Monday Links: Signing Enforcers Who Score Edition

by bradflick55 on Jul 18, 2011 11:27 AM CDT

Blues News

Welcome back. Reaves. [Blues]
We've asked this question every off-season for the past couple off-seasons, so why not ask it again? Are the Blues legit contenders? [Bleacher Report]
Some player reviews for the 2010 season. [Blue Men On Ice]

NHL/Hockey News

A list of players each franchise shouldn't get rid of. I laughed when I saw Paul Stastny first, because we all know the Blues are going to dress up a rusty Zamboni and acquire him in a trade. [Bleacher Report]
Some mid-major signings for the Winnipeg Jets. [Toronto Sun]
The new Winnipeg coaching staff is getting to work on its young core of players. [National Post]
This is news: Joe Sakic sinks a hole-in-one. [ESPN]
The Devils signed their first round pick from this year's draft, Adam Larsson. [ESPN]
Smaller nets? Brendan Shanahan is full of wacky/great ideas, but this one could prove to be his greatest, says PD. [Puck Daddy]

Other Stuff

From PCS: Jeff Suppan is the greatest pitcher of our generation. [Facebook]
You'll never leave the house drunk again. [Offbeats]
I'm not racist but... [Not Racist But]

Monday Video

I don't watch Bill Maher regularly, but when he lays a smackdown, I have to watch.

Note from Joe: All videos on this site are optional to watch. If a video offends you, don't watch. That being said, the video can be for today featuring Bill Maher found here because seriously guys, no one wants to hear what you have to say about politics on a hockey blog. We're hear to talk Blues, hockey and other things but NOT politics. Politics turns sane people in braying jackasses and well, that's annoying.

gametimelinks AT gmail DOT com

Tweet Comment 14 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

When I saw the term "smaller nets" . . .

I was like “Now, for fucking real . . . goalies are massive, they CAN’T make the nets smaller.” Obviously I misread the headline.

So then I read the article. And I was like . . . “Holy shit, THAT makes a whole lot of sense. Since when was Brendan Shanahan supposed to make sense?! This is crazy!”

So yeah, I like that idea.

Fight Club writer for the print edition of St. Louis Game Time . . . I need another beer.
The Throwdown Lowdown Report, only on The Bluenote Zone.
And I can also write things in 140 characters or fewer.

by Donut King on Jul 18, 2011 1:23 PM CDT reply actions

I did the same thing.

by Kevin4 on Jul 18, 2011 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions

i HAVE to do it. I just have to

this theory is, like the cake, a lie

We’re always talking about increasing the size of the ice surface to help generate more offense in the NHL. Here’s a way to do it without having to remove premium seating in the front rows to widen the ice. Which, as you know, is the primary concern for NHL teams when it comes to fiddling with the rink.

INCREASING THE ICE SURFACE DOES NOT ELIMINATE FRONT ROW PREMIUM SEATS!!!! IT INCREASES THEM.

once again, everyone stay with me on this for 3 minutes. just three minutes.

you have a table. the chair seats are 1000k. standing behind chairs is 10k standing anywhere else in the room is S100. you put 3 leafs in the table. and magically you lose all the chairs?!?!?! hellz no! you get more chairs around the table therefore MORE PREMIUM 1000k seats! and more people in the ring standing behind the chairs at 10k

you do lose standing room. those leafs take up space that cant be used to stand in.

again enlarging the ice surface INCREASES premium seats but does costs seats. the seats it costs (and again if you think of the dining room analogy it will make perfect sense) is the back row(s) of the lower bowl

it this too much cost? is the cost offset by having more premium seats? yes? no? not sure! i don’t have a calculator or the blues books.

but the NHL is LYING whenever they tell you they lose “premium” seating with an enlarged ice surface.

they lose last row of the lower bowl seating while gaining seats in all other premium rows

And a harvest of righteousness is grown from the seed of peace planted by peacemakers.

by Childhood Trauma on Jul 18, 2011 6:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Which is still a pretty significant loss.

And then there’s the cost of ripping up the existing rink floor and piping, and building out a new piping system and pouring a new floor, and even then you’re only done if the existing refrigeration equipment can handle the task of cooling the extra ice…

Seems like a lot of work for an inferior product.

by BleedBlue42 on Jul 18, 2011 7:23 PM CDT up reply actions

correct

2 rows MIGHT be significant, might not but the nhl always (and even that report is repeatintg it) claim they are losing the “most expensive” premium front -row seats. which is not even close to true

as a counter measure to just how much more the first row is worth to the 30th row, i suggest you watch the area where off ice officials used to sit in the bench row. they bloody stuck 4 folding chairs down there and charge hyper premium and despite not being able to leave the area during the game it is ALWAYS filled. yet most nights the area for wheelchair fans (also folding chairs) is half filled at best which is just 20 rows higher :)

the “dont make the playoffs and pay half” seats were where the blues shoot twice lower bowl back aisles (and worse seating) which are hard to sell even at significantly less than face value (despite all the sell outs).

i am not saying, nor did i suggest, there isnt a seating loss, i am saying the loss is being greatly exaggerated by owners and nhl brass, and that there may, in fact, be an increase in revenues with more premium seats and a better, faster, safer game :). improve the game, improve the finances of the game.

as far as the redesigning is concerned, that is easy to fix, simply grandfather rinks and allow current as MINIMUM, any new rinks, new areana makeovers etc will have to be the larger size. or any speed team that wants those playoff games a larger arena might guarentee the team are free to expand asap :)

i never had a problem in those old school days of the hawk=blues home and homes ALSO having two completely differnent rink sizes. made it, um, more fun :)

And a harvest of righteousness is grown from the seed of peace planted by peacemakers.

by Childhood Trauma on Jul 18, 2011 8:49 PM CDT up reply actions

At the risk of prompting another profanity-laced e-mail and being accused of "following him around"...

…I have to say that I agree 100% with CT here.

Expanding the width ice surface by 15 feet (from 85 feet to 100 feet) will result in the loss of exactly two rows of seats on either side of the arena. These seats do not have to be the more expensive seats; the reduced number of seats can be arrived at by taking seats from the less-expensive area of the lower bowl; “losing the last row or two of the lower bowl seating,” as CT notes.

And, you do gain approximately 16 seats at ice level (on the glass) by expanding the width of the ice surface.

"If we do not prepare for ourselves the role of the hammer, there will be nothing left but that of the anvil."

-- Otto von Bismarck, 1851

http://futurenotes.blogspot.com

by Tomorrows Blues on Jul 18, 2011 7:49 PM CDT up reply actions

Adding 16 glass seats doesnt necessarily make up for the loss of about 100 in the lower bowl with Olympic ice. Unless you get really “dynamic” with the ticket prices.

No – you cant take them out of the nosebleeds unless you’re an Architect named fucking Merlin.

Let's Go Blues!

by FlickAuVin on Jul 19, 2011 2:34 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions

^Troll food^

I want to meet Merlin, Architect. XD

Let's Go Blues!

by FlickAuVin on Jul 19, 2011 2:36 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions

I saw the link this morning and thought wtf theres no way. The idea is actually awesome, the headline should actually read “NHL plans to reduce net depth.” Then it would make sense

He raged at the world, at his family, at his life. But mostly he just raged.
Aren't you that guy who hates the blues?

by Icion on Jul 18, 2011 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Regarding a trade for Paul Stasny...

I heard this Rusty Zamboni kid has a hell of a presence on the ice. Colorado might have to sweeten the deal a little.

Let's Go Blues!
Support your local NAHL team. Seriously.

by Paperwork Ninja on Jul 19, 2011 8:49 AM CDT reply actions

Rusty Zamboni...

… is a force to be reckoned with in all three zones. He can move effortlessly from the right side to the left, or drive right down the middle of the ice. The entire rink is his domain, and none can stand before him.

I can’t believe the Blues are making him available. The ownership situation must be worse than we all thought. Colorado would be fools not to trade Paul Stastny for Rusty Zamboni.

by BleedBlue42 on Jul 19, 2011 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs

Rusty Zamboni yields only to David Backes.

That’s the kind of guy that Rusty Zamboni is!

Let's Go Blues!
Support your local NAHL team. Seriously.

by Paperwork Ninja on Jul 19, 2011 1:55 PM CDT up reply actions

I love you guys.

Kent Huskins cares. Do you?

by bradflick55 on Jul 19, 2011 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions

Rusty Zamboni loves everyone.

If by “loves” you mean “runs you over with a metal scraper and then sprays hot water into your open wounds” and by “everyone” you mean “everyone but David Backes.”

Rusty Zamboni is a dangerous man, but he’s not crazy.

Let's Go Blues!
Support your local NAHL team. Seriously.

by Paperwork Ninja on Jul 19, 2011 3:48 PM CDT up reply actions