I just wanted to draw your attention to a wonderful piece over at The Checking Line by Peter Tessier, in which he tries to determine just how much hockey fans really "know" about what it takes to succeed at the NHL level. While it shouldn't get in the way of good old fashioned barstool hockey sophistry, it's a useful reminder that there's so much more to fixing the problems of a team than merely giving the hot rookie more ice time or trading for a better goaltender.
Why is it that various media outlets continue trying to put their own spin on the "what's wrong with the NHL" story? Our latest example comes from The Hockey News , in a piece by Jay Greenburg entitled, "Excitement Level On The Decline." Take the opening sentence: Attendance is down and yet still up from before the lockout, leaving it arguable whether buildings in New Jersey and Florida are half-full or half empty. It's no surprise that attendance is down from last season, particularly if you compare the first half of 2005-06 to the first half of this year. Coming out of the lockout, there were legions of fans starved to see the on-ice product, particularly in light of the massive rule changes. This year is more indicative of business as usual, so the fact that the league is above pre-lockout levels is a positive. Toss in the projection that overall revenues are increasing despite a 1% decrease in attendance, and I'd say that paying fans have come back