The 2013 NHL Season Thread

[Funky Bunky]

These Winter Classics are supposed to be a national event and, really, the one big lure-in for the non-fan. Setting it as "Los Angeles vs. Anaheim" guarantees no national interest. Us hockey fans will watch, certainly, but this kind of spectacle isn't supposed to be designed for the built-in audience.

The Ducks gave us the lowest-rated Stanley Cup Final ever (yes, I know, Ottawa, but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary), and haven't raised their profile since. They are one of the top four teams on the league right now, and can't even fill their building with their own fans, much less get the rest of the country to give a toss about them. You put the Kings and Ducks in Chavez Ravine, that's not a matchup for national television, that's a game for Prime Ticket that you hope doesn't clash with a Lakers game.

The purpose of this game is to create excitement about hockey in California, more than it is to draw national attention. Right now, you have two teams at the top of the standings, each with a championship in the last decade (with one of those coming last year). Hockey is growing, and things like this will help. I'd say it's a good idea to try and create as much interest as possible in the 2nd biggest media market in the United States.

The Ducks also are doing alright attendance wise. They may not sell out every game, but they've been getting at least 90% the whole season, with a decent amount of sell outs in the last month. It's not like Phoenix where they still only got like 50% when they were in the thick of the playoff hunt.

Bottom line, if the league doesn't try to generate more interest in non-traditional markets, they'll remain in the same situation forever. Hockey is not going to grow too much more in places like Michigan or New York.

[dbadefense1990]

These Winter Classics are supposed to be a national event and, really, the one big lure-in for the non-fan. Setting it as "Los Angeles vs. Anaheim" guarantees no national interest. Us hockey fans will watch, certainly, but this kind of spectacle isn't supposed to be designed for the built-in audience.

The Ducks gave us the lowest-rated Stanley Cup Final ever (yes, I know, Ottawa, but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary), and haven't raised their profile since. They are one of the top four teams on the league right now, and can't even fill their building with their own fans, much less get the rest of the country to give a toss about them. You put the Kings and Ducks in Chavez Ravine, that's not a matchup for national television, that's a game for Prime Ticket that you hope doesn't clash with a Lakers game.

The rumor is that the target date is January 25th, a Saturday, and rarely do the Lakers get put into a Saturday game. So I wouldn't worry that much about fearing a Lakers game.

But I do agree with the general sentiment that additional outdoor games kill the specialness of the game itself. Sure I wanted a Winter Classic-type game in LA as a pipe dream, but given the parameters and logistics, it was a very big pipe dream. While this kind of game would be thrilling, the effects to the rest of the NHL would be detrimentally damaging.

It's kind of like double jeapordy: on one end, this is the chance for the NHL to capitalize on SoCal's successes over the last 10-15 years, but on the other, the outdoor game fears alienation from casual fans out east (highlighted by the 2007 and 2012 Cup Finals being the two least watched series of all time).

[FiddySicks]

Yeah, Ducks vs Kings from Dodger Stadium sounds like a huge mistake. An outdoor game between the Kings/Ducks and Sharks from Squaw Valley would draw so much better. And even the logistical nightmare of setting up a temporary arena at Squaw is only just slightly worse than it would be at Dodger Stadium due to the weather. If it just happens to fall on a weekend that's unseasonably warm for LA (which can happen just about any time there, really) or, God Forbid, it rains, it's going to be an enormous disaster.

[Funky Bunky]

These Winter Classics are supposed to be a national event and, really, the one big lure-in for the non-fan. Setting it as "Los Angeles vs. Anaheim" guarantees no national interest. Us hockey fans will watch, certainly, but this kind of spectacle isn't supposed to be designed for the built-in audience.

The Ducks gave us the lowest-rated Stanley Cup Final ever (yes, I know, Ottawa, but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary), and haven't raised their profile since. They are one of the top four teams on the league right now, and can't even fill their building with their own fans, much less get the rest of the country to give a toss about them. You put the Kings and Ducks in Chavez Ravine, that's not a matchup for national television, that's a game for Prime Ticket that you hope doesn't clash with a Lakers game.

The rumor is that the target date is January 25th, a Saturday, and rarely do the Lakers get put into a Saturday game. So I wouldn't worry that much about fearing a Lakers game.

But I do agree with the general sentiment that additional outdoor games kill the specialness of the game itself. Sure I wanted a Winter Classic-type game in LA as a pipe dream, but given the parameters and logistics, it was a very big pipe dream. While this kind of game would be thrilling, the effects to the rest of the NHL would be detrimentally damaging.

It's kind of like double jeopordy: on one end, this is the chance for the NHL to capitalize on SoCal's successes over the last 10-15 years, but on the other, the outdoor game fears alienation from casual fans out east (highlighted by the 2007 and 2012 Cup Finals being the two least watched series of all time).

How would it be damaging? How would they alienate fans back east? They already have had 4 winter classics, plus there will probably be one in New York to go along with the one in LA.

[Funky Bunky]

Yeah, Ducks vs Kings from Dodger Stadium sounds like a huge mistake. An outdoor game between the Kings/Ducks and Sharks from Squaw Valley would draw so much better. And even the logistical nightmare of setting up a temporary arena at Squaw is only just slightly worse than it would be at Dodger Stadium due to the weather. If it just happens to fall on a weekend that's unseasonably warm for LA (which can happen just about any time there, really) or, God Forbid, it rains, it's going to be an enormous disaster.

Would that many people drive all the way there? Especially the Kings or Ducks fans?

Also, it won't be too warm if you have it at night, and it can rain anywhere. (LA actually gets less rain than most of the country)

[Stampman]

but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary

Did you mean Calgary-Tampa Bay

or Edmonton-Carolina?

[Funky Bunky]

Their ratings were so bad, they didn't even beat out an imaginary series.

[Still MIGHTY]

Don't even want to get in that discussion because I know I'll get nothing from it but:

1) We shouldn't be having multiple outdoor games (at the very least, multiple in the US) no matter where the hell you want to play them. The reason these things work is the novelty and the once-a-year national stage. (which even then is starting to wane because every other college in the midwest/northeast is doing one now, along with the minor leagues.)

2) There are reasons there shouldn't be a Ducks/Kings Winter Classic or one in SoCal, but some of the reasons you all are throwing out aren't those reasons. The biggest problem, really, is the timing in regards to weather and ice creation. If they want to do it, they'd have to do it as the nightcap to Hockey Day in America (if I understand thats when they want to). The daylight sun, no matter the time of year, would be a killer to game ice. And hell, it'd be hard on the ice in prepping it. Which is the other problem, you can't exactly plan on even cool weather for the entire time of prepping the ice or game day. It could be mid to low 40s at night, but it could also be high 70s and even into the 80s at day time. Unless Bettman and Co. are really that super confident in their snocone machine, gameplay could be a disaster. I'd imagine they'd have to build some sort of temporary structure over the ice area to act as a type of freezer or cooling house to create the ice and just take it down before the game.

-----

Also, Ducks beat the Kings in a shootout. Ducks spent the majority of the 3rd letting the Kings skate circles around them and cycle around for point bombs. They're lucky the Kings didn't up and win this game in regulation. It's a rivalry and it's going to be close, but when you get the lead in the 3rd against a team at the end of a back to back, they shouldn't be controlling the play like they did. You should be finishing them off.

Didn't help Getzlaf was out again with his "lower body injury" (Actually saw him in his suit in the elevator lobby when I walked past it. Kinda gave me a sinking feeling for the game... and can we stop this injury ambiguity crap. I remember when that nonsense was saved for the playoffs, but its every single time now. We saw him twist his knee. Its a knee injury.) It's good the Ducks are finally getting some time off soon, because they need him back in shape and in action ASAP.

Nine games left to shore up the holes. Thankfully they get Edmonton three times starting tomorrow, Columbus/Colorado/Calgary/Phoenix all one more time. Only true tough games left are at LA Saturday and at Vancouver at the end.

Magic numbers: 1 pt for the playoffs, 9 pts for the division.

[Sport]

That was the worst effort I've seen from the Blue Jackets since early February. See you later, playoffs. See you later, playoff hunt. Twas fun while it lasted.

[wildwing64]

Yay to the Ducks beating the Kings.

As for the SoCal outdoor game, I had a feeling we'd see one some point or another. I get the impression the Ducks have been wanting to host or take part in the Winter Classic - presumably the Kings too - and this is the next best thing they're gonna get. Impractical as it may look on paper, I'm all for it, if only to see if it can actually be pulled off. That and I have false hope of seeing a Mighty Ducks throwback uniform.

[Sodboy13]

but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary

Did you mean Calgary-Tampa Bay

or Edmonton-Carolina?

I think I meant both, but my brain is too small to process both Southeast-Canadian Cup Finals of the 2000s. This is my Princeton Review of Books.

[The_Admiral]

Mike Smith's "fire and da passhin" is admirable up to a point - I think everybody wants at least one guy on their team that's got a wild hair up his ass (or is it hare?), but it's one thing to get chippy/vocal, another entirely to make a spectacle of yourself and venture into the realm of being an outright embarrassment.

He's just trying to be Ron Hextall, except Ron Hextall was an elite goalie for a long time and Mike Smith is a 30-year-old who made it out of the AHL when his coach got his skaters to take away all the shooting lanes.

[The_Admiral]

Bottom line, if the league doesn't try to generate more interest in non-traditional markets, they'll remain in the same situation forever. Hockey is not going to grow too much more in places like Michigan or New York.

I disagree with this. I still think there's work to be done in the more "traditional" areas of the United States. There's no reason that their respective cities shouldn't eat, sleep, and breathe the Bruins, or Flyers, or Penguins. Illinois should be dotted with pond hockey rinks on every neighborhood's retention pond. St. Louis and Washington are still lagging behind where they ought to be, in my opinion. Wisconsin is right there waiting to be exploited as a hockey hotbed (coldbed?) but all they get is a decent college program in Madison and Neckless Barry's Fourth-Liner Factory in Milwaukee. Absolutely supersaturate everything along/east of the Mississippi River and north of Washington, then worry about "growing the game" elsewhere. You can't grow without good soil!

It reminds me of the idiotic argument people made, and still make, about adding teams to Canada. "You're not growing the game because Canadians are watching hockey anyway, and putting that team in America adds new people." Okay, great. Are Canadians paying thousands of dollars for season tickets to NHL games in the absence of a team to sell them those tickets? Oh, they're not? Canada isn't magical? Okay.

[dbadefense1990]

These Winter Classics are supposed to be a national event and, really, the one big lure-in for the non-fan. Setting it as "Los Angeles vs. Anaheim" guarantees no national interest. Us hockey fans will watch, certainly, but this kind of spectacle isn't supposed to be designed for the built-in audience.

The Ducks gave us the lowest-rated Stanley Cup Final ever (yes, I know, Ottawa, but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary), and haven't raised their profile since. They are one of the top four teams on the league right now, and can't even fill their building with their own fans, much less get the rest of the country to give a toss about them. You put the Kings and Ducks in Chavez Ravine, that's not a matchup for national television, that's a game for Prime Ticket that you hope doesn't clash with a Lakers game.

The rumor is that the target date is January 25th, a Saturday, and rarely do the Lakers get put into a Saturday game. So I wouldn't worry that much about fearing a Lakers game.

But I do agree with the general sentiment that additional outdoor games kill the specialness of the game itself. Sure I wanted a Winter Classic-type game in LA as a pipe dream, but given the parameters and logistics, it was a very big pipe dream. While this kind of game would be thrilling, the effects to the rest of the NHL would be detrimentally damaging.

It's kind of like double jeopordy: on one end, this is the chance for the NHL to capitalize on SoCal's successes over the last 10-15 years, but on the other, the outdoor game fears alienation from casual fans out east (highlighted by the 2007 and 2012 Cup Finals being the two least watched series of all time).

How would it be damaging? How would they alienate fans back east? They already have had 4 winter classics, plus there will probably be one in New York to go along with the one in LA.

Like I said (and as many other people said), having multiple outdoor games dilutes the importance of set games. And on top of it, people on the right coast seem to have a problem with the successes of the left. National NBC has accustomed their viewers to only see the Pens, Flyers, Red Wings, Bruins and other east belt teams, to the point that the viewers are oblivious to what the Ducks, Kings and other Pacific/Mountain zone teams have done. The 2007 Final had lower ratings than Cosby Show reruns (how were the networks going to sell a Ducks/Sens matchup?). Then the hockey audience got the Pens/Wings battles, followed by Cup wins by Original Six teams (Bruins, Blackhawks). The media lost out on last year's Cup Final being LA vs NYC, but it didn't help that teams from some of the loyal markets (Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, Philadelphia) went out early in the playoffs.

[IceCap]

These Winter Classics are supposed to be a national event and, really, the one big lure-in for the non-fan. Setting it as "Los Angeles vs. Anaheim" guarantees no national interest. Us hockey fans will watch, certainly, but this kind of spectacle isn't supposed to be designed for the built-in audience.

The Ducks gave us the lowest-rated Stanley Cup Final ever (yes, I know, Ottawa, but they couldn't match Carolina-Calgary), and haven't raised their profile since. They are one of the top four teams on the league right now, and can't even fill their building with their own fans, much less get the rest of the country to give a toss about them. You put the Kings and Ducks in Chavez Ravine, that's not a matchup for national television, that's a game for Prime Ticket that you hope doesn't clash with a Lakers game.

The purpose of this game is to create excitement about hockey in California, more than it is to draw national attention.

If that's the goal then why only focus on two southern California teams? From what I know about the state there's a huge difference between northern California and southern California, with the fans of teams in one region considering the teams in the other their chief rivals. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the Kings or Ducks play the Sharks?

Though the whole thing is idiotic, really. The allure of the Winter Classic is two-fold. First, it's a novelty. It's a once in a year event that even your casual American fans can look forward to. Having more then one dilutes that. Secondly, there's a charm in seeing hockey played outdoors in the snow. Playing an outdoor game in the middle of sunny Los Angeles is just going to turn off a lot of the potential audience who wants to see Olde Tyme Iced Hockey.

The concept of the outdoor game was already wearing thin with imitators at every level of hockey. By codifying multiple games per year you're taking what was once a special event and making it mundane. Well done, NHL.

[charger77]

Olde Tyme Iced Hockey.

Awesome!

[The Six]

The NHL brought it upon itself. As long as the same cycle of eastern teams gets outdoor games, you'll have fans of the rest of the teams complaining. Now that two Pacific teams (maybe) get it, you have the east coasters complaining because it's an affront and insult to have such a thing.

[IceCap]

The NHL brought it upon itself. As long as the same cycle of eastern teams gets outdoor games, you'll have fans of the rest of the teams complaining. Now that two Pacific teams (maybe) get it, you have the east coasters complaining because it's an affront and insult to have such a thing.

Get over the west coast persecution complex. The allure of the outdoor game just doesn't lend itself to southern California. It doesn't lend itself well to the Carolinas, Florida, Nashville, Dallas, or Phoenix either.

[The Six]

The NHL brought it upon itself. As long as the same cycle of eastern teams gets outdoor games, you'll have fans of the rest of the teams complaining. Now that two Pacific teams (maybe) get it, you have the east coasters complaining because it's an affront and insult to have such a thing.

Get over the west coast persecution complex. The allure of the outdoor game just doesn't lend itself to southern California. It doesn't lend itself well to the Carolinas, Florida, Nashville, Dallas, or Phoenix either.

Get over the outdoor game coming to LA.

[IceCap]

The NHL brought it upon itself. As long as the same cycle of eastern teams gets outdoor games, you'll have fans of the rest of the teams complaining. Now that two Pacific teams (maybe) get it, you have the east coasters complaining because it's an affront and insult to have such a thing.

Get over the west coast persecution complex. The allure of the outdoor game just doesn't lend itself to southern California. It doesn't lend itself well to the Carolinas, Florida, Nashville, Dallas, or Phoenix either.

Get over the outdoor game coming to LA.

Thank you for essentially conceding that the points about more then one game over-saturating the concept and the LA market not being suitable to host a game people expect to see snow in are valid, and that you're just in favour of it because YAY LA!