The NHL and the Emerald City

My recent relocation from sunny Florida to rainy Seattle is no big secret to regular readers.

It's a great city where I landed a great job. But more important than that, as a hockey fan, I want to know if it could someday soon be home to an NHL franchise?

That was the subject of a news report on a local TV station — where I found that great job, by the way. One of our reporters headed up to Vancouver, B.C. where he'd lined up an exclusive interview with NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly to talk about the future of the NHL in Seattle.

One quick note about the clip above before the comments explode. Our anchor mistakenly says the the Canucks won the series in six games instead of five. I don't know if it was a typo in the script or what.

Daly was in Vancouver for Game 5 of the Western Conference Finals — which saw the Canucks clinch their first Stanley Cup Final berth since 1994 (on the strangest goal ever). He says the league has been in contact with a group in Seattle about purchasing a franchise but wouldn't go into anymore detail.

Clearly, I'd love nothing more than to have an NHL team in town — Vancouver is an irritating three-hour drive north (that's not counting the border crossing). It's worth it when the Lightning are visiting, however, such as the 5-4 OT Tampa victory I enjoyed back in December.

In our rundown meeting at work this afternoon, the question came up: Is the NHL looking to expand? Obviously not right now while several teams are struggling financially. And even if the deal is all but done to send the Thrashers to Winnipeg, Phoenix could be an option in 2012. But Quebec City is already licking its chops over the prospect of snatching the them away.

None of that really matters, though. Seattle still has no hope. The problem is the shocking lack of a proper arena here. KeyArena sits in the shadow of the Space Needle but seats only 11,000 for hockey. It's too big for the WHL. Too small for the NHL. And as Daly points out, obstructed views are a problem.

So for now, while the city lacks a building, the NHL is a long shot. And it doesn't look like there are any plans to change that in the foreseeable future. At the very least, I'll keep hoping for an NHL exhibition game or two at the Key to get Seattlites excited about the sport. Until then, I'll cheer on my Bolts from afar.

(And thank you for putting up with one more post about hockey in Seattle. I'll make it up to you.)

Update on Thursday · May 26 · 2011 | 1:43 AM PDT by Chris

Wednesday brought another day of speculation with regard to the possible future of the NHL in Seattle — this time, bad news.

Just a day after Bill Daly said publicly that the league has been in contact with a group interested in bringing a team to the city, comes a new wrinkle.

KING 5 reporter Chris Daniels learned that a deal to buy a piece of land in nearby Bellevue to build a new arena had fallen through. This is unfortunate news but is by no means the end of the Seattle hockey story, I'm sure.

If you haven't watched the package above, you should. Chris tracked down former NHL defenseman Jamie Huscroft — a member of my Tampa Bay Lightning for parts of two seasons (the Vancouver Canucks too, by the way). He runs two hockey rinks in the area. He likes the idea of a Seattle-Vancouver rivalry just like many commenters on this post. (Though he's apparently misjudging the distance between the two cities.)

I'll keep you updated on this as more details trickle out. It's definitely not happening next season and you'd have to be extremely optimistic to think 2012-13 — and heck, the world might end by then, right? But if it doesn't, I'm eyeing the 100th anniversary of the formation of the old Seattle Metropolitans in 2015.

One more thing. A couple of you have asked about my team allegiance if, say, the Stinkin' Panthers were to relocate to Seattle. Would I still root for them? As long as they're not the Stinkin' Panthers, sure. But only because they'd be closest geographically and would bring the Lightning to town at least once a year. Nothing will change the fact that the Bolts are my team. I've said it before: You don't pick your team, it picks you.

And lastly, as far as naming ideas go, I think Metropolitans and Totems are equally terrible. In the comments, Erik brought up the Seattle Breakers — the Thunderbirds' old name. (Another team Jamie Huscroft played for, by the way. No kidding!) For more about Seattle's hockey history, check out SeattleHockey.net.

Breakers would get my vote all the way! Fits nicely with the Mariners and Sounders theme. And speaking of the Sounders, I wouldn't mind borrowing their colors too. Their official names are Sounder Blue, Rave Green and Cascade Shale. Yes, yes and yes.

Atlanta to Winnipeg: The Unfolding Story

Despite passing the midway point of the Conference Finals this weekend, the hot topic seems to have been the future of the Atlanta Thrashers and whether or not it will be in Canada. Winnipeg, specifically.

My inbox is filling up with questions about the situation. I'm not an expert on this particular subject so I'd like to defer to those who are. Like many of you, I've been reading a lot about what may or may not be going down.

To make this easy, I've assembled a list of articles from well-repected sources to paint a picture of all that's going on with regard to this subject. But first I should say something.

Thrashers fans protest relocation / TSN.caAs I've reviewed my post from Friday about the Thrashers' imminent move, my bias is clearer to me. As a fellow hockey fan from a southern state, I feel for Thrashers faithful who are on the brink of losing the team they love.

I'm bothered by the apparent heartlessness of Winnipeg residents who should know what it's like to have a franchise ripped right out from them. But it's not heartlessness, is it?

If we step back and look at the numbers, it's hard to argue with them. How can we expect them to feel bad for Atlanta when all they've wanted for 15 years is to have their team back?

Add to that, the hundreds, even thousands of diehard Thrashers fans are dwarfed by an entire city of more than a half-million that would live and die by the team. That's awfully hard to deny.

If it's a question of who deserves it more — and it shouldn't be — who wins out? Atlanta has the team now. They've supported it (mostly) for 12 years. But from everything I've read, it sounds like the ownership, Atlanta Spirit, has let them down. So it's hard to blame the fans in Georgia. And it's just as hard to tell the folks in Manitoba to subdue their excitement.

I still have no patience for any Canadian who innately thinks their geography makes them more deserving of hockey. (Remember, you keep coming back to read a hockey blog written by a Floridian.) But I recognize the predicament both cities are in. Now, having said all that — which I'm sure most of you didn't bother to read — here are the bullet points from the weekend.

• Deal! On Thursday night, Stephen Brunt of the Globe and Mail (Toronto) reported the deal was done and the Thrashers are moving to Winnipeg for the 2011-12 season. He said an announcement would be made Tuesday (tomorrow). details
• No Deal Everyone else, including TSN, reported that, in fact, no deal had been done — yet. But that it's just a matter of time. details
• Moving Day On Friday, TSN reported that some players had been told to start working on new real estate plans for the fall. details
• Contingency Plan On Saturday, the St. John's Telegram said the AHL's Manitoba Moose will be announcing their relocation to Newfoundland on Friday. This assumes a deal to move the Thrashers is completed by then. details
• Inching Closer As of this morning, things are still looking grim for Atlanta as, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, True North Sports and Entertainment continues to close in on a deal. It has become highly unlikely anyone will come along to keep the team in Georgia. details

Part of TSN's online coverage of the NHL's possible return to Winnipeg has included what they call the Jets Meter — a subjective scale based on the likelihood of it happening. As of today, they're five rungs from dropping the puck. So they're pretty positive about this.

For the longest time, it looked like the Phoenix Coyotes were the most likely victim, set to return to their Winnipeg Jets glory — until the city of Glendale took action to squash that dream. Now it's become the Thrashers. Only they wouldn't be called the Jets since that's part of the Coyotes' heritage. So for the rest of this post, we'll assume the deal goes through this week. What happens then?

• Last month, SportsLogos.net reported that the only way the Jets name would come back is if the Coyotes did too. Because it looks to be the Thrashers, that's probably out. Instead, TNSE, the likely new owners, would bank on their existing hockey brand — the Manitoba Moose. details
• Last Tuesday, TSN pointed out that whatever the name, it would likely be preceded by Manitoba rather than Winnipeg this time. They then asked what the team should be named. It yielded a variety of responses from readers including Monarchs, Boomerangs, Rebels, Lakers, and yes, even Thrashers. But Jets remains the most popular. details
• On Thursday, TSN writer Dave Naylor discussed the love for that Jets name in Winnipeg. In particular, he wondered why the Thrashers couldn't take on that moniker even though it is part of the Coyotes' history. After all, it wouldn't be a first in pro sports. Just ask the Cleveland Browns. details

Whatever happens, I'll keep an eye on it — especially as far as the name and logo are concerned. And keep an eye on the Icethetics Twitter feed in the sidebar as I frequently post or retweet useful links there.