and for the most part, people didn't care. Hardcore hockey fans did but causal fans like me didn't miss a thing of it. There's just not enough hardcore fans out there to carry hockey that high up.

Neither do I. I hope that happens.

 

[klunderbunker]

Klunderbunker, lemme repost something that I said to Slyfox and basically proved to him why the contraction idea is idiotic and ridiculous.

In the NHL aspect, getting rid of your teams COSTS YOU MONEY because you no longer have those teams that you got rid of to make a profit off of. Thats why I said that hockey and regular businesses were different in that aspect because regular businesses could cut some departments, but if you think that it is not high risk, high reward, then you are kidding yourself.

Baseball is not run in a proper way and does not allow compettive balance. Thats why many of those stadiums that I mentioned thatr barely fill half their stadiums are the way they are, they dont believe their team has a chance where the competition in the NHl makes sure a new team has a chance each year because there is a salary cap.

Name some of the teams that you believe are dead weight. Any teams from the Southeast division except for the Capitals. Thats all I am aware of, name a few more and we'll debate on whether those teams make a profit.

Different teams make the playofffs each year in the NHL with the eception of the Columbus Blue Jackets and Florida Panthers. Detroit and New Jersey have been the only mainstay in the last 15 years.

Like I said in an earlier post, there was a strike a few years back. Would you put all your money in a company that was just on strike? No! I wouldn't. Any business that comes back from a strike is a liability because you cant trust them.

I bet you any6thing that give it about a year or maybe two or three and the NHL will eventually strike a deal with an actual cable network that people give a shit about. Hell, maybe ESPN. The NFL has a network, the NHL could add one too and say no charge to people who want to add it. (dream world...haha)

Say you turn in your propsal to the guys in Toronto, they agree with everything but the downsizing part, how do you respond? I would say how about moving a couple of the teams back to Canada? You remember Quebec Nordiques and Winnepeg Jets? Canada needs at least 8 teams to ensure a little more profit.

The fact of the matter is that teams such as San Jose and Boston are really popular with their cities because their cities love hockey. I know a lot of LA Kings fans too so unless you live here, you cant really say anything. The Duck fanbase is growing too. We're getting more fans every year and it continues to rise. Granted, we are not going to get to the level of the Wings, Canadiens or Maple Leafs, but growth is growth.

NHL is getting better. Like Justin said, give them an actual tv network and people will come. Now you may (and Sly too) may say "hockey sucks because americans dont watch it" and I will say "BULLSHIT". You don't watch it. Does not mean that millions of other Americans don't watch it.

One more thing, the attendance figures for Wrigley Field January 1st-SOLD OUT...ratings-THROUGH THE ROOF. .....tell me after that...that people don't give a shit about hockey. Im a fucking Southern Californian and I love the game.

That's true when the economy is solid. Right now people can't afford to spend money on tickets so are you telling me that teams are making money off of hall full arenas? I find that very hard to believe. With the salaries that are given to players on top of it, with the attendance being low, how can they be making profits?

I hope they get a major deal. No one I know has Versus so all we get is regional stuff. Idk about ESPN but maybe Fox Sports or something like that. They have a successful run tehre and ESPN will indeed take them back. The League is coming back up which is good and the outdoor games always draw well. Hockey has some life, but it's got a long way to go. However there's no way that you can convince me that teams like Nashville, Florida, Phoenix or Columbus are making money right now.

 

[RBH]

The NHL had a network....the strike fucked that up. They had an audience. It may have not been a great audience but it was growing. The game was gtetting more popular in the 90s with the emergence of teams such as the Colorado Avalance (their fans celebrated like crazy after they won the cup) and the Dallas Stars.

Give me numbers before you say that the NHL is in financial trouble. I have not read anything...not one thing...about any trouble. Like I have reiterated in a majority of my hockey posts, teams like the Devils, Rangers, Flyers, Penguins and other well known eastern teams continue to almost sell out their arenas nightly. Others such as the Ducks and Coyotes are growing an audience and some like the Stars and Sharks already have a strong audience.

Well, hockey had a growing audience in the late 80s and early to mid 90s with Wayne Gretzky and Jaromir Jagr. Somewhere along the line, things slowed down and then of course, the strike. If you take a look at other sports, they usually gain back a lot of their fanbase through the popularity of a few superstars. MLB has Alex Rodriguez, Mark Texiera, Johan Santana, David Ortiz, hell even Barry Bonds makes news after he retires. NFL has Terrell Owens, Tony Romo, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. NBA has Kobe Bryant and Lebron James. I used these players as examples because every single one of them has been in some sort of headline that was either related to their sport or possibly not. My point? All of these sports have always had players to build around. 80s in NBA-Bird, 90s-Jordan, 00s-Bryant.

The NHL has not had that stability. But now, with the emergence of new studs Alexander Ovechin and Sidney Crosby, the NHL is starting to develop a flair. Two Talented players who are young enough to be filled with mystique and interest and young enough to carry the NHL on their backs for the next 10-15 years. The NHL has not had a marketable player since Gretzky. Again I use Gretzky, because when I was growing up in So-Cal, I always saw images of that man or his likeness around OC and everyone knew who he was. So do not tell me that LA fans dont know shit because when they have a special player, they know it.

Now with these marketable players, the NHL can only continue to grow. The game will not die.

You make a valid point about the people not caring but you forget that baseball lost a HIGH portion of their fans when they went on strike. Two men saved that game, their names: Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa.

If a strike were to happen to any of the other 3 sports, I can guarantee you that they will lose a large portion of their fanbase. It's like when you break up with someone, you become disillutioned for a while and then you finally manage to pick up the pieces. The NBA did suffer a little during their minor strike but Kobe Bryant saved the game.

So KB, Im not trying to attack ur views dude...it just irritates me when casual fans (as u call urself) talk about a sport that they like to bash but do not fully understand...no offense.

 

[klunderbunker]

None taken.

You're absolutely right when you say it was growing but then as you said the strike slammed into it and that ended things dead. If there's one thing that people get mad about in sports it's athletes complaining about wages and labor. You're making millions of dollars for a 6 month season. We don't want to hear about labor issues. From everything that I remember, no one but hardcore fans missed hockey. That tells me that hockey needed to start from the ground and build their way back up. As you say they'll be carrying the league in 10 years or so and hopefully by then the league will be better than ever. At that time, sure having 30 teams would be ok. Right now though it just seems like too much. The talent is too spread out and there's not enough fans to follow so many teams. When I say to contract teams I don't mean keep the league that low forever. Once the league gets back to where it was bring them back.

 

[justinsayne]

That's true when the economy is solid. Right now people can't afford to spend money on tickets so are you telling me that teams are making money off of hall full arenas? I find that very hard to believe. With the salaries that are given to players on top of it, with the attendance being low, how can they be making profits?

Jesus fucking Christ KB, half full arenas?!? are you fucking kidding me?!?, do you know fucking hard it is to get tickets to a Wild game, it's neraly impossible, not to mention many many other teams have no problems selling out arenas, and BTW did you forget about that Salary Cap they put into effect, not only to keep shit more competive and spread talent around but to keep players salaries in check

However there's no way that you can convince me that teams like Nashville, Florida, Phoenix or Columbus are making money right now.

If they're weren't making money then their owners would be trying to sell them, and Phx actually does very well BTW

 

[klunderbunker]

Have you ever seen a Panthers game or a Jackets game? You can count the people. I didn't say it was empty I said it wasn't full. The cap is a big deal indeed. Whenever you can control the amount of money professional athletes make I see it as a good thing.

Is it possible that they can't sell them because no one wants to buy them right now?

 

[RBH]

Florida does not like pro sports except for basketball and football. They hate baseball too...or do we forget this?

The fact of the matter is that like we have all agreed on, strikes fuck up everything and right now the NHL is in a rebuilding mode but last year they had one of the most exciting finals ever (Red Wings and Penguins)...I hate to say it. The year before had a Canadien team (Ottawa) versus a team that had not won before (Anaheim)....Yes I will admit my city is FILLED WITH BANDWAGONS....but hey let them come. If they keep pumping money into the team, they will continue to play and win. As long as our owner stays out of jail (for a crime he did not commit) and our GM does as good as Burke, the Ducks will continue to grow into a top tier team (both in performance and attendance)...

Columbus? I did not even know where bloody Columbus was until a few years ago. They don't have teams in any other sports therefore, they are not a sports town. Did you ever think of that? Well, I am done for the night, be back tomorrow. Have fun debating gentlemen.

 

[klunderbunker]

Not at all. I've had some very sad nights watching the Rays and Marlins play.

About Columbus that's exactly my point. Why in the world is tehre an NHL team there? The fans don't go the games and seemingly don't care about sports so why should there be a team there? That's the problem with the NHL to me: they have Canada and even still they pick places like Columbs for a team. That makes no sense at all.

I'm off too.

Edit: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=3790207

Article about the Coyotes being in financial trouble. That's about a month old. Despite the increase in ticket sales (you were right) they're still in trouble.

 

[RBH]

Winnepeg needs a team...LOL

People in Arizona somehow have 4 sports teams (5 if you count soccer and 6 womens basketball) and yet they pretty much dislike all 4 of their teams. The Arizona Cardinals have not had a great fanbase for years until they made the playoffs and super bowl this year.

The Phoenix Suns fanbase is getting worse now that the team is getting worse. They have not had a strong base for a while even in the great years (if you call winning your division and losing in the playoffs great). When they play the Lakers, they have a lot of Laker fans in the stands. But the Suns are probably the most popular team of the Arizona teams.

The Arizona Diamondbacks are a team that wins with its fans. Would you go to an Arizona D-Bakcs game in the middle of fucking summer? Do you know how hot it is there? Good Lord it is freaking 120 degrees sometimes. You will fucking melt. No shit. you will fucking melt. That proves the Diamondbacks theory.

The Coyotes have not made the playoffs in 10 years since the Ducks eliminated them from the first round way back when. No playoffs=no fanbase. It is simple as that. They are only now starting to get good again but could still miss the playoffs if they lose more games like the game against the Ducks,

Anyways, back to hockey. My Ducks went 2-1 last week. We won a great game against the Coyotes and Avs but they need to have better defense and goaltending if they are to make the playoffs and be successful.

 

[Mr. TM]

The Vancouver Canucks need a new coach. That is simple. Alain Vignault has created a teamful of individuals and pears. There are no lines on the team and the team has not gelled. By this time most teams have created lines that can play well together, and have a solid team. The Canucks have not been able to do this yet this year. He may have won coach of the year two years ago, but in reality, that should be Luongo's trophy. He needs to go, and there is a person who resides in Vancouver who I would love to replace him. A guy who won Gold for Team Canada in 2002, and won gold with the rookies for Canada in 2009. Pat Quinn would be good for the team, a man who can create lines. Some say he has no chance in today's hockey. I say that is flat out wrong, the Vancouver Canucks can only get great with him. With two former Maple Leafs on the team, Quinn wont feel like he has missed a beat.

 

[simpsons_fanatic742]

So, Craig Hartsburg got fired today. Honestly, the coach was not the problem with the Senators, but they have to have a scapegoat to make it look like they are trying to fix the team. I think it's unfair to fire him when the team is playing very badly right now. The Senators have a ton of problems going for them right now and they shouldn't have given up on him so fast, but that's Ottawa for you.

 

[a7xoff]

So, Craig Hartsburg got fired today. Honestly, the coach was not the problem with the Senators, but they have to have a scapegoat to make it look like they are trying to fix the team. I think it's unfair to fire him when the team is playing very badly right now. The Senators have a ton of problems going for them right now and they shouldn't have given up on him so fast, but that's Ottawa for you.

It's really a shame. I agree that it is not the coach's problem. I mean the Senators are really just broken. They have just one solid line and that's it. Their goal tending is mediocre at best and they are not the most disciplined bunch. If anything, I think the Senators firing the coach is just going to hurt the team even more. It's not like the Devils a few years back where they fired the coach when they got onto a rough streak. Ottowa has had a real bad year and this I don't think is going to help. They just don't have the players to be a real good team anymore. However there is always the art of trading that could help. Anyway Devils play the Capitals tonight

 

[RBH]

The Ducks have won 3 of 4 to distance themselves a little bit from the rest of the pack. I hope they keep it up as they play the Wild tomorrow. February is a very important month for the Ducks as a majority of their games are on the road and they need to keep up the momentum to guarantee a spot in the playoffs. I know they can do it as they have played pretty well recently. It is just a matter of executing. I believe that the Ducks can do that and make it back to the postseason. I really want to play either the Blackhawks or the Flames in the first round. Though those are not anywhere near guaranteed wins, it is much easier than the Sharks or Wings in round 1.