HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Devils fire Julien

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-03-2007, 12:39 PM
  #101
Brooklyndevil
82nd Airborne
 
Brooklyndevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
No Genius, my point is that Lemaire - who coached Jersey before your time - helped kill the quality of the game in the NHL by having his players clog up the neutral zone and not send a forecheck in, and then clutch and grab players all throughout the neutral zone on top of that.

Teams caught onto this, and thought they could win with it, and some did. Another Lemaire coached team, the Minnesota Wild, are probably the best example of it.

Boring is boring, whether your team is winning or losing.

The Devils didn't win 3 cups because of the trap, they won 3 cups because of the play of Stevens, Niedermayer, and Brodeur, and once Brodeur is gone, there will be some rocky times in Jersey, mark my words. Brodeur is the only goalie good enough in this league to perennially play 70+ games and win about 95% of them by 2-1 or 1-0.

That is why Brodeur is the best goalie in the league.
You're probably right and if it's up to me I hope the lean years start in 2009. But the funny part is that many on this board have been predicting the fall of the Devils for the past few years and here they are again on top of their division. Go figure.

Brooklyndevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 12:44 PM
  #102
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,510
vCash: 500
I predict the fall of the Devils when Marty retires.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 12:54 PM
  #103
Brooklyndevil
82nd Airborne
 
Brooklyndevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY USA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnthonyF27 View Post
I predict the fall of the Devils when Marty retires.
And I mean this sincerely, we can use a few high picks before Marty retires. He's 33, he can probably go another 5 years.

Brooklyndevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:01 PM
  #104
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,510
vCash: 500
what, you think you're going to get another brodeur? They don't grow on trees you know.

BTW, Brodeur turns 35 in May .

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:04 PM
  #105
DevilSinceDayOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
I am going to get blasted for this but here it goes:

Funny how the grass seems to be a little greener depending on which side of the river you are on.

See, us Devils fans like to think it was teams like the Rangers who killed hockey. After all how can us small market teams compete against the big boys who were spening nearly 100M to field a team. And snapping up every available free agent at ridiculous salaries. The only way to compete against that is to play iron clad defense.

Ranger fans would love it if the only teams in the league were NY, Philly, Detroit, Colorado, et all. The teams with the deep pockets.

You might win a Stanley Cup more often than once in 54 years if that were the case.

DevilSinceDayOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:14 PM
  #106
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,510
vCash: 500
The Devils didn't have that low salaries either. They may have not been in the 80 million dollar level, but they were still top 10 in the league I believe.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:19 PM
  #107
DevilSinceDayOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
Around 50M give or take. Middle of the league. But as slaries escalated we (and many other teams) could not continue to spend more and more.

DevilSinceDayOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:22 PM
  #108
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilSinceDayOne View Post
I am going to get blasted for this but here it goes:

Funny how the grass seems to be a little greener depending on which side of the river you are on.

See, us Devils fans like to think it was teams like the Rangers who killed hockey. After all how can us small market teams compete against the big boys who were spening nearly 100M to field a team. And snapping up every available free agent at ridiculous salaries. The only way to compete against that is to play iron clad defense.

Ranger fans would love it if the only teams in the league were NY, Philly, Detroit, Colorado, et all. The teams with the deep pockets.

You might win a Stanley Cup more often than once in 54 years if that were the case.
Yeah, the NHL you say we would like would be one where skill, skating and talent are all on display and are the primary factors in who wins or loses a game.

As opposed to you guys who would love to see a NHL where the team that makes the fewest mistakes while playing a passive, take no chances, negate skill and skating as much as possible, style that was allowed to thrive only because the NHL over-expanded by forcing a 1/3 increase in just 10 yrs so in order to let these teams not be out of the PO race by December after paying tens of millions in expansion fees, so what we had was the darkest and least entertaining period in NHL history, one that forced a whole new slew of rules specificly to minimize the effect of playing p&*^$ hockey as a result of the success you were able to achieve by playing the trap.

And while we might have more than 1 cup in 54yrs if it was just a league of the big cities on the flip side you may actually be able to sellout EVEN A SINGLE REGULAR SEASON game and maybe even a PLAYOFF game for christs sake if you didn't play such a BS style of passive, disgusting, anti-everything hockey is supposed to be hockey.

JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:33 PM
  #109
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,510
vCash: 500
I wonder what's going to happen when the Devils organization finally does collapse and falls back to what it used to be before 1993-94. Funny but the Devils were never a good team until Brodeur, and I think that once he's gone, the Devils are going to collapse again.
I'd say 95% of Devils fans became fans of theirs during the Brodeur era so none of them know what being a losing team is about. It'll be interesting.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:48 PM
  #110
DevilSinceDayOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
I guess 1994 EC Finals was a real snooze fest. Or, was it only one of the greatest playoff series ever because the Rangers won. Had the Devils prevailed it would have been just another boring series. Can't have it both ways guys.

DevilSinceDayOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 01:58 PM
  #111
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilSinceDayOne View Post
I guess 1994 EC Finals was a real snooze fest. Or, was it only one of the greatest playoff series ever because the Rangers won. Had the Devils prevailed it would have been just another boring series. Can't have it both ways guys.
That was ONE series 13 yrs ago for gods sake!

Is that really the best arguement you could come back with?

JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 02:09 PM
  #112
DevilSinceDayOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
In as much as everyone says the Devils have been boring since winning their first Cup (1995) yeah I would say so.

DevilSinceDayOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 03:25 PM
  #113
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyndevil View Post
You're probably right and if it's up to me I hope the lean years start in 2009. But the funny part is that many on this board have been predicting the fall of the Devils for the past few years and here they are again on top of their division. Go figure.
Yeah, with my luck, the Devils end up getting John Tavares.

Actually, with my bad luck, Pittsburgh finds some loophole and retains it's title as the NHL's Resident Welfare Leech, tanking for yet another future superstar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilSinceDayOne View Post
I am going to get blasted for this but here it goes:

Funny how the grass seems to be a little greener depending on which side of the river you are on.

See, us Devils fans like to think it was teams like the Rangers who killed hockey. After all how can us small market teams compete against the big boys who were spening nearly 100M to field a team. And snapping up every available free agent at ridiculous salaries. The only way to compete against that is to play iron clad defense.

Ranger fans would love it if the only teams in the league were NY, Philly, Detroit, Colorado, et all. The teams with the deep pockets.

You might win a Stanley Cup more often than once in 54 years if that were the case.
Wrong.

The Rangers didn't kill hockey. Whether you like it or not, it's proven fact that when the big market teams do good, that sport does good as well.

What killed hockey is over-expansion. Teams in poor markets not being able to hack it. There's too many teams in the NHL that have markets where hockey doesn't belong in.

Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa... all bad markets who have fans who only support the team unless they win. Those teams for years were not able to generate the revenue necessary to help the NHL out.

That's what killed the NHL.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 03:46 PM
  #114
Staggarelli
@erikthedirector
 
Staggarelli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cincinnati
Country: United States
Posts: 1,158
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Staggarelli
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
Y
The Rangers didn't kill hockey. Whether you like it or not, it's proven fact that when the big market teams do good, that sport does good as well.

What killed hockey is over-expansion. Teams in poor markets not being able to hack it. There's too many teams in the NHL that have markets where hockey doesn't belong in.

Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa... all bad markets who have fans who only support the team unless they win. Those teams for years were not able to generate the revenue necessary to help the NHL out.

That's what killed the NHL.
You forgot the most important part of the killing hockey equation

GARY BETTMAN.

Staggarelli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 03:53 PM
  #115
DevilSinceDayOne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 198
vCash: 500
Now that is something I think both Ranger and Devil fans can agree with.

DevilSinceDayOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 04:21 PM
  #116
GuloGulo
Registered User
 
GuloGulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: trunkofacamaro
Country: Bahrain
Posts: 3,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
Yeah, with my luck, the Devils end up getting John Tavares.

Actually, with my bad luck, Pittsburgh finds some loophole and retains it's title as the NHL's Resident Welfare Leech, tanking for yet another future superstar.



Wrong.

The Rangers didn't kill hockey. Whether you like it or not, it's proven fact that when the big market teams do good, that sport does good as well.

What killed hockey is over-expansion. Teams in poor markets not being able to hack it. There's too many teams in the NHL that have markets where hockey doesn't belong in.

Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa... all bad markets who have fans who only support the team unless they win. Those teams for years were not able to generate the revenue necessary to help the NHL out.

That's what killed the NHL.
Pittsburgh and Tampa don't have attendance-related troubles at all.

GuloGulo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 05:32 PM
  #117
cringer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
Phoenix, Pittsburgh, Carolina, Atlanta, Nashville, Florida, Tampa... all bad markets who have fans who only support the team unless they win. Those teams for years were not able to generate the revenue necessary to help the NHL out.

That's what killed the NHL.
This might be off on a tangent... but it kinda bothers me when people immediately associate the southern US with all that is wrong with hockey.

Yes... hockey is somewhat of a regional sport in the U.S. It's just not that big in warmer climates from a participation standpoint and never will be. But is that killing the NHL. I don't think it's that simple.

Let's look at some numbers (06-07):

The bottom 6 teams in the league measured by home attendance capacity

78.9 % Boston (Original 6 supposedly one of the great hockey cities)
78.4 % NY Islanders (BOOSTED by 4 guaranteed sellouts per season - NYR)
74.3 % NJ Devils (3 cups in 10 years? coulda fooled me - also padded by local rivalries)
73.3 % Washington (not very far south... and once proud contenders)
61.6 % Chicago (see Boston)
59.6 % St. Louis (wasn't too long ago they were always in the playoff mix)


teams that "ruined" the NHL?

Phoenix 85.3
Pittsburgh 96.6
Carolina 92.7
Atlanta 86.8
Nashville 89.1
Florida 79.8
Tampa 100.4

So why do the "real" dead teams get a pass? Why has no one ever called for the Islanders to move or fold... the Devils? God forbid one of those storied O6 teams that have been invisible for years now?

cringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 06:21 PM
  #118
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuloGulo View Post
Pittsburgh and Tampa don't have attendance-related troubles at all.
Not now, but before the lockout, they most definitely did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cringer View Post
This might be off on a tangent... but it kinda bothers me when people immediately associate the southern US with all that is wrong with hockey.

Yes... hockey is somewhat of a regional sport in the U.S. It's just not that big in warmer climates from a participation standpoint and never will be. But is that killing the NHL. I don't think it's that simple.

Let's look at some numbers (06-07):

The bottom 6 teams in the league measured by home attendance capacity

78.9 % Boston (Original 6 supposedly one of the great hockey cities)
78.4 % NY Islanders (BOOSTED by 4 guaranteed sellouts per season - NYR)
74.3 % NJ Devils (3 cups in 10 years? coulda fooled me - also padded by local rivalries)
73.3 % Washington (not very far south... and once proud contenders)
61.6 % Chicago (see Boston)
59.6 % St. Louis (wasn't too long ago they were always in the playoff mix)


teams that "ruined" the NHL?

Phoenix 85.3
Pittsburgh 96.6
Carolina 92.7
Atlanta 86.8
Nashville 89.1
Florida 79.8
Tampa 100.4

So why do the "real" dead teams get a pass? Why has no one ever called for the Islanders to move or fold... the Devils? God forbid one of those storied O6 teams that have been invisible for years now?
2001

20 Edmonton 41 640,085 15,611 91.3 41 688,270 16,787 96.2 82 1,328,355 16,199 93.8
21 Washington 41 636,914 15,534 83.2 41 678,516 16,549 90.9 82 1,315,430 16,041 87.0
22 Boston 41 632,746 15,432 82.9 41 674,974 16,462 91.0 82 1,307,720 15,947 86.9
23 Atlanta 41 625,780 15,262 82.3 41 639,436 15,596 84.0 82 1,265,216 15,429 83.2
24 Chicago 41 614,875 14,996 73.2 41 681,760 16,628 96.5 82 1,296,635 15,812 83.8
25 Tampa Bay 41 611,173 14,906 75.4 41 640,119 15,612 86.2 82 1,251,292 15,259 80.6
26 Florida 41 596,857 14,557 75.6 41 666,679 16,260 87.6 82 1,263,536 15,408 81.5
27 Phoenix 41 583,194 14,224 87.8 41 683,192 16,663 95.5 82 1,266,386 15,443 91.8
28 Anaheim 41 553,470 13,499 78.6 41 682,447 16,645 98.8 82 1,235,917 15,072 88.6
29 Carolina 41 547,584 13,355 71.3 41 638,600 15,575 84.0 82 1,186,184 14,465 77.6
30 NY Islanders 40 443,329 11,083 68.0 41 685,575 16,721 92.4 81 1,128,904 13,937 81.0

2002

20 Tampa Bay 41 644,610 15,722 79.6 41 650,112 15,856 86.1 82 1,294,722 15,789 82.7
21 Calgary 41 644,466 15,718 91.6 41 665,253 16,225 88.8 82 1,309,719 15,972 90.1
22 Pittsburgh 41 641,615 15,649 92.3 41 696,667 16,991 91.6 82 1,338,282 16,320 91.9
23 Chicago 41 638,324 15,568 75.9 41 692,209 16,883 92.3 82 1,330,533 16,226 83.7
24 Carolina 41 635,868 15,508 82.8 41 700,937 17,096 91.6 82 1,336,805 16,302 87.2
25 Boston 41 631,546 15,403 82.7 41 696,144 16,979 91.3 82 1,327,690 16,191 87.0
26 Nashville 41 606,347 14,788 86.4 41 664,754 16,213 87.9 82 1,271,101 15,501 87.2
27 NY Islanders 41 596,498 14,548 89.3 41 722,932 17,632 94.2 82 1,319,430 16,090 91.9
28 Atlanta 41 560,404 13,668 73.7 41 658,698 16,065 86.6 82 1,219,102 14,867 80.1
29 Phoenix 41 539,770 13,165 81.2 41 683,152 16,662 90.6 82 1,222,922 14,913 86.230 Anaheim 41 492,087 12,002 69.9 41 698,804 17,044 93.3 82 1,190,891 14,523 81.9

2003

20 Florida 41 632,552 15,428 80.1 41 652,829 15,922 85.6 82 1,285,381 15,675 82.8
21 Boston 41 616,197 15,029 80.7 41 697,859 17,020 91.8 82 1,314,056 16,025 86.2
22 NY Islanders 41 612,154 14,930 91.6 41 667,102 16,270 87.1 82 1,279,256 15,600 89.2
23 New Jersey 41 609,218 14,858 78.0 41 696,391 16,985 92.1 82 1,305,609 15,922 84.9
24 Chicago 41 606,580 14,794 72.2 41 702,088 17,124 94.2 82 1,308,668 15,959 82.5
25 Pittsburgh 41 604,728 14,749 87.0 41 712,167 17,369 93.1 82 1,316,895 16,059 90.2
26 Anaheim 41 573,524 13,988 81.5 41 681,221 16,615 90.3 82 1,254,745 15,301 86.0
27 Buffalo 40 549,402 13,735 73.5 41 696,218 16,980 91.0 81 1,245,620 15,378 82.4
28 Atlanta 41 552,535 13,476 72.7 41 653,056 15,928 85.7 82 1,205,591 14,702 79.229 Phoenix 41 542,404 13,229 81.6 41 664,124 16,198 88.7 82 1,206,528 14,713 85.4
30 Nashville 41 542,367 13,228 77.3 41 662,925 16,168 88.1 82 1,205,292 14,698 82.9

2004

20 Buffalo 40 613,726 15,343 82.8 41 656,415 16,010 86.0 81 1,270,141 15,680 84.4
21 Atlanta 41 619,965 15,121 81.5 39 635,694 16,299 87.6 80 1,255,659 15,695 84.5
22 Boston 39 587,744 15,070 80.9 41 680,371 16,594 88.5 80 1,268,115 15,851 84.8
23 Anaheim 41 614,476 14,987 87.3 40 668,425 16,710 91.6 81 1,282,901 15,838 89.5
24 New Jersey 39 581,599 14,912 78.3 40 668,622 16,715 90.7 79 1,250,221 15,825 84.5
25 Washington 41 603,528 14,720 78.8 41 669,099 16,319 87.1 82 1,272,627 15,519 83.0
26 NY Islanders 40 537,264 13,431 82.4 40 661,517 16,537 88.5 80 1,198,781 14,984 85.7
27 Chicago 41 543,374 13,253 64.6 40 670,536 16,763 92.2 81 1,213,910 14,986 77.4
28 Nashville 40 527,091 13,177 77.0 40 666,687 16,667 90.3 80 1,193,778 14,922 83.9
29 Carolina 40 486,870 12,171 65.0 40 648,763 16,219 86.9 80 1,135,633 14,195 75.9
30 Pittsburgh 41 486,961 11,877 70.0 40 666,091 16,652 89.5 81 1,153,052 14,235 80.1

This year doesn't matter, what happened BEFORE the lockout is what mattered. The lockout wouldn't have happened if we had teams in markets with poor/fair-weather fanbases that don't understand hockey at all.

It was the same teams, every year before the lockout.

The Islanders, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, Carolina, Jersey, Atlanta, Nashville, Anaheim...

The numbers don't lie... THAT is what's killing the NHL. The selling to percentage of capacity numbers are the real indicator... some of the numbers are just atrocious. 65%??? You've gotta be kidding me.

CM Lundqvist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2007, 07:00 PM
  #119
cringer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NY, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
The Islanders, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, Carolina, Jersey, Atlanta, Nashville, Anaheim...
THat's a little better but you're still not mentioning Boston and Chicago even though their listed every single year... why not? Let's call a spade a spade.

The Islanders, Pittsburgh, Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, Carolina, Jersey, Atlanta, Nashville, Anaheim, Boston and Chicago.

There that's better. Can't belly ache about hockey in the South unless you are prepared to belly ache about hockey in the North were it's not faring any better. What fans know or don't know is irrelevant if they're not showing up to games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GretzNYR99 View Post
The lockout wouldn't have happened if we had teams in markets with poor/fair-weather fanbases that don't understand hockey at all.
You certain about that? You know who some of the most hard-line owners were in the lockout?

cringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.