NHL

There was some assface economist on Day to Day yesterday that said that the hockey lockout hasn't had an effect on the local economy. People are still going to the mall, or the movies, or the NBA, so the money is staying in the community. This is typical of the overly simplified thinking of economists (see yesterdays post). While that may be true in some areas, it is definitely not true in Detroit, and I would guess the situation is similar in other areas.

1) Detroit is (at least for the last 10 years) Hockeytown, and there are many businesses whose livelihood is pinned to the success of professional hockey. From Mac's on Third, right near the Joe, to the many downtown restaurants that offer shuttle service, to the parking lot and garage owners, the emptyness of Joe Louis Arena is backbreaking. Many of these businesses have made changes to try to stay alive, but the fact remains that 20,000+ people suddenly not being around is not something you can just adapt to.

2) This is equally true for the city of Detroit. There are no movie theaters in Detroit. There is no NBA in Detroit. Shopping is just starting to pick up, but the plain truth is that Sporting events are still the main draw that brings people out from cowering in the suburbs to support their central city. In a year that finds the city in gigantic budget overruns and massive layoffs (brought upon themselves, say true), you cannot misunderestimate the effect of all the parking, tax, and gate income from Red Wings games. To say that a dollar spent in Auburn Hills is equivalent to a dollar spent in Detroit is asinine.

3) Two sample sets with the same mean are not the same if their standard deviations are wildly different. To restate in non-mathspeak: Even if the exact same number of dollars are being spent, if half the business are doing better than usual and the other half are going bankrupt, the conclusion is not that "there is no impact on the economy". Assface.

So it has been terrible for Detroit. However, that's part of the problem, in that Detroit is one of the only clubs that actually makes money on the hockey season. For many of the other owners, they are actually making more money by not playing. Hockey is a northern phenomenon. Truly a Canadian sport, it has adapted to the cold border areas much like Canadian beer, or donuts, or saying "eh". And in Minnesota, Michigan, and upstate New York (maybe Mass. too, can't say), it truly is a part of the culture. In fact there are at least three NHL teams owned by Detroiters (Red Wings, Hurricanes, and Lightning) and there could be more.

Canada has nearly lost it. CBC is running movies during the hockey night in Canada time slot, while Ron McLean plays with his pickup league, leading into the commercials. They showed that curling comedy, "Men with Brooms" a couple weeks ago. I'm not sure how much longer they can hold out. They're on edge. I'm staying away from Tim Horton's, just as a precaution.

But that doesn't mean the same thing in Florida or the Carolinas. And the continued attempts by the NHL to become the NFL can be safely called a failure. And if this lockout can concretely make that point and get the league back to a manageable, reasonable size, it will have been the best possible thing for the game.

I heard an interview with Chelios a couple days ago. It's clear he's older now than the last labor dispute, in which he threatened Commissioner Gary Bettman's family. He spoke about the possibility of them never coming to an agreement, and the player's association creating their own league starting with 5-6 teams, mostly Canadian. Starting back over at the beginning with a new original 6 would be sad, but it might be one of the best ways to make things work. The game will live on. If it takes a year or so without hockey to get back to sanity, it will be well worth it.

Note: While writing this, news has shown that the players have agreed in principle to a salary cap, but that talks broke down anyway over the proper amount. If an agreement isn't reached by tomorrow, the season will be canceled.