The Athletic Hockey Show - Detroit Red Wings coaching update, Hockey Hall of Fame voting system needs to be overhauled and TNT steals the show from ESPN in year one of the US TV deal

Episode Date: June 28, 2022

Sean Gentille welcomes guest co-host Max Bultman to this week's show.Max provides an update on the Detroit Red Wings head coaching search and what winger Tyler Bertuzzi's trade value is. We stick tap the Stanley Cup Champion Colorado Avalanche and Sean and Max take a look at the 2022 Hockey Hall of Fame inductees and discuss the change that needs to be made in the Hall of Fames voting.Gentille and Bultman welcome Sean Shapiro, the Athletic's hockey business writer to critique TNT and ESPN's first year of hockey coverage, plus Sean explains why the NHL's record year of business doesn't compute to a larger salary cap and we answer your questions and respond to your comments in our widely popular Tuesday boyzzz third segment. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Good evening. This is the Tuesday edition of the Athletic Hockey Show. I'm Sean Tilly. Custance isn't here. I think he's somewhere at an undisclosed location in Michigan, but I could be wrong about that. In his place, we have the Superior of Michiganer. Went to a real college.

All that fun stuff. Max Boltman, prospects guy, Detroit Red Wings Beat Rider. It's a big week for you in one, one element of the job, but as far as the Red Wings are concerned, dude, we'll come in hot here. What's going on with the coach situation? They don't have one, and they're certainly not the only team that that's the case for it, but we're going on several weeks without them making a decision. So what's new?

Any movement? Well, I think the, well, the clock is certainly ticking, and I think it started ticking once the Stanley Cup ended and once a couple of Tampa assistance became more readily available. So I am now expecting it to be sooner here. Steve Eisenman kind of set like a soft target of having it done before the draft. And I assume he doesn't mean like the day before the draft. So my guess is it will be in the next couple days here. And I do think it will be one of the two Tampa assistants.

but they do a pretty good job of keeping stuff tight, and it would obviously a curveball wouldn't totally stun me here, but that's what I think is going to happen. But we'll see. I mean, maybe they'll go to player coach route. You never know. Who would be the guy? Like Sam Gagne or something, right?

They got rid of all their old. I guess it will be Sam Gagne, yeah. That's another one. Sam Gagne is my. Yeah, just bring them back, whatever. Come back for cheap. Sam Gagne is my dude of the week. I think this happens.

I've noticed this happens. uh every show now where there's one guy who comes up and i'm like oh yeah he's old now and that's that's that's that's that's that's him con yeah it's just like it's just a reminder of how old i i am getting uh myself did i okay so all the islander's stuff right i know that everybody had eisenman linked to lane lambert yeah they played together you know there's speculation that trot that trots maybe was an option in detroit obviously you know we found out a couple days ago that he's it at least take the year off and cash those islanders checks and rebuild after 25 years behind a bench who can you can blame him for that but do you think if one of those guys would have been a more

viable option that that's that that's a route iserman would have taken or was this always the way it was going to go i think it's possible that it could have gone the other way now the main things that he when he spoke publicly which was brief and at the very beginning of the offseason about it so we didn't hear the updates it was it was it was six months ago and he talked for 90 seconds Yeah, but the things that resonated in my head were, number one, he wanted someone who could help them improve their team defense. And I think he went on to do a radio interview where he really preached about the value of a demanding coach. But he also kind of led on that he really values familiarity in that role. Like he wants someone who knows how he operates and who he has that familiarity with.

And that, I think, always did point toward whether it was one of these two Tampa assistants, Jeff Halperner, Derek Lalonde, or to the HL coach for Tampa Bay, in Syracuse, Benoit Gru. Those guys, once he said that, all kind of jumped up, I think, the public consciousness side. And Lambert had the advantage of B& Steve Eiseman's former roommate as a player. So there's enough familiarity, I think, there to check that box. But just those two teams, like they- I knew they were tight. I knew they were tight.

I don't think I realized they had been roommates. Yeah, and I don't know how long it lasted. But yeah, like I remember we went to the to the island a couple years back. Me and the free press writer, Hohen St. James, and we had like, we had like consecutive one-on-ones with Lane Lambert. And I was like, all right, we're both thinking the same way here. And we'll see what this is about. And no, it was good. But now, I think, first of all, it was no one could have predicted at that time that Barry Trots was going to leave, you know, New York at that.

At that point, that to me was the most shocking one. I know you were less surprised by Bruce Cassidy than the public was. But those were the two curveballs. But when it comes back to being the two assistant coaches, for me at least, we'll see what happens. If it ends up being one of those two guys, I don't think anyone's going to say, oh, no, where did this come from? They're both coaches Steve Eiserman hired before,

so it would make sense if he were to hire one of them again. I think the Red Wings are one of those teams where, I mean, it's a sneaky important offseason for them and I think a lot of stuff league-wide hinges on them whether it's the coaches whether it's the coach hiring thing which is played out over the last few weeks or whether or really whether it's what they do with Tyler Bertuzia I think that's I think he's an interesting his situation is interesting I know Craig's kind of alluded to this before so I don't know if there's any I mean I look we we know what a vault that organization is and

how how tough it is to get anything out of them at all but is there as it stands for you, Maxie, on June 28th, like what's the vibe surrounding Tyler Batusi and his future there? You're going to have one of your commenters. You're stealing their thunder. I went through and I looked through the comments at the end. This is almost word for word.

Stealing valor. I forget who it was. It's one of the Michaels. You know this. Yeah, it's probably Michael Kay. You know this. You've seen it so many times whenever Craig bails on me, which happens every third show, I feel like at this point.

I don't read those things before they're on my phone and we're recording. Like, I have no idea what anybody said. Absolutely. I mean, Craig's the king of their Aunt Burgundy because he like, he'd read, you know, he'd read nasty things about his, about his kids if someone touched him into the ad reads. Like, he's, he's that far gone. But no, I don't, I don't know. It's the obvious question, though.

No, it is. It really is. They're interesting and they're relevant in a way this season that they haven't been in a while. So yeah, I mean, sorry. I want to know what's up with Tyler Bertuzi because it has like some league-wide, some league-wide. Well, it's perfect because I will just respond by stealing the valor of the reply to Michael K's comment. That's right. Which was if they're going to get a bunch for them, sure.

Like, you know, that's fine. I mean, my thing with this whole situation is you can't trade every good player forever, but you also can't get so locked into okay time to go that you start looking you know good deals in the face and at the end of the day he's still 27 he's got one year on his deal i think they could get an extension done i mean they got a whole year to do it um but they have a history of going to arbitration which doesn't usually pretend good things they they have done a contract since then so it's not like that's the most recent contract on the books but he's also got the back surgery in in the log and so if you're if you're going to look at all those things and say, how does this usually happen for a team that

is not particularly close to the playoffs? It usually does end in a trade. And it would not surprise me if that ends here. And I don't think they should rule it out. But I also know having seen the way that the team reacted to him scoring his 30th goal last year. Did you see this clip when he scores his 30th with like 10 seconds left in the season? Yeah. Like he's really well liked in that locker room. Yeah. He plays the way that they, now they're going to have a new coach, but he plays the way that I think whoever the new coaches is going to want them to play. And he's, you know, one of their longest tenured guys. And he's really good.

He's a 30 goal score. He's, you know, approached 70 points last season, even with missing. It's a pretty significant time. Like, you can't just. And he blends with guys in the roster. Like, you can't, you can't discount that either, right? Like, whether he's playing with, whether he's playing with Raymond or whether he's playing with Larkin.

I mean, that counts for, that counts for. something. You're going to need to win games at some point. Need to win games. And they don't have a lot of guys who can do everything he can do. Like, you know, you've got Raymond, you've got Verona. You're finally getting some of these guys who can really put the high-end offense, you know, up for you. But he's still one of those guys who can go into a corner and win a battle or just take a puck off somebody. And at some point, you have to have guys who can do that. And you have to have them on pretty much every line. Ideally, you've got, you know, Killorn and Pilat and Stamco's and Point, Sorrelli.

who do both. They put up offense and they do those things. But you got to have guys who can at minimum do that. I agree with the commenter to Michael Kay, I think it was, who said if the offer is really impressive, they should do it. But if not, they should just pay him. And, you know, the term, I think is the interesting question there. Like, how much term can you give a guy who's got the back surgery on the books? But I don't think you're treating this like you're treating most of the other one year left on the deal situations where I,

I actually don't think you can go into, I wouldn't, Eisenman's done it before with guys, I wouldn't go into this season without resolution on him. I wouldn't go in where he's going to be pending UFA at the deadline. I think you either get the extension done or you deal them. But I don't think you want to take this one down to, you know, February 20th or whatever it is. So what, we got nine days until that really hits, until we're going to have kind of an answer one or the other. That seems like a draft deal. You think so? Yeah, I could see that. It could also be...

You would imagine. I mean, that's just whatever. That's pure speculation on my part. But a lot of them happen around there. If he moves, that seems like a draft aid deal, doesn't it? Probably pre-free agency, right? Because then you're getting... You want it before teams start filling up their books if you're going to do it.

For sure. For sure. But, like, you know, the main pieces don't have to be 20-22 picks, especially, you know, 20-23 draft is being hyped up a lot. And you could see that. But yeah, a couple weeks, I think we should hopefully know one way or the other, right? 2023 draft is good now. And then we're going to spend 11 or 12 months picking an apartment.

Destroying Connor Bedard. And the 2024 kid will be a star. I don't know. I heard he stinks. We'll see. Look, we have a bunch of league-wide stuff that we're going to touch with our guest, Sean Shapiro. I should have introduced him at the start of it, but I didn't because I'm an amateur. He covers business, obviously, for.

us, the business of hockey for the athletic. And we're going to touch on TV stuff and cap stuff and some league-wide stuff. I don't know if there's anything else we need to say about the Aves clinching the Stanley Cup a couple days ago. I feel like it was not anti-climactic because that was an entertaining enough game. But I don't know if you feel this way, dude. But after four games of that. I think I'd kind of, my thinking had shifted into like, all right, this seem, it seems pretty unlikely that this team's going to lose three consecutive games here. Like, it's time to, it's time to turn towards the offseason. But I don't know, like, you were, I mean, you're, you're watching just like anything else. Was there any moment

in game five there or game six where, where you were like, okay, this, maybe this isn't going to work out for Colorado. I feel like there was, there was a, there was a, there was a stretch at the start of that last game where I was like, are they, you know, because I mean, if they choke in game six, everything's on the table for game seven. But early on, early on, I feel like that was on the table. But man, that's just one of the great, one of the great finishing kicks that we saw from, from them in the third period to bring it home, huh? Well, and that was always the thing about, you know, when they went in one game five in Colorado, they come back to Tampa and they take an early lead. And at that point, if you, if you,

Tampa is great at closing out a lead. That's the thing where you can't question them. And if they get that done, let's say that game's a 1-0, which they've done plenty in big games over the years. And they're taking that back to 7. At that point, I think Colorado does get really in their heads. And they talked after the game on the ice in all those interviews about the pressure that they had felt to get it done in Denver on that game 5-day.

You know, they talked about how they felt like they approached it better in game 6. do you think they're saying the same thing though if they lose that game do you think they're like yeah but we're we're improving now now it'll get better for game seven i think it goes the complete other way that's a hundred percent that is result dependent yes right and of course that's like they ended up being honest like we got the honest reaction from them which is like yeah basically yeah we needed we needed to get this done or else the collar was going to tighten up right yeah like that's the way it worked that's the way they actually felt and they were free to say that after it was all said and done versus versus giving them, you know, the safe, PC boring answer, which is, no, no,

we're, we're feel good about the spot we're in. We're going back home. We like the team we have, blah, blah. But at the end of the day, man, game seven would have been Darcy Kemper versus Andre Vasilewski. And it's Darcy Kempfer having, I hate trying to, you know, he's a really good goalie, and he gets compared to Vasilevsky throughout this series to the point that I think it is easy to lose sight of that.

But you have Darcy Kempur coming off a game in that scenario. where he's just given up one goal and lost. You've told him you have no margin for error. And there might be only one or two goals in the league. You can tell that to, and it doesn't rattle them. And they both just played in the Eastern Conference final. It was a bizarre series for him, right? Because I think he basically did what he needed to do.

But the goals that he let up were just like, like the first one on the first one in game six. Yeah, it's Steve and Samcoast alone in the slot. but like the route that the route that he took to scoring that goal you're like what's what's kemper doing there so i so i think there is that element right where you're like all right they needed to they need to close this out because whether it's darcy kemp or any other goal any other goal any other goalie on earth including sean shapiro is in the zoom room right now i don't think you want them going against i don't think you want them going against andrew vasselowski sheeperos sheperrero's going to stay silent here

but he's he's actually shaking his head he's a goalie so he's got so many takes about this and it's killing him to hold them in. Put me up against Andre Dasquez. I wanted to talk. Okay, so I wanted to talk about the Hall of Fame. Wait, hold on. I need to confess something first. I put hand up in the live blog in game,

I don't know which game. I think it was game three. I called for them to sit Kemper for Franso. I was close. Dude, I took a bunch of crap on Twitter because I forget, I forget which goal it was, but I gave you all like, I don't know how many more of those you can, you can, you can let Darcy Kemper give up.

It was really good when he was in. And at the time, Kemper had like a sub-900 in the playoffs. And he's a really good goal. It doesn't change that, but it is, it's hot hand season. And you had an undefeated goalie, who I think has always been a little underrated in Frantzot,

just sitting there waiting to come in. But I was wrong, obviously. But who also hadn't missed time early in the playoffs for an eye injury, which I'm told is a pretty important thing for, for goaltenders. All right. I wanted to move on to the Hall of Fame real quick. We have another goal in making it in. I feel like Roberto Longo is getting lost in the shuffle here a bit because people are talking about the twins and people are talking about Daniel Alpherson because I think he was sort of the borderline guy to make it in. That's all well and good. What I wanted

to address in one way or another here is whatever is happening in the women's wing of of the Hockey Hall of Fame. They get two spots devoted to women each year, which is good. That's a decent starting point where theoretically, especially after, you know, we're in year 12 of women actually being inducted. So the thinking there is like, all right, if we, you know, at least if we give them a cap of two, they'll actually use the allotted number to fill out, you know, to, you know, to to make up for the fact that, you know,

women have only been inducted since 2010. What we saw yesterday was Rika Saladin, who was a star center for the Finnish national team for years and years and years. Great player, certainly deserving. The second spot was not used, which is insane because you have Carolyn Alet, who is the third all-time leading score

in the history of the Canadian women's team, which, you know, I know we're not supposed to, we're not supposed to talk about the Canadian national team here, but we'll make a quick, quick exception here. That alone should have made it a no-brainer for 14 out of 18 people on that, on that committee to give her the second seat. Like, if you're not electing the third all-time score in the history of the Canadian women's national team, like, what's the point in voting women in at all in the first place? And that's to say nothing for Jen Baudrill and Julie Chie. and all these other deserving, deserving women who, you know, the, the backlog is building up here.

And it's about to get a lot more complicated in the next few years whenever, you know, jocelyn, whenever the, you know, whenever, whoever else, go down the list. Shannon Sabados, like go down the list of all these standout, standout players. Megan Duggan, also not inducted this year. For whatever reason, and you can attribute it to a lot of things, maybe it's just like a disagreement over who gets a second chair in a given year. But for whatever reason, they are not doing this, and it doesn't make any sense. Because if nothing else, Carolyn Nolette gets in, it's a no-brainer. It's like looking at a first ballot hall of famer. It's like looking at Ron Francis or someone

like that who's just like an all-time statistical star compiler, team success, everything you want, and for whatever reason, making them wait. There's no, there's no logic in place. plays and it's ridiculous. I think your theory is the best theory that, you know, if you get two spots and you got 10 people for them, like the number of permutations that you need to get to 14 is probably tricky. I don't know. Do we want to just openly advocate for it?

Because I'm fine with it. Can we just, can people just collude on this and write these wrong so that all the top 15 women's players of all time can get in? Because this shouldn't be something that has to get, you know, procedured into. oblivion here. There's maybe figured out in the next couple years where you have like a class or we have like a mandatory class of five that makes in because we've seen it happen in Hall of Fame for other sports where it can snowball on you pretty quickly.

It happened in baseball because of all the steroid guys. And it's happening in the past. It's happened in the past with the NFL because of how because of just statistical changes. So nobody knows how to vote for a wider C. now because of like the explosion and in that in in their statistics over the last however many years on and on it happens everywhere but you need to address it in a real way before it gets out of hand and that is the point we're getting at with with the you know with the women's vote because we have a whole generation of really great American and Canadian players who are

extremely accomplished that are about to come do here and they need to get it figured out out. And step one is figuring out a way to get Karen Lett into the Hall of Fame. It should be a no-brainer. It shouldn't be debated. I don't understand what happened yesterday. And we, Max, you were, you were on that, on that Hall of, on that Hall of Fame, we did that Hall of Fame thing. You know, is it hard? Yeah. It should be hard around the margins. It should be hard whether you're deciding whether to vote for Henrik Zetterberg or Rod Brindamor. Like, those are the tough decisions. But whenever, you have an all-time great no-brainer, like, don't make it more difficult than it needs to be. You're going to have problems elsewhere. Like, take the tap-ins when you have them. And I think

yesterday was an instance of them failing to do that. You almost need, like, a founding member push here kind of thing, because it is still, like, the earlier days of women's hockey, like, relative to the men that are in the hockey hall, you almost need to just kind of have the governing body say, you guys are in and then you could vote on the rest, but like we can't have the backlog. Like you said, it's going to snowball because you already have decisions where no brainers, there's not a space on the ballot for a no brainer. So it's either that or it's like the voters are going to have to all call each other and say, okay, is this the Wollett year? Is this the Bauderotro year? Is this the Marie-Filippe-Pulain year? So on to get it right. Otherwise, you're going to

crowd this and it's going to be really hard to get those perfect combinations to 14. Yeah. And at some point, you know, the voting body will be more representative and more and more diverse and, you know, whether you're having stakeholders in the women's game or former players or, or whatever, that's a long tail goal because these folks who are on the committee now, they hold on in these positions, they've earned them in one way or another. Like, the turnover doesn't happen all that quickly. So if you want there to be more women that are involved with a process or more women's game, you know, stakeholders involved with the process, fine. That can happen. that can happen down the line. In the meantime, take the obvious ones. Don't overcomplicate this.

And I think, like I said, we're on the verge of seeing it, of seeing, seeing kind of spit out of control. If let Kinkin in, then what kind of qualifications are you looking for? So, congratulations to everybody you got in. It is a fun class. It's a fun class, I think, I think Max for guys kind of in our age group, right? Because you see Luongo and, you see Luongo. when you see the Siddines. And those are folks that kind of bridge the gap for us, I think, you know,

from being fans into doing it professionally. So that's all well and good. That's fun. But, you know, there's work to be done too. And I think yesterday was a good reminder of that. All right.

Anything else from you? No, I think we've, I think we've let Sean sizzle long enough. I think he's ready. That's fine. Let's bring a Shapiro. So we're back with Sean Shapiro,

who covers the business of the NHHL NHL business writer? What's like the preferred, like when you introduce yourself to people, like what do you see? How do you describe your job? I mean, it's, I just kind of say I cover the business of hockey, I guess, is kind of where it goes. I don't know.

The role is, the rules, you don't have to, you know, you don't have to specify the NHL. It was those, those stupid. The role's evolved. I mean, no one had this job. No one had the job before I did. So I guess I get to decide what the job is. So.

Industry Trailblail. or Sean Shapiro. I like that. I like that. Part of the fun, yeah, right? Part of the fun of that last segment was we had to keep you on ice while we're talking about goalies and talking about the Hockey Hall debate, which I know that's something you have takes on.

You raised a really interesting point over the Carolyn-led thing whenever we were BSing before we were recorded here, right? Just the procedural element with hockey hall. Yeah, because we've done this. I know you've been on, Max, have you done, you've been part of it. of the mock one too, right? I think that we've done it. I've done two of them, I think.

All three of us run the last one. The issue, I mean, there's a lot of issues with the Hockey Hall of Fame selection committee and everything, and it all needs to be, all due respect to Eric who has hosted our thing rather well, but it completely needs to be ripped down and revamped on multiple fronts. But one issue is, we have no idea of Hulet was even nominated, right? Because you go into this thing and you can only nominate one person, and we may this whole big deal about like, oh, well, uh, uh, uh, Berks on the committee. And so he could only

nominate one of the Cedines. So someone had to make sure they nominated another Cidine. Did anyone even think to nominate Ulet? So like, did she, it's, it's not even like, we don't even, and since they sign this ridiculous disclaimer of, oh, we'll never talk about it, we have no idea. We have no idea of what names were even nominated. Like, everyone says like, oh, did McGill me, like, where was the discussion on McGilmy? Like, there's a reality where all 18 people said, you know what, it's a weird time. I'm not going to be the person that even nominates a Russian guy

for this conversation, this time of year. And he may have never even being discussed. So, like, we don't get anything at all. And to me, like, if I'm looking from the outside and trying to, like, detective an answer I'll never get when it comes to O'Lette, my simple answer is like, you know what? No one ever thought to even nominate her

because that's the only way she wouldn't get 14 of 18 votes. Like that's my working theory on this I honestly hadn't even That hadn't crossed my mind That's I think that's the best explanation Of what happened Because once you see her on the ballot Or the final ballot

Like oh Yeah There's no way in my mind Where she was on the ballot And didn't get it So like I just I have to assume that This is 18 people

Some not knowing anything about women's hockey Some Many some deciding oh well you know what someone else is going to nominate a woman's player and and essentially no one took the time to even nominator and i think that's that's that's my working theory of what happened and we'll never be able to prove that right or wrong since as we've been told multiple times they sign a nda or whatever so we'll never know exactly what happened but i'm going with that because her profile is such yeah where you would think you can easily imagine you know if you're

Brian Burke or Caney Granato or whoever, you're saying like, of course somebody's going to nominate her. Like, of course somebody's going to nominate Carolyn Millette. Everyone just leaves it up to the other person and then it actually, then it actually doesn't happen. It's a fascinating psychological exercise. And it's an insane thing. Like it is, this is not something you see from other halls of faith. Like if you're eligible, you're eligible. There shouldn't be that extra barrier where it takes like a nomination to to bring them to the four. If you're,

if you want to use your allotted time to argue for person X, so be it. But there shouldn't be that barrier of entry to the actual discussion either. I mean, well, never, once again, as we said,

the entire thing is issues, but like, when it comes to the baseball hall of fame, it's not like someone has to be nominated to get in. They get the ballot. They just send out a list. They get the ballot. Like,

like, why is that not the case with, Hockey Hall of Fame. Why is there not just a ballot of, hey, here's the people eligible, and then you vote. Like, that's to me that. And you guys have seen, you guys have seen the baseball hall ballots too. Like, there's never been a, they go so granular and goes so far down the list. There is never, it has never been a problem where a person has been, hasn't been on the ballot that should have been. If you're even, if there's, my gosh, like, it's, it's a fun thing every year where you see like what, it's like, hey, let's, like, hey, let's,

remember some guys because they're on the because they're on the hall ballot this year. That's never a problem either. I'm how surprised that we even know who the inductors are, honestly, for as secretive, for as secretive as they are and for his, you mentioned the NDA that they have or the, or, I wonder, I wonder how much, I wonder how much Eric the Hatchek gets like guys like, calling him names in those meetings since he has given us as much as he's given. Oh, totally. Right?

Because, like, the only reason anyone knows how it works is because, because Eric has, because of Eric. Like, I wonder if they're like, I wonder if like they all curse to hatchet when they open their meetings and everything. Because I mean, I, I remember the first, the first one or two of those mock induction things that we did. Like, I wasn't involved with it because I was still, I was still with the, with the Pittsburgh group.

So I was reading that like, oh, whoa, that's how it, that's how it works. Okay. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So whatever, man. Just fix it. What do you think of, what do you think about Long ago? You're a goalie. Is that, I mean, he's a, he's a, he's a no-brainer first ballot guy, right? he should be in. I think the issue just becomes there's all these other goleys that shouldn't be in.

In the past, when we've done this exercise, I've argued for the fact that Mike Vernon should be in the Hall of Fame. And the fact, Mike Vernon's not in the Hall of Fame as an issue that kind of... Didn't you nominate Mike Vernon? Like, wasn't he the guy... Wasn't he the guy you saw before when we did that? Yeah, yeah. Like, I think Vernon should be in the Hall of Fame.

And Vernon's a guy who, if you're not going to put Mike Vernon in the Hall of Fame, you start to create way too high of a... barrier for any goalie that can get into the Hall of Fame. And I think one of the other issues with goaltending becomes we use different like statistical barometer. I don't think everyone uses the same statistical. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. Save percentage. And I think people get caught up in what is, um, get caught up in other like, like, like, um, I remember I once had a conversation with Ben Bishop, not about like actual, not about like barometers for goaltenders where it's like, we think about like

how many times when a guy goes to the Hall of Fame do like if a guy plays a thousand NHL games all of a sudden he is always always, he's always, he's now always going to be in the Hall of Very Good right? Like a thousand games is the Hall of Very Good but what is it? It's Rodor

Wah and Flurry are those the only three that will like likely hit a thousand in their career right now I think? I think that's where I track and Flurry is going to be a lot of things. Yeah. I mean, Vasselowski with his pace, maybe, in a long time. But, but, like, so we don't, we don't, like, when a goalie hits 500 games, we should celebrate that more. Or 500 starts, for lack of it. Like, we'll use starts, right? When a goalie hits 500 starts, we should make a bigger deal about that. But we don't ever see a, there was, like, like, Braden Holpey got one this past year. Brainholpe, they got like a silver stick for starting 500 games and everything like that.

But how often do you see the, oh, 500 games goalie celebration? Like we make such a big deal about 1,000 games for players. And we don't give the, there's certain goaltender categories that we don't recognize or kind of forget about and everything like that. Yeah, because it's tough for, it's tough for goalies to be compilers, right? Like that's something you hear whenever, whenever you have the whole discussion, any sport, like such and such was a compiler. Jason Whitten was a compiler. or whatever is the first one that popped in my head. And the other issue with goaltending too is you have guys who you change the barometer.

I'll call this the Chris Osgood factor, right? Like, okay, you say, oh, well, what's going to stop? What's going to be the detractor against the long ago? Oh, he never won cups. Okay. Well, Chris Osgood, how many of cups did Chris Osgood win? He won three. Three.

But two as a starter, right? If we're going to go technically, he was the, but two as a starter. but we're going to be like oh well was Chris Oz good good enough like it's like it's it's it's it's for goalies we decide to use the cups is it not cups is it individual stats like yeah it's it becomes overly subjective of the of the of the of wins and everything like that like you have to be like from this generation of players like flurry like if flurry didn't get his Vesna two years uh two years ago all of a sudden there's a case where someone might be saying, well, Mark Andre Fleury is not going to be in the, shouldn't, shouldn't be in the

hockey all the thing. He always had one of the most interesting cases, I think, for years, because you're like, I think he needed, he definitely needed the Vegas kick to, to turn himself into, into a no-brainer. I'm not, I don't know about the Vesna, but like those few years, like if you, if you would have finished second year that he won the Vesna, I think he was still in a spot where he probably would have gotten it, but you never know, because it is, it's stacked against. I, so I'm a big haul guy, just generally, I think, at this point. Like, regardless of the sport that it is. So if someone's on the borderline, like, put them in, like, it's, it's, it's, it's,

it's not that big of a deal because that's the precedence that it's been set. It's also a freaking museum. Let's just be, let's just call it what it is. It's, it's at the end of the day, like, these are museums. These are the history of the game. These are, it's, well, it's, well, it's, well, it's an honor quote unquote. It's, we're talking about putting something in a museum. Like, we're not, we're not, we're not, we're not, we're not talking about.

out anything that really at the end of the day impacts anyone's lives beyond what you go and see on a website and what you go see in a plaque, right? It's a museum. It's not, it's not like there's money being given out. It's not like there's like, like it's cool. But it's also, it's not, it's, it's not as holier than that as it should be. There's no cost to anybody else to, to, to, to, to, to make it. And I think that the hockey hall has in spots been good with that. And yeah, they were, I mean, the, we just had the women's discussion. That's obviously far overdue and looking like a problem. Guys like Herb Carnegie who got in as a bill or this year should have been in long, long ago. So, so the contributions, the contributions of people of color and whatever, like that, that's,

that's being, that's a wrong that's being, that's in the process of being righted. But I think in some ways when you're talking about guys who have actually played the game, like skaters who, who are, who have marginal candidates or are marginal candidates or borderline candidates or whatever you want to say, I think they've done a pretty good job of letting those guys in. Like you have the, you have the Guy Carbonos of the world and Joe Newen Dykes and these guys who, you know, if you're a real stickler about it or if the precedent was something else,

then maybe they wouldn't have gotten in. So you have the mindset for the most part is where it should be for skaters. And it's not there for goaltenders because as long as Vernon and Osgood are out, there's major, major work to be done in that area. And it's the overall temptation to just say, especially with Osgood, like, well, you know, anyone could have won behind those Red Wings teams, but it self-feeds, right? Because I assume that's part of the reason why the awards numbers when you go to his hockey reference, you know, aren't where you could argue they should be.

And to me, like almost everyone judges goalies in a big way by what they've done in the playoffs. And that stuff is never going to get reflected in anything. but cups. And so if it's, it goes back to Sean's point about the cups, do they matter, don't they matter. But I think Osgood's career, playoff save percentage was like above 915. And this is, you know, as it starts to turn, but it's still not, it wasn't easy to do a 915, especially in the early days there. I mean, and the other thing about Osgood, and then I'll make that point, and then we can, one other quick, we can actually, we can actually talk about your work, because that's, I guess, yeah, uh, Osgood, how many times did the,

Wings try to, like, everyone says, like, anyone can play behind the wings. Yeah. How many times did the wings try to replace Osgood? And then they were like, well, we had the guy. Sorry, Curtis Joseph. So, like, how many, how many times did the wings try to replace Osgood? And it turns out, no, not everyone can play behind him. Like, come back.

It's like, come back from Long Island, buddy. That's fine. We made him a stick. Like, it's, is that. And then the other thing about the hockey Hall of fame that I think we do a disservice of, is we underuse the builder category and how we look at how things change the game because we have such a long list of guys

that are not in the builder category that stops us from getting to the minuscule that should be looked at. Like, for example, like, a guy to go to Max's Michigan ties here. So, like, Marty Turco, I'm not saying he's a Hall of Fame goaltender statistically or whatever,

but Marty Turco changed how the position was played completely. Obviously, Hextall and Bredora were handling the kind of the forefathers of puck handling, but every single, before Marty Turco, every single goalie, this is a podcast, not video, so I have to explain this. Every single goalie. This is now an episode of Goalie Corner with Sean Shapiro. Every single goalie before Turko had their glove hand facing down when handling the puck. Turco flipped his glove upside down, so basically the pointer finger on the glove was pointing back up towards the blocker on the stick. No one had handled the puck

like that ever in the history of hockey before that as a goalie. Marty Turco invented that, changed completely how goalies handled the puck, completely changed the game. The last goalie who didn't handle the puck like that in the NHL was Ante Niemey, who was one of the worst puck handlers I've ever seen in my life. Marty Turco is a builder

within the hockey world, but he's such a it's a minuscule thing that we will never ever be able to discuss because he changed the position completely, but we'll never be able to discuss it because we have all these, we're still having to get Herb Carnegie in. And that is because, and it's the same issue that we see with inducting women.

It's that we can only do one builder a year. It's insane. So if you vote for Herb Carnegie, that means you can't vote for Red Berenson, which is complete insanity. So expand that, if you want to cap it at two or cap it or three or don't cap it at any. Because that is going to be another issue for getting women in the hall over the next years. Cassie Campbell-Paskel should be in the Hall of Fame. She was maybe not there on her own on her merit as a player But if you consider what she did as a player and also what she's done as an announcer and as a symbol for growing the game

For growing the women's game over the last however many years It is a no-brainer she should be in there as a builder and because of the way the system set up She's like fourth or fifth in line and everything stacks up we're gonna have more of these people to consider year after year and there's no real mechanism for fixing it I like Max's idea of like, he used, I think Max was the one mentioned having an idea of, of going and having like, okay, well, let's put, let's, these people are in. Like, what, like, I almost feel like the hall needs like a hard reset of like,

you know what, call it, think of a much more PC name of other than the we effed up year and basically be like, okay, we're inducting 20 builders and we're inducting a dozen women and we're making it a whole big year thing. and we're resetting ourselves so we can actually be proportionate in the future. Doesn't baseball have something like this? They've got like some coalition

that like committee and all that stuff. So you could have like a Every single hall of fame has started including the Hockey Hall of Fame with like a larger group than average. Right? And that's not what happened at the start of things for women and just created this.

The table was set 12 years ago for this. This happened. So yeah, play catch up. Like the fact that it's 2022 when Herb Carnegie is only getting inducted in the Hall of Fame now is embarrassing. So find a way to fix all that. Find a way to get all the pioneers, whether you're talking about people of color, whether you're talking about women. Like, give them their flowers now, move on from it. And then we can judge players on their own merits as they retire.

So we can talk about Hillary Knight whenever she's done or whatever without having this, you know, difficult. who who who who who gets in over whom deal that we're dealing with now all right that's enough of that for now shapiro we did not bring you here to talk solely about the hockey hall of fame debate but here we are 45 minutes in or whatever we do want to talk about your work you'd have you had an interesting story that came out for a big story that came out in the last couple days about about the league having a record revenue year which is being received interestingly by some people on Twitter. So let's let's let's talk about that. Yeah, it's, uh, you learn how much people don't, uh, it's one day, oh, they, oh, they hate reading, don't they folks? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Uh, you learn, also, I mean, A, you learn how it's kind of confusing because the league, so much of how the league puts it out sometimes can be so very PR-y and everything like that. But, I mean, one of the things that's kind of, I think one thing people forget about COVID is how much money this cost everybody in the how much money this cost everybody and everything like that. So while it's, I think everyone kind of gets lost up in like, oh, record revenues and things like that. And we can talk more about why those happened. But the first thing to establish is the baseline. This is the most important thing is no, the salary cap is only going to go up like a million a year for the next three to four years. Because we're talking about players.

basically owing before going into this season players owed a billion dollars in back in back basically in in in escrow payments to owners and the players decided how and basically the players didn't want to for anyone for the quick quick 30 second synopsis which I'm finally able to do after explaining this to people 50,000 times it is funny it is funny how that works right whenever you explain stuff like that. It's like after the 10th time, you're like, all right, I got it. I got my 30 second explanation of what I wrote. So NHL revenue, NHL player salaries have to be set before the season. Therefore, you cannot do player salaries based off how much money the league made during the season. So player salaries are set before the season. That is not actually a player's salary.

The players salaries are determined on the league hitting their revenue goals and 50% going to players and 50% going to owners. If 50% of revenue does not cover player salaries, the players then owe owners money because of the CBA deal they signed and agreed, says the league did not make enough money to pay their salaries. How do you pay that

back? So through something called escrow. Escrow this past season was 17.2%. For simple math, every $100 check was really $81.8 instead. Next year, and that's before and that's before other things. Yes, yes. And so, and players coming out of

COVID and everything like that. So players weren't feeling a ridiculous escrow like 30, 40, 50% or whatever to pay this back right away. They kicked it down the line. Next year it'll be 10%. So any player making a million dollars is really making 900K. The following three years after that will be 6%. Essentially players right now put it in place where they didn't want to lose a ton of money from their current checks. But by doing so, it's also a system that means the salary cap cannot go up because, because owners are not going to raise the cap more than a million dollars here until they get their billion dollars back. Billionaires want their billion dollars. No.

So that billion, though, it can only be repaid via the escrow. So like the big NFT deal, the US TV deals, all that stuff that are big revenue items, those don't make a dent in the billion. It's just with the escrow? They can if it makes a certain amount. But the issue is it's still not even making that much. Like, I mean, like, yes, we're talking record revenues. Great. 5.2, 5.3 billion this year.

But the league was making, the league went, I think it was, the league missed out on three, two and three billion each of the prior two years. So we're talking about a big lump that you have to make up anyway. So it can, it can, it can. Those, those numbers do go into the whole pot and make the escrow pot bigger to pay off the old debt. but it's still we're still not talking about we're not talking about the NHL TV deal good for the sport it's not an NFL TV deal it's not an NBA TV deal let's just let's just be just be to be realistic about it everyone everyone when that TV deal was signed they're like oh the salary cap's

gonna go up 25 million like no look how much money the NBA got look how much money baseball gets like it was good compared to a really bad 10 year deal with NBC like that's something where like in the annals of history when one of the biggest failures for the league was not signing with NBC. One of the biggest failures for the league was signing for 10 years. Signing for 10 years with NBC. So the league basically handicapped itself where it missed out on being able to get the incremental rise in market. I mean, I know some people who even said this ESPN Turner deal, the seven year part of it, some people are even worried that that may be a little bit too long and that maybe a five-year deal would have been much better for the league.

Because as rights and values are going to go up. So there's a... Because the 10-year NBC deal, because I was working by that point, that was a bad deal when they signed it. Like that was the dialogue surrounding it, the debate surrounding it in the moment. This is not a hindsight thing. It was like, oh, this is way too long. Because even at that point, we were all.

already in the rights bubble. Like people, people, people were already aware that that was, that that was basically the only thing that, that broadcasters were going to pay for was, was, was live sports because of, because of streaming.

And back then it was like, there was, it was like DVR proof proofing sports was, was a concern on and on. It was a bad deal back then. And it only looked worse and worse and worse. When you look at, like say the NBA,

which has signed three TV deals now since, since, since that initial NHL one was signed. So they were playing, catch up for sure. No, and we can all laugh, like, at the, like, we should all be laughing at, not that we, this is a podcast about sports media, but we should all be wondering and looking at, okay, did the MLS just make a mistake by signing the 10-year deal with Apple?

Because someone should, someone from the MLS should have looked at what happened with the NHL, with a 10-year deal, and then they just signed a 10-year deal with Apple, where. Ten-year exclusive rights holder didn't work recently with another league. You have to learn from history on that. So, I mean, the league is the good news about the NHL and the business of the NHL right now is things are moving in the right direction for the cap to go up. That's the most important thing. That's the headline. The cap will go up and we're not going to be in a spot where some people were worried.

We were going to see a flat cap or the – I keep using the word flat cap because going up $1 million a year doesn't really – that doesn't change. I mean, that's a performance bonus for most teams, honestly. That's typically kind of, you're like, okay, that's only covering maybe our performance bonus is next year. So some people were worried. That's a bad RFA.

Yeah. It's like, yeah, we need to give this guy a raise. Like, we're going to see, so some people worry we're going to see a flat cap for five, six years. And the good news is with what happened this year and kind of the baseline it sets, we're going to see the cap rise to

normal, come back on a normal curve in three to four years. That's the good news. And that's what this sets the base for. How good is this year is always going to be interesting. Record is always great, but it's also interesting coming back back to back COVID years.

I mean, the biggest thing about the NHL and one of the things they keep billing and everything like that, one of their strengths is also one of their weaknesses at the same time. Where the NHL, then they sell this, They sell this to ad partners all the time.

You get your best return on investment, which means at the same time, you may be spent, if you spend X amount with the NBA, you're not going to get nearly as much. If you spend X amount with the NFL, you're not going to near as much. But that also means you're also not getting the most amount of money per deal.

So it's kind of one of the strengths and weaknesses of the league. So you lean into it while you can. And the other thing with the NHL, too, about the other strength the NHL has, and it's kind of a something no one in the league will ever acknowledge out loud. But like, who has the most dispendable income in the world right now? Rich white people. And that's where a lot of the sponsorship money is coming from.

Like, that's the other thing too. Like, that's a reality that no one from the league will want to probably admit out loud. But this league benefits from, it's a rich sport. So where do rich sponsors put their money in? Why do you think so many financial companies are investing in the league? It's what we've seen from televised golf for how many years, right? Where there's a lot of investment firms, a lot of fidelity advertisements, a lot of luxury brands. And I think it is that way, you know, with the NHL kind of in miniature.

I wanted to ask specifically about the NFT deal because I know that's something you wrote about. Yep. You wrote about last week. And I, if nothing else, I wanted to ask about the timing of it. Because I know, I know that part of your story was at the NHL deliberately slow played. It's kind of involvement there. do you how much of that do you buy because it is it is a wild time to get to the the timing publicly is is yeah on on on some level it's unfortunate for for for for the nchl depending on how much you

you know how depend on where you fall morally as far as enough to use are concerned yeah it's um i do believe the i think it's kind of a 50-50 thing on that like like they When you're talking about talking to 50 to, there's so many, like, there's so many weeds to sort through in the NFT space, right? Like, you have to make sure, like, there's, you don't want to, you don't want to get the, you don't want the Enron field of NFT deals, right? Like, you don't want, you don't want, you don't want, you don't want to be in that spot. And so, um, I think part of it, part of the slow play, I think is fair. Part of it is sorting through what is the best. And they allegedly spoke to 50,

they said they spoke to 50 to 70 different companies. And taking the time to get it right, I think is good. But I also think there is fair criticism at the same time of there's a difference between taking due diligence. And there's a difference between when did you actually start working on this? And did you strike while the iron was hot? basically. And I think for the NHL, I think this is one of those things where some teams were definitely frustrated. They couldn't do more early on. But this is also something that falls on the NHLPA and the players itself, because one of the reasons Top Shot got off the ground so quickly

was because it was players in the league working together. Okay? Right. NHL players and the higher culture of hockey is also culpable in this too, because NHL players just think of, don't ever think about anything but team first, game first, whatever, yada, yada, yada, yada, right? Very few of them. Anyone who does, anyone who does in the past, and we're still in that spot, depending on which place you plop down to go market. But like, any player that thinks about his brand first or whatever is, oh, that's a, he's a me first guy. He doesn't care about the team or whatever. So one of the reasons NFTs didn't really have, were difficult with the NHL was the NHLPA was, the NHLPA was, on board. And so you couldn't

have, like some teams sold NFTs, but like the devils and the capitals did and stuff like that, but they could only sell the logo, the Stanley Cup. Like, you couldn't do an NFT with a player in it. And vice versa, a player couldn't do an NFT with a team colors in it even. Like, there are some NFTs that, where some players clearly

broke the rule on it and, like, if some people wanted to get, if there's some, like, someone wanted to go ambulance chasing on NFT deals, I'm sure there's someone who could do it as far as legal, as far as legal implications, but the league and the NHLPA didn't get on this quick enough together. Like, take your due diligence, do everything like that, but you needed to have the NHLPA on board earlier as well. So it's partially on the people of the league, but it's also

a big, it's also on the PA and the league as well for basically having this whole system where we care about, we're here to negotiate CBA deals. We don't really do stuff like that. it's so it's it's kind of a it's it's a weird space um the other thing with nfts and the other thing that's going to be kind of i and i don't know the answer to this it's just going to be interesting to see where this goes because i don't is to be is going to be how when do they create how do they create the product that actually appeals is there is there even an nfts product product quote unquote since it's not something you can touch um that actually actually appeals to the person who wasn't in this right away.

Because when it came to NFTs, you were either in or out right away. I look at people like that. People either thought they were like, oh, this is such a cool thing, and they still like them, or someone who tried to buy them and thinking they could make money on them. And that left them, and those people are realizing that they either gotten early enough or they didn't. but if you say, okay, well, I want to make NFTs this big part of the future and this big part of collecting and everything like that. Like, is there, how do you make that fit? Because the digital collectible part of it, to me is still nothing. Like, I have, like, the one thing I've heard, and I don't know even if it would translate, but like the one thing I've heard is, um, ticket NFTs, right?

Because like, so like, for example, like, I have, I have on my, I have on my desk, like somewhere on my desk here, which is, like, a mess. I have a ticket from the first hockey game that my wife and I went to after we were married. It was a San Antonio Rampage Houston Arrow's game in 2012. I have the ticket stub from that. Ticket stubs don't exist anymore, right? Now, someone can take a picture, someone can take a picture at the game and stuff like that. But like, I've heard, how do you try to find some sentimentiality? Is that the right word? Whatever. That's what we're, that's what we're calling it. How do you find some of that to bring it to the NFT where you get it at someone at a game. Like Max and I were at the game in Detroit this year when Bertuzzi scored four goals, right?

Like, is there a space where the wings could be like, hey, we're going to now mint a Bertuzi four-goal game that proves you were here, but we're only going to sell it geolocked within Little Caesars right now? Like those are the things that I think become kind of the space of maybe you get a bigger market, but I say maybe with a heavy question mark afterwards. You know what will be kind of cool that will never happen? It would be, if they could NFTIs or whatever, the audio and video from like they're like between the benches stuff, it would probably have to be like in partnership with the broadcasters or whatever. But that would be something that if it never aired, it's like back audio video that you can have that isn't actually publicly available and you can just go to YouTube and find. And you can say, oh, I have the like this dust up of these two guys arguing or chirping.

each other during a game or the sound from the bench when this goal was scored that didn't actually air or something. That would be the kind of thing that I think I would actually be interested in from a collecting standpoint. I don't collect anything, so it's, I can't really relate, I guess. But to me, that's like the thing that would seem like it would have some actual, hey, I have this. No one else has this value. Yeah. Is there concern in the league's part just with getting involved with NFTs at all, since it's widely used to launder money and steal money from stupid people. Nope.

Nope. Yeah. I figured. No. Yeah. I mean, look at gambling. Who cares? I don't care.

Same thing. Same thing's happening with, I mean, there's no crypto. Like, I mean, it's, it's funny. They'll, they'll go and separate NFTs are not crypto and cryptos are not NFT, but the league is also actively working on a crypto deal right now, too. So there is, so it is, there is, it's. Perfect time for it, baby. They're always, they got the finger on the pulse with that one.

It's, it's money. That's what that's that's what it's it can't expect exactly morally That's just not that's not that's not what they do There's no ethical consumption okay I did want to like what's the Is there like a top line view of how things have gone for the first year in the TNT ESPND? I know we kind of we kind of picked it that earlier But what's the what's the overriding vibe there?

I mean the most important thing about the ESPN TNT deal This has nothing to do with anything that aired on television this year But the most important thing about the ESPNT&T deal was it was great for the league's valuation. Like it was by being on ESPN and TNT, by being on networks that are sports bar defaults that are carried more widely than NBCSN was, which is now completely gone,

it became much more attractive for a car company or a financial company to be like, okay, I'll buy a spot with, but not even just on TV, even like the local in ice in ice advertisement this year we had the debate when writing this story of whether it was in ice or on ice and we decided to go in ice that's tough

I don't know if I don't know if I would have done that one but a player is on ice and if the helmet is on the ice the ad is in the ice yes and the ad is in the ice so anyhow in ice advertising valuations went up this year just because of the fact where like oh hey your team's in the playoffs it's going to be an ESP

PN and TNT. Same thing with the helmet decals, which the helmet decals and the jersey valuation patches that we're going to get next year. They're going to go up. They went up as well because of the whole concept of, okay, you're going to get more eyeballs than you ever would have. So from that alone, it is success off the bat in that way. Now, the very interesting, now we get into the actual thing where there's people have lots and

lots of opinions. It's an undisputable fact. More people watched hockey this year. That is good for. hockey. That is a fact. I'm just going to put that there as in all of the people who are, because like when I tweeted the fact, the observation the other night, it was great that ABC actually aired the cup celebration, not in its entirety, but so much longer. And there are some people who are like, oh, their coverage sucks. Like, I don't care about their coverage. The fact

they did it is what's good. And so more people watching hockey, good. That's, that's, that's, baseline is there. The question going forward becomes, can you grow the baseline? Like the viewership and the numbers this year, will, does hockey actually grow on ESPN and Turner? Or is it just this is, or is it just, this is what it is.

This is normal ESPN Turner audience. So this is what it's going to be. So that's going to be a key question because the whole, the whole question of ESPN and Turner will grow the game. I don't think you can fairly answer that question for three to four years.

Like it's, I think it fairly grows the viewership this year. But that doesn't change the fact that like, How many people just turn ESPN? People just turn Turner on. People see like, oh, I'm going to see whether, I'm going to see. Is it the dark night or is it the basketball game? Right?

Like, that's what Turner is. And so that doesn't mean, that doesn't mean you're capturing a new hockey fan. It's going to, how it grows over three to four years will be the most interesting thing to me. And then the other key, and now we can talk about this, is the production and the content. Because I think you look at right now, they, have the easy shield, both networks have the easy shield of it was year one, we're working through it. Next year, I think we can be a lot more critical fairly of what's happened. Like, it's just like a, it's like a rookie player, right? Like, you're like, oh, he's a rookie,

he's a rookie. Like the ESPN and Turner and even the NHL were able to use that this year and year one. I think, yes, next year, when you have an issue with a broadcast, it'll be much more fair because it won't be like, oh, they're a new broadcast. They're like, no, they've done a full season. They've done a Western Conference final. They've done a Stanley Cup final. And by my view, I think off the bat, I think Turner, I think Turner stuck the landing better off the beginning. And I can, I'm curious what you guys both think. From my view, Turner stuck the landing beat better off the beginning for two key reasons where they decided what they were from day one and they didn't change. Whether you like it or not, they stuck with who they were.

and they actually went with assigned roles. To me, that's the biggest difference between Turner and ESPN. Turner, ESPN's issue, from my perspective, was they didn't stick with a, they didn't stick with assigned roles. They didn't put people in the best place to succeed and keep them there. Well, Turner just said, okay, we're going to work through this. We know what we want. And they stuck with the vision. Well, ESPN did not do that.

I mean, on my end, I think ESPN's, I like that the A crew with McDonough and Ferraro and Emily Kaplan, I thought they were, you know, varying degrees of really good to great, I think, as a product throughout, them individually were to me. I thought it got a little hinky in the middle whenever Ray moved between the bench and it turns in it to what do you do with Emily Kaplan? Does she just kind of hang out, hang out in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, in the, the tunnels. I mean, I think that was, that was an obvious, an obvious issue. But also, those are three really talented people who are good at their job. So I, I look at that. And I'm

like, okay, once they continue to iron that out and put them in the right spots, you know, that in terms of a game call gives them, gives them a pretty, like a, a little bit of an edge. But yeah, in terms of, if you're looking at it on balance, not just on game crews or whatever, I think the Turner, in TNT, um, intermission pregame post game just, it blew, it blew ESPN out of the water just as a,

as a product. I don't, and I don't think it was particularly close. No, and no surprise. I mean, they had the formula already from inside the NBA and, and they executed it.

I thought really well, as well as they, as well as they could have for hockey, for sure. Yeah. And Turner also was willing to spend the money. That's the other thing you saw. And this is,

this is, this is what you could obviously see in the playoffs. When Turner got more games, and when they had more games in the first round and everything like that, who was calling Turner games? They went and hired team broadcasters. They went and hired people.

Lots of them. Yeah, but they went and hired people who knew how to call hockey. It wasn't someone, it wasn't someone who was a... Ported over from another sport who was like, yeah. And so Turner

sent their studio crew to the Western Conference Final. It was pretty obvious to me you look at just who was spending and who was investing in talent and best success, it was pretty obvious when you go from the Western Conference final and you see, even though it was only four games, you see Tocke and Gretzky and everyone literally sitting there

watching the game in person. Then you go to ESPN and the games in New York and they still have the studio team is in Connecticut. Like it's, to me, there was a clear divide of how Turner was willing, how Turner invested in certain elements. elements that ESPN. Yeah, they're like, this is our show. These are the people who are on it.

We are spending money on our, on our intermission and pre and post. Like, these are the guys. Like, maybe sometimes grass could be there, maybe not. Like, like, folks get days off. Fine. But the core was there. And if you look at, and if you try to apply that same logic to ESPN, it was baffling because Mark Messier disappears for a few weeks and then you have like,

Chelyos is there. Like, there was no, it was clearly, you know, it's, it's about, it's about what you value, right? And it's about what you emphasize. And I think we got a pretty clear course in that with TNT versus ESPN. And you can tell there are certain parts with ESPN that are undisputably good, right? Like I think like as much as I do have to give them credit when you talk about the highlight and social reach and stuff like that. Like, yes, the ESPN does deserve credit that Turner could never.

have because Turner doesn't, as we said, as I said earlier, it goes from the hockey post game show to the dark night. Like it doesn't, like it's not, it's not a 24-7 sports network. Um, ESPN is what's going to be, is what's, when you walk into a restaurant at two o'clock on a Thursday, ESPN is what's on TV as opposed to, and actually, you, and hockey was actually viewed there. So hockey ESPN does deserve credit for that. The other thing with ESPN, I thought the point was good. I thought like, by, but, like, but, like, Like by the end of the show, by the end of the season, the point, you know, the, the weekly show with, with Butchagas and Greg Wasinski and torts and all them, I thought, I thought they were doing a good job. Actually having a studio show, I think, was huge because that, that was a, that was a direct answer, not intentionally, but it was a direct answer to everyone says like, oh, ESPN doesn't care about hockey.

If they were just buying it just to fill the, if they were only buying it to fill the ESP, to build ESPN Plus subscribers, for out-of-market package, they wouldn't have done the point. They wouldn't have put it on. So to me, the point is definitely a positive thing. I think the league, the league definitely will probably have some conversations

with ESPN about trying to get into some of the other shows, like the PTIs of the world, the, whatever, the Steve-A-Smith show. Like, what we were told would happen what we were told would happen with residual programming happened with SportsCenter, but it didn't happen with the other ones. The debate, the debate shows.

And I know, I know it's going to be an absolutely terrible scary. So like Stephen A. Smith starts talking about hockey. I am scared for what the Twitter reaction will be. I'm in. Are you kidding me? I'm like, let's go, baby. Give me something to write about. Let's make it happen.

And a lot of people will be telling on themselves in certain ways when that happens. but it will be one of the best things for the sport. Like if they can get Stephen A. Smith to get, if you can get Stephen A. Smith to get angry and have an opinion about, about where, about what, like, so Nikita Kucharov, the end of game six. Yeah. Yeah, freaks out. Like, that should have been, that should have been a whole like, like, if an NBA player

in a perfect world, yeah, that would, that would be a whole segment on. Yeah, that should be, that should have been the huge topic of debate shows. but it's hockey so it didn't it did that we're not there yet so in the future when when Tampa is when when when Tampa is in the cup final next year again or whatever right

like if Kucharav was throwing a stick at the end like you want that to be a spot where people are debate shows are like what the hell is this guy doing he's a league MVP how does it taint his legacy like I know people don't like that type of conversation but that is the conversation that gets hockey into the further lexicon of this country, this country, north of the United States,

I know Canada, you already talked about it, but like, we don't need, we don't need to talk about them. So I, it's, that's,

this is all, I mean, we could talk about this for, I think we, we should just do it again, like at some point during the off season because I could talk, I could talk this stuff with you all day.

It's, it's, where I, what I want to close on, though, is like, can you tell ESPN to fix their audio levels, please?

Is there someone, is, is there someone you can, you can bug about that? I think there is a Yeah, they're on doing. Oh, Kalli! Sean Shapiro, everybody.

Thanks for doing this, man. Yeah, thanks for having me, guys. I didn't get enough Paul Morisse. I know I was the fill-in for Paul Maurice, so does this mean I get to, do I also get to coach game? Do I get a preseason game in Florida? I'd love a, like.

No, these were the questions we were going to ask for Paul Maurice. Oh, yeah, wait a second. I was going to ask Paul Maris about ESPN audio levels and, and take shots at NFT. with him too. Yeah, I'm fine. I know, I know, it all went according to plan. Every year the Panthers and Predators do like that weird like split doubleheader. Like, if Paul, I will take one game from Paul.

You could take one of those. Yeah, I think Paul should let me have one of those games. I mean, like I said, if you, if you bug someone about the ESPN audio levels, whenever we talk to Paul in a couple weeks, we'll talk. It's, uh, we'll talk to him about that. I'll scratch my, you scratch our back, we'll scratch yours. I'll even take like associate title for one game. Just let me, I don't.

don't even have to say anything. Interim coach. John Shapiro. No, video coaches actually work. They actually have to do stuff. Yeah, I don't think I... Yeah, they're not giving you the cushy job. You got to start on the middle room.

I want the assistant coach during the preseason where you don't give it, where you don't care at all about the score. And so you're sending, so you're actually rolling lines no matter what. It's like, oh, here, here's the, here's the kid from who's going back to London in two days. Here, go play, go play, go play bumper on the power play. Go out there, buddy. Let's go.

Thanks, man. Thanks, guys. This is the only good segment on the show. It's even better this week because we got Max instead of Craig. It is when we go into the comments on our episode from last week where you guys

leave us wonderful questions and wonderful remarks and basically do our job for us by spoon-feeding us content for the last 10 minutes of the show here. These comments were left Maxie on our talk with Brady Kachuk. I don't

No, I don't know if you listen to that or not. I'm putting it on the spot. Did you listen to the interview? Not that one, but I listen to a lot of them. But not that one. Only the good ones. I'll go back and listen to that. Why do you hate Brady Kachuk?

That's my question. No, I don't. I probably just, like, didn't go hit tennis balls against a brick wall that day or something. Oh, dude, he was really good. Of course he was. Brady was good. Matthew was good. I'm sure whenever we have Keith and Chantel on the show, they'll be good, too.

they're like it's like if we don't have anything to do just dial up a kachuk he was he was good last week and these are comments that were left on on the episode page on the athletic app uh regarding that one josh r says if we are giving you guys free content and you are does this mean the meetup at tipsy mc staggers is paid for by craig max as a as a tipsy mc staggers I don't know, patron? Yeah. That's the way it works. Paid for it by Craig or the New York Times company, I think.

When I went to Tipsy McStaggers, it was paid for by Craig. So that's precedent. I think that holds up. Free Monsterlla sticks, bro. The sliders. It's all about the sliders. Sliders? Yeah. Tipsy McStaggers, Sliders.

I can't believe how much mileage you guys had gotten out of that. You know what? It kind of made a, it took a vacation. and the references did for a few weeks there, and now they're back. Eileen, she's our stars fan. What team makes most sense for Ethan Bear if Carolina is really okay with him moving on,

and why is it to Dallas Stars? I think I like that. I think I like Ethan Bear to the Dallas Stars. Man, we're at a point now where defensemen are going to be at a premium. You know, you look at the names that are on the market. not a lot of great ones, especially when you get past,

you know, the Chris LaTangs of the world. I think he's an interesting candidate. I'd like him on the stars. I'd like the stars to just get some competent, a couple more competent, you know, top three pairing guys.

And I think, I think Ethan Bear qualifies. All I want for Ethan Bear is to go somewhere that's actually going to play him. Where he's going to play. Just play. We need to figure out whether this guy is good or not. Like he's one like we've been hearing about it for years.

Like I know I know like stats folks love him. So I default to think I also default to thinking that Nathan Bear is some you know, unearthed gem here. Give this dude the minutes. We need to decide for certain or not whether he's whether he's worth playing every day in a lineup. Like it needs to happen. Because that's always what happens with players that are kind of beloved by the analytics community, you know, where it's like, I remember it was like Mark Arc.

Vince Dunn syndrome. Oh my God. Vince. It's absolutely Vince Dunn syndrome. It started back with Mark Archivello, right? Mark Archivello was 5-8 and he was kind of a skilled forward and everyone was like, you know, Mark Archibello like not getting not getting a chance. And then Mark Carcabello finally got enough chances and people are like, all right, we can

we can stop talking about him. Like he's, you know, a legit across-the-board option. That time has come for Ethan Bear. And if he's going to be good, I would love to see it with my below. of Dallas stars. We have a bunch more, God, we have a bunch more,

a bunch more awards category, suggestions, which we're going to keep because, like I said, you guys are doing our job for us. And at some point in the next couple weeks, Craig and I are going to have our season-ending award show spectacular.

And we're down to our Michael D question, which is the one that was specifically for you, right? You got the wrong Michael. We thought it was Michael K. It was Michael D. No, Michael D posted the question.

and Michael K posted their response. Here's a part of the question that we didn't really answer the Red Wings question. What is your goal, Max, if you're Steve Eiserman, is to get to the cap floor with cap dumps and take a run at 2023 or actually use the space? Like, is it one or the other? Are you blending the two? I'm not using all the space. I wouldn't use all the space, but I would not, if I'm them, I'm not trying to get in on the tank fest this year. Not because I don't think

Connor Pardard's amazing but just the competition is going to be so steep and you need to be trying to take steps forward and if you're bad, you'll be bad but you're not going to purposefully get as bad as some of the teams

that are already going to be bad and so then you're tanking to have like the fifth best odds versus like the 10th? Like, I don't know. Is that really worth it as opposed to making a little progress letting your guys have some good vibes?

I mean, we all know that they can tank as hard as they want They're sullen it up with the fourth pick in the draft. Yeah, right. It's just the way it goes. They're the Detroit Red Wings. Perry G. clarified something they said last week. I believe the phrasing was the Lou Lamrello Award for like undercover American or surprise, surprise American.

Perry thought he was Canadian, which like, I understand because nobody knows all that much about Lou Lamrello. Then he went to Providence and has worked in the league for 100 years and operates in a cone of silence. So we will incorporate that thought into our season ending awards deal. Tyler M. Hear me out Tuesday, boys, breezes. Tampa isn't the best team of the cap era because they didn't follow the cap. Just kidding. They are the best team of the post-COVID era. So we have, so he's breaking this down. Tyler is declaring that the O4 lockout to March 2020 is is one era and because we don't know how it's the cap era and because we don't know how lost seasons and games and lower levels will affect the next generation of players and the condensed

seasons and all that stuff. We're like, we're starting, we're starting fresh in 2020. No, that's the wrong framing. Do you buy that? I listen to this one. No, I listen to this episode where you guys had this debate. The cat bear is like the three point era. It's not, it's not a discreet era where it's like, you know, 15 years. It's everything after this, the game changed. Uh-huh. And so no, there is no, I mean, there's, we need to find, like, what Tyler, what Tyler is right about is that we do need to find, some way to break it up, or it might just be a discussion by discussion basis. And this is sort of what I said to Craig because he got all busy about it. Like, it just so happens, like, that

the Sydney Crosby era lined up with the Capp era. Yeah. Like, it's, it's, if that's the way you want to frame the discussion, like, those are the terms of it, right? Is that you're talking about Sydney Crosby's prime, which also for the time being dovetails directly with the cap era. So, there's no easy way to do this. I think you just argue based on the tenets of the, or on, on the parameters of, of, of the argument, right? So you can say, you can say, like, you can say like, you can say like, and you can have two different talks. You can say, like, who is the best team of the cat bearer so far? Who is the best team of the post? Like, whatever. Divide them up the way you ever want, the way you want to divide it up. The way Craig set that

discussion was like was in the entire cap era which starts in 2005 you guys were just talking different languages you were you were talking about franchise you were talking about what franchise has owned the cap era and it is the penguins it's either the penguins or the black hawks Tampa still has a shot to get in there but team of the cap era like the team like the discreet you know a couple year window it's this lightning group I take this lightning group against the others I think that's I think that's completely fine but I but that is not the way I understood the You were having two different conversations for sure all day. You know why?

Because Craig's stupid. That's why. Or he planned it. Or he planned it that way. Oh, wait a second. Craig's evil. That's why. Which do you think he would prefer to be called evil or stupid?

I don't care what he prefers because he's both because that guy's both the smart, lovable Craig Custin's. I kid, I kid. We all went from Maxie K. He loves the Friday show. He wants him more on the Tuesday show. I mean, I want you more on the Tuesday show, obviously. Let Max and Sean do all the work and Craig can just quip in with one-liners,

maybe talk more about writing books and let real journalists do the work. Hell yeah, baby. Craig's a boss now. He's not boots on the ground. Michael Kay's got it perfectly, perfectly laid up. These are all award suggestions, which, again, we are keeping for the future. Jesse W. Do you think that because Austin Matthews plays in Toronto,

the American hockey media does not pay him the reverence he would get if he played in the U.S. market? He may go down as the best USA player, but the Tuesday boys, three Zs, do not talk about him because he plays north of the 49th. Guess what? You don't need us to talk about Austin Matthews. He's talked about everywhere else except,

I mean, not even except on the show. We bring them up when necessary. Okay, but that's a yes. It's not a yes. It's not a yes because the Canadian media and the hockey media are inextricably linked. And that's why we do the show in the first place is because the Canadian media sets the parameters and then the U.S. media just kind of follows suit, which is understandable. That's the way it should be.

We do not need any more discussion about Austin Matthews until he signs with the Arizona Coyotes in a couple years. And then he's going to need some help. And then he's going to be the star of the show every week whenever it's me and Max hosting it permanently. Michael D is back. Max, please dedicate five minutes of your best take of all time, namely pepperoni and green onions.

He means olive. He means green olives. Pepperoni and green onions would be weird. Pepperone and green olives as an S-tier pizza toppings combo. I can't give you five, but I'll just elaborate. It's great. It's the balance of you need something

other than pepperoni texturally and olives still brings that, salt to it, which is just perfect. Because whenever meeting a bunch of pepperoni, you know what I say? It needs more salt. Yeah. No, I get it. But it's really good.

And it's also, especially if you get like the, especially if you get like the boosted crust or whatever, depending on where you're getting it, whether it's like a garlic butter crust or a Parmesan Romano crust, I'm big on adding as many of those as possible. Jets will let you do them all. Is this Jets? Okay. Yeah. Well, it can be just.

We're talking about the jets here. Yeah. Absolutely, we're talking about Jets here. But you can do some of them at other places. But if Jets is available, you're getting Jets. Who are we kidding? I'm down with olives. The move, if you want some other element on there, other than pepperoni, is banana peppers.

Thank you. My mom's big on the banana peppers. Oh, it's good, baby. Pepperoni and banana peppers, if you're going to. But it's probably too much, too many vegetables for me. Half pepperoni, half sausage. Let's go. Ted C

would the Blackhawks consider the second pick in this year's draft and Alexander Holtz plus some roster players for Debrinket would the devils consider this deal? How about this? We'll frame it this way, Mac. Would you consider that deal if you were the Blackhawks and or the Devils? Yeah, for the Blackhawks all day.

I'm not doing it if I'm the Devils. I'm giving up Holtz and Slavkovsky and what was the other piece? Plus a roster player. No. I'm not doing that if I'm the Devils. I don't think Holtz is going to be to Brinket, but it's not crazy that he can be a 30-gold scoring 60-point winger and Slavkovsky or Kooley, for that matter, can also be similar. I think Craig gassed up the Brinket a little bit too much on that last show, honestly.

Like, he's a really good player, but it's not like, it's also a no-brainer that Chicago should trade him. And it sucks, and I wish it weren't true. I wish, you know, that just like weren't the state of, you know, team-time. building in 2022, but they have to trade them. They have no choice. Yeah. And if they could get, if they could get number two, which you assume is Slokovsky, or, I mean, if you want to take Logan Cooley in your Chicago, like maybe give that a try. And Holtz and a roster player. The devils don't, would the devils consider this deal? I don't think so. I don't even know. Because you know what? If they want to spend money, if they want to go out and get a

guy like saying his mid to late 20s. They can just do it on the free agency market, baby. Throw a bunch of money at John Goddrow. Bring them to North Jersey. Yes. If they want a guy like that, they don't need to send assets out. Just go sign somebody. And if you're itching to trade that number two pick, which I just don't really get

why they're doing it that way, how to make a Godfather offer for Matthew Kachuk. That's the one. That's the one that you're making the crazy offer for. Right? That's the guy who I don't think I would go up Polts and Slavkovsky, but I'd think about it. Now, if you're Matthew Kachuk, do you want to go play for the New Jersey Devils? Well, that's the Kachuk thing. They're just going to go where they want. They're going to end up wherever they want, a matter what. Brady's staying in Ottawa now, so that's good. I think I wish you could give Tom Fitzgerald, like, sodium pentothal and make him tell the truth.

is he upset that he has the second pick and not the seventh? Because when it looked like they weren't going to basically win the lottery. Well, then he should trade back. He can trade back. He was, but like, dude, you remember before the letter, he was like, oh, yeah, we're definitely trading this. It's a lot easier to say that. It's a lot easier to say that when you have pick seven versus pick two.

Now he's stuck. Either has to make the pick or trade it for someone gigantic. Sean B closes things up. He says, I think it's time to recognize the Cory Perry Cup curse. It's true. He's now lost

three consecutive finals with three different teams. All I'm going to say is that I'm happy Cory Perry got a cup early in his career because if he didn't, this would be one of the

most horrendous examples of like, of like, not cup chasing, but just horrendous luck for a guy who wants to add that kind of valedictory

to the end of his career. It would be tragic. But he's got, he's got one in the coffers already and he's got the MVP and all that pretty good career for Cory Perry he doesn't have to he doesn't have to worry about it but it is but it is wild three in a real especially as one of those kind of haul a very good I don't think he's hall of fame but he's a hall you think so yeah put it all right I don't care all right I'm fine with it hey he won a heart yeah what am I talking about he won a heart he was he was a really good player for for a long

long time 50 goal score cup yeah you're right I was the best was the best was the best player on a cup champion he's going to end up he's a he's a he's a compiler he's he's probably not done yet by the time until it's all sudden done his numbers are going to be you know overall they're going to be really impressive but it would have been he's no brainer it would have been a brutal spot to be have his resume with no cup and then going into that versus right now it would be a as we're talking about the hall of fame this would be a guy who's in danger without without I think without a cup but maybe it's it's crazy man it's that just shows you how how how arbitrable

cherry this stuff is, you know, if there's, if 60 minutes of hockey goes differently, all those years ago with the ducks, like we're thinking completely, completely differently about Corey Perry's career. Unfair. We live in an unfair world. But the curse is real. He's right. I mean, it's kind of the, I mean, Marian Hosa would have been the, had he not got it done in Chicago, would have been, he'd been in that situation. That's it. That's it. And now is, gosh, that was, that's one of those weird storylines that I think people forget about is how crazy that was, Alyssa getting traded to Pittsburgh and then changing

teams, then changing teams again. Wild. I can't imagine. We love, we love Marion Hose on this show. We always, we always talk about both ends of that. Being on both ends of that, it's crazy. Oh, brother. Well, it's time to, I don't know, it's time, it's it's time to get out of here. We don't have to worry about

Cory Perry anymore. Like, this is about the Colorado Avalanche. We need to, we need to celebrate them. I'm sorry if we're not giving them enough dapp on this show. He's going to the abs next year now that you said that's it. That's it. We figured it out. Break the Cory Perry Curtis and go to the abs who are going to win

for the next six cups or whatever it is. Best team of the cat bearer? Best team of Sydney Crosby area. Uh-oh. Maxy, thanks for being here, buddy. I had a lot more fun today than I typically do. Good. I'm glad to hear that. I like to think I'm neither evil nor stupid.

But more stupid than evil. Unlike some people who are both. tomorrow we're still rolling like I think people are forgetting it's easy to lose track of how quickly we get into an off-season mode here like it's time to it's time to start thinking about this stuff so we're still doing shows we got the roundtable coming back tomorrow it's piso it's civy and it's jesse granger uh their guest kyle boccascasquez Canadian Charles Barkley or Canadian Tom Brady yeah Canadian Charles Parkley they need to do 45 minutes with Kyle

all about all about Berkeley. So listen to them, follow us on your favorite podcast platform, leave a rating, leave a review. If you leave a five-star review, you can say whatever you want about us, including really nasty stuff, and I'll read it. I forgot to check this week,

but we'll bring it back next week. And subscribe to the Athletic Audio Plus and Apple Podcasts to get all the bonus content from our entire network. You get a 30-day free trial, and it's just 99 cents a month after that. Also right now, you get an annual subscription to the Athletic.

Max, do you believe this is just a dollar a month for six months? Since when? That seems new. To get that, you go to theathletic.com

slash hockey show. You can sign up and get all our BS for one buck a month. Not bad. Next week, we're preempted. There will be no Tuesday

boy show, but there will be a Tuesday show with some boys. Maybe some not boys. We will return the day before a free agency. with Pierre LeBron and Paul Maurice. We talked about that earlier,

head coach of the Florida Panthers. So Craig and I will talk to you then and keep listening to the rest of the week, even though their shows aren't as good as ours. Everybody have a nice day. Bye, Maxie. See you.