What If?

A truly fascinating thing happened this week: an NHL team said something negative about one of their players. It wasn’t just “he missed that play” or “he has to be tougher on the puck” it was really ripping the guy.

The New York Post reported that the New York Rangers described Sean Avery to an arbitrator as “a reasonably effective player as well as a detriment to the team.” The Rangers continued: “Avery is not a mature player. He plays, at times, like an individual rather than a member of a team. This is sometimes referred to as an inability to see the ice, and in Avery’s case this seems to fit with his overall approach to the game.”

That’s incredible. It’s also a bit refreshing, don’t you think? What if, each season, an NHL team brought the brain trust to a bank of microphones and camera’s and just laid waste? What if Kevin Lowe said “well Jean Francois Jacques must be playing well in the AHL, we get these nightly wrapup reports with all the stats and a little bio and the guy is Eddie freaking Shack. However, he’s played below expectations by a little bit.”

And then MacTavish grabs the mic and says “I get a call from Scranton, which is a hole, and all they can do is talk about this guy. I think maybe it’s a bad connection but hell these guys are supposed to know, right? Thank God we never gave them Hemsky. Anyway, after all that good info from Scranton the kid gets here and poops a mukluk. He’s horse bleep. Seriously. I told the trainers to take his sticks away because he doesn’t need them out there. Honestly. I swear to God Almighty if he doesn’t improve I’m going to kick Kevin Prendergast in the ‘gnads.”

I’m just saying, it might be refreshing.

written by

The author didn‘t add any Information to his profile yet.
Related Posts

11 Responses to "What If?"

  1. Steve says:

    I have a useless comment to make. Readers who would rather read only intelligent, relevant comments should skip to the next one.

    Your apostrophe in “‘gnads” was misplaced. It should either be “g’nads”, with the apostrophe taking the place of the O and with the resulting pronunciation being to “gonads” as “g’day” is to “good day”, or it should be “‘nads”, with the apostrophe replacing the entire first syllable, in which case it should just be pronounced “nads”.

  2. Shadow says:

    I thought MacT ripped into Lupul pretty hard at the press conference at the end of the season.

    Ok maybe not THAT hard, but he still meant it to be.

  3. JB says:

    Let’s not forget Mac T’s comments about Winchester.

    “He lacks NHL pace” and the infamous “sometimes you need a second opinion from another team”.

    Basically said he’s slow and doesn’t take our advice well.

  4. Lowetide says:

    Steve: I misplace an apostrophe at least once a post. You’re just noticing? You hurt me with this.

  5. Steve says:

    Well, usually it’s an “its/it’s” error or something similarly mundane. I assume people have explained the difference to you a great many times, and the addition of my voice to the chorus won’t make much difference in your behaviour.

    Here, though, I saw a real opportunity to do some good.

  6. Lowetide says:

    steve: lol. I try, swear to God. I have my pet peeves too, the biggest one is that someone I’m very close to still says “relator” instead of “realtor.”

    But the apostrophe, it’s a moving target for me. I know it should be something I care enough about to get right, but it’s all over the place.

    I am complimented that you read my blog though, you have interesting insight into things. :-)

  7. MikeP says:

    “Poops a mukluk”?!

    I swear I almost pooped one myself thinking about it and laughing – to myself, the stepdaughter already thinks I’m insane.

  8. garnet says:

    This sort of frank talk in arbitration isn’t new — I seem to recall that when the Islanders had Salo, their assessment of him during his arbitration hearing left the guy in tears. It’s one big reason why teams (or coaches, anyhow) hate arbitration — you may have to heap scorn on your player to win the day.

  9. Dennis says:

    Yeah, I remember something like that about Tommy’s Tenure on the Island as well.

    I dunno, I’m as much for frank talk as the next guy, but the way the Rags cut up Avery, it seems to be about trying to sway the award to the point of giving them as much cap room as possible. And of course it’s a short term move because after this, you might have saved a few K this season but there’s no way Avery would come back there after ’08.

    I’d probably be ore for this move if Avery wasn’t a useful player but he clearly is of value.

  10. Steve says:

    LT: While I certainly like to think that I have interesting insight into things, I can’t remember ever having displayed any on your blog. As for why I read your blog, it’s because I’m an Oilers fan, and yours may be the best blog in the Oilogosphere (though I’m also partial to Tyler’s and CinO’s and, for blood reasons, the Ulanov fan club).

  11. Ribs says:

    I’m sure Avery sees it all as a compliment anyway.

    It is definitely fun to see what goes on word-wise in an arbitration hearing though. I hope more detailed reports become available in the future.

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

© Copyright - Lowetide.ca