Ducks during lockout

Thread for where they will be playing during the lockout.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1-Andy McDonald: ERC Ingolstadt-German League

2-Vitaly Vishnevski: Khimik Voskresensk-Russia

3-Petr Sykora: Metallurg-Russia

4-Kurtis Foster: Cincinnati AHL

5-J.S. Giguere: Hamburg-Germany (signed 1/28/05)

6-Sergei Fedorov: Played for World Stars tour of Europe December 1-21.

7-Samuel Pahlsson: Frölunda-Sweden

8-Martin Skoula: Litvinov-Czech Republic

9-Steve Rucchin-Signed with hc Cortina Italy December 29th.

10-Mike Leclerc-hockey news says: "Raring to go after knee surgery."

11-Rob Niedermayer- Hungary 1/18/05, http://www.fradihoki.hu/

12-Garrett Burnett: WHA tournament May 20, 2005
Danbury, UHL (player/assistant coach), claimed off waivers by Flint of the UHL, 1/28/05.

13-Ruslan Salei: AK Bars Kazan-Russia

14-Keith Carney-hockey news says: "Tracking his four young kids instead of NHL scorers."

15-Sandis Ozolinsh-hockey news says: "Residing with his family in Southern California."

16-Lance Ward-hockey news says: "Waiting it out in his hometown of Lloydminster, Alta."

*all entry contract players are with Cincinnati (AHL) with the exceptions of Ryan Getzlaf (WHL-Calgary Hitmen) and Corey Perry (OHL-London Knights).

And all the little people who depend on the NHL for a living are out of a job. Thank you selfish players. Don't think about all the small businesses around the arena and all the employees at the Pond. Players can go to Europe or the AHL to make some money. A lot of peoples are now on the unemployment line looking for work so they can feed their familes. This really pisses me off. European teams should not allow these idiots to play in Europe. I'm sure there are players in Europe going to lose their jobs as well. And these guys probably don't have millions saved.

so...
i guess we can always play hockey on ps2..lol

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=104166

Sweden
Frölunda - Samuel Påhlsson
Ex Duck:
Södertälje - Niclas Hävelid

Czech Republic
Litvinov - Martin Skoula
Ex Duck:
Ceske Budejovice - Vaclav Prospal (Tier II)

Switzerland
Ex Duck:
Langnau – Martin Gerber

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=99003

Sergei Fedorov has been contacted about doing a tour with other NHL stars acrossed Europe

Isnt Krog in Austria somewhere?

Isnt Krog in Austria somewhere?

yeah ex Duck Krog signed with Villach, Austria August 26th.

yeah, Krog plays for VSV Villach
forgot about him

Any news on Rucchin, Leclerc, Niedermayer, Burnett, Salei, Carney, Ozolinsh, Ward, Foster, Giguere?

Everyone else is either Entry Contract guys with Cincy(AHL) or have already signed in Europe.

Salei and Ozolinsh I would think are going to sign in Europe.

Carney might be taking more time off to rest.

Foster is OSHL bound

www.oshl.ca

yeah, Krog plays for VSV Villach
forgot about him
I still do not know anything sure, but VSV fans believe, the deal is permanent, no lockout-deal.

Vitaly Vishnevski is in Russia, playing for Khimik. He scored a PP goal today as his team fell to Lada Togliatti. Lada has several NHL players, Alexander Semin (Capitals), Viktor Kozlov (Panthers), Jussi Markkanen (Rangers), plus former Red Wing Yuri Butsayev, Montreal prospect Alexander Buturlin and Wings prospect Igor Grigorenko.

Khimik has fomer NHLer Petr Skudra in goal (Canucks) with former NHLers German Titov (Ducks) and Valery Kamensky (pick a team) on offense. They also picked up Slava Kozlov (Thrashers) to play under a similar arrangement as Vishnevski.

To finish up I just wanted to say that this has nothing to do with selfish players. People are just being misled by Gary Bettman's campaign of lies and deception. The owners are locking players out of the league. Not the other way around. Players would love to kick off the season on time. Moreover, players have agreed to substantial concessions in a form of a soft cap. But Bettman wouldn't listen to any of it. He wants his hard cap and he doesn't care how long the lockout will last because he is going to be paid in full regardless. And that's reportedly somewhere around $3 million.

The owners and Bettman got themselves into this mess and now they are out to destroy NHL. People should be angry with them and not the players. Regardless of what Bettman says this is a classic managers vs labor conflict. And I for one will always be on the side of labor.

Foster is OSHL bound

www.oshl.ca

He isn't playing for Cincy because he would have had to pass through waivers?

:dunno: :dunno:

I'm not completely sure of the waiver rules, due to the fact I don't have accurate information on when Foster first signed an NHL contract. However, with 5 NHL games to his credit, I can't see him not being able to pass through waivers....

Also, Giguere is helping sick kids in Quebec during the lockout. Joel Bouchard, a defenseman for the Rangers came up with the idea. Jose Theodore, Patrick Lalime and Marc Denis are also expected to participate in the four-team, non-checking four-on-four "barnstorming tour". Play is supposed to begin in late October. Expect a larger announcement next week or check out this article (http://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/09/18/sections/sports/pro/article_245301.php) in the OC Register for more informatuon.

That leaves Rucchin,Leclerc,Salei,Burnett,Carney,Ozolinsh,Nied ermayer,Ward.

When you hear about any of those 8 post it here and I'll add to the list at the top of the thread. :)

All these other leagues is why the CBA won't be resolved anytime soon. in MLB they didn't have these outlets, in football they didn't either.

This is going to be a long winter, I despise Bob Goodenow and Gary Bettman.

I gurantee you there will be a season in 05-06. However, it will be played by replacement players and young prospects. The NHL will be damaged for a long time if there is an impasse. I think we all have to ask, will we still be watching hockey?

I will be. I don't even like most of the NHL Ducks anyway, so bring on the replacements, baby.

I will be. I don't even like most of the NHL Ducks anyway, so bring on the replacements, baby.

yeah I mostly only like the young players. I won't miss the Sykoras and Fedorovs.

Well, it's something that both sides can be blamed for. When you get so angry at the players, just temember that this current agreement is one that the OWNERS came up with after the last lock out.

Last I heard about Ozolinsh was that he was with his team in Latvia of mostly 40+ players. This is a team he owns from what I heard. It's some of the work he does in his country to try and get hockey going and getting the revenue for the country that is needed. A lot of his money is put to some very needed projects, he is not just wasting it all. There are many charities he supports.

Well, it's something that both sides can be blamed for. When you get so angry at the players, just temember that this current agreement is one that the OWNERS came up with after the last lock out.

Yeah, that's how it went. The owners came up with the whole thing and the union just said "okay".

It was totally one-sided. The owners didn't cave or anything.

Yeah, that's how it went. The owners came up with the whole thing and the union just said "okay".

It was totally one-sided. The owners didn't cave or anything.
They kept renewing the agreement and seemed pretty happy with it. I don't remember the owners complaining when it was a done deal the last time, maybe you recall differently but it seemed to me the owners were pretty happy with the way the agreement turned out!!!!! Or so they said!!!!

To finish up I just wanted to say that this has nothing to do with selfish players. People are just being misled by Gary Bettman's campaign of lies and deception. The owners are locking players out of the league. Not the other way around. Players would love to kick off the season on time. Moreover, players have agreed to substantial concessions in a form of a soft cap. But Bettman wouldn't listen to any of it. He wants his hard cap and he doesn't care how long the lockout will last because he is going to be paid in full regardless. And that's reportedly somewhere around $3 million.

The owners and Bettman got themselves into this mess and now they are out to destroy NHL. People should be angry with them and not the players. Regardless of what Bettman says this is a classic managers vs labor conflict. And I for one will always be on the side of labor.

First, you really show your colors when you characterize the league's position as "Bettman's campaign of lies and deception". Instead of engaging in baseless rhetoric, why don't you concentrate on the facts? If you think Bettman's lying, why don't you spell out the lies?

Is it your position that the vast majority of teams in the NHL are NOT losing money? If so, what facts, if any, do you have to substantiate your position?

Are you aware of the how much players' salaries have risen compared to the rise in team revenues (which, to a large extent, come from ticket sales)?

Do you honestly think Edmonton can compete with the Rangers or the Red Wings when it comes to shelling out big bucks for marquee players?

If the NFL and the NBA---both of which have larger fan bases than the NHL---have salary caps, why shouldn't the NHL?

Is there any doubt in your mind that hockey in the number 4 sport in North America? (Sometimes we diehard hockey fans seem to lose sight of that fact.)

I may be wrong, but I don't remember the NHLPA offering up a proposal that included a "soft cap". Hasn't the NHLPA been intransigent in its opposition to any form of a salary cap?

If a prolonged work stoppage causes the NHL to contract several franchises, do you think the NHLPA will acknowledge that its unwillingness to budge caused a number of its members to lose their jobs?

If you're "always on the side of labor", aren't you acknowledging that you're incapable of looking at this issue objectively?

I gurantee you there will be a season in 05-06. However, it will be played by replacement players and young prospects. The NHL will be damaged for a long time if there is an impasse. I think we all have to ask, will we still be watching hockey?

If you look at the history of using "replacement players" during lockouts or strikes in professional sports in the U.S., it has been an unmitigated disaster. As a Ducks season-ticket holder, I'll be damned if I'm going to pay top dollar to see a bunch of replacement players. If I'm going to be force-fed minor league hockey, I'm not even that interested in watching it at minor league prices.

They kept renewing the agreement and seemed pretty happy with it. I don't remember the owners complaining when it was a done deal the last time, maybe you recall differently but it seemed to me the owners were pretty happy with the way the agreement turned out!!!!! Or so they said!!!!

The owners biggest mistake was renewing the last CBA twice during a period in which salaries were spiralling.

If I'm going to be force-fed minor league hockey, I'm not even that interested in watching it at minor league prices.

I'd gladly watch the Cincy Baby Ducks with Lupul, Chistov, Glencross, etc. for 10 bucks a game!!

With the lock out, I think a lot of die hard hockey fans will be finding their fix watching the minor leagues. It's great hockey at a much more reasonable price.
The NHL better worry that a lot of fans may become attached to the minors.

First, you really show your colors when you characterize the league's position as "Bettman's campaign of lies and deception". Instead of engaging in baseless rhetoric, why don't you concentrate on the facts? If you think Bettman's lying, why don't you spell out the lies?

Is it your position that the vast majority of teams in the NHL are NOT losing money? If so, what facts, if any, do you have to substantiate your position?

Are you aware of the how much players' salaries have risen compared to the rise in team revenues (which, to a large extent, come from ticket sales)?

Do you honestly think Edmonton can compete with the Rangers or the Red Wings when it comes to shelling out big bucks for marquee players?

If the NFL and the NBA---both of which have larger fan bases than the NHL---have salary caps, why shouldn't the NHL?

Is there any doubt in your mind that hockey in the number 4 sport in North America? (Sometimes we diehard hockey fans seem to lose sight of that fact.)

I may be wrong, but I don't remember the NHLPA offering up a proposal that included a "soft cap". Hasn't the NHLPA been intransigent in its opposition to any form of a salary cap?

If a prolonged work stoppage causes the NHL to contract several franchises, do you think the NHLPA will acknowledge that its unwillingness to budge caused a number of its members to lose their jobs?

If you're "always on the side of labor", aren't you acknowledging that you're incapable of looking at this issue objectively?


Yes, I always show my colors. I don't see anything wrong with being clear about where I stand. And I am not engaging in any baseless rhetoric. That's just an assumption on your part.

It's basically a fact that NHLPA approached the league with a soft cap proposal and was willing to make substantial concessions that would reduce the average player salary. Bettman acknowledged as much in his lockout speech and Trevor Linden pointed it out in his guest article in THN.

But at the same time Bettman is blatantly lying in the media that NHLPA's position is to preserve the status quo. Preserving status quo means not wanting to change anything from the way it is. And that is obviously not the case here. NHLPA was ready for a compromise.

And the league has made an organized effort to make people believe that it's the players' fault that there will be no NHL hockey this year. Once again, deception. The league has been getting ready for this for a long time. They put a so called war chest together. And while the supposedly greedy players are locked out, Bettman will be paid his full salary. Which is reportedly in the neighborhood of $3 million.

And what did the players do wrong here? They simply benefited from a free market system. And the only reason that happened is because owners drove the salaries up through their own foolishness and mismanagement.

Bettman tried to put more revenue into owners' pockets by continually expanding the league. The last 4 teams paid $80 million each to join. Who in their right mind would pay that kind of money right now for any of Thrashers, Wild, Predators, or Blue Jackets??? Who would pay half that?

In the meantime, overexpansion introduced 100 new regular jobs into a market where the talent pool was already pretty thin. That created sharp demand for skilled players and raised salaries.

If that wasn't enough, idiot managers like Neil Smith in NY, started throwing money like it was their job at anything that resembled a decent player. It started with offer sheets to Sakic and Fedorov and escalated into ridiculous offers to such brutal signings like over the hill winger Valery Kamensky and certified nut job Theo Fleury. Nobody held a gun to their head. Moreover, any smart and sane manager would exercise fiscal responsibility, which NHL managers and owners know nothing about.

If they did, the league would not be in this bad a shape. So owners are as much, if not more to blame for the lockout. Yet Bettman once again is misleading the public by saying that the players won something and now their decisive victory hurt the league really bad. The truth is that the owners hurt themselves.

As for NBA and NFL having hard caps, the THN had a study on that in a recent issue. The caps did not solve the problem of escalating player salaries and do not appear to be the answer.

However, NFL and NBA have sufficient revenue streams to balance out the salaries. NHL does not. And that's the biggest problems. Once again NHL has created its own problems by expanding too fast into Florida, California, Arizona and moving teams to small markets like Carolina that are just not viable for this game.

Number 4 sport in North America??? Who's kidding who here? The truth of it is that NHL has fallen far below even that dubious honor in terms of viewer interest. Racing, bowling, golf and even figure skating all get better ratings than a regular NHL game.

The question is why. And the answer is because Bettman, in his mindless pursuit for a bigger slice of the sports entertainment pie, ruined the game by changing the rules to decrease scoring and root out fighting. No scoring and no fighting. And no fan base either because that's what people want to see.

Add to that a putrid marketing campaign and it's no wonder the league is ready to change its logo and is basically paying NBC to show hockey games.

I think that spells out the facts pretty well. It's not about objectivity. It's about the truth. Sure the league is in trouble. But more people in higher positions need to speak out about why it is in trouble and who got it there.

And there would be nothing wrong with contraction. In fact, I have been in favor of contraction for a few years now. What's so horrible about it? Nothing. In fact, it's the real solution to the problem at hand. A smart businessman always knows when to cut his losses. The first loss is always the best loss. Take it, get it over with and move forward from there. Nobody will miss the Hurricanes, the Panthers, the Lightning, the Coyotes, and maybe even the Ducks.

Close down the franchises that are struggling to survive, right the imbalance in the market between demand and supply and the league would again be healthy.

A hard cap is just a way to make player salaries more or less of a fixed expense for the owners. All the ******** about partnership with the players is just that. The owners want cost certainty. Or in other words they want to make sure they make a buck. And they want to achieve that through regulation. So much for free enterprise.

Nobody will miss the Hurricanes, the Panthers, the Lightning, the Coyotes, and maybe even the Ducks.

Close down the franchises that are struggling to survive, right the imbalance in the market between demand and supply and the league would again be healthy.

A hard cap is just a way to make player salaries more or less of a fixed expense for the owners. All the ******** about partnership with the players is just that. The owners want cost certainty. Or in other words they want to make sure they make a buck. And they want to achieve that through regulation. So much for free enterprise.
First, there's plenty of people who will miss those teams. Second, why shouldn't the owners want to make sure they can make a buck? Isn't that the point of a free enterprise system? They need to regulate player's salaries if they are going to do that. It's a business.

But at the same time Bettman is blatantly lying in the media that NHLPA's position is to preserve the status quo. Preserving status quo means not wanting to change anything from the way it is. And that is obviously not the case here. NHLPA was ready for a compromise.

No they weren't. The point the league is trying to change is the unchecked growth of players' salaries out of proportion with revenues. A one-time rollback or a ridiculously easy luxury tax does nothing to change that. The status quo would be preserved.

A hard cap is just a way to make player salaries more or less of a fixed expense for the owners. All the ******** about partnership with the players is just that. The owners want cost certainty. Or in other words they want to make sure they make a buck.

They're owners. What kind of a gigantic ass of a businessman wouldn't want to make a buck. Players aren't entrepreneurs and they're not bearing any financial risk. They're employees.

The owners made a lousy deal and they lived with it, stupidly, but there was no lockout before - the deal was honored. That doesn't mean they have to endlessly repeat their mistake. There's no cookie-cutter approach to bargaining. Live and learn. Owners have every right to try and control their costs by whatever means they can negotiate.

No they weren't. The point the league is trying to change is the unchecked growth of players' salaries out of proportion with revenues. A one-time rollback or a ridiculously easy luxury tax does nothing to change that. The status quo would be preserved.



They're owners. What kind of a gigantic ass of a businessman wouldn't want to make a buck. Players aren't entrepreneurs and they're not bearing any financial risk. They're employees.

The owners made a lousy deal and they lived with it, stupidly, but there was no lockout before - the deal was honored. That doesn't mean they have to endlessly repeat their mistake. There's no cookie-cutter approach to bargaining. Live and learn. Owners have every right to try and control their costs by whatever means they can negotiate.
You make some very valid points there CFOB...very good read. Thanks.

If the NFL and the NBA---both of which have larger fan bases than the NHL---have salary caps, why shouldn't the NHL?


I don't think the NFL is really comparable to hockey given their lack of guaranteed contracts, but the NBA is certainly. The fact you fail to mention is that it took a lengthly lockout by the owners in 1998 for the NBA to get to their current agreement. With millions of dollars on the line neither side is going to give in easily, even if they should.

First, there's plenty of people who will miss those teams. Second, why shouldn't the owners want to make sure they can make a buck? Isn't that the point of a free enterprise system? They need to regulate player's salaries if they are going to do that. It's a business.


Of course, each team has its die hard fans. But there isn't nearly enough of them to keep some of these franchises financially viable.

Everybody wants to make a buck. The desire to make a buck doesn't make one a businessman. It's the ability to make a buck that does. And free enterprise system does not involve regulation. The words "regulation" and "free" exclude each other. If there is regulation, the system can't be free. Moreover, it's one thing for a third party to regulate the market system. And it's a whole other thing for one of the participants in the market system to force regulation for own benefit.

And free enterprise system does not involve regulation. The words "regulation" and "free" exclude each other.

By that defination, a true free enterprise system does not exist in this world.

Moreover, it's one thing for a third party to regulate the market system. And it's a whole other thing for one of the participants in the market system to force regulation for own benefit.

You obviously didn't see the recent strike by the super market union in SoCal first hand, because that's exactly what unions and owners do. Its the whole point in having a union in the first place.

No they weren't. The point the league is trying to change is the unchecked growth of players' salaries out of proportion with revenues. A one-time rollback or a ridiculously easy luxury tax does nothing to change that. The status quo would be preserved.

Once again, a desire for a compromise is not preseving the status quo. And the league is deceiving the fans by saying otherwise. Their logic is ludicrous. Just because a proposed change doesn't solve the problem doesn't mean that a party wants to leave things exactly the way they are, which is what preserving the status quo really means.

Using Bettman's logic, instituting the cap would also be preserving the status quo. The cap did not stop salaries from escalating in either NBA or NFL. So there is no evidence that it would do so for the NHL. And if it's not the solution to the problem than I guess it's also preserving the status quo.

They're owners. What kind of a gigantic ass of a businessman wouldn't want to make a buck. Players aren't entrepreneurs and they're not bearing any financial risk. They're employees.

The owners made a lousy deal and they lived with it, stupidly, but there was no lockout before - the deal was honored. That doesn't mean they have to endlessly repeat their mistake. There's no cookie-cutter approach to bargaining. Live and learn. Owners have every right to try and control their costs by whatever means they can negotiate.

Everyone wants to make a buck. Like I said in my other reply, it doesn't make one a businessman. It's the ability to make the buck that does. And when someone doesn't have that ability, they go out of business. That's what real entrepreneurs are faced with. And that's what should happen to the franchises that can't make it. They should be allowed to die, not kept afloat through artificial regulatory systems.

Nobody said that owners don't have the right to lock out the players. But Bettman is saying that they had no other choice. And that's just more lies. And now they are getting an unfair labor practicies charge filed against them by the union. Which is yet another indication that Bettman and the owners have a pretty big vendetta against the players and this whole lockout is not about financial health for the league, but about sticking it to the players. I am impressed that Bettman can keep a straight face saying that the owners don't begrudge the players anything. But I guess that's what it takes to be a lawyer.

It's good to hear from you Mr. Linden:

Why would Bettman and the owners want to stick it to the players? As a fan, I'm mad at this situation too, but this isn't just a pissing contest.

I think it's kind of necessary anyway...The players make 75% of the revenue in the NHL. In the other major pro sports leagues, (all which draw in way more cash) the % earned by the players is 63%, 58%, and 64%, for the MLB, NBA, and NFL. That alone says a lot to me. It is the owners fault, but they don't have to put up with it, it's they're business after all. The players are employees and should deal with it.

The problem with this dispute, unlike the California supermarket thing is the employees aren't fully replaceable. That's about the only thing the union has going for them.

Next time we see NHL hockey, it will be under a hard cap.

The problem with this dispute, unlike the California supermarket thing is the employees aren't fully replaceable. That's about the only thing the union has going for them.

On the other hand an un-employeed grocery clerk can find 1000 other jobs. How many choices does an out-of-work hockey player have? Especially ones that support a multi-million dollar life style. The hockey players NEED an operating league and that is huge disadvantage for them.

Of course, each team has its die hard fans. But there isn't nearly enough of them to keep some of these franchises financially viable.

Well, if we are really talking about teams that should be eliminated because they are not financially viable, we should include Edmonton, Ottawa, and Buffalo in the conversation.

Everybody wants to make a buck. The desire to make a buck doesn't make one a businessman. It's the ability to make a buck that does. And free enterprise system does not involve regulation. The words "regulation" and "free" exclude each other. If there is regulation, the system can't be free. Moreover, it's one thing for a third party to regulate the market system. And it's a whole other thing for one of the participants in the market system to force regulation for own benefit.

As Hank pointed out, perhaps the textbook tells you that "regulation" and "free enterprise" are mutually exclusive. But that's not the way it works in the real world. The United States is pretty much the original free enterprise system, and there are volumes of regulations in the US. What's wrong with wanting to regulate salaries? Especially if said salaries are causing the business to lose money. You make it sound like NHL players are blue collar laborers. The average NHL player makes 7 figures. Trust me, they are on the side of "labor" by technicality only in my book.

And now they (the owners) are getting an unfair labor practicies charge filed against them by the union. Which is yet another indication that Bettman and the owners have a pretty big vendetta against the players and this whole lockout is not about financial health for the league, but about sticking it to the players.
Having an unfair labor practice charge filed indicates NOTHING to me. (Except that the NHLPA is trying anything to win their case). You tried to point out how our economy works, so try to remember how our judicial system works. Innocent until proven guilty. If and only if the owners are found guilty of unfair labor practice will I start to believe that maybe they've instituted unfair labor practices.

Once again, a desire for a compromise is not preseving the status quo.

A desire for a meaningless compromise is very much preserving the status quo.

And the league is deceiving the fans by saying otherwise. Their logic is ludicrous. Just because a proposed change doesn't solve the problem doesn't mean that a party wants to leave things exactly the way they are, which is what preserving the status quo really means.

Oh. Thank god we defined that semantic insignificance. The problem isn't being solved, but we're compromising by god, so we're doing our part.

You have to be kidding me with this crap.

Using Bettman's logic, instituting the cap would also be preserving the status quo. The cap did not stop salaries from escalating in either NBA or NFL. So there is no evidence that it would do so for the NHL. And if it's not the solution to the problem than I guess it's also preserving the status quo.

:shakehead
Nothing on earth would prevent the escalation of salaries. The point is to keep them in step with revenues.


Everyone wants to make a buck. Like I said in my other reply, it doesn't make one a businessman. It's the ability to make the buck that does. And when someone doesn't have that ability, they go out of business. That's what real entrepreneurs are faced with.

What the? Entrepreneurs do whatever they can to stay in business and make money. No one's going to give a damn about someone's narrow view of what a "real" entrepreneur ought to do.

And that's what should happen to the franchises that can't make it. They should be allowed to die, not kept afloat through artificial regulatory systems.

Why in the world should the owners allow that to happen if they don't have to?

And now they are getting an unfair labor practicies charge filed against them by the union.

Well the union said it, so it must be gospel.

Which is yet another indication that Bettman and the owners have a pretty big vendetta against the players and this whole lockout is not about financial health for the league, but about sticking it to the players.

Yeah. That's it. Gary Bettman is so obsessed with sticking it to the players that not only is he willing to jeopardize the league (not to mention his job), but he also convinced the owners to go along! He's Jim Jones! They're all drinking Bettman Kool Aid and the players are being victimized by extremism.

I am impressed that Bettman can keep a straight face saying that the owners don't begrudge the players anything. But I guess that's what it takes to be a lawyer.

Or a union shill.

Yeah. That's it. Gary Bettman is so obsessed with sticking it to the players that not only is he willing to jeopardize the league (not to mention his job), but he also convinced the owners to go along! He's Jim Jones! They're all drinking Bettman Kool Aid and the players are being victimized by extremism.




:lol

It's good to hear from you Mr. Linden:

Why would Bettman and the owners want to stick it to the players? As a fan, I'm mad at this situation too, but this isn't just a pissing contest.

I think it's kind of necessary anyway...The players make 75% of the revenue in the NHL. In the other major pro sports leagues, (all which draw in way more cash) the % earned by the players is 63%, 58%, and 64%, for the MLB, NBA, and NFL. That alone says a lot to me. It is the owners fault, but they don't have to put up with it, it's they're business after all. The players are employees and should deal with it.

The problem with this dispute, unlike the California supermarket thing is the employees aren't fully replaceable. That's about the only thing the union has going for them.

Next time we see NHL hockey, it will be under a hard cap.

Mr. Linden? I doubt that NHLPA would support contraction, which I believe is the real solution to the problems in hand. The league should go back to being a 26 team league IMHO. That would hurt both players and owners. But it would be the best solution for the fans. The level of hockey would be better. I mean who really thinks that Anders Eriksson is an NHL caliber player anyway? And there's easily 3-4 guys like him on every team, except the high rollers maybe. And on top of that the demand supply balance would be restored. That should help curb salaries without a hard cap.

And I definitely think that the standoff between NHL and NHLPA is just a pissing contest. I just find it easier to relate to the players' side. Owners caused this mess and now Bettman is looking for sympathy from fans through a public campaign that is filled with misrepresentations. But in the end of the day, neither side gives a flying hoot about the fans. Both are looking for ways to get a larger share of the revenue pie.

But for some reason the owners are entitled to making a profit and the players are just employees, so somehow they are not entitled to negotiate the best salaries possible. They should just deal with it.

That doesn't make any sense to me. First off, the owners are not entitled to making a profit. There is no divine right here. If you can run a business, you make a profit. If you can't, you don't. But there is no entitlement to a profit just because you take on the risk of failure. In fact, the entitlement would eliminate any risk.

And secondly, the players as employees are definitely entitled to seek the best financial deal available. After all, any of us would look for the best salary possible and would not offer our services at a reduced rate just to make sure that our employer makes a profit.

Well, if we are really talking about teams that should be eliminated because they are not financially viable, we should include Edmonton, Ottawa, and Buffalo in the conversation.

Perhaps. I would think that reducing the league to 26 teams would do the trick. I'd say goodbye to Pittsburgh, Panthers, Hurricanes, and Thrashers. But I get your point that there are small markets in the North as well as in the South. It's true.


As Hank pointed out, perhaps the textbook tells you that "regulation" and "free enterprise" are mutually exclusive. But that's not the way it works in the real world. The United States is pretty much the original free enterprise system, and there are volumes of regulations in the US. What's wrong with wanting to regulate salaries? Especially if said salaries are causing the business to lose money. You make it sound like NHL players are blue collar laborers. The average NHL player makes 7 figures. Trust me, they are on the side of "labor" by technicality only in my book.

Sure, I go a little bit over the top and NHLers are not blue collar laborers. But that's not really a major point. And yes, there are plenty of regulatory agencies that look after the economy and set business standards. But none of them directly benefit from the regulations they impose. This would not be the case with the NHL imposed salary cap. And that's why it's wrong.

Having an unfair labor practice charge filed indicates NOTHING to me. (Except that the NHLPA is trying anything to win their case). You tried to point out how our economy works, so try to remember how our judicial system works. Innocent until proven guilty. If and only if the owners are found guilty of unfair labor practice will I start to believe that maybe they've instituted unfair labor practices.

I think you got me all wrong on this one. I brought up the charge to illustrate just how much of a pissing contest this really is. But I guess you didn't know what this was about. The union asked the league for a list of players who are locked out, so that they could fill the AHL rosters. And Bettman told them to screw off. This is why the charge was filed. And it just shows the lack of cooperation and the level of animosity between the two entities.

That doesn't make any sense to me. First off, the owners are not entitled to making a profit. There is no divine right here. If you can run a business, you make a profit. If you can't, you don't. But there is no entitlement to a profit just because you take on the risk of failure. In fact, the entitlement would eliminate any risk.

Hello? Hello? Is this thing on?

A desire for a meaningless compromise is very much preserving the status quo.

Why is it meaningless? Because Bettman said so? Then it must be.

Oh. Thank god we defined that semantic insignificance. The problem isn't being solved, but we're compromising by god, so we're doing our part.

That's what a negotiation is, a compromise. And all problems are solved through negotiation. But if one party just wants to force its way, negotiation is not possible. And then the problem is definitely not being solved.

You have to be kidding me with this crap.

Nope. And if you find it all so ridiculous, then may I suggest that you don't read it.

Nothing on earth would prevent the escalation of salaries. The point is to keep them in step with revenues.

Yes, there is. Demand and supply. That's why contraction is a much better solution than a cap. Besides, the owners caused the salaries to escalate to a level they can't support in the first place. So why can't they just be fiscally responsible? After all they are all supposed to be united.

What the? Entrepreneurs do whatever they can to stay in business and make money. No one's going to give a damn about someone's narrow view of what a "real" entrepreneur ought to do.

Narrow view? Couldn't have been broader. All I said is that all businesses deal with a risk of failure and the NHL should be no different. If a team can't survive, let it die. And if a bad management decision was made, then the decision maker should bear the brunt of it, not the employees.

Why in the world should the owners allow that to happen if they don't have to?

A better question is why did they allow it to happen, if they didn't have to.

Well the union said it, so it must be gospel.

A little sarcasm to the rescue, eh?

Yeah. That's it. Gary Bettman is so obsessed with sticking it to the players that not only is he willing to jeopardize the league (not to mention his job), but he also convinced the owners to go along! He's Jim Jones! They're all drinking Bettman Kool Aid and the players are being victimized by extremism.

Gary's job is safe. Don't worry about him. He is getting his full salary and his deal runs through 2008. So with a heavy heart he fired 50% of the NHL staff and is using scare tactics to force the salary cap through. Considering his track record, it should work like a charm.

Or a union shill.

You are, but what am I?

Hello? Hello? Is this thing on?

Why do you bother??? You said your piece. If the discussion doesn't interest you any longer, move on.

That's what a negotiation is, a compromise. And all problems are solved through negotiation. But if one party just wants to force its way, negotiation is not possible. And then the problem is definitely not being solved.

Unless of course the the way being forced is the solution and the status quo is the problem...

Besides, the owners caused the salaries to escalate to a level they can't support in the first place. So why can't they just be fiscally responsible? After all they are all supposed to be united.

Uh der. They're in competition with one another. Remember all the rambling you just did about free markets? Now you're saying they should eliminate the free market by mutual unilateral consent (collusion), rather than in a negotaited CBA? That would actually make you feel better?


Narrow view? Couldn't have been broader. All I said is that all businesses deal with a risk of failure and the NHL should be no different. If a team can't survive, let it die.

They're only nonviable in the current system. Rather than going out of business, a better way from their perspective to get themselves in the black is to control their biggest cost. Change the system - there's no reason to be a slave to it.

And if a bad management decision was made, then the decision maker should bear the brunt of it, not the employees.

Where is that written?

A better question is why did they allow it to happen, if they didn't have to.

I don't think anyone is sitting at the negotiating table pondering metaphysics. They have a problem to solve, and the solution isn't going to involve losing money just because they did it once.

No matter how much you'd like to avoid issues by parsing words.

Gary's job is safe. Don't worry about him. He is getting his full salary and his deal runs through 2008. So with a heavy heart he fired 50% of the NHL staff and is using scare tactics to force the salary cap through. Considering his track record, it should work like a charm.

Uh, okay. I don't give a crap about the guy either way. It sounds like you're as obsessed with him as you claim he is with sticking it to the players.

You are, but what am I?

You're an oddity, and I'm going to keep poking you to see what comes oozing out. It's not often you come across someone with half a brain and such a blatant bias.

Perhaps. I would think that reducing the league to 26 teams would do the trick. I'd say goodbye to Pittsburgh, Panthers, Hurricanes, and Thrashers. But I get your point that there are small markets in the North as well as in the South. It's true.

Contraction would solve nothing. The 120 jobs eliminated would cause the Players Union do everything in their power to prevent it. And the owners gain nothing in terms of cost certainty that they want.

I fail to see how contraction helps in this situation.

back under the topic of players during the lockout
here's a link about Giguere's charity league in Quebec

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=99762

cska: Your logic escapes me. I'm as big a proponent of free enterprise as you'll find on these boards. Generally speaking, the less government regulation, the better things will be. But there is a unique aspect to professional sports. Unlike automobile manufacturers, wireless phone companies and virtually any other type of business you can think of, professional sports teams do not benefit when one of their competitors (i.e., another team in the league) goes out of business. In fact, it harms them financially. It might be the only way the New York Rangers will ever win another Stanley Cup, but it won't do them or anyone else any good if they're the last NHL franchise left standing.

That brings up another issue: You seem to think that the economic fate of any NHL franchise is solely and exclusively a function of the business acumen of the owner(s) of that franchise. Nothing could be further from the truth. They're not playing on a level playing field (or should I say the ice surface is tilted and some teams are skating uphill?)

You have to be a genius in Edmonton or Calgary to be able to compete with the Rangers and the Red Wings. No matter how well you market your franchise, you'll never be able to get television and radio revenues that begin to approach the amount the Rangers get. The essence of sports is competition. The more competitive a league is, the more fan interest it will generate.

You say that the owners are not guaranteed to make a profit. Maybe not. But the players have no inherent right to outrageous salaries. Who would be hurt more if the NHL disappeared, the owners or the players?

Why should the least viable of the four major professional sports not have a salary cap when it's more successful brethren all have one? (I don't want to get into a discussion of "hard" caps and "soft" caps. I fully understand the difference.)

I want to see franchises remain in cities like Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa and Buffalo. There's something drastically wrong with the system if about 20 teams in the NHL are losing money. Whether the owners bear some, or all, of the responsibility for that fact is wholly irrelevent.

(Regarding the law suit brought by the NHLPA versus the owners) I think you got me all wrong on this one. I brought up the charge to illustrate just how much of a pissing contest this really is. But I guess you didn't know what this was about. The union asked the league for a list of players who are locked out, so that they could fill the AHL rosters. And Bettman told them to screw off. This is why the charge was filed. And it just shows the lack of cooperation and the level of animosity between the two entities.
Okay, but now you're changing your tune a little bit. In your original post on the matter, you said this...

And now they (the owners) are getting an unfair labor practicies charge filed against them by the union. Which is yet another indication that Bettman and the owners have a pretty big vendetta against the players and this whole lockout is not about financial health for the league, but about sticking it to the players.

You're right, I don't know much about this lawsuit. Nor do I care, as it does not further the negotiation process any, and because it needs to be heard before a court of law before I pass judgement on it.

Anyways, this thread has veered off it's course about talking about what the Ducks players will do during the lockout, so I'll cease posting on this side note. If another thread is devoted to this argument about the lockout, I may post there.

Uh der. They're in competition with one another. Remember all the rambling you just did about free markets? Now you're saying they should eliminate the free market by mutual unilateral consent (collusion), rather than in a negotaited CBA? That would actually make you feel better?

I didn't say anything about collusion. And I fully expect them to compete. You can compete and be fiscally responsible at the same time by not signing Alexei Yashin to a 10 year $90 million deal. And that's just one example. I could've named Holik, Tkachuk, Lapointe, Amonte and at least half a dozen other instances where a franchise just made a bad decision that cost the whole league. And the most ironic thing is that signing these players did not make any of these team competitive.

Uh, okay. I don't give a crap about the guy either way. It sounds like you're as obsessed with him as you claim he is with sticking it to the players.

I wish I could say that it was my claim. But that very same claim is all over the new THN issue. Bettman and the owners want to stick it to the players and the players don't want to yield and give up their positions. Otherwise, why would Bettman be so aggressive towards the union during his speech? That's not a behavior of someone who wants to negotiate.

You're an oddity, and I'm going to keep poking you to see what comes oozing out. It's not often you come across someone with half a brain and such a blatant bias.

All I did was express my view and anyone is free to disagree. Only I am not sure that you disagree. It seems you just find it necessary to nitpick at everything and play devil's advocate all the time. But in the end I suspect you may agree with quite a few of my points. And now you make this into some sort of a lab experiment on your part. Do you always feel it necessary to put people down in a debate?

Contraction would solve nothing. The 120 jobs eliminated would cause the Players Union do everything in their power to prevent it. And the owners gain nothing in terms of cost certainty that they want.

I fail to see how contraction helps in this situation.

The union has no say on the matter. If your firm goes out of business, what can you do except go and work for a different firm? Same here. And the owners would get a benefit from an increased supply of NHL players. Over time that should drive salaries down. Something a salary cap won't do.

But the party that would benefit the most is fans. Because the quality of play would be greatly improved.

Kick Save: All I am saying is that the league is too big and many of the NHL problems are caused by overexpansion. So why not contract? I am not talking about leaving every team to fend for itself. And I understand that it's not a level playing field out there. I fully support revenue sharing to support teams in locations that are not as lucrative as Detroit, Toronto or New York.

But right now there are too many of these locations. And many of these teams have no business to be where they are. Contracting the league back to 26 teams (just as an example) would not harm other teams. You'd just be eliminating the worst of the dead weight that constantly bleeds dry the collective revenue pool. Plus it would create a nice supply of NHL talent that in turn should drive down the salaries. Plus, it would improve the game itself.

My logic is simple. If expanding too quickly hurt the game and the league, then a little contraction might set things right. And coupled with some rule changes and revenue sharing (plus elimination of player arbitration) it could lead to a better and stronger NHL.

Anyways, this thread has veered off it's course about talking about what the Ducks players will do during the lockout, so I'll cease posting on this side note. If another thread is devoted to this argument about the lockout, I may post there.

I didn't mean to start so much noise. I just saw a post putting the blame for the lockout squarely on players' shoulders and I felt that it wasn't right. But in the end, I think we all can agree that it doesn't matter who claims a victory in this standoff, as long as hockey is back and is played at its highest level.

Anaheim's past and future in the NHL:

"Quack, quack."
(waddle, waddle)

BOOM!
(flutter, flutter, flutter)

...
...

Anaheim's past and future in the NHL:

"Quack, quack."
(waddle, waddle)

BOOM!
(flutter, flutter, flutter)

...
...

thank you for the enlightening commentary and imagery, please see yourself out

{All I did was express my view and anyone is free to disagree. Only I am not sure that you disagree. It seems you just find it necessary to nitpick at everything and play devil's advocate all the time. But in the end I suspect you may agree with quite a few of my points. And now you make this into some sort of a lab experiment on your part. Do you always feel it necessary to put people down in a debate?}



Sometimes people HAVE to do that in order to feel superior. You don't think that CFOB would ever DREAM of admitting he is wrong???
I feel that debates can be very helpful and there are times when in debating something you can even be enlightened, but when you try to debate a point with someone who is nothing more than an intellectual bully, you get no where.

There are school yard bullies and then there are internet bullies, people who get a high by insulting and trying to degrade anyone who dares disagree since they see themselves as so superior to everyone else.

I didn't say anything about collusion. And I fully expect them to compete. You can compete and be fiscally responsible at the same time by not signing Alexei Yashin to a 10 year $90 million deal. And that's just one example. I could've named Holik, Tkachuk, Lapointe, Amonte and at least half a dozen other instances where a franchise just made a bad decision that cost the whole league. And the most ironic thing is that signing these players did not make any of these team competitive.

You didn't say the word collusion, but it's what you described. I know you're big on semantics. But, one more time with feeling, the system allowed retarded contracts before, and it still will, only under a cap the penalty for such behavior will make it much less likely. That's staying in business and staying competitive. It would be stupid to live (and die, as you'd like them to) by a mistake if you didn't have to.

All I did was express my view and anyone is free to disagree. Only I am not sure that you disagree. It seems you just find it necessary to nitpick at everything and play devil's advocate all the time. But in the end I suspect you may agree with quite a few of my points. And now you make this into some sort of a lab experiment on your part. Do you always feel it necessary to put people down in a debate?

Only the ones who are deliberately or helplessly stupid.

7 Duck employees laid off...

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-ducks25sep25,1,6961718.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

No Duck fan should be rooting for contraction because most likely it would be our ***** who are contracted. Our friend Horse Toothed Mikey Mo said that he would be fine with contraction as long as he got to keep his 8 million+ salary. Screw the little man, right Horse Tooth?

I honestly don't see where the pro union people are coming from. They seem to think that the owners shouldn't have a system in place that allows them all to make money. The players aren't entitled to 10 million are year to play hockey, how does that grab you?

Only the ones who are deliberately or helplessly stupid.

I'm sure that in your mind, anyone who has the nerve to disagree with you IS stupid, there is no way that you could comprehend the fact that it just may be the other way around.
The minute someone disagrees, you resort to name calling. Interesting!!
:D

Foster signed an AHL contract with Cincy so he is out of the OSHL I assume...

http://www.cincinnatimightyducks.com/

well we are 2 weeks into the lockout...

anyone know if these players have signed deals to play in Europe or N.America?

Rucchin, Leclerc, Niedermayer, Burnett, Salei, Carney and Ward.

Fedorov has apparently committed to playing in the world stars tour of Europe that starts in December.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=100309

Here is another article about J.S. Giguere's charity hockey tour:

starts Oct. 23rd.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=101099

Burnett is playing with the Danbury Trashers of the UHL

http://sportzdomain.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=30489&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Garrett's going to take out the Trash!

yeah, Krog plays for VSV Villach
forgot about him


at the moment he ist the best scorer in our league. and today he scored again. he marked the 1:0 against villach and he has two more periods to go ...

krog made 2 shorthanded goals today. but villach lost anyway 4:2

Ruslan Salei has signed with AK Bars Kazan in Russia

The Oct. 26th issue of Hockey News has team reports for what every NHL player is doing during the lockout. Here are the players for Anaheim who we didn't know about and what Hockey News says they are doing. (basically nothing, which we did know)

Keith Carney: Tracking his four young kids instead of NHL scorers.

Mike Leclerc: Raring to go after knee surgery

Rob Niedermayer: Enjoying the Scenery in Cranbrook, B.C.

Sandis Ozolinsh: Residing with his family in Southern California.

Steve Rucchin: Leading sparsely attended practices at Anaheim rink.

Lance Ward: Waiting it out in his hometown of Lloydminster, Alta.

Saw that....the Rucchin description is the best one in the whole article, independant of team.

Mike Leclerc: Raring to go after knee surgery

Yeah, he's always raring in the offseason.

More on Fedorov's European Tour.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=104941

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=105055&hubName=nhl

Fedorov tour again...

The Worldstars team, made up mostly of players represented by International Management Group, begins a 10-game, seven-country tour on Thursday against Riga 2000, the Baltic country's top club (available on pay-per-view).

The team is excited to play against NHL stars like Sergei Fedorov, Rob Blake, Luc Robitaille, Kris Draper and Glen Murray. The dyed-blond Fedorov got the biggest cheers from fans at practice.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=107433

Elias is joining Sykora with Metallurg

Feds scored a goal today in the World Stars win in Latvia.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=107550

Fedorov played on a line with his brother Fedor during Saturday's game vs. Russia.
Fedor will play for Russia in today's game

Also of interest, the Russia team the WorldStars are playing against is the Rosno Cup team. Ilya Bryzgalov played the first half of the game for Russia.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=107732

"Sergei Fedorov scored with four seconds left in regulation and again in a shootout as the Worldstars defeated Poland's national team 4-3 to cap their 10-game tour of Europe on Wednesday night."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=108933&hubName=nhl

Now he can come back to California and go clubbin with Tara Reid every night.

Don't forget those great music videos... :handclap:

Article on Coach Babcock's charitable work during the lockout.

"Babcock, who has three kids, spends much of his time these days meeting with cancer organizations and people at the Children's Hospital of Orange County. He had a two-hour meeting with the American Cancer Society earlier this week, and more meetings with other organizations are planned."

http://www.mightyducks.com/pressbox/pressBody.asp?id=915

UHL news:

Burnett on a new UHL team.

**Garrett Burnett (F) Claimed off of waivers by Flint 01/28/05

http://www.theuhl.com/cgi-sys/transactions.php

Also George Davis has been put on the 21 day injured list by Kansas City.

I put this in another thread but I'll put it here as well:

J.S. Giguere signs with Hamburg, Germany.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nhl29jan29,1,7284687.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

Elsewhere, optimism seemed to dwindle. Mighty Duck goaltender Jean-Sebastien Giguere, one of the team's union representatives, signed a contract to play in Hamburg, Germany, and planned to fly there Monday.

He said he and his agent, Bob Sauve, "pretty much viewed this as the last chance to get a deal done. It's getting pretty late and how much longer can we go and have a season that is meaningful? I see this as being over."

**Garrett Burnett (F) Claimed off of waivers by Flint 01/28/05


**Garrett Burnett (F) Placed on team suspension 01/31/05

http://www.theuhl.com/cgi-sys/transactions.php

He probably didn't show up in Flint after getting claimed off waivers.

Ruslan Salei has signed with AK Bars Kazan in Russia
Geez...how many NHLer's do they have?

AK Bars Kazan Denis Arkhipov Nashville RUS
AK Bars Kazan Fred Brathwaite Columbus CAN
AK Bars Kazan Darius Kasparaitis N.Y. Rangers RUS
AK Bars Kazan Nikolai Khabibulin Tampa Bay RUS
AK Bars Kazan Ilya Kovalchuk Atlanta RUS
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Kovalev Montreal RUS
AK Bars Kazan Vincent Lecavalier Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Morozov Pittsburgh RUS
AK Bars Kazan Brad Richards Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Ruslan Salei Anaheim BLR
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Zhitnik Buffalo RUS

AK Bars Kazan Denis Arkhipov Nashville RUS
AK Bars Kazan Fred Brathwaite Columbus CAN
AK Bars Kazan Darius Kasparaitis N.Y. Rangers RUS
AK Bars Kazan Nikolai Khabibulin Tampa Bay RUS
AK Bars Kazan Ilya Kovalchuk Atlanta RUS
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Kovalev Montreal RUS
AK Bars Kazan Vincent Lecavalier Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Morozov Pittsburgh RUS
AK Bars Kazan Brad Richards Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Ruslan Salei Anaheim BLR
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Zhitnik Buffalo RUS
10. Yeah that's quite a few.

http://www.sandiegogulls.com/news/?cat=1&id=416

"The San Diego Gulls have agreed to terms with NHL veteran Dave Karpa, head coach Martin St. Amour announced on Saturday. Per club policy, terms of the deal were not disclosed. Karpa, who began skating with the team Wednesday, will be available to play Saturday night against the Fresno Falcons.

Karpa, 33, has played 557 career games in the NHL with the Quebec Nordiques, Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, Carolina Hurricanes and New York Rangers, notching 98 points (18g, 80a) and 1,374 penalty minutes. He’s also appeared in 19 playoff games in the NHL, registering two points (1g, 1a) and 39 penalty minutes."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm surprised he is only 33. I would have thought he was closer to 40.

AK Bars Kazan Denis Arkhipov Nashville RUS
AK Bars Kazan Fred Brathwaite Columbus CAN
AK Bars Kazan Darius Kasparaitis N.Y. Rangers RUS
AK Bars Kazan Nikolai Khabibulin Tampa Bay RUS
AK Bars Kazan Ilya Kovalchuk Atlanta RUS
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Kovalev Montreal RUS
AK Bars Kazan Vincent Lecavalier Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Morozov Pittsburgh RUS
AK Bars Kazan Brad Richards Tampa Bay CAN
AK Bars Kazan Ruslan Salei Anaheim BLR
AK Bars Kazan Alexei Zhitnik Buffalo RUS

They also signed Dany Heatley, impressive! They're good enough to win a Stanley Cup, but even moe impressive is the fact that they're NOT the best team in the RSL.

what they would have done if the season was started last week...replacing your top 2 lines isn't that easy, i think :)

2005. február 15.
Ellátták Niedermayer sérülését

A mária utcai szemklinikán látták el a délutáni edzésen megsérült Rob Niedermayert. A kanadai csatárt egy felpattanó korong a szeménél sértette meg. Az orvosok három öltéssel varrták össze a felrepedt szemöldököt. A vizsgálat kiderítette, hogy nagyobb baj nem történt, de a játékos holnapi pályára lépése kérdéses, mert a baleset következményeként valószínűleg csúnyán be fog dagadni a szeme.

Well...i translated it online, so i didn't get all the infomations...but Rob got hit by a puck in his face...he did not play the first playoff game

from nhlpa, follow your ducks in europe...

Sergei Fedorov: Spartak Moscow, Second Division/Russia (www.spartak.ru)
Jean-Sebastien Giguere: Hamburg Freezers, Deutsche Eishockey Liga/Germany (www.hamburg-freezers.de/)
Jason Krog: EC VSV, Ersta Bank Liga EHL, Austria (www.ecvsv.at)
Andy McDonald: ERC Ingolstadt, Deutsche Eishockey Liga/Germany (www.erc-ingolstadt.de/html/index.php)
Sami Pahlsson: Vastra Frolunda Indians H, Elitserien/Sweden (www.frolundaindians.com/)
Steve Rucchin: SG Cortina, Italian Serie/Italy (www.sgcortina.org/index.php)
Ruslan Salei: AK Bars Kazan, Russian Super League/Russia (site unavailable)
Petr Schastlivy: Lokomotiv Mognitogorsk, Russian Super League/Russia (site unavailable)
Petr Sykora: Metallurg Magnitogorsk, Russian Super League/Russia (site unavailable)
Vitaly Vishnevsky: Khimik Voskresenks, Russian Super League/Russia (site unavailable)

And, for those interested, here are a few recent Ducks abroad:

Martin Gerber: Farjestads BK, Elitserien/Sweden (www.farjestadsbk.se)
Niclas Havelid: Sodertalje SK, Elitserien/Sweden (www.sodertaljesk.se/)
Craig Johnson: Hamburg Freezers, Deutsche Eishockey Liga/Germany (www.hamburg-freezers.de/)
Vinny Prospal: HC Ceske Budejovice, 1 Liga/Czech Republic (www.hokejcb.cz/)
Todd Simpson: Herning IK/Denmark (www.herningbluefox.dk)

by the way, Prospal had 80 Points in 35 games :) just in the 2nd highest league though

Steve Rucchin: SG Cortina, Italian Serie/Italy (www.sgcortina.org/index.php)


There was an article today in the london free press on Steve Rucchin. He is curently here skating with the University of Western and plans to play in the alumni game. He has had offers from europe and he talks about going there in late july, start of august when they start there season.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/Sports/2005/02/18/934574-sun.html

http://www.worldhockeyassociation.net/news/20050306000.php

WHA Tournament in Late May.

Garrett Burnett will be there.

former Duck Jason Krog will play in the tournament also.

Jonathan Hedström is really tearing up in Sweden. He scored another two goals yesterday to give Timrå a victory and equal the series, 3-3, vs Djurgården. He has been one of the best two-way forwards in the leauge all season, his development this season have been impressive. He also showed last year his play is good enough for international play. Hedström is more or less a lock for the WC IMO, ahead of NHL experienced players such as Nils Ekman, Marcus Nilson, Christian Berglund and Mikael Samuelsson.