Yeah, he's up there. But I'd personally take Lindros.

They talk so much of that "clutch goal". But it was a huge gift. He was just sitting in front of the net. It was all Tavares' work.
- prock

Gift or not... A panel of experts enlist him at #1... Eberle is as clutch as they come!

Gift or not... A panel of experts enlist him at #1... Eberle is as clutch as they come!
- saskoil21

Clutch at getting gifted a goal. Awesome.

I would honestly say that play was more about Tavares being clutch than Eberle.

I'm quite sure the NHLPA is aware of what they've given up in lost salary this year.
- MJL

Clutch at getting gifted a goal. Awesome.

I would honestly say that play was more about Tavares being clutch than Eberle.
- prock

If you are going to keep making coments like this, pleae correct the spelling of your username.

So far I've been Eklund, various players, and now Allan Walsh. You have no idea what you beleive.
- MJL

On a side note I thought I state that Mr Jordan Eberle has been touted as the BEST EVER WJC CDN http://www.ctvmedia.ca/ts...se.asp?id=15959&yyyy=2012
- saskoil21

without a doubt.

and the crazy part is after the miracle against russia, he did it AGAIN the next year!!
down by 2, coach rode him for like the last 6 mins.
2 goals in the last 3 mins to tie the game and send it to OT. too funny. i think it might have been remembered even more had the yanks not pulled it out.

there's no question he's the greatest cdn junior to ever play.

i put him as one of the greatest players to ever wear the maple leaf regardless of level.

The NHL is the league. The teams are FRANCHISES. Players keep spouting about Revenue sharing because it benefits THEM. Why should Rogers pay hundreds of millions then not get the profits? So do you see Subway franchises all equal? Do the rich franchises support the struggling ones? Nope. If you cant make it work, close or move or change your economics (ie. change your business plan and get some cost under control). If you really want 4 franchises to close, then the players would really hate that. So they can do their part to keep them afloat and keep their million dollar salary's flowing.
- Iggysbff

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept the teams having to pay into it. And they make more then enough to be able to do it. I love this argument from people that say the NHL is trying to make every team profitable. That making 30 teams strong financially is the goal. They when they're given something that would mean the Owners paying to help the struggling teams. Heaven forbid, we can't do that. Why should the rich teams pay the struggling ones? But they're perfectly okay with the players paying for it.
There's a reason why all the other major sports Leagues have some form of it. And at a much higher level then the NHL has. So what's a better example, other major sports or Subway?

Well about 10% of the players have 5 year or longer contracts. And at this point that is all the are really fighting about. And of course the players who don't make the min. salary won't fight it because they don't have to worry about it.

Name me the issues that are being fought for that effect all the players.
- Khadgar

Right now contract term. probably doesn't affect all the players, but the large majority of them.

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept the teams having to pay into it. And they make more then enough to be able to do it. I love this argument from people that say the NHL is trying to make every team profitable. That making 30 teams strong financially is the goal. They when they're given something that would mean the Owners paying to help the struggling teams. Heaven forbid, we can't do that. Why should the rich teams pay the struggling ones? But they're perfectly okay with the players paying for it.
There's a reason why all the other major sports Leagues have some form of it. And at a much higher level then the NHL has. So what's a better example, other major sports or Subway?
- MJL

Because the players share of revenue is too damn high, so really, that's where they should start taking revenue from. When it gets down to a normal level, then I totally agree, start looking at other things. There isn't enough profit to be spreading it around. Even among the "rich" teams. It's that simple.

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept the teams having to pay into it. And they make more then enough to be able to do it. I love this argument from people that say the NHL is trying to make every team profitable. That making 30 teams strong financially is the goal. They when they're given something that would mean the Owners paying to help the struggling teams. Heaven forbid, we can't do that. Why should the rich teams pay the struggling ones? But they're perfectly okay with the players paying for it.
There's a reason why all the other major sports Leagues have some form of it. And at a much higher level then the NHL has. So what's a better example, other major sports or Subway?
- MJL

Economic illiteracy

Economic illiteracy
- TrueGrit

Refute it. Tell me how I'm wrong!

Right now contract term. probably doesn't affect all the players, but the large majority of them.
- MJL

Contract term affects very few players. And the players that sign with their own team can sign for seven years.

So tell me what is it in the NHL's last offer that is so objectionable that the players could not sign it?

Here is another semantic tid bit. Players get a fixed percentage of REVENUES. That has nothing to do with profits. That means players get paid first and owners have to take the other half, pay team expenses, then be happy with what is left....

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept (sic) the teams having to pay into it.
- MJL

Brilliant.

- RichardHertz

Nothing like holding $40,000 in cash, while you are wearing $8 Walmart sweatpants.

I'm still waiting for you to tell me what the owners have given in these negotiations. We know they have taken almost $ 400 million. Easy question to answer for you???
- yttrohs

The owners don't have to give anything. They are locking out the players because the players received a retarded 90% of the profit.

It is like a union going on strike and the companies owners then wondering what the union is going to give them.

This should be easy to understand. If it is difficult for you to grasp, then sorry, can't help you bud.

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept the teams having to pay into it. And they make more then enough to be able to do it. I love this argument from people that say the NHL is trying to make every team profitable. That making 30 teams strong financially is the goal. They when they're given something that would mean the Owners paying to help the struggling teams. Heaven forbid, we can't do that. Why should the rich teams pay the struggling ones? But they're perfectly okay with the players paying for it.
There's a reason why all the other major sports Leagues have some form of it. And at a much higher level then the NHL has. So what's a better example, other major sports or Subway?
- MJL

You mean other major sports that have multiple times the amount of revenue and tv deals? Multiple times more fans? Ya, apples and apples...

If you want give and take...well the owners have increased Revenue sharing....they have given more in pension...now the players need to move to 50/50 with out these ridiculous cap gaurantees that will see them no where near 50%. And the contract consessions will be met in the middle.

Done. Could have been there back in Spetember. But the PA wouldnt get off their ass and come to the table.

Revenue sharing benefits everyone accept the teams having to pay into it. And they make more then enough to be able to do it. I love this argument from people that say the NHL is trying to make every team profitable. That making 30 teams strong financially is the goal. They when they're given something that would mean the Owners paying to help the struggling teams. Heaven forbid, we can't do that. Why should the rich teams pay the struggling ones? But they're perfectly okay with the players paying for it.
There's a reason why all the other major sports Leagues have some form of it. And at a much higher level then the NHL has. So what's a better example, other major sports or Subway?
- MJL

The NHL has offered already, in October, to share as much revenue as the NBA does. If you can find different info, I would be glad to hear it.

On the other hand... the players are already being offered a softer landing to 50/50 than the NBA or NFL got.

Contract term affects very few players. And the players that sign with their own team can sign for seven years.

So tell me what is it in the NHL's last offer that is so objectionable that the players could not sign it?
- Khadgar

The answer is, absolutely nothing.

The PA is fully aware that they have gone as far as they can go with regular negotiations.

Their plan all along was to wait until the cancellation of the season is imminent. Get the NHL to make its best offer, and then file a disclaimer, hoping that the threat squeezes out a few last concessions.

Anyone who has paid attention to how they gave gone about "negotiating" (if you can call never submitting a comprehensive offer negotiating), should know that we are where we are because this was the PA plan from day 1.

Their plan has worked beautifully... except for the part about them losing more than they will gain by holding out from October, or even holding out past the December negotiations.

You mean other major sports that have multiple times the amount of revenue and tv deals? Multiple times more fans? Ya, apples and apples...

If you want give and take...well the owners have increased Revenue sharing....they have given more in pension...now the players need to move to 50/50 with out these ridiculous cap gaurantees that will see them no where near 50%. And the contract consessions will be met in the middle.

Done. Could have been there back in Spetember. But the PA wouldnt get off their ass and come to the table.
- Iggysbff

This is another thing I find funny - why in theory do the owners - or the players, for that matter - have to give anything?

Why do people equate this with figuring out a way for two six-year-olds to split a cookie?

The owners need to come up with a deal that enables them to keep 30 franchises afloat. That may or may not entail giving something back to the players.

Drop the idea of "fair." This is business.

Clutch at getting gifted a goal. Awesome.

I would honestly say that play was more about Tavares being clutch than Eberle.
- prock

Except that he did it 3 times over 2 World Juniors. Even if it was a "gift", you have to be good to know where the right spot is to receive those gifts.

This is another thing I find funny - why in theory do the owners - or the players, for that matter - have to give anything?

Why do people equate this with figuring out a way for two six-year-olds to split a cookie?

The owners need to come up with a deal that enables them to keep 30 franchises afloat. That may or may not entail giving something back to the players.

Drop the idea of "fair." This is business.
- Atomic Wedgie

I don't understand how people can fail to follow a very simple concept.

There is a strike, or a lockout, when one side is not happy with the status quo and the other side is wanting to continue.

To think that the side that is striking or locking out should also be giving back, is retarded. Sure, they might give stuff back during the course of negotiations as everything is up for discussion. But they are the ones initiating this, they don't have to "give" to the other side.

- RichardHertz

What a lovely pair of pants

Michael Stipe is in Australia... He just reported, "I feel fine."

Michael Stipe is in Australia... He just reported, "I feel fine."
- laughs2907