Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Lockout 'Script'; '94-'95 Redux?; Results Roundup

This is pretty much how I feel except you have hope for a season where as I have none.

I know if there is a season starting in Jan, I think the LA Kings are going to have like a 13 game home stand in Jan. Starting in Feb Staples is booked for like 2 weeks, the Kings always have had an extended road trip that month. Normally they played a heavy home schedule in Nov. and Dec. to offset that Feb situation

I could be wrong, but I think in this day and age there are fewer hockey only rinks than in the 90's.In the case of Staples you have 3 tenants.
Rangers, Hawks, Bruins, Panthers, Stars, Avs,Flyers I believe share time with basketball teams. (Again I could be wrong about that.)

Doesn't Calgary need to leave their building for the rodeo or something for an extended period. Not sure when that is.

Granted there would fewer games, but logistically I think there are more challenges now than in the 90's as crazy as that may sound with all the technology.

It can be done, but the schedules are going to be real interesting.

As much as this lockout has distressed me, I would not mind a shortened season. I frankly think the season is too long anyway. It is just a war of attrition til the second season starts in April.

I know if there is a season starting in Jan, I think the LA Kings are going to have like a 13 game home stand in Jan. Staring in Feb Staples is booked for like 2 weeks, the Kings always have had an extended road trip that month. Normally they played a heavy home schedule in Nov. and Dec. to offset that Feb situation

I could be wrong, but I think in this day and age there are fewer hockey only rinks than in the 90's.In the case of Staples you have 3 tenants.
Rangers, Hawks, Bruins, Panthers, Stars, Avs,Flyers I believe share time with basketball teams. (Again I could be wrong about that.)

Doesn't Calgary need to leave their building for the rodeo or something for an extended period. Not sure when that is.

Granted there would fewer games, but logistically I think there are more challenges now than in the 90's as crazy as that may sound with all the technology.

It can be done, but the schedules are going to be real interesting.
- fsanford

True, but they also have to get creative with the schedule in Olympic years (never understood, though, why teams would have four-day to week-long breaks in October to early November even in those seasons where extra back-to-back and three-in-four slates would be scheduled after the Olympics).

True, but they also have to get creative with the schedule in Olympic years (never understood, though, why teams would have four-day to week-long breaks in October to early November even in those seasons where extra back-to-back and three-in-four slates would be scheduled after the Olympics).
- bmeltzer

Because the NHL is just brilliant in all that they do. It's rare in this day and age to see such a bumbling group of elitists so loyally and ravenously supported by blue collar money.

Bill Meltzer: Meltzer's Musings: Lockout 'Script'; '94-'95 Redux?; Results Roundup
- bmeltzer

i was still living in vermont that year and the media world wasn't anything like it is now...so i don't remember being crazy about the lockout and obsessing over it. couldn't really watch the flyers anyway. what i remember is the playoffs - knocking out the defending cup champion rangers - which was sweet - and rallying from an 0-2 hole against NJ - Lindros's quick OT strike off a 2 on 1 in game 3 to give them life. Game 4, my first live playoff game ever, where they sent brodeur packing and then my last game ever at the spectrum for a flyers game the next day - the dreaded game 5. th go back and watch the youtube clip of the goal and you'll see lemieux interfere with lindros off the O zone draw - which knocked him down - and allowed lemieux to get the puck and have a wide open lane down the right wing.

ugh.

anyway - i think these talks will produce nothing - in particular because jacobs will be present. the season will eventually be cancelled. to get this far while quibbling over so little after the players have agreed to 50-50 is the reason why. this should have been put to bed months ago - but they're both interested in posturing, being right, and somehow defeating the other side. in the end, they're both losing. the damage will be significant.

True, but they also have to get creative with the schedule in Olympic years (never understood, though, why teams would have four-day to week-long breaks in October to early November even in those seasons where extra back-to-back and three-in-four slates would be scheduled after the Olympics).
- bmeltzer

I agree, I think you load up a bit more on the front end and then have some longer breaks on the back end of the schedule to let guys recover from the grind of the season. Always want to see the best players on the ice during the push for the playoff's.

Hope you are right Bill, a short season is not great, but better than nothing.

I sure am going to miss the Winter Classic this year. Has become a tradition at my house, bloody mary's to recover from the night before, and the winter classic on TV.

Shortened season is bogus and the Cup winner should have an * next to the team name.

Shortened season is bogus and the Cup winner should have an * next to the team name.
- Scoob

Yeah, just like the 1995 Devils who went on to win 2 more Cups in the next 8 years - as well as 2 more Cup appearances in 2001 & 2012 - to show they weren't a 1-year fluke.

I think a shortened schedule is fine and I think that's what we're going to get, a la 1995. At the end of the day, I think the owners know they can't have two full cancelled seasons of hockey inside of a decade without some sort of financial repercussion. I don't think the issues are worthy of nuking the season and I think the owners do know that and are just trying to squeeze every last bit that they can out of the union. Involving Jacobs is a naked attempt to antagonize the union and reeks of desperation.

I'm also willing to bet more than one hockey writer has a column, pre-written, on a hard drive stating how much more enjoyable a shorter regular season is compared to a full 82 game schedule and how a shorter regular season should be adopted going forward (even though a shorter schedule will likely never happen).

Shortened season is bogus and the Cup winner should have an * next to the team name.
- Scoob

As I noted in the blog today, the 1994-95 division winners were the Flyers (Atlantic), Quebec (Northeast, four points ahead of Pittsburgh), Detroit (Central) and Calgary (Pacific).

After the season, Quebec became the Colorado Avalanche and were placed in the Pacific Division. In 1995-96, the division winners were the Flyers, Pittsburgh, Detroit and Colorado.

The Devils won the Cup in 1995 and would go on to a couple more with largely the same nucleus of players.

The shortened season really meant little in terms of skewing which teams rose to the top. No asterisk necessary.

Shortened season is bogus and the Cup winner should have an * next to the team name.
- Scoob

Would you still want the asterisk if it was Clode who ended up hoisting the Cup?

if the season is canceled does edmonton get another #1 pick

if the season is canceled does edmonton get another #1 pick
- Philly1980

no pittsburg will get the first pick

As I noted in the blog today, the 1994-95 division winners were the Flyers (Atlantic), Quebec (Northeast, four points ahead of Pittsburgh), Detroit (Central) and Calgary (Pacific).

After the season, Quebec became the Colorado Avalanche and were placed in the Pacific Division. In 1995-96, the division winners were the Flyers, Pittsburgh, Detroit and Colorado.

The Devils won the Cup in 1995 and would go on to a couple more with largely the same nucleus of players.

The shortened season really meant little in terms of skewing which teams rose to the top. No asterisk necessary.
- bmeltzer

The only (short-lived) "justification" was that the Devils missed the playoffs in 1996.

Yeah, just like the 1995 Devils who went on to win 2 more Cups in the next 8 years - as well as 2 more Cup appearances in 2001 & 2012 - to show they weren't a 1-year fluke.
- Flyskippy

A has nothing to do with B, nor did I disparage the Devils with my comment.

The only (short-lived) "justification" was that the Devils missed the playoffs in 1996.
- Flyskippy

Yup. But the Devils had made it to overtime of Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals the year before they won the Cup. Even in 1996, I thought it was flukier that they missed the playoffs that year (essentially because they got SO caught up in trapping they totally forgot they needed to score some goals, too).

As I noted in the blog today, the 1994-95 division winners were the Flyers (Atlantic), Quebec (Northeast, four points ahead of Pittsburgh), Detroit (Central) and Calgary (Pacific).

After the season, Quebec became the Colorado Avalanche and were placed in the Pacific Division. In 1995-96, the division winners were the Flyers, Pittsburgh, Detroit and Colorado.

The Devils won the Cup in 1995 and would go on to a couple more with largely the same nucleus of players.

The shortened season really meant little in terms of skewing which teams rose to the top. No asterisk necessary.
- bmeltzer

Yes, I read the blog. Always read yours.

I still think it's bogus and asterisk worthy because it's not a full season.

As I said above, my opinion isn't a condemnation of the Devils for winning the Cup that season. They played the cards dealt to them. I just don't like that the deck was missing nearly half the cards.

Would you still want the asterisk if it was Clode who ended up hoisting the Cup?
- BulliesPhan87

Yes.

Yes, I read the blog. Always read yours.

I still think it's bogus and asterisk worthy because it's not a full season.

As I said above, my opinion isn't a condemnation of the Devils for winning the Cup that season. They played the cards dealt to them. I just don't like that the deck was missing nearly half the cards.
- Scoob

Lebron James finally won his championship but it wasn't a full season...

asterisk*

Yes.
- Scoob

you would still party like it's the last day on earth as the Mayans have told us

no pittsburg will get the first pick
- phi1671

wouldnt surprise me......

you would still party like it's the last day on earth as the Mayans have told us
- phi1671

Well, I'd be happy they won but I'd still think it would be an asterisk worthy accomplishment.

Well, I'd be happy they won but I'd still think it would be an asterisk worthy accomplishment.
- Scoob

Meh. Phillies fans were told their 2008 WS win was of less value than others because of their opponents that post-season. For instance, they did not have to face the Yankees.

Never mind that they beat the team the Yankees could not.

Sports fans...