Auston Matthews

[Kin]

The whole premise of the article is that the NHL is failing because it's a "distant fourth" to the other 3 big sports here in the US.  Surely that matters to Bettman et al., but in the bigger scheme of things, so long as the league keeps generating enough new fans to remain stable, who cares?

Well, I assume the players would like the league to grow and generate more revenue because that means they'd make more. Likewise my takeaway from the article was more that Matthews, for all his success, isn't getting famous. Which may suit him fine but you'd like to think that individual players being more famous would mean additional revenue opportunities open up for them that the league wouldn't take a cut of. I don't think the central premise of the article is that the league is failing but that the players aren't themselves becoming recognizable figures which does a bunch of things like diminishing their leverage when collectively bargaining.

But more central to what you raise is I think you're kind of buying the false notion the league puts forward of "The League" as a singular financial entity. I don't personally have much invested in whether the Coyotes or Hurricanes survive but we shouldn't kid ourselves into thinking of the league's financial situation as being good because the Leafs/Rangers/Bruins are making money either.

 

[Kin]

Also, I guess, I should maybe point out the inherent irony of asking why should we care if the game grows in the Auston Matthews thread when one of the central points of the article is that if the game hadn't grown to Arizona, Matthews probably wouldn't be playing hockey.

 

[ZBBM]

But more central to what you raise is I think you're kind of buying the false notion the league puts forward of "The League" as a singular financial entity.

I'm not going to argue this point but it certainly isn't a false notion, from Bettman's perspective -- not to mention the perspective of the writer, which is what I am reacting to.  That's what "a distant fourth" refers to.

Anyway, my main point is that this article, like countless others, proceeds from an unexamined assumption that bigger is better.  If Auston Matthews is happy being a bland, noncontroversial superstar, then complaining that he isn't, or that the "culture of hockey" is the only thing that stands between him and supposedly wonderful stunts like wearing a tux on opening night or whatever it was, just reveals how shallow this whole run of thinking is.

And, just as aside, if anyone really cares about whether the NHL is as popular as the NFL, I say -- just be patient.  I know a lot of people, myself included, who used to follow the league but don't anymore because of the concussion issue.  I predict that there will be some significant migration of fans from NFL towards the NHL *if* the NHL gets its own concussion house completely in order.  They are stumbling toward that IMO.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Thanks for posting that Nik, I enjoyed it and it provided some food for thought.

A few things, Matthews wasn't born in Scottsdale, he was born in the Bay area. The author talks about his continued lack of media participation, while that was true last year, all of the triplets are getting almost full media exposure now, including between periods interviews, small steps.

As for the Judge comparison, it's understandable why that was drawn, but given Matthews age, I think it might be worthwhile comparing the two in five years time when Matthews is 25 and fully matured the way Judge clearly has. I suspect we will see much more of Auston's personality going forward, from some of the chirps he's given opposing players, the autograph on Craig Anderson's stick and a few other moments, I think he'll blossom in that regard as he gets more comfortable.

Generally though, I agree with the author, the team and league would be smart to embrace more of the Subban school of PR.

It's a shame the NHL isn't going to the Olympics, an Eichel/Matthews vs Crosby/McDavid showdown would be amazing and had the potential to draw national interest.

 

[Kin]

I'm not going to argue this point but it certainly isn't a false notion, from Bettman's perspective -- not to mention the perspective of the writer, which is what I am reacting to.  That's what "a distant fourth" refers to.

I'm not going to argue this point so instead I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not seriously trying to make the case that Gary Bettman doesn't understand that money is not equally pooled between NHL teams and that it's very possible for some NHL teams to be profitable and others to not be and as a result have differing financial interests.

Anyway, my main point is that this article, like countless others, proceeds from an unexamined assumption that bigger is better.

The league being bigger and more popular will inevitably result in:

1. The owners making more money
2. The players making more money
3. More people playing the game, broadening the talent pool and improving the game on-ice(see, again, Auston Matthews)

Acknowledging that players and owners want the game to get bigger but that they're having problems growing the game is not "complaining" or making any assumptions. It's looking at the league from a financial perspective. Or any perspective, really, that isn't working under the assumption that hockey fans are a bunch of hipster record store clerks at a Yo La Tengo concert whining about bands that have "sold out".

 

[Kin]

As for the Judge comparison, it's understandable why that was drawn, but given Matthews age, I think it might be worthwhile comparing the two in five years time when Matthews is 25 and fully matured the way Judge clearly has. I suspect we will see much more of Auston's personality going forward, from some of the chirps he's given opposing players, the autograph on Craig Anderson's stick and a few other moments, I think he'll blossom in that regard as he gets more comfortable.

It's tough to say. The Anderson thing seems like a pretty good example of how there's a general attitude that hockey players can have a personality(in so much as liking puns constitutes a personality) in private but they should be as bland as possible in public.

And I'm not sure exactly what you mean re: the Judge comparison because I don't see how Judge's age fundamentally makes things different. I understand if you're saying that because Judge is 25 and Matthews 20 that the Yankees are generally more ok with Judge going out into the non-hockey media as a star because they think he can handle it better but I think that may be getting bogged down in the one specific example here. Matthews wasn't a big deal in the non-traditional hockey media last year regardless of what the Leafs were letting him do. The Yankees may have given Judge the ok to go on the Tonight Show but my guess is the Tonight Show didn't even ask the Leafs.

In five years time Matthews will be older, sure, but it seems unlikely that with that age he'll be more likely to engage in behaviour that, in general, the hockey world generally categorizes as immature. We certainly haven't seen much of that from guys like Crosby.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I definitely take your point about the hockey world, in general, being a lot more reserved.

What I was getting at is that as a 25-year-old I think you're more likely to be more forthright and comfortable in your own skin to the point that you don't mind joking around a little more. So since we've heard that Auston has quite a dry sense of humor in private, I figured we might see more of that as he gets older and becomes more confident as a man and less likely to be restrained by Lou's archaic conduct code.

I could definitely be off though and you're right, hockey, in general, is much more of a reserved old boys club, I just hope as the league gets younger, we start to see more personality.

 

[ZBBM]

The league being bigger and more popular

Nik, you know I've been around long enough to see through your rhetorical tricks (here, subtly changing words and then arguing from those premises, etc.). "More popular" is, of course, not what I said.  I said "better," and my very point is that better is not always the same as more popular. 

Disagree with that if you like, but there's no need to try to "win" a discussion that wasn't meant as a debate in the first place.

 

[disco]

https://twitter.com/oak_leafs/status/920312162484195329

 

[Kin]

Nik, you know I've been around long enough to see through your rhetorical tricks (here, subtly changing words and then arguing from those premises, etc.). "More popular" is, of course, not what I said.  I said "better," and my very point is that better is not always the same as more popular. 

You said bigger. Which in a financial sense means "more popular". Unless you actually mean physically bigger which would be entirely irrelevant as the article is not making the case for expansion. Remember when John Lennon said that the Beatles were "bigger than Jesus"? Were you labouring under the impression he meant they were fatter?

 

[Kin]

I definitely take your point about the hockey world, in general, being a lot more reserved.

What I was getting at is that as a 25-year-old I think you're more likely to be more forthright and comfortable in your own skin to the point that you don't mind joking around a little more. So since we've heard that Auston has quite a dry sense of humor in private, I figured we might see more of that as he gets older and becomes more confident as a man and less likely to be restrained by Lou's archaic conduct code.

I could definitely be off though and you're right, hockey, in general, is much more of a reserved old boys club, I just hope as the league gets younger, we start to see more personality.

I don't think you're wrong about that just that I think the article only compares Judge to Matthews in the sense that they both burst onto the scene fairly suddenly. I think you're right that Judge maybe was better equipped to handle it because of his age and that Matthews may get better at it as time goes along but as time goes along he becomes less of an overnight sensation to boot and, because of the nature of the league, becomes less exciting in that sense of being new.

So it's a structural problem as much as anything. The 19 and 20 year olds who burst onto the scene may be ill equipped to handle being a big deal while the 25 and 26 year olds are old news.

 

[ZBBM]

Nik, you know I've been around long enough to see through your rhetorical tricks (here, subtly changing words and then arguing from those premises, etc.). "More popular" is, of course, not what I said.  I said "better," and my very point is that better is not always the same as more popular. 

You said bigger. Which in a financial sense means "more popular". Unless you actually mean physically bigger which would be entirely irrelevant as the article is not making the case for expansion. Remember when John Lennon said that the Beatles were "bigger than Jesus"? Were you labouring under the impression he meant they were fatter?

You are the best, man.  I love your sass.  Hey, the stakes here aren't great so I concede.  Let's go forward together, like brothers, in love and unity.

 

[Kin]

I mean, I get what you're saying in that you, as a fan, aesthetically do not care whether or not the league is doing financially well or growing from year to year. But the whole premise of this article was "The league and players have a financial incentive to grow the game, they clearly want to, Auston Matthews seems like the right guy to base this on and yet they're having difficulty doing so. Why?".

It was not "The League and players want to grow the game. But should they? Let's have a dialogue about the ethos of present day capitalism and its departure from JS Mill's concepts of utilitarian good."

I am as disappointed in the lack of scope of ESPN's articles as anyone.

 

[ZBBM]

I mean, I get what you're saying in that you, as a fan, aesthetically do not care whether or not the league is doing financially well or growing from year to year. But the whole premise of this article was "The league and players have a financial incentive to grow the game, they clearly want to, Auston Matthews seems like the right guy to base this on and yet they're having difficulty doing so. Why?".

It was not "The League and players want to grow the game. But should they? Let's have a dialogue about the ethos of present day capitalism and its departure from JS Mill's concepts of utilitarian good."

I am as disappointed in the lack of scope of ESPN's articles as anyone.

When's it just me, my laptop, and the online universe, I decide the terms of the dialogue.  And FWIW I'm a deontologist, not a utilitarian.

 

[Kin]

And FWIW I'm a deontologist, not a utilitarian.

And here I always took you for an Anekantavadan skeptic.

 

[disco]

https://twitter.com/BradyTrett/status/920807336972730368
"I don't like this angle... there, this one's better." - AM

 

[disco]

https://twitter.com/mirtle/status/920807709036777472

 

[herman]

I think Auston should stick with single breasted jackets.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Capitals' coach Barry Trotz calls Matthews a "young Mario Lemieux", and Nationals' Bryce Harper is among his fans:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/sports/nhl/auston-matthews-a-young-mario-lemieux-says-capitals-coach/ar-AAtEyvg?li=AAggNb9

 

[Kaberle15]

I'm just glad he broke his goal slump last night  :