Several reports indicate that a season as long as 52 games could be played if a new CBA is in place prior to Jan. 11, thus adding millions of dollars to the 2013 revenue pie.

How about 52?
- Feeling_Glucky

52<82

52<82
- Doppleganger

good guess u won't be watching or posting then when season starts in 2 weeks.

how many people care or even remembered that the devils won the cup in a shortened season?

not me.
- sens rock

not me... and probably not many else (maybe the thread starter), but thats expected.

the people I see complaining are the ones that are butt hurt over the strike the most. Comments "just cancel the season instead of 48 games", or "I dont care if they play 48 games its not the same, I doubt I will even watch"

They are still posting and complaining about a 48 games season, proclaim they dont care but cant stop talking about hockey, logging into a hockey site and joining the discussion they dont care about.

Im pissed about the whole thing, but I will watch the second they are back. I can probably hold off on going to live games and buying anything NHL related for a while.

good guess u won't be watching or posting then when season starts in 2 weeks.
- Feeling_Glucky

If there is a shortened season, I'll watch the Sens games. But as I said in my first post, I would not equate a team that wins the Stanley Cup after a 48 game season, with one that was won in the (now) traditional 82 game season. To me it wouldn't mean as much

Just to clarify, as you will no doubt try to put words into my mouth as you always do, I'm not saying a Cup win after a 48 games season is better or worse than one after a 82 game season ( the now standard season)......it just wouldn't feel the same to me.

Because some teams will have some advantages with a shortened season, while other would have disadvantages that they would not have had, IF the season started as usual. Go back and review that standing (playoff seeds) after 48 games in any season (http://dropyourgloves.com...mes/AnyDateStandings.aspx) and then compare that to the actual playoff seeds.

If there is a shortened season, I'll watch the Sens games. But as I said in my first post, I would not equate a team that wins the Stanley Cup after a 48 game season, with one that was won in the (now) traditional 82 game season. To me it wouldn't mean as much

Just to clarify, as you will no doubt try to put words into my mouth as you always do, I'm not saying a Cup win after a 48 games season is better or worse than one after a 82 game season ( the now standard season)......it just wouldn't feel the same to me.

Because some teams will have some advantages with a shortened season, while other would have disadvantages that they would not have had, IF the season started as usual. Go back and review that standing (playoff seeds) after 48 games in any season (http://dropyourgloves.com...mes/AnyDateStandings.aspx) and then compare that to the actual playoff seeds.
- Doppleganger

Everyone is playing under the same rules so every game will be meaningful so ur point is incorrect as usual.

Everyone is playing under the same rules so every game will be meaningful so ur point is incorrect as usual.
- Feeling_Glucky

So EVERY team has the SAME number of players, who've been playing regularly in the AHL or Overseas? So NO team(s) will have an advantage because their rosters will have an equal number of players in "game shape" and an equal number of players who will need to play 20 games to get into "game shape".


Or can you NOT really see any difference between a team who goes to training camp, runs a number of practises and plays a number of exhibition games to work on special teams and such....................and a team thrown together with little or no time to work on their systems, special teams and have a roster of players at various stages of conditioning???

Because some teams will have some advantages with a shortened season, while other would have disadvantages that they would not have had, IF the season started as usual. Go back and review that standing (playoff seeds) after 48 games in any season (http://dropyourgloves.com...mes/AnyDateStandings.aspx) and then compare that to the actual playoff seeds.
- Doppleganger

I dont see that as a valid comparison. If a Team or GM is playing a 48 game season, everything changes, the players, callups, trades (assuming there are trades), the way players are used. Just saying that if you cutoff last season at 48 games its the same thing is dumb.

What if they add the 34 games missed this season to next year?

Would the team that wins next year get the most praise ever?

clearly the bruins stanley cup win is more worthy than the kings cause they played 7 more games.

clearly the bruins stanley cup win is more worthy than the kings cause they played 7 more games.
- sens rock

It has to be, the amount of games played is directly connected to how good you feel and how deserving they are.

It has to be, the amount of games played is directly connected to how good you feel and how deserving they are.
- senstroll

most teams generally feel terrible about them selves after sweeping a team

It has to be, the amount of games played is directly connected to how good you feel and how deserving they are.
- senstroll

nice spin guys.................but no matter what you come up with you'll never be able to equate an 82 game season, with a 48 game season.

Yeah, we're talking about the length on the regular season, not the total number of games played including playoffs.

nice spin guys.................but no matter what you come up with you'll never be able to equate an 82 game season, with a 48 game season.

Yeah, we're talking about the length on the regular season, not the total number of games played including playoffs.
- Doppleganger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_seasons

So by your #'s only 16 seasons count, well 18 if you can't the 84 game seasons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_seasons

So by your #'s only 16 seasons count, well 18 if you can't the 84 game seasons.
- Lahey

Man, do you ever have a hard time understanding a simple statement. The original post I made was

One constant thread through the last few months, is that the NHL would want to at least salvage a 48 game season.

I don't know about you, but I would not equate a team that wins the Stanley Cup after a 48 game season, with one that was won in the (now) traditional 82 game season. To me it wouldn't mean as much, and I suspect the players would not regard it (a Stanley Cup Win) in the same light either.

An asterisk would be there, regardless if it was visible or not.
- Doppleganger

clearly pointed that the NOW standard season is 82 games. I put this in because I know that the number of games in a regular season has changed over the decades, and wanted to put the topic in perspective...............because I KNEW some loons would bring up these points.

I NEVER once indicated that only 82 game seasons count.............that came out of your mind, not mine.

Some of you are actually arguing that a Cup Win after a 48 game season is exactly equivalent to one won after an 82 game season, with not being able to back it up.

How far did I need to Dumb it down ?

Man, do you ever have a hard time understanding a simple statement. The original post I made was


clearly pointed that the NOW standard season is 82 games. I put this in because I know that the number of games in a regular season has changed over the decades, and wanted to put the topic in perspective...............because I KNEW some loons would bring up these points.

I NEVER once indicated that only 82 game seasons count.............that came out of your mind, not mine.

Some of you are actually arguing that a Cup Win after a 48 game season is exactly equivalent to one won after an 82 game season, with not being able to back it up.

How far did I need to Dumb it down ?
- Doppleganger

What the hell is the difference? You think in 30 years people are going to be talking about how such and such team doesn't deserve it because of a lockout?

Is the Hockey Hall of Fame going to be taking the shortened seasons into account when picking hall of famers?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NHL_seasons

So by your #'s only 16 seasons count, well 18 if you can't the 84 game seasons.
- Lahey

if Sens win we won't stop hearing about it ever.

What the hell is the difference? You think in 30 years people are going to be talking about how such and such team doesn't deserve it because of a lockout?

Is the Hockey Hall of Fame going to be taking the shortened seasons into account when picking hall of famers?
- Lahey

The difference is 34 games, and the teams will not have a traditional training camp and exhibition games. Players will be a different stages of conditioning (some are playing regularly and some at not at all)

The playoff seeds after a 48 game season will not be the same if there was a a full 82 game season.

The difference is 34 games, and the teams will not have a traditional training camp and exhibition games. Players will be a different stages of conditioning (some are playing regularly and some at not at all)

The playoff seeds after a 48 game season will not be the same if there was a a full 82 game season.
- Doppleganger

How many people bash the Devils for their cup win?

How many articles have been written about how tainted that win was in 95?

How many people bash the Devils for their cup win?

How many articles have been written about how tainted that win was in 95?
- Lahey

It's clear you don't understand the topic of this thread. If you want to believe a 48 games season, is the SAME as an 82 one, then you can.

It's clear you don't understand the topic of this thread. If you want to believe a 48 games season, is the SAME as an 82 one, then you can.
- Doppleganger

I'm asking you, how many people are saying the last shortened year were a sham? Everyone that thinks its a sham now must be saying the last Stanley Cup winner of a shortened season didn't deserve it.

I'm asking you, how many people are saying the last shortened year were a sham? Everyone that thinks its a sham now must be saying the last Stanley Cup winner of a shortened season didn't deserve it.
- Lahey

Ignore him - he doesn't know poop.

I'm asking you, how many people are saying the last shortened year were a sham? Everyone that thinks its a sham now must be saying the last Stanley Cup winner of a shortened season didn't deserve it.
- Lahey

you're saying it, not me. I'm just saying an 82 game season is not equivalent to a 48 game season.

Prove to me that it is, or move on.

you're saying it, not me. I'm just saying an 82 game season is not equivalent to a 48 game season.

Prove to me that it is, or move on.
- Doppleganger

So you and only you are saying this and I have to prove to you how they aren't equal?

Now I know how the boys in the misc lounge feel when i post nonsense.

you're saying it, not me. I'm just saying an 82 game season is not equivalent to a 48 game season.

Prove to me that it is, or move on.
- Doppleganger

less games but Stanley Cup still means exactly the same to the winner as well as Hart and all the trophies as any other season in NHL history.

you're saying it, not me. I'm just saying an 82 game season is not equivalent to a 48 game season.

Prove to me that it is, or move on.
- Doppleganger

The fact that the NHL has played 82 games a year the least amount of times in its history would suggest it is.

Guys like Howe and Richard ect never played 82 games a year. Are their wins tainted or somehow less worthy?