• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

2011-2012 NHL Thread

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nhl/story/_/id/6823432/long-island-voters-reject-400m-plan-arena


"...With 89 per cent of votes counted, the referendum failed 56 per cent to 43 per cent.

"I'm disappointed.  I'm heartbroken," the millionaire founder of software maker  Computer Associates said.

" Proponents including labour union, tourism officials and many business groups argued the construction project would bring jobs and spark economic growth in the community...

Voters were clearly concerned however, with the prospect of higher taxes.

Republican County Executive Edward Mangano... expressed disappointment with the outcome, but insisted he was not quitting on the idea of developing 77-acre site, one of the most valuable undeveloped parcels of property in the county.  "This just opens up new doors," he said.

Nassau residents last year paid an average property tax of $11,500, nearly the highest in the county.  The county portion of the tab is 16.4 per cent."
 
Busta Reims said:
THat was my first thought, but I read somewhere about changes in the plan for that arena and cost cutting measures and such that lead to it no longer being able to accommodate an NHL arena. Not sure how accurate that is, but, if it's true, Brooklyn would be out of the picture. I'd say odds are that the Islanders become the team to finally fill that arena in Kansas City.

Last thing I'd read was that it was still going to be able to have hockey games but that the capacity would be something like 14,000. Obviously that wouldn't be ideal but I still have to think that a team in NYC drawing 14 thousand a night is going to be more lucrative than a team in Kansas City with a 17,000 seat arena.
 
Saint Nik said:
Busta Reims said:
THat was my first thought, but I read somewhere about changes in the plan for that arena and cost cutting measures and such that lead to it no longer being able to accommodate an NHL arena. Not sure how accurate that is, but, if it's true, Brooklyn would be out of the picture. I'd say odds are that the Islanders become the team to finally fill that arena in Kansas City.

Last thing I'd read was that it was still going to be able to have hockey games but that the capacity would be something like 14,000. Obviously that wouldn't be ideal but I still have to think that a team in NYC drawing 14 thousand a night is going to be more lucrative than a team in Kansas City with a 17,000 seat arena.

I've read the same.  Hockey capacity around 14,500 with some terrible sightlines.  While that's not much smaller than Winnipeg, the fanbase just isn't present (although the population certainly would be).  I don't think Brooklyn would be a very viable option for the NHL or the arena owners.  If a move is coming, Quebec or Kansas City would be my guess.
 
Stumpy said:
I've read the same.  Hockey capacity around 14,500 with some terrible sightlines.  While that's not much smaller than Winnipeg, the fanbase just isn't present (although the population certainly would be).

There's not a NHL fanbase in New York City?
 
Saint Nik said:
Stumpy said:
I've read the same.  Hockey capacity around 14,500 with some terrible sightlines.  While that's not much smaller than Winnipeg, the fanbase just isn't present (although the population certainly would be).

There's not a NHL fanbase in New York City?

For the Islanders? No.  Granted, I lived in the Bronx, but the only hockey fans I knew rooted for the Rangers.  Most sports fans were all about baseball, anyway.

At any rate, the Isles' attendance has been abysmal: an average of 12,819 over the past five seasons.  Moving into an even smaller arena (with less ability to have low-tier pricing options) with admittedly terrible sightlines doesn't seem like the answer to me.

Also, I revise my previous statement about relocation to Quebec or Kansas City; just read that the Islanders' lease runs through 2015.  Who knows what happens by then, particularly with Phoenix.
 
There have been rumblings that the Mets are looking for someone to join them in Queens, so, my guess is that would be option #1 right now.
 
I will be interested to see how this goes moving forward. Not sure where they are going to go yet, but apparently there are plenty of options.
 
Stumpy said:
For the Islanders? No.  Granted, I lived in the Bronx, but the only hockey fans I knew rooted for the Rangers.  Most sports fans were all about baseball, anyway.

At any rate, the Isles' attendance has been abysmal: an average of 12,819 over the past five seasons.  Moving into an even smaller arena (with less ability to have low-tier pricing options) with admittedly terrible sightlines doesn't seem like the answer to me.

I think that's probably got quite a bit to do with the location of their building, the state of their team and the existing quality of their building. Probably shouldn't judge the fanbase under those conditions, especially considering that they'd be moving into Brooklyn as opposed to Manhattan.
 
Busta Reims said:
There have been rumblings that the Mets are looking for someone to join them in Queens, so, my guess is that would be option #1 right now.

The Mets may as well try hockey.... at least somebody will be hitting.... ;)

Actually the Mets are only 14.5 games outta first this year lol
 
I believe that thy will somehow find a way to build this proposed new arena.  As one read, in the words of County Executive Edward Mangano '"This opens new doors."'. It's pretty obvious no one has given up just yet, and I am a firm believer of the old adage 'where there's a will, there's a way'.  As a fan of the New York Islanders dating back to their glory years, I would be saddened to see them leave the Island. 

While Kansas City, (and Quebec) beckon, with the Pheonix situation on an uneasy keel, so to speak, I doubt many fans of both the Islanders & Rangers (in New York), would want to see an end to one of the NHL's best rivalries (or rather, a decimation of it completely).  If the Islanders improve as a whole, then the Isles/Rangers rivalry can once again be 'rejuvenated' and sport an appeal again.
 
So is Shea Weber a UFA next summer?  I keep hearing conflicting reports that its 2 summers from now.

Anyways know with certainty and why?
 
Erndog said:
So is Shea Weber a UFA next summer?  I keep hearing conflicting reports that its 2 summers from now.

Anyways know with certainty and why?

I keep hearing and reading that both Rinne and Suter are UFAs next summer while Weber would be a RFA next summer (last year before UFA) as well. 
 
Peter D. said:
Erndog said:
So is Shea Weber a UFA next summer?  I keep hearing conflicting reports that its 2 summers from now.

Anyways know with certainty and why?

I keep hearing and reading that both Rinne and Suter are UFAs next summer while Weber would be a RFA next summer (last year before UFA) as well.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/predators/2011-08-02-shea-weber-arbitration-case_n.htm

In their says 2 more years as a RFA.  I don't get why though.  He will have played 7 seasons and will be over 25 years old.

I must be missing something here.
 
Erndog said:
Peter D. said:
Erndog said:
So is Shea Weber a UFA next summer?  I keep hearing conflicting reports that its 2 summers from now.

Anyways know with certainty and why?

I keep hearing and reading that both Rinne and Suter are UFAs next summer while Weber would be a RFA next summer (last year before UFA) as well.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/predators/2011-08-02-shea-weber-arbitration-case_n.htm

In their says 2 more years as a RFA.  I don't get why though.  He will have played 7 seasons and will be over 25 years old.

I must be missing something here.

Yeah, it seems strange, I wonder if it's because of the arb option of taking 1 or 2 years that's causing confusion?
 
Erndog said:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/predators/2011-08-02-shea-weber-arbitration-case_n.htm

In their says 2 more years as a RFA.  I don't get why though.  He will have played 7 seasons and will be over 25 years old.

I must be missing something here.

This will only be his 6th season towards UFA eligibility. In order to earn a season, a player has to be on the active roster for 40 or more games, and Weber was not in his first year in the league and, therefore, has one more RFA season after this one.
 
Busta Reims said:
Erndog said:
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/predators/2011-08-02-shea-weber-arbitration-case_n.htm

In their says 2 more years as a RFA.  I don't get why though.  He will have played 7 seasons and will be over 25 years old.

I must be missing something here.

This will only be his 6th season towards UFA eligibility. In order to earn a season, a player has to be on the active roster for 40 or more games, and Weber was not in his first year in the league and, therefore, has one more RFA season after this one.

Right, thanks Busta, 28 games his first year.
 
Tigger said:
Right, thanks Busta, 28 games his first year.

Yeah, and a lot of time in the AHL. I remember this discussion came up earlier in the summer and I looked into his recalls and demotions, and based on what was there, he was not on the active roster for long enough to qualify for an "Aggregate Season," as the CBA calls it.
 

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top