Didn't see this coming. Hope he get's the help he needs.
Around the League 36-But Who's Counting...
- Thread starter geehaad
- Start date
- Status
Eric was enigmatic for sure.....but 2008-2009 Eric Staal (along with Cam Ward) carried the Canes on his back all the way to the ECF. His "give a shit" meter was running all out that season.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
In that respect, maybe the best (and most obvious, looking back on where this started) comparable would be Malkin. Unquestionably an MVP level candidate, unquestionably capable of putting the team on his shoulders when Crosby was out of action.
Imagine an alternate universe where the Pens roster is built like the Oilers roster, and they still hadn't done shit through the year 2014. At some point they have to ask hard questions where the forward progress is going to come from. Maybe they get lucky with a home run draft pick, maybe they stumble into a highway robbery trade. But most likely it's going to be internal growth, plus whatever bold moves management is willing to make in hockey trades.
If you're the Pens in that scenario, you have to really start thinking of Malkin as a redundancy in the lineup rather than an untradeable pillar. Likewise, the Oilers don't need to have a Hart winner on their second line, so much as they need to have better players at every other position. It's so much easier to find a quality 2C than it is to find the kind of player the Oilers need right now at D or G. At some point they just have to stop waiting for Darnell Nurse and Stuart Skinner to become something they aren't, and make a trade to build a hockey team rather than a collection of hockey players.
zman77
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2015
- 14,610
- 36,490
Kapanen has 1 year remaining @ $3.2M Cap Hit. If clears waivers & sent down, #LetsGoPens
save $1.125M of cap hit. To activate Rutta from LTIR, they need to clear $1.44M, so they would need to send 1 additional player down if Kapanen clears & sent down
save $1.125M of cap hit. To activate Rutta from LTIR, they need to clear $1.44M, so they would need to send 1 additional player down if Kapanen clears & sent down
The RSN model, at least in its current form, is dying before our eyes.
TheReelChuckFletcher
Former TheRillestPaulFenton; Harverd Alum
The RSN model, at least in its current form, is dying before our eyes.
Streaming, baby! You just need to find a way to pull it off without losing revenue streams.
Unsustainable
Seth Jarvis has Big Kahunas
NHL.com needs to offer plans with no black outs, I’d spend 120 a year for it. Stream every game, no matter the region.
- Dec 6, 2011
- 12,914
- 41,988
There will be pain for a while with these network situations. But that was a bubble that often seemed like it could burst. Teams and leagues will need to figure out how to pivot to something else quickly.
I don’t believe most fans have the stomach for what a streaming model would cost. Regional provider models are subsidizing our viewing by making the guy that likes all the History channel spinoffs pay for his local hockey team. When it’s just us that watches paying, it won’t be as cheap.
Joe McGrath
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2009
- 18,575
- 40,073
Malkin is the right comp. The Pens went on to be great for a lot of reasons but tops among them was Crosby turning into a 200 foot player. One of Drai or McDavid may want to give that a try.
Last edited:
cptjeff
Reprehensible User
It'll be priced at what maximizes revenue based on price and number of buyers. I don't think that'll be that much higher than current prices.
That may mean that sports may cease to be as profitable as they have been in the past. But if they charge too much and turn away fans, they'll die.
They got to at least pay the bills. If that costs more than what most will pay…
cptjeff
Reprehensible User
Then nobody will pay it and they still won't be able to pay the bills. They will then have to cut costs.
But since the NHL is still hugely gate driven, they'll be plenty able to operate.
Agreed RE spend amount.
Problem is that the sports leagues have benefited tremendously from all satellite and cable subscribers paying whereas the new approach will have a tiny subset of that now paying (even if at a higher subscriber fee).
NFL is ok but NBA, MLB, NHL and to a lesser degree College Athletics will be hurt.
hblueridgegal
We'll bounce back
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
If the monthly cost is less than full-on subscribing to cable, then it’s a win.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,389
- 102,350
It depends. It's a win if watching NHL hockey is the only thing a household is interested in, but how universal is that? I watch NHL game via Bally and ESPN+, which I get for "free" from my cell phone plan. My wife has no desire to watch the NHL so HGTV, Discovery, Hallmark, Foodnetwork and 3-4 others are her channels.
If I can get all that stuff plus hockey streaming for less than cable, then it's a win. I'm skeptical though.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Sounds like it’s time to lay down the law about what’s gonna be on TV from now on, eh?
surfzone365
Registered User
Congrats to the Kings. They finally held on to win a game in regulation.
Boom Boom Apathy
I am the Professor. Deal with it!
- Sep 6, 2006
- 49,389
- 102,350
Pick your battles .Sounds like it’s time to lay down the law about what’s gonna be on TV from now on, eh?
Is anyone else kinda glad Florida lost last night? I don't want to ever be glad about a player leaving to, but Spencer Knight's entrance to the player assistance program might sideline him for a few games. I'd put the odds of Florida taking a wildcard spot right now at, say, 25%.
My point is, of all the wildcard teams, they scare me a bit more than the others. A high octane offensive team can give us fits, and we also have seen Spencer Knight stonewall us earlier this year with an incredible game (40sv shutout in November). I like our matchup against the other wild card teams better, assuming we finish the job and win the division which is far from guaranteed.
My point is, of all the wildcard teams, they scare me a bit more than the others. A high octane offensive team can give us fits, and we also have seen Spencer Knight stonewall us earlier this year with an incredible game (40sv shutout in November). I like our matchup against the other wild card teams better, assuming we finish the job and win the division which is far from guaranteed.
Are we talking about this year’s Florida or last year’s?
I happy they lost, not because I’m worried about them, but because it may shake loose a player this week.
This year. They still have Barkov, Verhaeghe, Lundell, Bennett, Reinhart, and they added Matthew Tkachuk. That's an insane top 6.
I get they're a lot less threatening than last year, but I do think they still have a better roster than most of the other wildcards, even with their defense being what it is. That's the nature of the wild card teams is that they all have some flaws.
- Status
