How would you react to Bruins who choose not to return to play?

[Ladyfan]

If a player thought playing in the NHL was too risky because he didn't trust air travel, I'd think he was a little crazy. If he did travel by car, which is much more risky than airplane, I would think it irrational. Now, plenty of my nearest & dearest are crazy and irrational, possibly including yours truly, and I don't plan to "denounce" any of them nor would I "denounce" a player. But I believe it's well established that the risk to a healthy (not obese, etc.) 20-to-42 year old from coronavirus is not significant.

Once again the players may have other people besides themselves they need to consider.

 

[McGarnagle]

I wouldn’t have any issue with it myself.

Having said that, and I know this is purely speculative, I would be straight up shocked if any of these guys decided not to return with what they have in front of them.

Yes, a lot of it has to be related to expectations. The Bruins are favorites for the cup right now, that's worth coming back for and taking the minor risk of getting a little sick. Plus, if the Bruins got to game 7 of the SCF and lost by one goal, imagine if Jake Debrusk or Charlie Coyle or someone sat out the playoffs. They'd never hear the end of it.

However, if you're a player on the Canadiens or Wild, that's less of an issue, less pressure. And say the MLB comes back for a 48 game season and institutes the salary rollbacks the owners are pushing for. If you're Mike Trout and the Angels are probably going to finish 3rd or 4th in their division again, then it's not worth it to him to even get out of bed and play for that money, wouldn't blame him at all. But a Bruins player going for the cup, they won't get a pass in the public eye.

 

[LSCII]

Yes, a lot of it has to be related to expectations. The Bruins are favorites for the cup right now, that's worth coming back for and taking the minor risk of getting a little sick. Plus, if the Bruins got to game 7 of the SCF and lost by one goal, imagine if Jake Debrusk or Charlie Coyle or someone sat out the playoffs. They'd never hear the end of it.

However, if you're a player on the Canadiens or Wild, that's less of an issue, less pressure. And say the MLB comes back for a 48 game season and institutes the salary rollbacks the owners are pushing for. If you're Mike Trout and the Angels are probably going to finish 3rd or 4th in their division again, then it's not worth it to him to even get out of bed and play for that money, wouldn't blame him at all. But a Bruins player going for the cup, they won't get a pass in the public eye.

Easy for you to say given it's not your neck on the line out there risking it. You going to stick to this if someone gets sick and ends up exposing his team and the other teams he's played? What about if someone has a really negative reaction and loses their career or worse over it, you sticking to this view then?

 

[McGarnagle]

Easy for you to say given it's not your neck on the line out there risking it. You going to stick to this if someone gets sick and ends up exposing his team and the other teams he's played? What about if someone has a really negative reaction and loses their career or worse over it, you sticking to this view then?

You can play the what-if game all day long. Stuff can always go wrong. The bus can crash on the way to the game and kill half the team. You can't let the worst-case scenario determine your course of action when probability is low. Plus, these are all healthy young men presumably without pre-existing conditions. I'm pretty sure there's a handful of players in the league with diabetes, and perhaps some with asthma, I'd be more apt to give those guys the benefit of the doubt if they need to sit out. And if they have a deathly sick child who is at risk that they need to care for, then yeah, stay home and take the year off. But otherwise, the players are not going to be in danger here. Honestly the bigger threat to their health and quality of life is the rampant concussion problem in this league, but I suppose that's another matter.

If it wasn't safe to resume play now, the league wouldn't be doing it.

 

[Kate08]

No issue at all.

What I do have issue with, however, is the Bruins may win the Stanley Cup and I wouldn't have gone to any playoff games.

That's the real kick in the dick.

**disclaimer, i wouldn't want to go given the situation, I understand why they're doing it, blah blah blah.

 

[LSCII]

You can play the what-if game all day long. Stuff can always go wrong. The bus can crash on the way to the game and kill half the team. You can't let the worst-case scenario determine your course of action when probability is low. Plus, these are all healthy young men presumably without pre-existing conditions. I'm pretty sure there's a handful of players in the league with diabetes, and perhaps some with asthma, I'd be more apt to give those guys the benefit of the doubt if they need to sit out. And if they have a deathly sick child who is at risk that they need to care for, then yeah, stay home and take the year off. But otherwise, the players are not going to be in danger here. Honestly the bigger threat to their health and quality of life is the rampant concussion problem in this league, but I suppose that's another matter.

If it wasn't safe to resume play now, the league wouldn't be doing it.

Really? Why do you say that? From all accounts from the healthcare experts, there is still certainly risk. Which is why baseball is still trying to come up with a plan to return, NBA is allowing players not comfortable coming back to stay home, and the NHL had to negotiate a deal with the union. Because regardless of your cavalier attitude towards it, there is absolutely still risk involved for these players.

 

[LSCII]

If a player thought playing in the NHL was too risky because he didn't trust air travel, I'd think he was a little crazy. If he did travel by car, which is much more risky than airplane, I would think it irrational. Now, plenty of my nearest & dearest are crazy and irrational, possibly including yours truly, and I don't plan to "denounce" any of them nor would I "denounce" a player. But I believe it's well established that the risk to a healthy (not obese, etc.) 20-to-42 year old from coronavirus is not significant.

Yet there are plenty of cases you can point to where it did impact young, healthy people. So you can say the risk is minimal, but regardless of the virus not typically impacting a younger age bracket, it still has impacted members in said age range. And sometimes in a very severe way. Which is still risk.

 

[YouTakeTheVan]

Yet there are plenty of cases you can point to where it did impact young, healthy people.

Much lower risk than driving a car. Okay, three posts is plenty on the subject, so I'm done here, just to say I hope people look at the data, understand the risk factors and make informed decisions, hockey players, staff on ice officials, and everyone else.

 

[McGarnagle]

Really? Why do you say that? From all accounts from the healthcare experts, there is still certainly risk. Which is why baseball is still trying to come up with a plan to return, NBA is allowing players not comfortable coming back to stay home, and the NHL had to negotiate a deal with the union. Because regardless of your cavalier attitude towards it, there is absolutely still risk involved for these players.

Baseball's return is being held up because of a labor dispute between the owners and union over money. They absolutely could've started spring training by now if Manfred wasn't trying to use a crisis to screw the players out of money. Any risk that remains is minimal, you're as likely to hospitalize yourself slipping in the shower. Should we just never bathe again then?

 

[LSCII]

Much lower risk than driving a car. Okay, three posts is plenty on the subject, so I'm done here, just to say I hope people look at the data, understand the risk factors and make informed decisions, hockey players, staff on ice officials, and everyone else.

I give you a bowl of 1000 M&Ms, and tell you that only one is poisoned. The risk is really small that you're going to eat the bad one. Do you reach in and grab a handful?

 

[LSCII]

Baseball's return is being held up because of a labor dispute between the owners and union over money. They absolutely could've started spring training by now if Manfred wasn't trying to use a crisis to screw the players out of money. Any risk that remains is minimal, you're as likely to hospitalize yourself slipping in the shower. Should we just never bathe again then?

Players have come out and said they wouldn't return before the $$$ issues arose. Then the owners wanted to do a prorated salary by number of games only by the time it got to the players, it was a prorated salary and a giant reduction thrown on top. And you know why the players are fighting it?

BECAUSE THE RISK IS TOO LARGE TO TAKE FOR WAY LESS MONEY

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

If they had some kind of pre-existing condition that rendered them vulnerable, like a Rich Peverley situation, I'd accept it for their health. I like players who give everything to win (i.e. Bergeron playing through a punctured lung), but don't expect them to literally die for it.

But if we lost the cup because a Pastrnak or Debrusk for example is scared of a flu, I would never, ever forgive them. You're making $6 million a year for this, you can socially distance yourself from your grandparents for another 6 weeks.

This really is incredible.

I thought I’d be used to it by now, but no. This persistence of this rhetoric with anyone is absolutely astounding.

 

[Jaguar God]

I give you a bowl of 1000 M&Ms, and tell you that only one is poisoned. The risk is really small that you're going to eat the bad one. Do you reach in and grab a handful?

Only if the mainstream media says there's a poisoned one - fake news, obviously.

(being sarcastic - you make an astute point that people don't consider when saying "well, it's only X% death rate!!!")

 

[DKH]

If they had some kind of pre-existing condition that rendered them vulnerable, like a Rich Peverley situation, I'd accept it for their health. I like players who give everything to win (i.e. Bergeron playing through a punctured lung), but don't expect them to literally die for it.

But if we lost the cup because a Pastrnak or Debrusk for example is scared of a flu, I would never, ever forgive them. You're making $6 million a year for this, you can socially distance yourself from your grandparents for another 6 weeks.

The flu can be pretty bad but maybe miss a game and get fluids in them and hopefully limit it to a game or so

if Pastrnak is throwing up and feels like crap I would not want to him to pass it around

thankfully most people get over flu in a few days and with days off between probably looking at a game

 

[TD Charlie]

I'd fully support their decision because who are we as fans to decide what's right for a player, their family, and their safety? It would suck, but I get why.

end the thread. This is the only reasonable response anyone should have to this

 

[Dicky113]

This just all seems so desperate as a cash grab for the owners. I just can’t get my head around this.

 

[LSCII]

end the thread. This is the only reasonable response anyone should have to this

I want the Bruins to win, and I want their best players to play, but I'm not arrogant enough to expect them to risk their own well being for my viewing pleasure while I sit on my couch safe and sound. That's just flat out selfish to me.

 

[JOKER 192]

I just heard a short clip with Max Domi on TSN690, who happens to have type 1 diabetes. So he says he wants to play but that it will be decided by team doctors if it is safe for him to play, so out of his hands basically. Didn't sound terribly optimistic.

 

[Smitty93]

Honestly, I'd probably respect the player more.

Step into their shoes for a second. They've spent their entire lives trying to get to the NHL and their entire careers trying to win the Stanley Cup. They won the Presidents Trophy this year and are co-favorites to win it all. Think about the kind of emotional sacrifice it would take to put your health, or your loved ones health, ahead of your lifelong dream. Think about how difficult a decision that would be.

Even if I was bummed out about it, I couldn't possibly be upset. It's their decision.

 

[Dicky113]

Honestly, I'd probably respect the player more.

Step into their shoes for a second. They've spent their entire lives trying to get to the NHL and their entire careers trying to win the Stanley Cup. They won the Presidents Trophy this year and are co-favorites to win it all. Think about the kind of emotional sacrifice it would take to put your health, or your loved ones health, ahead of your lifelong dream. Think about how difficult a decision that would be.

Even if I was bummed out about it, I couldn't possibly be upset. It's their decision.

It just makes no sense:
- middle of summer
- 24 teams get in (what was point of regular season)
- no fans in attendance
- bubble lines with limited contact with other teammates
- middle of summer
- risk to players, coaches and their families (and we thought concussion lawsuits were looming!)
- passive pressure on those uncomfortable to play
- incomplete teams without key players
- middle of summer

Is anyone actually going to watch this? I love hockey, and I love my Bruins, but I’m struggling to imagine I’m going to take time away from campfires and hammock swinging to watch out of shape athletes play bad hockey on poor ice in the middle of summer in empty arenas for a questionable cup. I’ll check scores in the morning with my coffee but that’s about it.

it just feels so desperate. Let it go.....

 

[Smitty93]

It just makes no sense:
- middle of summer
- 24 teams get in (what was point of regular season)
- no fans in attendance
- bubble lines with limited contact with other teammates
- middle of summer
- risk to players, coaches and their families (and we thought concussion lawsuits were looming!)
- passive pressure on those uncomfortable to play
- incomplete teams without key players
- middle of summer

Is anyone actually going to watch this? I love hockey, and I love my Bruins, but I’m struggling to imagine I’m going to take time away from campfires and hammock swinging to watch out of shape athletes play bad hockey on poor ice in the middle of summer in empty arenas for a questionable cup. I’ll check scores in the morning with my coffee but that’s about it.

it just feels so desperate. Let it go.....

I'm not going to argue with any of the points in the top half of your post, but the answer to the bolded question is absolutely 'Yes'. Nothing is going on this summer. Vacations are cancelled (I know mine was). They'll probably have the highest ratings ever. It's a money grab by the NHL, and the players are absolutely fine with it because they all want to win the Cup. Maybe most of the fans will see an asterisk with it, but do you think the players are going to care when they're lifting the Cup or looking at their rings years later? Nope!

 

[Trap Jesus]

I've felt so strongly about people around me having to go back to work, I would hold nothing against them.

 

[BAD BOY]

I wouldn’t have any problem you do what is best for you. But the selfish part of me wants hockey back. I fully understand the situation either way.

 

[GordonHowe]

This just all seems so desperate as a cash grab for the owners. I just can’t get my head around this.

I can, sadly.

First: I'm certain I'd feel disappointment, but it's their life, and their decision.

Second: What is a 24 team "play in" about? Money.

Effing Bettman. Effing owners. Sorry,

GH

 

[BigGoalBrad]

At least there’s not that much nonsense before the playoffs. NBA went too far.

Guys who don’t play will be remembered for it.

Excessive precautions are going to be too much and make these guys miserable and relieved when they lose. Could be like that South Park episode.