haha, crosby clarifies his position. who'd have thought??

[Slats432]

I think Trevor Linden and members of the executive committee gave them a call, explained the ramifications of their statements, what their positions were, and these players saw the issues in a more enlightened manner. I certainly dont think you could successfully threaten everyone of them. What leverage do you suppose they had that gave them 100% success in persuading these guys? Logic and facts seems the only one that would work to me.

Wouldnt Steve Thomas be more likely to get a contract if he sided with the owners right now?

Which union do you know does or is well advised to encourage their members to be scabs. Why would any action they take in this light be surprising or worthy of the nonsense being posted about it by many fans here.

I don't want to get into this with you because you don't see the truth.

Not once has a player ever said that he spoke with someone and was educated on the issues and has a different point of view. This is simple human behavior.

Instead of saying this, they say..."duh, I misunderstood the question."

And in this whole situation, the person I respect most is Pierre Daigenais. He said his piece and never retracted it...just said that he now understood all the issues and had nothing more to say other than he supports his union.

 

[thinkwild]

Its going to be awfully hard for you to go back to cheering the players on your team, isnt it Iconoclast.

 

[thinkwild]

I don't want to get into this with you because you don't see the truth.

Not once has a player ever said that he spoke with someone and was educated on the issues and has a different point of view. This is simple human behavior.

Instead of saying this, they say..."duh, I misunderstood the question."

And in this whole situation, the person I respect most is Pierre Daigenais. He said his piece and never retracted it...just said that he now understood all the issues and had nothing more to say other than he supports his union.

Well since you have chosen to get in this with me, I can only wonder where the link is that shows the: duh ... quote. Oh that was Kolnik with the alleged translation problem. I dont see how Crosby was any different from Dagenais or Madden. All these guys want to play. Hate having to go through this. But such is their fate. Players before them didnt personally benefit so they could. And similarly they will. And once they all see the issues in perspective, they all sing the same song.

I guess not getting into it with me, is a convenient way of saying you cant think of a reason that all players could be strongarmed into changing their position. Do you think Goodenow threatened their wives or childrens lives? What leverage could he have that would make them change their mind? Truth maybe? Of course not your truth, I mean the other truth.

But, I dont blame you, it will be easier to cheer the players again if you think they were all just fooled by the evil Goodenow and didnt really know what they were doing. They were threatened to say the say things they did, they didnt really mean it.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Its going to be awfully hard for you to go back to cheering the players on your team, isnt it Iconoclast.

No, not at all. I cheer for the TEAM. The jersey means more to me than any one individual wearing it. Players come and go, the jersey remains the same. I guess this is why I like junior hockey and college football. You don't get a chance to have a bunch of primadonnas who hold the fans hostage at some point. They are gone in four years no matter what. The jersey and the goals of the team are what matter the most.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

So what's your point? The players don't have other sources of income? They don't own other businesses themselves or have investments made for them by their agents? You want to argue apples and apples, please do so. Look at the guys that are whining and crying the most and what they have on their side of the balance sheet? A lot of these players throw their money around frivolously and are glorified for it. How many of these guys blow their money on fast cars and easy women? How many of them blow the money down the crapper on poor investments like restaurants? How about one brain sugeon who built a golf course in Sweden where you get play for three to four months of the year?

Point is that the players dont earn more than the owners. Some of the players have other buisnesses other than hockey, but none of the owners income comes soley from hockey so it's not really a point to argue which you were. Some of these guys don't have jobs outside of hockey because they earn a nice income from hockey (which obvously people like you are jealous of or pissed off about). Owners complain about losing money as well. You crack me up though. You think the players are glorified for spending lots of money or making bad investments. Don't quite know what reality you live in. And I'm not sure what a brain surgeon with a golf course in Sweden has to do with this.

Conversely, the NHL owners BUILD something and are crucified. They make solid investments that put them into a position where they can buy a hockey franchise. They have companies that employ hundreds or thousands of people and they get beat up for it. Yes, the owners make a very good living, and by doing so they employ people and give them a chance to make a living. What do the players do? How many people do the players employ? What makes the players such upstanding citizens other than being able to slap a puck around and be arrogant jerks?

No one is cruicifing them for building companies so I dont know where you got that from. And yes they make solid investments, good for them and more power to them. And you just said players have other buisnesses like restaurants, dont you need waiters to run a restaurant? What does employing people have to do with anything? A boss employs a construction worker, how many people does that construction worker employ? Not a very good argument there. Some guys build charities like Brad Richards who gives a box to cancer patients even during the stanley cup finals. What a jerk!

The players are nothing. They are blips on the radar screen that fade to nothing once their playing days are over. Until these players can do something that provides valie to the community they live in (beyond lending their name or writing a check) they are not worth the money they are paid.

These guys have as much obligation to provide community service as you do. Yet when they write checks they help build hospital wings. Horrible people these players when they write these checks. Horrible people that give tickets to sick children so they get out of the hospital and get to see a hockey game. You really hate the players its pretty obvious, pretty sad to have tunnel vision. Some of us can see both sides of the argument and understand both sides. Clearly you don't and are 100% owner no matter what. I really don't have a side, I just want to see hockey. I put blame on both sides because neither will pick up the phone to negotiate. I feel sorry for you that you cant understand the other side of an argument and cant have a decent debate/argument without calling the players names.

 

[Slats432]

Well since you have chosen to get in this with me, I can only wonder where the link is that shows the: duh ... quote. Oh that was Kolnik with the alleged translation problem. I dont see how Crosby was any different from Dagenais or Madden. All these guys want to play. Hate having to go through this. But such is their fate. Players before them didnt personally benefit so they could. And similarly they will. And once they all see the issues in perspective, they all sing the same song.

I guess not getting into it with me, is a convenient way of saying you cant think of a reason that all players could be strongarmed into changing their position. Do you think Goodenow threatened their wives or childrens lives? What leverage could he have that would make them change their mind? Truth maybe? Of course not your truth, I mean the other truth.

But, I dont blame you, it will be easier to cheer the players again if you think they were all just fooled by the evil Goodenow and didnt really know what they were doing. They were threatened to say the say things they did, they didnt really mean it.

No, but I can believe that Bob Goodenow would get on the phone with Pat Morris and "influence" and get Crosby to "retract" regardless of the way he felt.

Like the "Pissed off at Primeau thread" Like every other situation that any player does anything against what the PA wants or thinks, you get negative reactions from your peers. You also get Chelios, Pronger and Peca threatening you if you want to cross the lockout line.

Not getting into it with you means that your blind passing off of the NHLPA strongarm tactics is something I could never overcome.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Chelios, Peca and Pronger threatened Crosby?

 

[thinkwild]

I think his fellow members on the executive committee, and his agent probably did explain the ramifications of what he casually said on tv to be. I dont think everyone of those players could be threatened into changing their tune if they didnt believe it to be in their best interest. I for one can actually see the logic in it. It doesnt seem a stretch to me to suggest that facts alone persuaded them. I can understand how you could find that impossible to believe the players have a good case, and assume the only possible way is that they were strongarmed or threatened.

Obviously our work of letting you see the light is not finished

 

[Slats432]

Chelios, Peca and Pronger threatened Crosby?

Go back to your cave.

 

[Sinurgy]

People like NGO and JFF...everytime I see an owner or someone pro-owner do or say something stupid, I recognize it as such.

Why is it that you try to justify everything the PA says and does because of your support?

I think they (along with a couple others) are in love. It's the only explanation. I mean the zealousness they show is amazing. They are like a pack of dogs that are constantly on the attack. Someone makes any comment against a player or the NHLPA, within seconds one of them is there and squeeling. Heck if you didn't watch the names of the posters you'd almost think the board was split 50/50 as far as the CBA goes...they are THAT LOUD!! Only love could drive you to such extents.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Point is that the players dont earn more than the owners.

Really? How about you make a list of the owners who have a personal income of more than $7 million per season and I'll do the same for the players. I guarantee my list is a lot longer than yours.

Some of the players have other buisnesses other than hockey, but none of the owners income comes soley from hockey so it's not really a point to argue which you were.

And whose fault is that? The players have gobs of money and they don't invest it wisely and develop that second income. Whose falut is that again? Seems to me you're bitter because the owners were able to garner these fortunes to purchase the teams and the players are to stupid to turn their millions in the hundreds of millions required to do the same. Bottom line is that the majority of the owners applied themselves, made a buck and turned it into two. That makes them great men. The players play a game where the money is dropped in their lap and the player's greatest feat is not blowing it all before he turns 50.

Some of these guys don't have jobs outside of hockey because they earn a nice income from hockey (which obvously people like you are jealous of or pissed off about).

I'm not pissed at all. I think its great that a player can make a good buck playing a kids game. What I don't like is when the player refuses to acknowledge how well off they are and what a advantage they have in their lives. God knows how Mike Modano is feeding his dog right now, or Jarome Iginla is making ends meet for his family? They are so hard done by. Maybe they can get in line at the soup kitchen with the real people experiencing a hard time. Maybe they'll open their eyes.

Owners complain about losing money as well. You crack me up though. You think the players are glorified for spending lots of money or making bad investments. Don't quite know what reality you live in. And I'm not sure what a brain surgeon with a golf course in Sweden has to do with this.

You're right, you don't get it. Players don't compl;ain about losing money because they are guaranteed their money, no matter how poorly they perform or how bad the economy is. The players get their millions no matter what. And what does a brain sugeon with a golf course have to do with anything? Well, when that brain surgeon is Peter Forsberg and he's building a golf course (a bad investment to begin with) for his personal amusment, it really hammers the point home.

No one is cruicifing them for building companies so I dont know where you got that from. And yes they make solid investments, good for them and more power to them.

Seems like you were. They are evil for having successful companies and making money from these other comapnies. The owners are evil for expecting to make a profit on the $250 million they invest in their team.

And you just said players have other buisnesses like restaurants, dont you need waiters to run a restaurant? What does employing people have to do with anything? A boss employs a construction worker, how many people does that construction worker employ? Not a very good argument there.

You don't see the parallel between using your money to make more money and the spin off economy in the local market? Alrighty then.

Some guys build charities like Brad Richards who gives a box to cancer patients even during the stanley cup finals. What a jerk!

Actually Richards lends his name to a charity. Many players do this. The agents are the ones who connect the players with the national foundations and get the player's name front and center. Its a brilliant tax dodge, one the agents use very well.

These guys have as much obligation to provide community service as you do.

Actually, as human beings we all have an obligation to contribute to the community we live in, especially if they are supporting us. The owners do it all the time.

Yet when they write checks they help build hospital wings.

Puh-lease! When has a player EVER built a hospital wing. When has a player ever donated the millions of dollars required to do that. The richest players barely donate enough to purchase an MRI machine. Now they are building hospitals. Wow! The koolaid stand is serving you doubles!

[/QUOTE]You really hate the players its pretty obvious, pretty sad to have tunnel vision. Some of us can see both sides of the argument and understand both sides. Clearly you don't and are 100% owner no matter what. I really don't have a side, I just want to see hockey. I put blame on both sides because neither will pick up the phone to negotiate. I feel sorry for you that you cant understand the other side of an argument and cant have a decent debate/argument without calling the players names.[/QUOTE]

What I hate is listening to the Modanos, the Iginlas, the Guerins, etc. cry about how hard done by they are and make two faced bold faced lies about standing up for the next generation of player when they are tossing these guys under the bus to guarantee their own salaries in the future. You see both sides of the argument yet don't see this? You don't even see one side of the argument clearly.

 

[hfboardsuser]

I think his fellow members on the executive committee, and his agent probably did explain the ramifications of what he casually said on tv to be. I dont think everyone of those players could be threatened into changing their tune if they didnt believe it to be in their best interest.

The only reason it's in the best interest of the players to retract their statements is because they'll be blacklisted by the union for speaking out. They'll lose the respect and trust of every other NHLPA member, making it pretty difficult to be in the same room as these guys, let alone on the same sheet of ice.

I for one can actually see the logic in it. It doesnt seem a stretch to me to suggest that facts alone persuaded them. I can understand how you could find that impossible to believe the players have a good case, and assume the only possible way is that they were strongarmed or threatened.

It's pretty easy to persuade a player when the "facts" are what I outlined above. Tell me what else the union could say that would change the tune of players so quickly.

 

[CarlRacki]

Really? How about you make a list of the owners who have a personal income of more than $7 million per season and I'll do the same for the players. I guarantee my list is a lot longer than yours.

.

A more appropriate list would be individuals who invest in team ownership with a hockey-related income of $7 million or more per season. Most owners (that aren't corporations) make much more than $7 million a year, but certainly not from hockey.

 

[thinkwild]

Most of the owners are in the Forbes top 500 billionaires list. I wonder if they believe that one. Many of the owners are up on charges of accounting regularities in their other businesses. For misrepresenting their books, imagine.

Not even Mario can afford a team without a partner and league help. Gretzky couldnt afford one. Players arent in the same league as owners here.


Those are pretty good facts Mr Bugg. And there's good reasons behind them.

 

[YellHockey*]

Gee, you think the owners would not like that idea? How about you go and put out $250 million of your money to start a business and then have an employee come to you and say that they want a chunk of it when you sell it. What are you going to tell them?

As usual, you have your facts screwed up. The PA only went to the owners asking for a share of the capital gains on franchises after Bettman publically expressed a desire to form a partnership with the players.

Since the definition of partnership is, "A legal contract entered into by two or more persons in which each agrees to furnish a part of the capital and labor for a business enterprise, and by which each shares a fixed proportion of profits and losses." why wouldn't the PA expect a portion of the profits from capital gains?

I guess Bettman has his own dictionary when he uses the term "partnership".

 

[PecaFan]

Since the definition of partnership is, "A legal contract entered into by two or more persons in which each agrees to furnish a part of the capital and labor for a business enterprise, and by which each shares a fixed proportion of profits and losses." why wouldn't the PA expect a portion of the profits from capital gains?

Um, how about because they didn't furnish capital! Sheesh.

 

[hfboardsuser]

Those are pretty good facts Mr Bugg. And there's good reasons behind them.

Yeah, almost as good as the reasons behind cabinet solidarity....

 

[YellHockey*]

Um, how about because they didn't furnish capital! Sheesh.

And the owners aren't furnishing the labour. What's your point? One brings the capital and the other the labour.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Pro sports is in the entertainment business so without the star players you have no entertainment. It is what the NHL markets - they sure do not market Bill Wirtz, Jeremy Jacobs or the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund. That makes the pro sports industry unique because the product is dependnent upon the players. The product is the employee.

It is quite different than a bunch of people working a factory line who are pretty much replaceable by another group of people. You can train any number of people to be factory workers or nurses, etc. but you have to be one of 750 people in the world with special and unique skills to play in the NHL.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Like I said, if the NHLPA were to put a penalty of the same to their membership..take away lockout pay etc....then I am all for that...

And I know why they do it, but to have people make some calls to get players to "retract" a statement, use their bullshevik lines like "Duh, I misunderstood the question.", is pathetic. The owners at least know that they can speak their mind, but at a cost. The players are just influenced after the fact like some common shakedown, and are made liars out of because they may not believe what they are coerced into saying.

In other words, you support fining someone up to a million dollars for speaking their mind.

You are against the union calling a player and saying, "hey, your comments in the paper hurt our cause. If you're on board with us, we'd like you to clarify them."

To you, that is a common shakedown.

The other thing to consider is this:
There are a ton of unethical journalists out there who take quotes out of context. I've worked with plenty of reporters who get a quote they know will be a headline buster. As long as it's on their tape recorder, they don't care how the quote gets played.

And yet another thing to consider is this: Sometimes, a reporter asks a specific question and gets a specific answer. Then, in the course of writing the story, the he places a specific answer into a broader context, changing the ultimate meaning of a quote.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

Really? How about you make a list of the owners who have a personal income of more than $7 million per season and I'll do the same for the players. I guarantee my list is a lot longer than yours.

How about you make a list of NHL players that own multi million dollar companies and I'll make a list of the owners who own muli million dollar companies. I gurantee my list is longer than yours.

And whose fault is that? The players have gobs of money and they don't invest it wisely and develop that second income. Whose falut is that again? Seems to me you're bitter because the owners were able to garner these fortunes to purchase the teams and the players are to stupid to turn their millions in the hundreds of millions required to do the same. Bottom line is that the majority of the owners applied themselves, made a buck and turned it into two. That makes them great men. The players play a game where the money is dropped in their lap and the player's greatest feat is not blowing it all before he turns 50.

Its the players fault, but I'm not their financial advisor or family so I could care less how they spend it. Its not my problem. I'm not jealous of the owners for making good investments. I say good for them and more power to them in a capatilist society. But making millions on an investment doesnt make you a great man. The folks at Enron were making millions, but theyre not good men. Just makes them good buisnessmen and if they keep making money good for them.

I'm not pissed at all. I think its great that a player can make a good buck playing a kids game. What I don't like is when the player refuses to acknowledge how well off they are and what a advantage they have in their lives. God knows how Mike Modano is feeding his dog right now, or Jarome Iginla is making ends meet for his family? They are so hard done by. Maybe they can get in line at the soup kitchen with the real people experiencing a hard time. Maybe they'll open their eyes.

Doesnt make me happy at all either with these comments. The guys sound like idiotos and theres no defending that. If Modano doesnt have money to feed his dog then he should find a job during the lockout. If Iginla cant make ends meet he should find a job. These guys are better suited keeping their mouths shut about their money and playing hockey.

You're right, you don't get it. Players don't compl;ain about losing money because they are guaranteed their money, no matter how poorly they perform or how bad the economy is. The players get their millions no matter what. And what does a brain sugeon with a golf course have to do with anything? Well, when that brain surgeon is Peter Forsberg and he's building a golf course (a bad investment to begin with) for his personal amusment, it really hammers the point home.

Ah ok. See if you had said Forsberg earlier, I would have understood. With the lockout, they arent guranteed money so they do have something to complain about technically, but then again they have some money in the bank account. A smart person with their money keeps an emergency account for funds, if they dont then theyre idiots. No way around that.

Seems like you were. They are evil for having successful companies and making money from these other comapnies. The owners are evil for expecting to make a profit on the $250 million they invest in their team.

I dont think theyre evil at all. They expect a profit on their investment, but they should know that any financial investment has a risk to lose money. They shouldn't be complaining over it, just finding a way to make profit (which they are obviously trying to do).

You don't see the parallel between using your money to make more money and the spin off economy in the local market? Alrighty then.

I didn't see the point in asking who the players employ when they themselves are employees.

Actually Richards lends his name to a charity. Many players do this. The agents are the ones who connect the players with the national foundations and get the player's name front and center. Its a brilliant tax dodge, one the agents use very well.

No Richards actually started his own charity and buys the box out himself with his own money. Theres a better example in Derrick Brooks an NFL player who has his own charity, has seats for the kids at the games, visits them to see how theyre doing in school, and takes them on trips to places like Africa. There are some who just use their name, but there are others who use money out of their own pocket. I thought it was unfair to lump all the players in the same pile.

Actually, as human beings we all have an obligation to contribute to the community we live in, especially if they are supporting us. The owners do it all the time.

The owners probably do the same thing the players do, write checks to different organizations to get tax breaks and using their name to look good. I don't know about all owners, but I dont hear much about owners organizing community service activites.

Puh-lease! When has a player EVER built a hospital wing. When has a player ever donated the millions of dollars required to do that. The richest players barely donate enough to purchase an MRI machine. Now they are building hospitals. Wow! The koolaid stand is serving you doubles!

I didnt say they themselves bought the entire wing, I said they help build it. As in contribute money to help build it. A bad example, but the point is that its not like these checks go to waste. The money is used to help the community.

What I hate is listening to the Modanos, the Iginlas, the Guerins, etc. cry about how hard done by they are and make two faced bold faced lies about standing up for the next generation of player when they are tossing these guys under the bus to guarantee their own salaries in the future. You see both sides of the argument yet don't see this? You don't even see one side of the argument clearly.

I don't like it either. I think its a joke these comments the guys make, but it doesnt make me pick the owners side cause some guys make stupid comments. I don't think theyre main purpose is to fight for their generation, but to keep their own income the same. I dont think they are tossing guys under the bus though. After all some of the lower guys in the PA made half a million last year so they should have some money saved to pay bills and such. If not theyre not helpless, they can find jobs like some have done in Europe. I think this is all going to end in a cap so the owners can make a profit. I think the players should see this and realize that this is whats going to keep teams financially healthy. The players should agree to a cap and the owners should give some concessions to make the deal favorable to both sides. I find it aggrevating neither side is willing to negotiate. I don't pick a side in this, because I understand where both sides are coming from. I just don't agree badmouthing one side and acting like the other side is all angels who have done nothing wrong.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

The players are nothing. They are blips on the radar screen that fade to nothing once their playing days are over. Until these players can do something that provides valie to the community they live in (beyond lending their name or writing a check) they are not worth the money they are paid.

You need a reality check.
What does Hollywood provide to our community? How does Jennifer Lopez get $15 Million for yet another bomb?
How is Ben Affleck worth more than a heart surgeon?

Entertainment brings in big bucks. There are only a few mass-released movies every week. There are a thousands of heart attacks

Owners pay big money for talent that produces big money.
The NHL system is out of whack somewhat, even when compared to other sports/entertainment industries.

But it's entirely unfair to call Steve Yzerman or Jarome Iginla a "blip on the radar."

Such statements only diminish your already shaky argument.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

This thread is about the ongoing strongarm tactics of the NHLPA and its members..

This thread is about people dreaming up scenarios in their efforts to make reality fit their worldview.
Does anyone here have a SHRED of evidence that anyone STRONGARMED anyone???
And even if a little pressure was put on these players, big deal. How does that compare with a $250,000 fine?
It doesn't, no matter how much some people will foolishly attempt to rationalize it.

People like NGO and JFF...everytime I see an owner or someone pro-owner do or say something stupid, I recognize it as such.

Why is it that you try to justify everything the PA says and does because of your support?

Ooooh. Check your brush. It's rather broad, isn't it? So broad, in fact, that you are no longer posting anything resembling the truth.

I have called out the union several times.
But mostly, I'm not attacking owners.
I'm questioning the twisted logic that posters are using to bolster their feeble opinions.

See, when 80 percent of the people agree with a position, that's fine.
But when 80 percent of the people agree with a position, and 50 percent of them are using ridiculous arguments to support that position, and the other 30 percent cheerfully sing along, you can begin to see the mob mentality.

Like these ridiculous threads about the PA "strong arming" players. Terms like Mafioso or shakedowns.

No one here has a shred of evidence to support these claims, but they are accepted as facts because 80 percent of the people are willing to support them.

Kind of like America just before the Iraq war, when people all agreed that there were WMODs in Iraq, or that Hussein was a 9-11 plotter.

People in and within the NHLPA contact their players whenever they say anything against the union or it's stance. They make their players retract statesments that they make under good concience. They threaten their own brethren if they even consider to cross the lockout line.

Just so you know..overall I am pro union, those that protect employees in good faith. I was part of a union and would have no problem being a part of one again....

I just don't understand how people can defend stupid things carte blanche.

Then why are you defending this thread.
This claim to strongarming is a "stupid thing."

I'd be glad to have a real conversation about the BUSINESS OF HOCKEY.
I was one of the first to criticize the 24 percent rollback offer, saying it was too much rollback and not enough luxury tax.

I am pro-player, but I agree that salaries are out of hand. I think they should be reduced and I think a Luxury Tax is the best way to do so without strangling teams in red tape.
I for one believe that a franchise should have the ability to keep its core together, and I think a salary cap prevents that.
If Tampa can find a way to make the revenues to keep their key players together, I'm all for it. The fans in Tampa deserve it if they are willing to support their team financially.
But at the same time, I don't want Tampa going out and signing Iginla and Bertuzzi from small market teams. Doing so would be altogether unlikely with a strong luxury tax.

But let's not talk about that.
Let's make more unsubstantiated claims about the big bad PA

 

[djhn579]

Pro sports is in the entertainment business so without the star players you have no entertainment. It is what the NHL markets - they sure do not market Bill Wirtz, Jeremy Jacobs or the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund. That makes the pro sports industry unique because the product is dependnent upon the players. The product is the employee.

It is quite different than a bunch of people working a factory line who are pretty much replaceable by another group of people. You can train any number of people to be factory workers or nurses, etc. but you have to be one of 750 people in the world with special and unique skills to play in the NHL.

We have over 14,000 tickets sold for an AHL game in Buffalo tonight (Tuesday, 12/28). From that, I would say all star players are replaceable. If they provide an entertaining product (the game is the product), new stars will emerge.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

We have over 14,000 tickets sold for an AHL game in Buffalo tonight (Tuesday, 12/28). From that, I would say all star players are replaceable. If they provide an entertaining product (the game is the product), new stars will emerge.

I only hope the NHL isn't foolish enough to take the gamble and bring in scabs.
I'd hate to see what happens to the league.