a bad minnesota team sells over 98% of their tickets. a very good phoenix team sells 72% at discounts and has trouble selling out playoff games. are you seriously going to compare the situation in minnesota to phoenix? you're really reaching here to make a point that doesn't really matter.
Nashville sold 97.5% of tickets (Sold but a little exaggerated on butts in seats)
Here is a nice local article about how % of tickets sold does not mean a city is not ponying up money. Yes a teams security should matter when that player is going to play for a certain city to be close to his home and family. How would it not matter?
Nashville sold 97.5% of tickets (Sold but a little exaggerated on butts in seats)
Here is a nice local article about how % of tickets sold does not mean a city is not ponying up money. Yes a teams security should matter when that player is going to play for a certain city to be close to his home and family. How would it not matter?
Nashville sold 97.5% of tickets (Sold but a little exaggerated on butts in seats)
Here is a nice local article about how % of tickets sold does not mean a city is not ponying up money.
If the Predators sold out 100% of the games from pre-season through the cup finals, led the league in merchandise sales and television ratings... the city would STILL pay money, because that's the lease agreement that THEY negotiated.
Writers can spin articles any way they want, but when the city agrees to pay certain moneys, they do so knowing that it's only a percentage of what the team generates for the city either through hockey or more likely non-hockey revenues, even non-arena revenues such as taxes from bars on Broadway being packed 100+ nights a year.
If the Predators sold out 100% of the games from pre-season through the cup finals, led the league in merchandise sales and television ratings... the city would STILL pay money, because that's the lease agreement that THEY negotiated.
Writers can spin articles any way they want, but when the city agrees to pay certain moneys, they do so knowing that it's only a percentage of what the team generates for the city either through hockey or more likely non-hockey revenues, even non-arena revenues such as taxes from bars on Broadway being packed 100+ nights a year.
Exactly. I'm not sure why people even care, to be honest. A lot of cities give special consideration to professional sports teams.
But we're getting dangerously close to a political discussion here. Can't go there...
Oh really, 6 articles all from the past 3 months say different. I could list pages if you want to go back to when this thing started a couple of years ago.
None of that is any different from any city anywhere.
The Bucs had to pull teeth and threaten to move to LA to get a new stadium in Tampa.
Penguins had one foot out the door in order to get the new Pitt arena.
Hell, even Steinbrenner threatened to move the Yankees to New Jersey at one point.
All those articles say nothing except that there was a long and tedious negotiation process. Like there is every single time a team tries to get a stadium built by the city/state. The only hard fact is, Minnesota has ponied up somewhere in the neighborhood of a gazillion dollars for it's sports teams.
Winged-wheel fans can now see spots open for the Sutes/Webs combo for sure....
From the TSN website: "The Detroit Red Wings gave defenceman Brad Stuart and the San Jose Sharks a head start on completing a reunion for next season.
Detroit sent the potential unrestricted free agent back to his original team in San Jose on Sunday in exchange for forward Andrew Murray and a conditional seventh-round draft pick in 2014."
I am in total agreement that much, if not most, of all these Suter-Parise as a package "sources" are a speculating just like anyone on here is doing. No one really knows anything but Suter & Parise ...
I am in total agreement that much, if not most, of all these Suter-Parise as a package "sources" are a speculating just like anyone on here is doing. No one really knows anything but Suter & Parise ...
Only point in favor is the 'taking my talents to South Beach' factor.
"But Suter? Well, color me not convinced. I think there’s a serious chance someone is going to horribly overpay for him and I hope it’s not Detroit"
"But whenever I’ve watched Suter play, I’ve seen a great #2 defenseman, not the great #1 guy that everyone talks about."
"So what exactly is so special about Suter? I'm not sure. I’m even more worried that his decent point totals are a result of playing with Weber, similar to how Lidstrom made Rafalski almost hit 60 points multiple times. Without Weber is he a 25 point guy?"
"Chris" wrote a terrible piece. Not only does it open up like a rejected Cracked.com article ("If we don't get one of those two puppies will be kicked. Kittens will be thrown. And turtles flipped. Kenny, think of the turtles"), but he decides to inform us all of the time he allegedly hit on Parise's girlfriend. In the first three graphs we have a failed comedian using his blog to brag about something that 1) doesn't even matter, and 2) cannot be proven even if it did.
Then, he admits to not having studied Suter. No big deal, though, because looking up stats is an easy enough way to study a player, right?
Suter doesn't hit, no, but he doesn't need to. He also realizes that running around trying to hit triple digits in hits suddenly has our first pair out of position more often than it needs to be. What he does do is use his body along the boards to separate the player from the puck. That is hugely important in a defenseman. Weber throws the hits. Suter plays the boards.
But hey, hits aren't everything, right? He goes on to compare Suter's offensive production to Rafalski and White, neglecting to mention Suter's superior defensive play. I guess he wouldn't bring that up, though, because he hasn't studied Suter, just his stat sheet.
Oh, but maybe he has. He ends the blog by saying Suter appears to be a #2 defenseman based on "both my eye and the stat sheet." So which is it, Chris? Have you not studied him, or have you?
Terrible blog entry Hopefully my post saves people from clicking that link, and wasting their time reading that drivel.
[QUOTE=ThirdManIn;50763649]"Chris" wrote a terrible piece. Not only does it open up like a rejected Cracked.com article ("If we don't get one of those two puppies will be kicked. Kittens will be thrown. And turtles flipped. Kenny, think of the turtles"), but he decides to inform us all of the time he allegedly hit on Parise's girlfriend. In the first three graphs we have a failed comedian using his blog to brag about something that 1) doesn't even matter, and 2) cannot be proven even if it did.
Then, he admits to not having studied Suter. No big deal, though, because looking up stats is an easy enough way to study a player, right?
Suter doesn't hit, no, but he doesn't need to. He also realizes that running around trying to hit triple digits in hits suddenly has our first pair out of position more often than it needs to be. What he does do is use his body along the boards to separate the player from the puck. That is hugely important in a defenseman. Weber throws the hits. Suter plays the boards.
But hey, hits aren't everything, right? He goes on to compare Suter's offensive production to Rafalski and White, neglecting to mention Suter's superior defensive play. I guess he wouldn't bring that up, though, because he hasn't studied Suter, just his stat sheet.
Oh, but maybe he has. He ends the blog by saying Suter appears to be a #2 defenseman based on "both my eye and the stat sheet." So which is it, Chris? Have you not studied him, or have you?
I knew this would get some people fired up especially the one who replied. I do not agree with the majority of his opinion but to be fair just because you do not agree with it does not mean it is something to read on are beloved Ryan Suter. Also he said he is a number #2 by HIS eye test and what HE gathers from the stats. He did not say he basied his opinion on studying him. Just being fair.
Haha it didn't really get me "fired up". Sorry if that disappoints you. I just wanted to point out how the blog is poorly written, and not much thought was put into it.
So you don't think it's contradictory to say "Admittedly, I haven't studied Suter" only to make a claim later that "based on my eyes" Suter is not a #1 defenseman? He could have said "based on my eyes Suter is the greatest defenseman in the league" and it STILL would have been contradictory. He quite obviously knows next to nothing about Suter, yet he trudges on throughout the blog using nothing but a basic stat sheet as proof. When he begins comparing Suter's offense to the likes of Rafalski and Ian White without mentioning once Suter's far superior defensive abilities it's further proof he has no clue what the hell he is talking about.
That blog came across to me as a Red Wings fan feeling like his team won't be able to land Suter, so he is trying to make it seem like it's the Wings who shouldn't want Suter rather than the other way around.
If you agree with what he has to say that's fine, but I disagree and I gave a fairly detailed post explaining why.
Haha it didn't really get me "fired up". Sorry if that disappoints you. I just wanted to point out how the blog is poorly written, and not much thought was put into it.
So you don't think it's contradictory to say "Admittedly, I haven't studied Suter" only to make a claim later that "based on my eyes" Suter is not a #1 defenseman? He could have said "based on my eyes Suter is the greatest defenseman in the league" and it STILL would have been contradictory. He quite obviously knows next to nothing about Suter, yet he trudges on throughout the blog using nothing but a basic stat sheet as proof. When he begins comparing Suter's offense to the likes of Rafalski and Ian White without mentioning once Suter's far superior defensive abilities it's further proof he has no clue what the hell he is talking about.
That blog came across to me as a Red Wings fan feeling like his team won't be able to land Suter, so he is trying to make it seem like it's the Wings who shouldn't want Suter rather than the other way around.
If you agree with what he has to say that's fine, but I disagree and I gave a fairly detailed post explaining why.
Two now
No, i do not find it that way since he clearly said Suter did not pass the eye test which means after watching Suter play with his own eyes, Suter did not pass his eye test to be a number #1 D man. He never said what he did and then concluded with "after studying Suter"
Last edited by Trade Legwand: 06-11-2012 at 04:17 PM.
Reason: Stick to the point.
Do you really think sports franchises in a city do not effect each other. Things they do are voted on by the same city governmernt. If the the city was not going to support a long time franchise like the Vikings if you were the Wild and things were going bad would you not have more of a thought process of getting out of town. In turn if you were Ryan Suter would you want to be a part of something like what the Coyotes are going through.
The Vikings may be getting a new building now but it sure did not happen without threatening to leave and a fight. Google it.
while that does make some sense in theory, I would draw your attention to nashville and the difference in treatment of the titans and preds. titans have been, and continue to be, given the world, whereas preds are AGAIN being criticized and held up over their lease - as just one example. so, nope, not buying the "they were mean to the vikings so they'll be mean to the wild" argument.
or you could ask a chicagoite about the different treatment of the cubs and sox, let along pulling the other franchises in....
I think I'd rather lose Suter than wish that upon him. It's one thing to date a girl who has a track record of being a mean, crazy person once the relationship ends. It's another to have to hear songs about it on the radio for months...
= Predator for life.
