The John Scott Situation

[Oaklandblue]

The NHL caved. Watch the process change for next year - no way they allow this debacle to be possible again. Someone screwed up big time by saying 'vote for anyone' with no criteria attached.

Did they screw up though? All players are on MLB ASG ballots. Why is it a problem if fans choose to vote for somebody unexpected? What actual harm is caused by it?

Here's the problem:
1) it takes away a roster spot at the All-Star game for someone else who should be there.
2) the harm caused is that it makes the NHL look bad for allowing this to happen and not putting rules in place to prevent it. It demeans the whole event and becomes a running joke.
3) think of the precedent that is now set for next year if no rules are put in place. What's to stop someone from nominating themselves and getting it to go viral. Suddenly you see Joe Schmoe captaining the central and stepping out on skates for the first time and weighing 400 pounds. You have to have some rules and restrictions to prevent this from recurring again.

Invalid point #1. Who should be there was determined by fan vote. If the fans voted for Scott, he deserves to be there. The whole "taking away a spot" in a meaningless game is pointless.

TAKE AWAY A ROSTER SPOT?! NO ONE on the Yotes is going but him. So of course the well-ran franchise in Glendale decides to listen to NHL pressure and trade him. For the Yotes, a well-liked member of the team going to the ASG, promoted right can equal ticket sales and for them, they need it but of course they even pissed that opportunity away because well, it's the Yotes.

And with that analysis of yours, here's the Pacific "team":

Sharks: 2
Kings: 2
Oilers: 1
Ducks: 2
Flames: 2
Yotes: 1
Canucks: 1

Why do the Oilers, Yotes and Canucks only have one player going while the other teams have two? That would be a better point of contention to complain about than John Scott.

Anyways...

Look at the ASG for what it is; a promotion. The NHL has expanded into areas where people do not play hockey. You put in a guy like John Scott, to fans he's a Good, but to the everyday, non-hockey person he's a "gateway personality" - can't play too well, has alot of heart and seems like a nice guy. It's alot easier for a non hockey fan to like and follow a guy like him over a "God" like Jagr or whoever have you. It helps promote the game, helps make it more than a corporation looking for a money grab and builds some serious goodwill and creates a story that will circulate long after the ASG is over.

Everyone keeps looking at this in terms of who deserves to be there based on skill. The ASG has never really been about that. It's a showcase for the NHL to advertise itself to the rest of the country, if not the world and the only game that most non-nhl fans would catch. If half of the people on Reddit were not Hockey fans and voted for John Scott, say 5000 people, that's 5000 people who will be watching the ASG because who they voted for got in. And who knows, they might run into something, a player, a team, etc. that catches their eye and they look into it and before you know it, you got a fan. These things do happen and that's kind of the point of the ASG anyway.

The ASG is NOT a real game. It's an weekend full of exhibitions and a contest for cash. That's it. Unless someone gets hurt, it doesn't harm or hinder the rest of a player or team's "Real" season.

[goon attack]

He at one point asked fans to stop voting for him. He knew it the whole time. Duh.

[Oaklandblue]

He at one point asked fans to stop voting for him. He knew it the whole time. Duh.

It's no more a joke than fans voting for a player whose been on the decline for the last 3-5 years because their name is popular and previous success still resonates.

[goon attack]

He at one point asked fans to stop voting for him. He knew it the whole time. Duh.

It's no more a joke than fans voting for a player whose been on the decline for the last 3-5 years because their name is popular and previous success still resonates.

To split the hair, I agree. But in intent, the Scott vote was an intentional joke, as I'm sure you'd agree.

[ecbm]

He at one point asked fans to stop voting for him. He knew it the whole time. Duh.

It's no more a joke than fans voting for a player whose been on the decline for the last 3-5 years because their name is popular and previous success still resonates.

To split the hair, I agree. But in intent, the Scott vote was an intentional joke, as I'm sure you'd agree.

Yes but-regardless of Scott's embarrassment-he was not the butt of the joke. The predictably prissy and out-of-touch NHL was.

[cprice12]

The NHL caved. Watch the process change for next year - no way they allow this debacle to be possible again. Someone screwed up big time by saying 'vote for anyone' with no criteria attached.

Did they screw up though? All players are on MLB ASG ballots. Why is it a problem if fans choose to vote for somebody unexpected? What actual harm is caused by it?

Here's the problem:
1) it takes away a roster spot at the All-Star game for someone else who should be there.

The fans decide who "should" be there...at least they do for the captains this year.
Asking someone who "should" be there is subjective and you might get 10 different responses from 10 different people when asked who they feel should have made the all start team that didn't.
There is no set formula for what the all star teams rosters should look like.

2) the harm caused is that it makes the NHL look bad for allowing this to happen and not putting rules in place to prevent it.

The NHL wouldn't have looked bad at all if they hadn't stepped in and asked Scott not to play, and then said they had to "review" the situation before announcing that he could play. THAT made them look bad.
Like we discussed on the podcast, the NHL should have come out and said from the beginning, "Yup, he's playing...as long as he wants to play. Why wouldn't he be playing? The fans voted him in fair and square."
THAT is what they should have said, instead of trying to change what the fans voted for.

It demeans the whole event and becomes a running joke.

Scott getting voted in does that?
No. It most certainly does not.
Can you imagine how the crowd will react if John Scott scores a goal? They'll go ballistic...it will be the biggest cheer of the night...and it will be on every highlight film...and will be the only goal people are talking about. It would be fantastic publicity for the NHL. The NHL should have embraced this as a fun thing instead of acting all pissed off about it. THAT is why they look bad, not because Scott got voted in.

3) think of the precedent that is now set for next year if no rules are put in place. What's to stop someone from nominating themselves and getting it to go viral. Suddenly you see Joe Schmoe captaining the central and stepping out on skates for the first time and weighing 400 pounds. You have to have some rules and restrictions to prevent this from recurring again.

What?
Dude, there are rules in place this year. You have to be an NHL player on an NHL roster and you can't be on the IR or DL or whatever. You most certainly can NOT vote in some guy off the street. That's kind of a ridiculous. And correct me if I am wrong, but it isn't even possible for someone to cast a vote like that as there was no write in candidate as an option as every player in the NHL was available to choose from.

The only precedent that was set here is that any player in the NHL could conceivably be voted in by the fans...and I see nothing wrong with that. I mean, I wouldn't vote for a goon, but I'm not going to condemn someone else's vote and say they are wrong for voting that way.

And if lesser players shouldn't be allowed to play, then why do we even vote at all? Why not just make it the top point getters at forward and the top point getters on defense and the goalies with the best GAA all get in. Just make it cold and calculated. Done. That is essentially what everyone is saying who doesn't think folks should be voting for Scott. The fans vote on who they want to see play in an exhibition game...period.

[WaukeeBlues]

If you accept the baseline that the All-Star game is intended for a league to showcase its (arguably) best players while simultaneously being a special entertainment event for its fans, then at least on prong one the whole John Scott situation was a fiasco, yes.

I think Scott will have a blast that weekend, I don't think it hurts the NHL's "image" to have him there, and I'm glad they allowed him to go. But next year I absolutely see each team nominating 4-5 players on their roster to go to the All-Star game and the fans will only be able to vote for those names, not any write-in. The fans would still have 120+ players to pick from, everyone is (more or less) happy.

[theohall]

FWIW, Scott asked Doan, Ekman-Larsson, and Domi if they wanted to play in the All-Star game and he would bow out, respectfully. They all said No, go have fun.

When really good players would rather have the time off than play in the game, it says what the game really means to them. Not a whole heckuva lot.

The NHL allowed any player currently on an NHL roster to be voted in. Scott got voted in, in spite of the league ceasing any advertising for voting, burying the vote link on the NHL.com page down near the Terms of Use link, and essentially not asking anyone to vote anymore once the early results came in and Scott was leading the vote. Had the NHL actually put some effort into getting fans to vote, Scott might not have gotten the Pacific Captaincy.

[cprice12]

If you accept the baseline that the All-Star game is intended for a league to showcase its (arguably) best players while simultaneously being a special entertainment event for its fans, then at least on prong one the whole John Scott situation was a fiasco, yes.

I agree that it was a fiasco, and I never have liked campaigns to vote bad players in. I wouldn't ever participate in that kind of thing...but I respect the rights of others to vote for whoever they want.
The NHL really tripped all over themselves though and just came out looking really bad, when they could have come out looking really good. They looked like a monkey (Franking) a football during this whole thing.

I think Scott will have a blast that weekend, I don't think it hurts the NHL's "image" to have him there, and I'm glad they allowed him to go. But next year I absolutely see each team nominating 4-5 players on their roster to go to the All-Star game and the fans will only be able to vote for those names, not any write-in. The fans would still have 120+ players to pick from, everyone is (more or less) happy.

Yup...agreed.

[cardsfan04]

John Scott wrote an article for the Player's Tribune today. It's a good read and very well put on why he should be in this game. I had no idea his tweet way back when telling fans to stop voting for him was because the NHL told him to say that.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/a-guy-like-me/

[Portland Blues]

John Scott wrote an article for the Player's Tribune today. It's a good read and very well put on why he should be in this game. I had no idea his tweet way back when telling fans to stop voting for him was because the NHL told him to say that.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/a-guy-like-me/

Haven't really followed him as a player but that was a great article.

Thanks for posting the link.

[dmiles2186]

John Scott wrote an article for the Player's Tribune today. It's a good read and very well put on why he should be in this game. I had no idea his tweet way back when telling fans to stop voting for him was because the NHL told him to say that.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/a-guy-like-me/

The NHL at it's finest:

If the league thought this was an embarrassment, pretty much all of the players I’ve encountered have thought otherwise. I’ve gotten texts from so many guys saying the same thing: “You should go.”

And that didn’t happen because of the internet. I busted my ass to be one of them. I’ve skated every day since I was three years old to be one of them. I’ve persevered through Juniors roster cuts, Alaskan bus rides, Advanced Dynamics exams, and — yes — fights, to be one of them.

But I’m one of them. And that means a lot to me.

It means a lot to my family.

So when someone from the NHL calls me and says, “Do you think this is something your kids would be proud of?”

… That’s when they lost me.

That was it, right there. That was the moment.

Because, while I may not deserve to be an NHL All-Star, I know I deserve to be the judge of what my kids will — and won’t — be proud of me for.

[theohall]

...But next year I absolutely see each team nominating 4-5 players on their roster to go to the All-Star game and the fans will only be able to vote for those names, not any write-in. The fans would still have 120+ players to pick from, everyone is (more or less) happy.

Yup...agreed.

This was being discussed yesterday afternoon on NHL Radio and again this morning. The talking heads are pretty much convinced if they leave it up to the players to submit 4-5 players from each team for whom they can vote, the players won't name their true All-Star caliber players.

1) the game itself is meaningless
2) it's a chance for the star players to rest if they don't have to play in an All-Star game. Important when teams are looking at a potentially long playoff run depending on how heavy their schedule is post all-star game.
3) Giving the team the option to nominate players, they will nominate guys who don't really need the rest, but deserve recognition and it's a chance to recognize them.

All the talking heads, most former players, were in agreement on all of the above on multiple talk shows. That won't make the NHL "happy", but the stars, who don't need to get worn out playing 3-on-3 won't have to do so.

Side note: How is the 3-on-3 thing going to work with 3 separate games being played? Whomever has to play the 2nd game is going to be worn out when the 3rd game starts. (I know, it doesn't really matter).

[cardsfan04]

John Scott wrote an article for the Player's Tribune today. It's a good read and very well put on why he should be in this game. I had no idea his tweet way back when telling fans to stop voting for him was because the NHL told him to say that.

http://www.theplayerstribune.com/a-guy-like-me/

Haven't really followed him as a player but that was a great article.

Thanks for posting the link.

I had the same thought. I hardly knew who he was outside of recognizing the name until the ASG stuff came up. I gained a ton of respect for his outlook after reading the article though.

[WaukeeBlues]

...But next year I absolutely see each team nominating 4-5 players on their roster to go to the All-Star game and the fans will only be able to vote for those names, not any write-in. The fans would still have 120+ players to pick from, everyone is (more or less) happy.

Yup...agreed.

This was being discussed yesterday afternoon on NHL Radio and again this morning. The talking heads are pretty much convinced if they leave it up to the players to submit 4-5 players from each team for whom they can vote, the players won't name their true All-Star caliber players.

1) the game itself is meaningless
2) it's a chance for the star players to rest if they don't have to play in an All-Star game. Important when teams are looking at a potentially long playoff run depending on how heavy their schedule is post all-star game.
3) Giving the team the option to nominate players, they will nominate guys who don't really need the rest, but deserve recognition and it's a chance to recognize them.

All the talking heads, most former players, were in agreement on all of the above on multiple talk shows. That won't make the NHL "happy", but the stars, who don't need to get worn out playing 3-on-3 won't have to do so.

Side note: How is the 3-on-3 thing going to work with 3 separate games being played? Whomever has to play the 2nd game is going to be worn out when the 3rd game starts. (I know, it doesn't really matter).

Oh I don't think it would be the players doing the nominating, that would virtually defeat the whole purpose. I'm envisioning either the GM straight up or some blend of the GM/coach/president of hockey operations, etc, etc.

And that quote by the NHL f*cking pissed me off. If someone affiliated with the NHL actually told John Scott that I would tell him to go f*ck himself.

99.99% of players in this world never play in an NHL game. John Scott has played in 285. That doesn't happen without, as he accurately put it, a lot of hard work and determination his whole life. So for an NHL front office crotch-stain to sit there on the phone and have the balls to ask him if his kids would be proud of him... Go to hell. Go straight to hell.

[Kerfuffle]

We don't see eye-to-eye on this one. I side with the league on it and would have done the same thing. Scott had a chance to back out gracefully and the league would have blessed that decision. They only relented and let him play now to save face and get the story to end - but I'm sure there will be rules to prevent a recurrence - it will become known as the "John Scott Rule" - you watch.

[cprice12]

Scott had a chance to back out gracefully

And why would he do that exactly? He was voted in, fair and square. Joke or not, he has every right to attend if he wishes. Hell, the NHL will fine you for not attending if voted in. But John Scott actually wants to play and the NHL doesn't want him to.
It's insanity is what it is.
If the NHL doesn't like it, change the rules for next year. But it is what it is this year.
And speaking of that, if they didn't want less than deserving players voted in, then they shouldn't have opened up the voting for every NHL player to be eligible. THAT was a dumb decision, and one they should have honored right from the start. But no, they tried to change the rules halfway through the game because they didn't like how it was going.
That's just plain wrong.

They only relented and let him play now to save face and get the story to end

I'm sure that's the case. But that doesn't change the fact they botched this thing horribly. They could have embraced it and ran with it and it would have been great, but they turned it into a PR nightmare.
The NHL screwed up royally on this whole thing.

but I'm sure there will be rules to prevent a recurrence - it will become known as the "John Scott Rule" - you watch.

I think this is something everyone expects.

But nobody gives a shit about the "integrity" of the all star game or who wins the dumb thing. It's all about having fun. It's an exhibition, it doesn't mean anything...it doesn't matter.

Letting John Scott play shouldn't have been an issue in the slightest. The fact that the NHL made it an issue and some folks still don't think he should play, is a damn shame.

Bob Probert was voted in one year...and he didn't "deserve" to be there. So what? Who cares?
I'm not sure where this NHL All Star game high horse came from that some people are riding in on...but it's (Franking) annoying.

When the NHL called him asking him to decline to play, they asked him how his kids would feel about him playing in the game under these circumstances.
What a total dick thing to say...trying to use his kids as leverage to influence his decision?? Wow.
Scott said THAT was the defining moment for him that he was going to accept the vote results and play. And good for him. With myself having kids, I thought his response was fantastic and touching.

Like I said before...if John Scott scores a goal, the crowd will go nuts and it will be a huge story and would have been great PR for the NHL...but now the NHL has been tainted on this whole thing, so now it's like Scott vs. the NHL...and if he does score a goal, the fans will go nuts for Scott and to spite the NHL, and rightfully so. The NHL deserves that, but it didn't have to be that way at all.

There will be a 30 for 30 made about this, and the NHL will come off looking like assholes because they are simply in the wrong here.

[ecbm]

They only relented and let him play now to save face and get the story to end

Fair enough. As long as you understand-as the NHL clearly does-that this means that the vast majority of people who know of and give two shits about this situation completely disagree with you. Which makes me feel better, as I'm glad most don't side with a corporation with multi-billion-dollar yearly revenue that lays a guilt trip on a guy making pretty much league minimum about his kids.

[theohall]

And why would he do that exactly? He was voted in, fair and square. Joke or not, he has every right to attend if he wishes. Hell, the NHL will fine you for not attending if voted in.

Actually, they suspend players for one-game for not participating in the All-Star game if voted in.

Toews and Ovechkin were both given a one-game suspension, because they aren't going to participate in this All-Star game, even though both may have minor injuries or the flu as has been reported.

[Kerfuffle]

Fair enough. As long as you understand-as the NHL clearly does-that this means that the vast majority of people who know of and give two shits about this situation completely disagree with you. Which makes me feel better, as I'm glad most don't side with a corporation with multi-billion-dollar yearly revenue that lays a guilt trip on a guy making pretty much league minimum about his kids.

League minimum last year was $550K so he's doing very well compared to the average Joe out there - I don't feel sorry for him. I also think the remark about his kids has been blown out of proportion - and also only Scott's version is being told. We don't know if that's what was really said or the intent. The league has done the right thing and stopped talking about it - it doesn't make sense for them to keep commenting on it.