Sutter lays down law on injury talk

[Steve Macfarlane]

Sutter is tired of being asked about injuries. Reports know he's not going to answer. And over in Edmonton, Jay Woodcroft is enjoying the responses from his veteran counterpart.

https://calgaryhockeynow.com/calgary...-nhl-playoffs/

[browna]

As the NHL as a league moves more towards being friendly to gambling, at some point in the not so far future there will have to be more formality to injury reports. That means not just classifying players simply as on IR or not on IR.

Especially come playoffs.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by browna

As the NHL as a league moves more towards being friendly to gambling, at some point in the not so far future there will have to be more formality to injury reports. That means not just classifying players simply as on IR or not on IR.

Especially come playoffs.

Yes you’ll know the NHL has made it big in the US and globally when the betting markets start paying more attention. The mystery injury stuff won’t go over at that point. Guys like Sutter probably won’t ever change though.

[BigRed]

Originally Posted by browna

As the NHL as a league moves more towards being friendly to gambling, at some point in the not so far future there will have to be more formality to injury reports. That means not just classifying players simply as on IR or not on IR.

Especially come playoffs.

To the detriment of the sport, IMHO. That element of gamesmanship is an essential part of playoff hockey. It'll be a sad day if/when that happens.

[Steve Macfarlane]

The gambling angle is something I plan to dive into more soon.

[chubeyr1]

If I am making the lineups I would play Sutter with Toffoli.

Edmonton should be scared if Sutter laces them up!

Injury questions in the playoffs are just stupid.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Steve Macfarlane

The gambling angle is something I plan to dive into more soon.

One thing I like about the NHL is the focus on it as entertainment. Once all of the talk about a sport turns to betting the actual game becomes secondary. It's why I don't watch the NFL.

[GullFoss]

I agree. There is something corrupting about betting with regards to how it changes the experience for the spectator. When everything is turned into a bet or a cointoss, it losses a lot of its intrinsic value IMO. I watch for the love of the game, team, players, etc.

That said, I've been putting down a few hundred on the flames to win the cup every year since I turned 20. I figure, if they make the finals, I would hedge the bet out and use the money to attend the games in the finals.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I agree. There is something corrupting about betting with regards to how it changes the experience for the spectator. When everything is turned into a bet or a cointoss, it losses a lot of its intrinsic value IMO. I watch for the love of the game, team, players, etc.

That said, I've been putting down a few hundred on the flames to win the cup every year since I turned 20. I figure, if they make the finals, I would hedge the bet out and use the money to attend the games in the finals.

I agree. Golf coverage and some American cable sports channels are pushing the boundary on this. They are bringing up live betting lines on various outcomes in their commentary, and that really does make some of these sports feel more like a vehicle for betting (akin to horse racing) than being able to watch for the sport.

I have nothing against gambling either, but don't really like the road we're going down. Being transparent about injuries for the sake of gambling wouldn't really bother me though.

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That said, I've been putting down a few hundred on the flames to win the cup every year since I turned 20. I figure, if they make the finals, I would hedge the bet out and use the money to attend the games in the finals.

I do the same. Got decent odds in February after the Flames struggled a bit.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I agree. Golf coverage and some American cable sports channels are pushing the boundary on this. They are bringing up live betting lines on various outcomes in their commentary, and that really does make some of these sports feel more like a vehicle for betting (akin to horse racing) than being able to watch for the sport.

I have nothing against gambling either, but don't really like the road we're going down. Being transparent about injuries for the sake of gambling wouldn't really bother me though.

They’re doing the same thing on hockey broadcasts, especially the American ones. I saw a clip of a game that was ongoing and the score and shot counts were replaced with current odds…

[Geeoff]

Subzero wins! Upper body injury!

[Rick M.]

After the Evander Kane gambling scandal, you’d think the league might stay away from the easy money. Do you remember the huge hullabaloo about Janet Gretzky and Rick Tocchet placing bets a number of years ago? Now Wayne is advertising the MGM sports book. Times change, but not always for the better.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That said, I've been putting down a few hundred on the flames to win the cup every year since I turned 20. I figure, if they make the finals, I would hedge the bet out and use the money to attend the games in the finals.

I miss yooknew - it was a ticket futures site. So you could buy "Stanley Cup Final - Flames Home Game 1" in October, and it was a tradeable future that turned into a ticket if the game occurred. I bought Flames futures every year the site existed so would have had lower bowl tickets to the SCF those years if they had made it.

Sadly they went bust after they had to cover a bunch of super bowl tickets one year that someone stiffed them on and then the price ran away on them.

But it was awesome while it lasted, and because most of traders involved lacked futures experience there were cool arbitrage opportunities. EG I bought a bunch of NL World Series Game 1 futures once and sold Cubs World Series Game 1 for the same amount.