- 09:22 AM
- 11/21/24
i think thats a pretty fair assessment. federer doesn't exactly seem to be off his game right now, tho. speaking of close matches owlhouse, nalbandian/hewitt fit the bill pretty nicely...
posted by owl at 05:15 PM on January 26, 2005
it was a let down in a way, but it did serve (no pun intended) to showcase federer's dominance, you're right. plus, i got to bed an hour earlier than i thought i would, so thats good... i don't think anyone can outlast him, but safin might be able to outpower him. how bout that nadal? damn good run against hewitt.
posted by owl at 09:51 PM on January 25, 2005
im very much looking forward to the agassiz/federer match tomorrow. wish i were there.
posted by owl at 01:29 AM on January 25, 2005
both the vancouver province, and the vancouver sun are reporting that goodenow and whats-his-name are meeting over this weekend (past). but who knows.
posted by owl at 01:46 AM on January 17, 2005
an intersting mefi post. perhaps a bit overdone, but the meaning is clear, and i am consistently being drawn to what should be an obvious conclusion: we are all taking this too seriously. i mean, who really cares if a man pantomines mooning a crowd? did it hurt you? who cares what the players get paid? if they get paid less, will it help you? who cares what happens in the grump between the league and the PA. if it means you dont want to watch anymore, or play anymore, than dont. hockey wont miss you, sports wont miss you, and i wont either.
posted by owl at 03:57 AM on January 14, 2005
that was harder than another cricket game i played...more fun.
posted by owl at 04:10 AM on January 12, 2005
odds seem to point to the latter?
posted by owl at 03:06 AM on January 05, 2005
camcanuck, the nba sets them at whatever rate they want and nobody plays by the rules...as i noted half of the teams pay luxury taxes, and they kick in at 61%. it sure does look like the tv deal is going sour. but a lot of teams are developing their own distribution channels, they should make up some of the difference.
posted by owl at 04:45 PM on March 31, 2004
i don't think it was that poorly written, but i will agree he does not come across as someone who had an open mind about the numbers going in. that being said, what each player gets is irrelevant. what is relevant, to be profitable, is to keep salaries at some percentage of gross income. the nfl sets that at 64%, the nba sets it at 48%, but half of the teams pay luxury taxes that kick in at 61%, so they are kind of comparable. the nhl claims that salaries are 75% of gross income, which is out of whack to the other leagues. the article linked points out some dubious accounting practices that even with limited access to data suggest its closer to 72%, and that other factors could lower it even more. in that case, we are looking at comparable percentages accross all the sports, _independant_ of what the source of gross income is. eg, tv deal or not, although loss of that income would obviously change things. so yeah, chicobangs, i agree, lets get a decent tv contract.
posted by owl at 11:37 AM on March 31, 2004
sorry, grum that was only a joke...thought it would be obvious.
posted by owl at 08:50 AM on March 22, 2004
"A hook is a hook. I don't care it it's the first period of a regular season game or the second overtime period in the finals. It should be called. Don Cherry would be upset because the 'we should let the players decide the game', but what he fails to grasp is they are. The players know the rules, if the refs would just called them consistently I don't think the players would mind." camcanuck, you were so right on here i couldn't quite believe that you also said you liked the glowing puck! ;)
posted by owl at 07:11 AM on March 19, 2004
"Dryden is not only a vice chairman with Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment in Toronto, but also a lawyer, a social commentator, a former NHL goaltender, a hockey administrator, a former Youth Commissioner for the Province of Ontario, a prolific author and a man who moves comfortably and ably on both sides of the US-Canadian border." he was also, by reputation, one of the most gentlemanly players of his era.
posted by owl at 06:59 AM on March 19, 2004
this is great. i wish more owner's and atheletes would do this!
posted by owl at 10:04 AM on March 17, 2004
"see ya in the Marchment thread, where I hope we can both agree that he's a knob and the NHL is about as balanced as my diet." hehe - yours and mine both.
posted by owl at 10:50 AM on March 16, 2004
wfrazerjr - so it's not good enough to express concern once, because its too early in the process, and therefore not newsworthy? you have to wait until the right time? who's right time? or, you have to keep expressing it. if you don't keep expressing it, you are a jerk, or under a gag order, or... the fact that the news doesn't normally lead up to this is entirely the point. the news never causes these incidents, they just hype them. the same bloodthirsty reporting which hyped the game led to overwrought calls for the villain's head after the game. but who reported about marchment? not many. who applauded the brawl between ottawa and philly? many. who is virtually ignoring all the other incidents that have or could have resulted in serious injury this year in the nhl or other sports? the media. who is picking and choosing? the media. regardless, much of this discussion is engendered because you are convinced that bertuzzi stalked a guy, and then tried to kill him. im convinced what happened to moore was a unintended consequence, if terrible, of an un-premeditated emotional response (which is why the DUI analogy breaks down in my mind, read above). bertuzzi's apology was sincere (the original point of the thread). bertuzzi deserved a pretty severe punishment, and he got it - one of the most severe ever. while i might be a canuck fan, i'm not so rabid a fan that i would defend that position unless i truly felt so. i think we are getting far enough off-topic here to move this to the recent thread on marchment.
posted by owl at 09:20 AM on March 16, 2004
wfrazerjr, well - i was having a few drinks friday before i posted that, and honestly i had a lot more to say than what is there. i thought i had cancelled it, but looks like not. so my bad, obviously i have no idea how much you follow hockey. i was going to go more along the lines of how the media fed the frenzy as much as the fans ate it up, how it was common, how players give these quotes all the time and nothing majour comes of it but a fight. like a coach recently saying a player's teeth would be fed to him after a 490 minute filled penalty game that resulted in no suspensions, and there are no fines to the comments, no suspensions, no censure, just a _ton_ of talk about bad blood between the canada team coaches - that is how hockey and the media have worked together till now. how another player crosschecked a guy into the boards, broke his collar bone and risked breaking his neck, but received neither media attention nor a suspension (now the subject of a post on its own for today. you say you think its classless that no one offered words to moore, when i point out that they weren't being quoted on it individually, you say 'oh thats no big deal, it was too soon, the writer did the normal thing". what? it's the thing you were just complaining about. i respect the fact that you have newspaper experience exceeding mine to the nth degree, but at the end of the day i have to say that the facts here are in disagreement with your feelings about writers. and, its all normal in hockey. as for the recent analogy with your friend - well we discussed drunk drivers before up above (many, many posts ago). the analogy is false, imho. but even condeeding it isn't, did you write about it in your paper, or even write a letter about it to another paper publicly condemning him, or did you tell him privately? that said, i have enjoyed the debate we've had/are having. sorry again about the drunk half assed thought.
posted by owl at 07:05 PM on March 15, 2004
wjfrazerjr, look at the first quote. it quite clearly indicates that they aren't reporting _everything_ the players are saying with the same emphasis. on top of that, if you can say with a straight face that the media _always_ reports quotes accurately, and all of them unbiasedly, and only ever reports what is being said, then I will absolutely cease any and all arguments i have against your stand on this issue as well as kiss your butt on any and all future stands you take. as for whether i would be interested in your response...huh?
posted by owl at 01:04 PM on March 15, 2004
"Frazer's right about Naslund digging himself in deeper by showing sympathy only for Bertuzzi. What a class act these Canucks are turning out to be." i don't think that is the case. i think the media are focussing on what sells papers. see: " The players find themselves in an awkward position. All express wishes for Moore's quick recovery but also stand by their teammate. " and: " On Tuesday, Naslund called Bertuzzi a close friend who had no intention of hurting anyone. Still, Naslund's voice caught with emotion as he tried to describe his reaction to an ugly incident that has been replayed countless times on television. "I was stunned to see what happened, as far as how the punch hit him, him falling and hitting the ice," said Naslund. " tends to suggest they _are_ saying things about moore, but not getting quoted, as opposed to what they say about bertuzzi.
posted by owl at 11:52 AM on March 15, 2004
"Slightly related question for the hockey heads out there: Is there a significant difference in terms of style between American college hockey and Canadian junior hockey? I'm assuming they're at about the same level as far as athletics goes." grades.
posted by owl at 12:07 AM on March 13, 2004
wfrazerjr, sorry, but i think you just dont follow hockey well enough. you have a right to your opinion. best to moore. owl
posted by owl at 12:06 AM on March 13, 2004
uhhh...who apologized for bertuzzi? in almost all of my posts i mentioned moore. i think its terrible what happened to him. you may be happy to hear that he is expected to recover fully, i am, im sure he and his family are and everyone who saw/heard what happened, whether they are fans of the game or not.
posted by owl at 03:23 PM on March 12, 2004
grum, agree, but he really shouldn't have said "I didn't mean to hurt him." Yes he did, but not that much. It stands out like a sore thumb in his apology and may cause people to ignore the rest of it as "insincere". cant argue with that. i think he meant 'not that much', but didn't say it right. press conferences are rough. a) made blatant statements about taking Moore out for the rest of the season; no, he said 'there is no way that guy is on the ice in march'. because he figured the avalanche wouldn't play a guy who would have to put up the fists every time he stepped on the ice. b) stalked Moore for 10-15 seconds in the game, which in hockey time is an eon; c) repeatedly tried to goad Moore into a fight, which failed; those are the same two things; happens all the time. d) attacked Moore from behind by clubbing him in the side of the head; e) smashed Moore's head into the ice. in the heat of the moment, frustrated by moores refusal to fight, he did a dumbass stupid thing, yes. So when do we get to the point where Bertuzzi didn't mean to do grevious harm to Moore? Can you really say Bertuzzi just meant to rough him up a little? see camcanucks post above.
posted by owl at 02:30 PM on March 12, 2004
86, if you have read the posts either garfield or me made, i think the point is pretty clear - bert screwed up, badly hurt someone, the blame falls squarely on his shoulders, but he certainly didnt mean to break anyone's neck, is likely not the kind of person who would be capable of meaning to break someone's neck, didn't plan to knock him out, and then slam him to the ice, we thought the apology was sincere (at least, i did) and its ok to feel bad for a guy that fucked up. can i make this clear to everyone: im not defending his actions. i am saying the apology was sincere, its ok for his teammates to support him, and that by saying so i dont think it takes one iota of blame or fault away from bertuzzi.
posted by owl at 12:15 PM on March 12, 2004
lil_brown_bat, sorry you ever had to part of such an incident with the drunk driver. personally, i hope i never have too, and i hope the pedestrian wasnt killed or paralysed. its an interesting comparison you make, but i dont think the situations are quite analogous, and here is why: first, the driver decided to go to a bar and drink. no pressure. then, the driver decided to drive to the bar. again, a choice made clearly. knowing that drinking after driving is wrong, and dangerous. then the driver decided to have more alchohol than the law allows one to have before driving. then the driver decided to drive. bert, on the other hand, made one clearly wrong choice in the heat of the moment. or at least, thats the way it appeared to me. neither of the results are excusable, but i do think one shows much more of a reckless disregard for others safety leading up to the results. the other thing is that hockey is by its nature risky. they play on cold slick concrete, basically. every legal and illegal check has the possiblity of horrible consequences. in every fight, someone could fall down the wrong way. most of these nuckleheads wont even wear their helmet correctly. most of the time these sucker punches and slashes and boardings dont cause the damage that happened this time. so could bert have reasonably forseen the outcome? maybe, maybe not. i dont think he did, and i believe his nature is one thats vicious enough to have forseen it and then gone ahead and done it anyway, unlike the drunk driver. its what makes it possible for me to feel bad for bert unlike the drunk driver. and i dont see why i cant feel bad for bert and yet place the blame squarely on his shoulders for what happened, all the same.
posted by owl at 11:01 AM on March 12, 2004
i think he has a point actually. sure there are more canadians in the league than anyone else, but why are ALL the enforcers canadian (ok, almost all, 9 of 10). and then look at scoring - only 3 of 10. canadians are just over 50% of players in the league. i would say its pretty arguable from that that the focus of the canadian game is on toughness, not skill. its the way we like it, it's what cherry always praises, what the media praises. the juniors haven't won the world championship since 97, by far the longest stretch going back to the 70s, though they have challenged most years. maybe our game needs to look a little more at skill and less at big and tough. i think so.
posted by owl at 09:34 AM on March 12, 2004
lil_brown_bat: i didn't argue the fact that he bears responsibility for what happened. he does. and i, for one, feel terrible for moore, and his family, and happy that he seems to be feeling well. but there is a big difference here in intent, and whether or not he intended to cause such damage to moore is of issue, especially if you are deciding, as a teamate or a fan, to feel bad for bert too. if you think he is evil and wanted to kill moore and almost succeeded, then you cant feel bad for bert at all, obviously. you are also way out of touch with reality.
posted by owl at 09:07 AM on March 12, 2004
wfrazerjr...with all due respect, you are going way overboard here. who are you to say what was going through bertuzzi's mind at the moment? no one here has tried to apologize for the result, but you seem to be the only one suggesting that you know he did it on purpose. the guy was crying about it on tv for chrissake the other night. you know what the real problem is? everyone. everyone who watches, plays, coaches or manages hockey. the media hyped it, the fans hyped it, it was good copy. now someone got hurt because someone stepped over the line. in the heat of the moment. be there once, and you get to judge. till then, you are just like me, a punk ass commentator.
posted by owl at 10:38 PM on March 11, 2004
thoughts out to moore. hope he recuperates fast and well.
posted by owl at 06:40 PM on March 09, 2004
bert is one dumb mofo. i thought he had smartened up after the suspension for coming off the bench, but apparently not. watching the game last night, i felt sick to my stomach when i saw moore's head hit the ice. i dont think bert meant for that to happen, but he created the situation that allowed it to happen...the effect this could have on the team probably cannot be underestimated. its going to be a while before ill be proud to say im a canuck fan again.
posted by owl at 08:43 AM on March 09, 2004
ok - i thought that the gretzky trade was the proverbial straw on the camel's back when it came to salaries. it broke the personal services contract he had with pocklington, which otherwise could have kept his salary down? certainly average salaries began increasing post 1989.
posted by owl at 10:59 AM on March 08, 2004
" "I would not have hit (Martin)," Clarke said. "I am not that stupid...." hehe. one wonders....
posted by owl at 10:47 AM on March 08, 2004
wonder what would have happened to salaries. good read, thanks.
posted by owl at 03:58 PM on March 06, 2004
camcanuck, i hope you are right with your prediction about the west - but the canucks are going to have to play a _lot_ better than they did last night to survive a series. lets hope they wake up!
posted by owl at 07:57 PM on March 04, 2004
"In your opinion, who is the best Division I assistant coach in the country?" wha...? how many halves are in a hockey game. now _thats_ a toughie.
posted by owl at 10:33 PM on March 03, 2004
thats a lot of picks for 'stand pat' quinn to give up - he must be under some pressure.
posted by owl at 09:23 PM on March 03, 2004
leonsis cares tho - i said it before, i think kolzig will stay, at least for a while. unless he decides to go - who wants to be a veteran goaltender pelted with shots game after game?
posted by owl at 10:35 AM on March 03, 2004
agreed camcanuck - i dont think in general much really happens. nhl.com has a story on five deals that 'sizzled' and five that 'fizzled'. the most interesting one to me was the fizzle that sent Stojanov to Pittsburgh for Naslund....heh.
posted by owl at 10:29 AM on March 03, 2004
that would be known as sublimation, wouldnt it garfield?
posted by owl at 02:11 PM on February 20, 2004
why is another sport's commissioner even _bothering_ with this???
posted by owl at 02:09 PM on February 20, 2004
naslund doesn't think the hit was dirty. im a big canucks fan, i dont think it was dirty. it was cheap tho. and big stars shouldnt face this. lose the instigator rule, nhl. say what you will, gretzky might have been hit once or twice or more in his career, but guys like semenko made sure it didnt happen too often.
posted by owl at 08:43 PM on February 19, 2004
no way caps deal kolzig. they want to rebuild, they need strong netminding. kolzig stays. mkn, i was just talking about zhamnov with a friend who is a caps fan. he said zhamnov to philly....
posted by owl at 06:31 PM on February 19, 2004
sirens is a great film garfield, and not just because of elle (but it helped)
posted by owl at 02:38 PM on February 19, 2004
she's the one on the left, garfield
posted by owl at 12:55 PM on February 19, 2004
i loved the part about the goalie getting upset by the booing and so just "wandered upfield". heh.
posted by owl at 12:46 PM on February 19, 2004
"Assuming all teams continue to earn points at their current rates [This is funny] Seriously, although I respect the guy for taking the time to do all this analysis, I do not think NJD finishes sixth in the East--PHI will hit a rut and the Devils almost surely will take most of the points from the three games in hand they have on the Flyers." really billsaythis? you know, this isn't the the only site that leaves new jersey down there. ok, granted, its a ranger's fan site, but the guy seems pretty involved in getting the right stats, even if he hates what he sees.
posted by owl at 01:00 AM on February 19, 2004
and they asked me: why do i climb it? and i said: because it's there.
posted by owl at 12:56 AM on February 19, 2004
you might be right, offsides, but i think its the wrong reason to be right (does that make sense?). anyway, the other side of that coin is is that the goalie chooses how much risk he is willing to take. the crease would still be a safety zone, he can stay there or play the puck.
posted by owl at 04:28 PM on February 15, 2004
garfield: that is one side of the debate, the other is that the nature of the biz is that it should be cyclical - build up (cheap, young players), compete (players have matured, so have their salaries), and finally be outcompeted (with older, very expensive players, lose money) so that you have to move back to the beginning, trading away expensive contracts. the other side seems to be as you stated. but it didn't convince me. that last article you posted makes a good point too, i don't follow the league nearly as much as i follow a team either.
posted by owl at 04:25 PM on February 15, 2004
a debate between two insiders, one of whom claims to have seen the books of at least one team
posted by owl at 06:56 PM on February 13, 2004
garfield, your comments are fair enough. but, honestly, it sounds to me that all in all, hasek is refinishing his career, no help needed.
posted by owl at 11:01 PM on February 12, 2004
"Or at the least, he'll have an asterisk beside his name with "dick" in small print." hehe.
posted by owl at 08:00 PM on February 12, 2004
doesn't change the fundamental problem - that grapes' cherished tough canadians born outside of Quebec aren't wearing visors because they think it looks wimpy. same used to be said about helmuts.
posted by owl at 06:28 PM on February 11, 2004
no fan of big business either, but think about it. the flyers probably make comcast some money, no matter what the flyers say their bottom line is. the ducks dont make anyone money. so comcast unloads them, and they move to a city that appreciates hockey. not too bad. im not sure the nhl would let one owner own two teams anyway, so they might well be forced to sell, and that in turn might mean a pretty good price for the buyer.
posted by owl at 03:37 PM on February 11, 2004
ok, perhaps i should have used 'arguably' the best GM. for one thing, his peers said he was in 2001 (i think), and the canucks are better now. for another, he has done it with a checkbook that would make Lacroix giggle. i think Lamorriello is a far more fair comparison. as for vancouver being 'respectable again', i think they are quite a bit more than that. winning a cup is a real possibility now, and Burke helped put them in a position to do it. not even jersey or the wings can win it every year (tho they and the Avs sure do own it lately), no matter how good their teams/coaches/GMs are.
posted by owl at 03:33 PM on February 11, 2004
a hockey player: "well, yeah, its broken. i broke it maybe last week, last month, i dunno. suxs tho" heh.
posted by owl at 11:03 PM on February 10, 2004
Sharapova has lost "N" match points
what luckygirl said. sorta.