NHL arena coming to Seattle?

Yahoo sports is reporting It was only three years ago that Kevin Durant and the rest of the Seattle SuperSonics folded up their green-and-gold uniforms for good and moved to Oklahoma City. Now word comes that there are plans for an arena to be built in a Seattle suburb that could house an NHL team, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reports. The main focus of the plan is to try and lure an NHL team to Seattle, the online newspaper reports. From what I hear, we are talking about a private project in Bellevue,” said Chris Daniels, a reporter for KING/5, the paper reports. The Post-Intelligencer notes that “reports surfaced last week that Donald Levin, a Chicago tobacco merchant and movie producer, recently visited the Seattle area and expressed interest in a real estate development that would include an arena.” Levin, by the way, owns the Chicago Wolves, a minor league affiliate of the Vancouver Canucks.

Daniels also said that he recently spoke with deputy NHL commissioner Bill Daly, who told him that “there is a group interested in bringing hockey to the Seattle area,” but “he didn’t want to get into too much detail.

“To read more:http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/rumors;_ylt=AiK2S213Qrp2vxJn8.i8IZd7vLYF

135 Responses to NHL arena coming to Seattle?

  1. blaze says:

    I would do Grabo for Turris. I like Grabo but hard to say if he's a long term fit. Risky move but the potential for a steal as Turris could be something special.

    I'd rather move Grabo than Kadri. Could be an error in my judgement but I'd like to hold on to whatever potential blue chip young talent we can.

    As for Turris why would the Coyotes want to trade him? And would they be interested in Grabovski, who will be looking for a big payday if he has another good season.

  2. albertateams says:

    I agree it doesn't really make a lot of sense for either team. Phoenix needs nhl caliber centers (and contracts to get to the cap floor) and Turris doesn't improve TO's top two center positions in the short term.

    I really like Turris and think he will get much better in the next years or two. I doubt he turns into the top line center they envisioned when they drafted him 3rd overall, but I think he can be a really good 2nd line center.

    I was actually hoping Calgary would target him via trade or even an offer sheet.

  3. reinjosh says:

    Grabo would make more sense for them and maybe us but its a big step back for us. We go from a 30 goal center, a guy who centered one of the leagues deadliest lines to a a center who is unproven and has had many questions about him. It could work better in the long term but it might bite use hard long term.

    Best case scenario is he makes us worse short term and better long term. Even if thats the case, I'd want more than just turris for Grabo.
    I jsut don't think it makes much sense for either team.
  4. reinjosh says:

    Exactly. I would question both GM's in that trade.

    I would like him on Calgary. One – two punch of Backlund and Turris would be nice. Even transforming Turris to a high performing third liner and Backlund at second would be nice. 
  5. albertateams says:

    I wonder if Phoenix would take Hagman (Salary), Nemisz and 3rd (2012) for Turris. G

  6. reinjosh says:

    Hmm. Hagman could be sold as a guy in his last year who could step up to provide solid scoring. Nemisz is a decent prospect. 3rd is decent. 

  7. reinjosh says:

    I also want to say I love reading your level headed analysis. It's always great and well thought out. Keep it up. 

  8. albertateams says:

    Yeah, I look at Phoenix's line up and I just don't know where the goals are going to come from. A player with some skill could really have a career year there, with lots of PP time and minutes (assuming they buy into Tippets system).  

    I like Nemisz but he really doesn't have a huge up side. Upper limit probably good 2nd line power forward scoring 20-30 goals per year and playing a physical well rounded game. I hate the idea of Calgary giving up more picks and prospects but I think Turris would be worth it.

  9. thisgamewelose says:

    To be fair, Turris was a much better player when he was getting 13-15 minutes per game. 

    Leafs aren't my favorite team, but I wouldn't trade Grabo for him. Not yet. I think after this season it'll really give you an idea of how Turris is going to turn out. 

    It's geat to have another young player with high potential, however, I think I'd be more willing to takea risk trading Kardri, rather than Grabo.  And I justify this by saying Grabo is coming off a great season. Yeah, he's going to demand a lot more if he has another good season, but wouldn't he be worth it then?  He's also become a leader on the team. Giving up Kadri who has been a big question mark, and less than a year younger than Turris is less of a risk than trading Grabo.

    I'm not saying this trade benefits the leafs or Pheonix. But, I'f I were going to swap for Turris, Kadri would go before Grabo.  

  10. reinjosh says:

    Yeah I agree on a player by player basis if I'm coming from the Leafs perspective. Even then it doesn't make much sense. Kadri in less time has proven to be at a similar level to Turris. Not sure it makes sense to swap that. 

    From Phoenix's perspective (which uis why I suggested he him, I should have mentioned that), kadri wouldn't make as much sense but Grabo would make more sense for them. 
    Pretty much agree with you on everything. This year will be important for Turris. If he comes out and plays like he did in the Detroit series, then Phoenix looks alright keeping. If he doesn't they look at a swap similar to this if they can get it. 
  11. reinjosh says:

    For that very reason I'm not sure they would want Nemisz. The potential for Turris would probably have them keep with him right? 

  12. reinjosh says:

    Out of curiosity, who is your favorite team?

  13. mojo19 says:

    I would trade MacArthur for Turris and play Turris on the wing. Similar to the Grabovski suggestion, I think it makes the Leafs worse this year but could pay off in 2-3 years.

    For whatever reason I really warmed up to Grabovski the 2nd half of last year, and it wasn't just all the goals, he was wearing the 'A' and he seemed to be way stonger on his feet than before. He was so effective everywhere. Having said that, MacArthur was pretty solid and consistant throughout the whole year, and who knows about Turris?

  14. mojo19 says:

    I hope he has a trick or two as well…

  15. DannyLeafs says:

    Thanks, and it's the only way I know is to analyze. Math degree and finance industry pretty much has me trained to add analysis to justify pretty much every thought I have.

    Also, I think the 3 year rule would need some other tweaks. Something simple like a player's salary has only three options. Level pay, declining scale, or escalating. That would make sure teams can't just put random low years in to keep the average lower than it truly is.

    Another thought would be a simple division of terms. Anytime a player's salary drops to less than half of the highest year, we make a division. The player carries the cap hit of the first part of the contract for that amount until the drop, and carries a new cap hit of the lower part of the contract for the duration. If it happens multiple times, then simple have multiple stages.

    It's hard to say what is best, but almost anything is better than what they have now. I don't particularly mind the idea of having the cap hit be whatever a player's salary is. It makes for some interesting scenarios, and it would take some actual saavy to make it work out all the time, so I wouldn't mind when GM's who are saavy get the better of the system.

  16. JoelLeafs says:

    I like the term limits idea, especially after 30.

    What team do you mean when you say 2-3 years to be able to bring home a cup? Toronto, Edmonton, someone else? I'm confused.

    In any case, I find the language filter on this site to be fantastic. Babc*ck and Doc*ment are my favs. Why is there no option to disable it? Also, why is it there in the first place… if you're old enough to use the internet on your own (providing your parents aren't total a-holes) then you're old enough to read a bit of salty language.

  17. JoelLeafs says:

    The "Nancy Hockey League" has had multiple teams that have borne the same name (albeit, not simultaneously). I hope the joke of a league folds.

    Some wimpy troll making fun of an entire league of football players over the internet. Funny stuff.

    And the CFL is older, more Canadian, and more unique than the NHL.

  18. albertateams says:

    Depends how high they still are on Turris. I didn't think Columbus would move Filatov for a 3rd rounder either, different cir*****stances, but you never know how teams have prospects slotted in their organization and in other organizations.

  19. Leafs_Wallace says:

    I 'have no logic'? I didn't realize logic was thing someone can posses. It's illogical to go after Stamkos….. Ok, so it's logical to suck hard for two more years and ignore a chance a chance at going after arguable the best talent in hockey…. if that's the case wouldn't be fair to criticize the GM that cemented himself in that position? You know the whole f'ing point, that I've repeated and taken you by the hand to walk you through twice in this thread already. 

    Did you maybe wanna step up and address that? As long as you ignore it I have to assume this is just some passive aggressive trolling because you willfully ignore the point I've made clear….


    Spare us the semantics, some contracts can be buried of trade can make salary dumps (Connolly, Komisarek, Armstrong ect…)

    Stamkos doesn't make us an immediate contender but he's next big step towards becoming one. Burke has built another middle of the pact teams that accomplish nothing in next two years.  It's the dead air in terms of rebuilding.  So go ahead an applaud failure….

    4 middle of the 1st round picks do not produce superstar talent. Schenn, Kadri are more valuable alone than 4 firsts and their cheap to fit under the cap.

    You're harping a weak criticism that doesn't even address the issue of Burke's mismanagement of the Leafs. :O

  20. reinjosh says:

    I`d do that. I`ve been a big fan of Grabo`s since the Olympics last year and I`d to keep him. The big thing to me in that line is the Grabo-Kulemin portion. I like MacA but I think he was the biggest beneficiary of that line, not the other two.

    I`d be much more willing to make the Turris for MacArthur deal. However that`s essentially what I view Kadri as. MacA is just a stop gap while Kadri develops for that line.
  21. Leafs_Wallace says:

    Well put, I'm bias against Buffalo because it's the saddest place on Earth and Vanek's preference for Edmonton speaks to that point.  Lowe was foolish to risk premium draft picks but Vanek would have giving them a top line player to build around (as opposed to Penner's struggles) so who knows how that would have played out.

    Lowe was public enemy number one at the time for inflating the market but that no longer bothers me because the constant rise of the cap ensures the inflation of the market.  Vanek would probably get 7 on the open market today. 

    Again did anyone exact revenge on Edmonton? GMs risk picks in RFA compensation nothing more (of merit).

  22. reinjosh says:

    Haha thats funny and sort of interesting. It`s sort of interesting how a persons job and education affect how they approach things. I`m working for a think tank right now and its sort of caused me to take in a massive amount of information and just ask question and look at different scenarios. 

    I think we both agree that changes have to be made. I like you ideas. I also have similar thoughts on a savvy GM. I think if a GM can game the system under the rules, then sure why not. I may not be a fan of the long term contracts but if a GM wants to use them, go right ahead. I don`t think its smart but obviously you do . If you can figure a way to play the system under the rules, I don`t see why you can`t.
    I think the system needs to be change but it can`t be such a rigid system that it stagnates the league. 
  23. LeafFansAreGay says:

    To Laffs fans, an article named NHL Arena Coming To Seattle really means Stamkos To The Laffs. HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

    Forget about it, not happening in this life. Tampa not taking any crappy Laffs players for Stamkos. He would never play for that garbage team.

    The guys you wanna trade for Stamkos are garbage. Grabiskov, Kadra, Mcarther, Gunman, all these guys suck. The hole laffs roster not good enough to get the deal done. Stop taking those mind altering substances before writing trash.

  24. LeafFansAreGay says:

    Stop smoking weed you social reject. Burke didn't make an offer sheet because he knows Tampa is matching anything. A trade can't happen also because the laffs got nobody good enough to trade.

    Burke is also not smart enough, if he was he wouldn't be gm of the laffs. HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

  25. LeafFansAreGay says:

    That's right, for once somebody says something smart. The laffs can't fit Stamkos in their salary cap. They have to trade some of their so called good players like Schenn or Kessel. If it happens or doesn't happen, the laffs will suck anyway.

  26. DannyLeafs says:

    I don't think the long term contracts are smart either. Actually, I don't think they are a good idea from either side's perspective. Like I said, I like a system where players constantly get paid for what they are worth. If the player is a good player, he will make more money this way. Ask Nik Lidstrom. Had he signed a retirement deal right after the lockout his cap hit would likely have had to come down to about 4 million, and he would be making about 450K a year for the last couple. Think of the money he would have left on the table.

    It takes so much flexability away from the players as well. What if a guy like Recchi had one. What if a guy like Selanne and signed one, and didn't win a cup with Anaheim. He would likely still be on an average salary of about 5 million, and probably would be untradeable. He wouldn't have the option to choose a team to try and win with on a cheap one year deal.

    The only thing those contracts protect are if a players career goes in sharp decline due to injury. At least in those cases, a player can know they will be paid a good salary until the end of their contract. Other than that, I really think they hurt the system as a whole.

  27. Leafs_Wallace says:

    I think we give up more value in a trade than offer sheet, with Stamkos on board we give up one maybe two quality first round picks out of four.  Keeping Scheen and Kadri are quality draft picks further along in their development they would compliment Stamkos.

    Being pushed further towards the cap with elite talent is a good thing, it saves us from settling for gambling on Komisareks and Connollys by forcing us to be more calculated spending.

  28. Leafs_Wallace says:

    I'd like Garbovski a lot more than Kadri, I was surprised like everyone else with his breakout last year.  But he's clutch in shootouts, has great chemistry on his line and shows up every night.  My only concern is what his asking price would be.

    As for Turris, I never saw the big deal about this kid, I'd prefer to keep Kadri as he's more of a raw talent with greater upside.

  29. blaze says:

    Ya true and keeping Schenn and Kadri goes with Burkes win now. It would be nice to get Stamkos at a nice rate but it's far from critical. A Stamkos-Phaneuf-Kessel-Schenn-Kadri-Kulemin core is rock solid.

    As for calculated spending our prospect pool is deep with support type players and empty of elite talent. Good mid-level players should develop and keep a supply of entry level deals to save cap.

  30. Leafs_Wallace says:

    Hahaha, when LFAG is siding with you, you lose the argument…

  31. JoelLeafs says:

    Yeah, no sh!t.

    "The cool kids are sooo inclusive and only talk about things they like. Why won't they hang out with me and talk about the crap I like that they don't give a shit about?"

    Love these people: too lazy to write their own articles or inseightful posts, but still want to b!tch about the present dialogue.

  32. Leafs_Wallace says:

    You nailed it, you get your mid depth with guys like Aulie, Gunnerson, Franson from trades and farm system, you don't give them 3-4 million ala Komisarek or the most recent Panthers experiment.

  33. Leafs_Wallace says:

    It is the best team we've had post lockout, definitely watchable, though it's unfortunate that this is where we decide to peak.

Leave a Reply