CXLIV - The Tempe era set to begin as ASU opens Mullett Arena

[BMN]

To the bolded: I don't believe you.

Well, to paraphrase a wise person, "no one cares about your ability to determine the veracity of what I say..."

 

[PainForShane]

So your argument, best as I can see it, is: Auston Matthews is worth it because the NHL needs superstars and without this franchise in Arizona, we'd be down one superstar.

ONE.

ONE superstar.

One superstar who hasn't even played in the second round of the NHL playoffs in the first six seasons of his career. Hell, even Mario Lemieux won a round in his fifth season and the Penguins were even worse when they drafted him than the Leafs were when they drafted Auston.

When you make this argument, the people who you're trying to persuade think "Coyotes fans don't understand ROI. Because they're overvaluing the return and overlooking just how much was invested."

And again, if you want to look that dumb, be my guest. I tend to stand up for southern hockey fans though and I hate it when they look stupid. But I get that makes me look hyper-patronizing because I'm just a random online idiot myself, and that's totally fair. But just didn't want it to go unsaid.

Personally, my argument for the Coyotes in the year 2023 is "they're a private entity owned by a private concern that wants to make it work there and there seems to be a lot of goodwill to make it work in a part of the Phoenix area where maybe they ought to have been in the first place." Auston Matthews is a nice little bit of gravy on top of the argument but I certainly don't make the crux of the argument.

There's also a whole debate about what role the actual NHL franchises "ought to" play in growing the sport but that's a whole other ball of wax...

The bolded above half of my argument. Basically it is better to have more superstars than not. The other half of the argument is that very few hockey fans (esp when counted as a %) care about which franchises who lose money and / or by how much. There are currently 32 NHL teams, some will be doing better than others but who cares. Mostly we all just want to see hockey games. Which is why we were all happy that the NHL played in the bubble, no one other than a few people cared that it cost the owners some money.

So, having a superstar = good, and having a poorly run franchise = neutral (again because hardly anyone cares). So therefore being in AZ = (good + neutral) so on the whole that is good. To use a different but more striking example, how many people cared about seeing Wayne Gretzky and how many cared about Peter Pocklington's finances? The answer is: "quite a lot," and "hardly anyone."

Seems like you have the order reversed, if that's the case I'm not the one 'looking dumb' in this conversation.

Anyway in this last post, looks like you are saying something like, "look the Yotes are owned by an owner who wants to make it work there" which is a good argument for keeping the Yotes in Arizona. You can have multiple good arguments arguing for the same point of view.

You can also have multiple bad arguments arguing the same (see all of your arguments in the post I actually responded to). smh

 

[Reaser]

If only there was a NHL team in Halifax and somewhere in Saskatchewan, might finally grow the game and get some legendary players from those places, for once. Have to have a NHL team in your city/state or province or there's a 0% chance of ever liking and playing hockey, as overtly has been implied.

I mean, look at Arizona, without the Yotes there's no Matthews. There's no Knies, it's not like his family is from Slovakia and his dad liked hockey and played street hockey or anything. Most of all, there's definitely no Tage Thompson, how could he possibly have ever started playing hockey without the Yotes existence?

 

[BMN]

You can also have multiple bad arguments arguing the same (see all of your arguments in the post I actually responded to). smh

Absolutely. And I see nothing wrong in saying "hey, this one point you're making kinda makes you look silly, maybe drop or modify that part."

If you want to take the AM argument on in good faith (and again, I find it pretty dumb but fine....here we go), I'd say your "good + neutral" argument is also flawed because it assumes such a superstar couldn't have been created if the NHL went elsewhere or that the NHL didn't invest in the growth of the sport in other ways (NCAA outreach, more neutral site games, etc. etc. etc.). At best, I'd say it's "neutral + neutral" if I take your point that most fans don't care that a city that might have loved the Coyotes more didn't have them but also because it's just as plausible there was an Auston Matthews (or maybe three!) lurking in Houston or, yes, Las Vegas (who only just got their team) but I guess we'll never know.....

Now, it'd be quite another thing if we had 10-15 solid roleplayers + a superstar and you'd say "this really wouldn't have happened if the NHL didn't go to Phoenix because the quantity is there plus the quality of the highest end player." But literally five NHL players born in Arizona have emerged since the franchise started. Just so happens one of them is Auston Matthews and given the low quantity on the backend of quality, I don't draw that up to anything but statistical randomness. That could have happened in Newport News for crying out loud (and yes, I know that also sounds stupid but that's kind of my point...).

To calm myself down and try to explain why I think this argument is silly: It doesn't do enough to explain why the growth couldn't have happened in any other place nor does it explain why a NHL team specifically was needed to make it happen.

 

[PainForShane]

Absolutely. And I see nothing wrong in saying "hey, this one point you're making kinda makes you look silly, maybe drop or modify that part."

If you want to take the AM argument on in good faith (and again, I find it pretty dumb but fine....here we go), I'd say your "good + neutral" argument is also flawed because it assumes such a superstar couldn't have been created if the NHL went elsewhere or that the NHL didn't invest in the growth of the sport in other ways (NCAA outreach, more neutral site games, etc. etc. etc.). At best, I'd say it's "neutral + neutral" if I take your point that most fans don't care that a city that might have loved the Coyotes more didn't have them but also because it's just as plausible there was an Auston Matthews (or maybe three!) lurking in Houston or, yes, Las Vegas (who only just got their team) but I guess we'll never know.....

Now, it'd be quite another thing if we had 10-15 solid roleplayers + a superstar and you'd say "this really wouldn't have happened if the NHL didn't go to Phoenix because the quantity is there plus the quality of the highest end player." But literally five NHL players born in Arizona have emerged since the franchise started. Just so happens one of them is Auston Matthews and given the low quantity on the backend of quality, I don't draw that up to anything but statistical randomness. That could have happened in Newport News for crying out loud (and yes, I know that also sounds stupid but that's kind of my point...).

To calm myself down and try to explain why I think this argument is silly: It doesn't do enough to explain why the growth couldn't have happened in any other place nor does it explain why a NHL team specifically was needed to make it happen.

BMN -- we're stuck in this timeline. You know, the one where neither of us is going to get our time back after this absurd discussion.

It's well documented that AM34 wouldn't have played professional hockey if not for the Yotes' presence in AZ, he would've played baseball instead. The Ovi goal -- one of the best goals that has ever been scored -- would not have happened if not for the Yotes being in existence and Ovi happening to be playing against AZ that night. Biz might not have had a platform from which to to start Chiclets. Bryzgalov may never have become Mr. Universe if not for his play with the Yotes that led to that massive UFA deal in PHI. All of these things actually happened and any / all events can be used to justify the Yotes' existence because of the benefit of hindsight.

Regarding Auston Matthews (and anything else mentioned above), it's not realistic to assume that you'd get one of the world's best hockey players if you randomly put a team in, say Houston, but in this case it actually happened. In other words we were lucky enough to win the lottery once, it's not likely you'd win if you happened to buy a similar ticket somewhere else.

Also, the Yotes being in Phx really has grown hockey -- to your argument we have a national-level women's hockey development program here, none of that's possible without the support of the NHL and Yotes in particular. I don't really follow that scene too much, but it is vibrant and I'm sure we'll soon have multiple female Olympians who grew up here and made it to that level because of the hockey infrastructure, it's that good.

But yeah. like I said above we're in this timeline and I'm never getting this time back. So, I'm going to bow out. Please continue to defend the Yotes' existence however you see fit, I will do the same to any hater I happen to come across irl. Nevermind that I have never come across anyone like this irl, only on this msg board where it seems to me like conversations are becoming more and more insane every day, but that is a different conversation. Good talk

 

[BMN]

BMN -- we're stuck in this timeline. You know, the one where neither of us is going to get our time back after this absurd discussion.
I'm stuck waiting for a windstorm to pass, this is as good a use of my time as any...

I get what you're trying to say by stating "only argue in this timeline," but you're comparing the Coyotes existence against absolutely nothing which is not addressing anything a critic says. "There shouldn't be hockey in Arizona, here's how it might be better if there was a team in Quebec City or Houston or Mexico City or Saskatoon or Timbuk2 in the 2000s....." "Well, that's not the timeline we live in....."

It's fair to point out that in the timeline we're in, (again) ONE GUY saw the Coyotes and said "I'll play that sport instead of baseball" and hockey gained a superstar (and four other guys of which there's assorted dubiousness to how much we can attribute their invovlement to the Coyotes). It's equally fair to point out "one guy isn't a tremendously big payoff for how ridiculously minor league the NHL has come off during assorted times in the Coyotes' assorted shenanigans."

But I guess, put another way, if AM says "no Coyotes, I'm not a hockey player," fine, I'll take his word at face value but I still don't think it adds much of anything to the defense of the Phoenix Coyotes' existence. I'm still not certain AM has done or will do anything nearly as transcendent for the sport as the Top 10 players of the past 25 years. Time will tell, I suppose...

The Ovi goal -- one of the best goals that has ever been scored -- would not have happened if not for the Yotes being in existence and Ovi happening to be playing against AZ that day. Biz might not have had a platform from which to to start Chiclets. Bryzgalov may never have become Mr. Universe if not for his play with the Yotes that led to his massive UFA signing in PHI. All of these things actually happened and any / all events can be used to justify the Yotes' existence with the benefit of hindsight.
The Top 10 best dunks of all time are the reason why it was sensible to put NBA teams in the ten cities where those dunks happened to occur? Because that's the logic you just laid out here...

Also it doesn't entirely work as a defense of the Coyotes in the here and now: No Coyotes, no AM isn't hypothetical, you say? Well guess what? No Coyotes for the next 25 years, no next AM is hypothetical. Totally hypothetical. Because again: it wasn't proven through quantity but by the massive quality of statistical randomness. Auston Matthews doesn't prove the NHL in the next 25 years is any better an idea in Phoenix than anywhere else because his existence and the good stuff you've cited don't just magically disappear if the Coyotes move tomorrow.

Why can't there still be developmental system once the Coyotes move? It's already there (by your own admission), it'd be pretty silly at that point to dismantle it just because the NHL team left (and you still have professional albeit not major league hockey). Will Auston Matthews just fade into the air like someone in a time-travel movie?

In other words we were lucky enough to win the lottery once, it's not likely you'd win if you happened to buy a similar ticket somewhere else.
That's like saying the lottery would never be won if today's winner didn't buy a ticket. The jackpot just gets moved to the next draw and sooner or later, someone else wins.

Also, the Yotes being in Phx really has grown hockey -- to your argument we have a national-level women's hockey development program here, none of that's possible without the Yotes. I don't really follow that scene too much, but it is vibrant and I'm sure we'll soon have multiple female Olympians who grew up here and made it to that level because of the hockey infrastructure, it's that good.
And that's a fair argument to make that I won't shade. There's going to be people for whom that's not good enough to justify the Coyotes' existence with either but again: those are just people whose metric is entirely different and that's all fine. Horses for courses.

 

[Devils 3silverones]

Basketball and/or soccer if you really wanted to know.

Might want to bone up on some interviews he’s done where he was asked why he got into hockey.

I couldn't care less what he has to say.

I only dropped in to say "Auston Matthews = clearly Coyotes were worth it" is a really really really really REALLY stupid argument

Re: Tempe, I've no qualms with it succeeding or for that matter failing (or at least, no more qualms than I have with the standard level charity billionaires receive for projects they stand to gain more from than cities. That exists everywhere. The Tempe project, best as I can tell, relies on far more private money than most so it's incredibly inoffensive by comparison to Glendale, etc.).

Logic doesn't go well here.

 

[Stumbledore]

....and?

Like .... seriously: what point have you proven?

I'm on your side here. I envision you thinking "Ha! The biggest Canadian sports franchise's anchor player is from Arizona which the Coyotes made possible. They know it and I'm real smart for pointing this out to these canucks.....they can't help but admit that 25 years of losing money and going nowhere was worth it *for that one player.*"

The biggest Canadian sports franchise's anchor player is actually from Richmond Hill, ON.

 

[Devils 3silverones]

and where were the New Jersey Devils formed, Devils...... wasn't Newark...... wasn't Denver.... try Kansas City, the market who doesn't want professional hockey, never mind an NHL Franchise anywhere close to that market but lets its name being marketed in Independence, MO, THAT's how lame and lazy the above post comes across as

I am well aware of how the Devils came about.
As this forum goes, you are very much offside.
Your opinion of my choice of hockey team has NOTHING to do with this business of hockey thread.
Your personal feelings, are well known.

And i respect your opinion.

 

[Devils 3silverones]

SorryNotSorry to parachute into this but like... wtf are you talking about.

The average nhl fan doesn't give two sh*ts about which franchises might be well or poorly run halfway across the country or even in their hometown. They sure as hell care about superstars though. Case in point, personally (as a Yotes fan), I don't really care whether Ottawa or Florida or CBJ or whoever else are losing money, it's irrelevant. But paying money to see McDavid in person? Yeah I'd do that. And so would everyone else even if the EDM Oilers org suddenly declared bankruptcy.

Put another way when I see AM34 I say, "wow I'm really impressed he actually plays a 200 ft game" not "How amazing is it that TML makes so much money for their faceless conglomerate owners!" I guess we watch hockey very differently.

Like seriously wtf are you talking about. The rest of this argument is equally nonsensical maybe that's probably why Legend didn't address any of your nonsense points

No. The reason why there is not a response, is contradictory .
Pick and choose.
I am with many posters on this board. I do not want the team to leave.

 

[TheLegend]

I couldn't care less what he has to say.

Then why are you here??

 

[OG6ix]

The biggest Canadian sports franchise's anchor player is actually from Richmond Hill, ON.

Who from the Raptors lives in Richdmond Hill?

 

[Devils 3silverones]

Then why are you here??

Why is that a question. AM. Is not a BOH thing.

 

[Stumbledore]

Who from the Raptors lives in Richdmond Hill?

You don't realize how little impact the Raptors make outside the Centre of the Universe.

 

[KevFu]

I think we tend to over generalize certain aspects. We talk about "the casual fan" as if this is a significant section of the population, and it COULD be won by the sports leagues.

Are the people who are causal sports fans just people who would be bigger sports fans, but they don't have enough time in their life to be one because they've got life/kids/family/responsibilities that prevent them from following sports?

I think being a sports fan is just a trait and all you can control is "get as much exposure possible to kids aged 8-12."

I know a few adults who WOULD be more of a sports fan if they had more time and more money. But without the time and money, there's no way the leagues COULD lure them in to being paying customers again until their kids go to college. A sports league isn't going to be worth more to them than their kids. They're choosing paying for gymnastics/ballet/piano/karate lessons for their kids instead of paying for cable to watch their teams. You can't WIN that fight as a league no matter what you do. So why try?

 

[RollingCoyote]

....and?

Like .... seriously: what point have you proven?

I'm on your side here. I envision you thinking "Ha! The biggest Canadian sports franchise's anchor player is from Arizona which the Coyotes made possible. They know it and I'm real smart for pointing this out to these canucks.....they can't help but admit that 25 years of losing money and going nowhere was worth it *for that one player.*"

I try to stand up for southern hockey fans (and as a transplant Canadian in the south, I find myself doing it often) and it's arguments like this that make them look like idiots.

1--- One player, however good he may be, doesn't really justify such a disasterous franchise in the eyes of most hockey fans. There are plenty of great athletes in the NHL without Auston Matthews. Besides...who's to say while we found Auston Matthews in those *25* years, we didn't also miss out on three or five of him, say maybe in Houston or something? Most anti Phoenix fans would say "Really? Just one or two guys? Where's the rest of them?,"
2--- There's no evidence Auston Matthews couldn't also have discovered and adopted hockey through an AHL team. We don't know because the scenario of a NHL-less Phoenix didn’t exist for him,
3--- Let's imagine a world without the NHL in Phoenix...maybe the Leafs draft Patrik Laine instead. He's not as good as Matthews but he gels better with a different free agent pick up that isn't Tavares etc etc etc. We have no idea how well the Leafs rebuild without an Auston Matthews because the rest of the league wouldn't have him either,
4--- FWIW there's probably as many if not more anti-Phoenix folks that *hate* the Leafs and would rather they didn't have a franchise player. So this isn't the music to their ears you think it is,
5--- Not saying I'm one of these people but a lot of Canadian fans don't think it's the role of a league and sport founded in Canada to improve America's fortunes in international competition.

So again: use that "Auston makes it all worth it" canard if you want. But along with the "it doesn't come across on TV" spiel, you're actually making a case against yourself, not for......

Wrong again BMN. From The Canadian Encyclopedia, “The origins of ice hockey have long been debated. In 2008, the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) officially declared that the first game of organized ice hockey was played in Montreal in 1875. Many also consider ice hockey’s first rules to have been published by the Montreal Gazette in 1877. However, research reveals that organized ice hockey/bandy games were first played on skates in England and that the earliest rules were also published in England. Canada made important contributions to the game from the 1870s on. By the early 20th century, “Canadian rules” had reshaped the sport.

 

[TheLegend]

Why is that a question. AM. Is not a BOH thing.

Well when people question the Arizona market for the unpteenth time as not growing the game it becomes relevant.

AM isn’t the first…. nor is he the only one now… nor will be the last.

 

[Devils 3silverones]

Well when people question the Arizona market for the unpteenth time as not growing the game it becomes relevant.

AM isn’t the first…. nor will be the last.

Enjoy the weekend. Hope to talk soon of positive and relevant news.

 

[BMN]

Wrong again BMN. From The Canadian Encyclopedia, “The origins of ice hockey have long been debated. In 2008, the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF) officially declared that the first game of organized ice hockey was played in Montreal in 1875. Many also consider ice hockey’s first rules to have been published by the Montreal Gazette in 1877. However, research reveals that organized ice hockey/bandy games were first played on skates in England and that the earliest rules were also published in England. Canada made important contributions to the game from the 1870s on. By the early 20th century, “Canadian rules” had reshaped the sport.

Your point is well taken but doesn't undercut the rest of the logic of Pt 5.

 

[OG6ix]

You don't realize how little impact the Raptors make outside the Centre of the Universe.

Doesn't matter - they are the move valuable and biggest Canadian sports franchise at the moment.

 

[Takuto Maruki]

You don't realize how little impact the Raptors make outside the Centre of the Universe.

I dunno, sure seems like they make a major impact considering the fact that their title win was celebrated across *all* of Canada, and represented a coming out moment for the growth of basketball in Canada by way of the players all across Canada having something to aspire towards. But what do I know, I'm just some jabroni who's lived in Western Canada for all his life.

 

[Ernie]

I dunno, sure seems like they make a major impact considering the fact that their title win was celebrated across *all* of Canada, and represented a coming out moment for the growth of basketball in Canada by way of the players all across Canada having something to aspire towards. But what do I know, I'm just some jabroni who's lived in Western Canada for all his life.

Heh yeah, Raptors have fans all across Canada, the Leafs only appeal to people who grew up in Ontario.

If anything, Stumbledore lives in a bubble and doesn't understand how limited the Leafs appeal is across Canada, overall there are more people who hate them than there are fans.

The Raptors are worth 1.5x what the Leafs are, I wonder why that is?

 

[Takuto Maruki]

There is something so hilariously out of touch and, frankly, stupid, about having *the Raptors* be considered the team that only has an outsized fanbase because of where they are located. I guess by that metric we should also consider the Jays only relevant because they are in the Centre of the Universe?

All of this just seems to be a smoke screen for the main argument currently happening: no, the Coyotes existing in general doesn't account for Auston Matthews' rise. What matters more is the programs and systems that have sprung up in the wake of the Coyotes that play to that. If the Coyotes don't come, then you don't have minor hockey programs popping up within the Phoenix area. You don't have Arizona steadily become a growing state in terms of sign ups with USA Hockey, as has been mentioned prior. You don't have Arizona State believe that elevating their club hockey program to a D1 program is a worthwhile investment and something that is also a major part of the Tempe proposal to begin with.

So no, Auston Matthews doesn't justify the Coyotes in totality. But the programs that the Coyotes set up, the infrastructure, what has been built already? That's what matters more in my eyes.

 

[AZDesertKnight]

This thread is so stupid. No Coyotes, Auston Matthews doesn't exist in the NHL right now. He's said so himself.

You guys are truly amazing.. what are you even arguing??

 

[BMN]

This thread is so stupid. No Coyotes, Auston Matthews doesn't exist in the NHL right now. He's said so himself.

You guys are truly amazing.. what are you even arguing??

Just to distance myself from everyone else here: my original point (which in hindsight wasn't even directed at Legend so I regret dragging him into it) was "no Coyotes, no Auston Matthews" isn't the "epic own" a lot of people think it is, even if it's 100% true. I shouldn't have sidetracked from that.....