Good analysis. there is a lot to that, but there is more. It was a wonderful thing to have the same faces and numbers year after year, it was also nice to start eainc95omech season with the same rules as the year before. The Commissioner should have a three year term limit to diminish his personal interest in the sport. It should be a position of minor importance in a league that is stable, rather unchanging, and not requiring a massive top down load of “management”. well, so much for a perfect world.

Posted by Gunnar from Ada, MI on 11/16/09 at 09:24 PM ET

This is exactly why I can’t get attached to NFL or (God forbid,) NBA teams. There’s too much roster turnover and the players are, with a couple notable exceptions, only out for their own immediate benefit. Sadly, one day Little Gary will have his big dream; the NBA on ice…sigh…

Posted by Chris from Flint, MI on 11/16/09 at 11:11 PM ET

There seems to be decent camaraderie on these nhl teams: Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Colorado.  Not sure why, that’s just what I noticed.  Maybe they like to play together?

Posted by stoneman from vegas on 11/16/09 at 11:38 PM ET

There seems to be plenty of camaraderie throughout the NHL, and while there is a
lot of turn-over year-to-year, there isn’t really as much during theseason until the trade deadline other than injury call-ups. If you’ve ever played ice hockey, you know the bond between the guys in the room, and that will never change.

Posted by NHLJeff from Pens fan in Chicago, IL on 11/17/09 at 01:19 AM ET

I’ve heard players describe certain teams as having “corporate atmospheres,” but it’s hard to believe anything that Bourne says at face value, never minding the fact that he’s essentially using this, “It’s just like the NFL” argument to proffer an argument that the instigator rule protects the players who really don’t respect anyone who doesn’t wear the same jersey. 

Bourne’s commentary in general makes hockey players out to be borderline alcoholic carousers of the highest order, whose lack of passion for doing anything other than half-assing it through practices and games by cruising on talent alone is only matched by their unwillingness to buck the good old boys’ club tradition in accepting hard-working players who are actually thoughtful into their testosterone-laden, intolerant, bigoted, and probably promiscuous fold (even Bourne says his column on puck bunnies is in the making).

[sarcasm]Thank goodness there’s someone who’s been inside the supposedly hallowed locker rooms to lift the veil and reveal that these pampered, spoiled, and petulant athletes are jerks like everybody else! [/sarcasm]  A
Right.  Bourne’s following the literary trajectory of the vast majority of particularly outspoken athletes of the highly educated vein who end up wanting to say things for shock value, essentially rendering them the college-educated Jeremy Roenicks of the sportswriting world. 

I’m not denying that player respect is a huge issue, nor that the concept of always “finishing one’s check” is leading to injuries, especially in a league where opponents simply cannot hold the morons who hit to hurt accountable without incurring a major penalty, but Bourne’s larger scope is anything but groundbreaking.

Yes, any professional sport has its share of petulant, spoiled morons who can get by on their talent, and yes, there are jerks who drink too much, live hard, think with organs below their waist or simply don’t give a rat’s butt about what they’re doing in the most elite of professions, but that’s the case in just about any profession, athletic or otherwise.

Posted by George Malik from South Lyon, MI on 11/17/09 at 06:31 AM ET

... the players are, with a couple notable exceptions, only out for their own immediate benefit.

Why shouldn’t they be?  They are only following the model that businesses and corporations have been following for years now - do not let anyone stay on the payroll too long, because then they will cost you too much in salary.  Forget any importance of stability in maintaining solid performance, because if no one stays more than five years it is cheaper for the management (of course, they don’t consider the hassle of training time, or paying overtime for someone to fill in for the trainer, or whatnot).

People have realized that they are nothing more than replaceable commodities in every other profession and need to look out for themselves because no one else is; why should hockey players be any different from any other job?

Posted by Baroque from Michigan on 11/17/09 at 06:33 AM ET

Kinda funny to read this as one looks to see the long term contracts of the Wings and the length of time players have been with the Wings.

This article underscores a philosophy the Wings have undercut.  The Wings have paid “reasonable” amounts to core players and kept almost the whole roster for years.  The team has kept a system of play and kept the fan base.

Rather unlike the rest of the league, and the unrest the league office wants.

Posted by bobbo from Romeo, Michigan on 11/17/09 at 08:38 AM ET