In response to the original question in the thread, I think during the 1980's it was pretty easy to root for individual players, or start rooting for teams based on individual players. I admit that I became a Kings fan because of the Gretzky trade. Teams were shaped by the superstars in their lineup, guys racking up well over 100 points yearly. Or 50 goals yearly. Or both. Heck, at times you could divide up fan bases solely on the question of who's better, Gretzky or Lemieux. But, if you wanted your own team to root for, there was Hawerchuk in Winnipeg, Savard in Chicago, LaFontaine on Long Island (later Buffalo), Francis in Hartford...everywhere you turned, it seemed a superstar was leading an NHL team. Even if you were a traditional hockey fan and rooted for one team and one team only, chances are you either had a great player or two to root for or a collection of greatness (Boston Bruins, Philadelphia Flyers, Calgary Flames of the 1980s could all fall under that category). Hel, even when teams sucked they still gave their fans loads of entertainment value (remember the Maple Leafs of the Doug Carpenter era? How exciting were they!).
My point is, back when records were being re-written and stats becoming more and more prevalent in the NHL, I think the sweater wasn't nearly as important. Oh sure, Calgary-Edmonton or Montreal-Quebec were rivalries that can still be matched by precious few today. But, who wouldn't have liked watching a matchup between the high-flying Oilers and high-flying Nordiques back in the 80s? Also, back then hockey pools were all the rage. Remember when Gretzky's goals and assists were separated, because together it would be impossible to beat? Lemieux's as well. Even though they've evolved into far more sophisticated entities nowadays (fantasy leagues online, keeper leagues, a wide variety of stats, rotisserie, etc.), it's just not nearly as entertaining in hockey right now because you are probably not going to ice a fantasy team with either A) a 100-point man or B) a 50-goal scorer. So, while it is more challenging nowadays, I would argue that it's just not as much fun.
So, what do we have to hang our hats on these days, if not for the sheer numbers the games offer? Rivalries. Sweaters. Leafs-Habs. Oilers-Flames, still. Rangers-Islanders. Sens-Leafs. Avalanche-Red Wings, etc. And the biggest burgeoning rivalry of them all, which figures to get bigger and bigger and bigger in the next little while...Canucks-Avs.
Personally, even though I'm pro-owner in this nasty labor dispute, I'd love to see a return to a league that featured a myriad of superstars. Guys piling up numbers...not just the guys with masks on, either. Opening up the game so that we can really see how talented these guys really are.
At least if that were the case, you could almost make a strong argument for an $11 million salary. Instead, with nobody even capable of reaching 100 points or 50 goals (benchmarks that are still extremely fresh in the minds of MOST hockey fans today), those salaries are laughable. Fuhgetaboutit.
