I just found this, what a huge Who You Crappin'
https://faxesfromuncledale.com/the-unfa ... of-it-all/Quote:
Which led me to the next train of thought, as I watched Brent Seabrook waddle his way through another clanger of a game. Because the story continues, and because of the inherent stupidity/unfairness of the NHL system, players like Seabrook are held up for treatment and scorn they should never have to deal with.
I’ve listened to far too many people honestly discuss a trade of Duncan Keith. Just as we did last season with Jonathan Toews. We’ve heard the lamenting of Seabrook’s contract. And to me it’s dispiriting at best, disgusting at worst.
All sports are moving this way now, and have for a while, but the NHL’s hard cap system forces fans to see players as only parts, or assets. Brent Seabrook is no longer Brent Seabrook. He’s Brent Seabrook’s contract. Duncan Keith is Duncan Keith’s trade value/possibility. It may not be long before Patrick Kane (setting aside all the other issues for a minute) or Corey Crawford become What They Can Be Cashed In For.
It’s not fair to the players, but it’s also not fair to the fans. No longer will any player aside from a very select few get to finish their careers with one team, unless they do some curtain-call like Patrick Sharp’s last year which felt sort of empty. It only happened because no one else would have wanted him. It’s a sideshow, not a swan song or farewell.
...
Seabrook, Keith, and Toews in the past have done far too much for the Hawks and the fans to have to deal with being seen as merely what they can return in trade or absence. While they’re paid professionals and it’s part of the job, it’s harder on fans whose memories get more and more sullied by views of the players who provided them now.
I don’t like hating on Seabrook. In fact, it hurts at times. And I or many others wouldn’t if his contract weren’t such an obstacle. We can’t help but see it that way because of the things the Hawks must do to rise again. Why is this working out for anyone? We should see what the players are now of course, but we shouldn’t have to turn on them because a team decided to give them a lot of money. They didn’t force anyone to do that.
Yes, Seabrook and Keith have culpability in how they’re perceived. Seabrook through his fitness levels and Keith through the lack of adjustments in his game as he ages. That doesn’t mean they should go from hero to wares in the span of a few seasons.
Of course, any of this would require an actual spine from the players’ association, who would probably have to strike to get it. Instead they’ll just roll over again to get their bellies tickled when the new CBA rolls along. And players like Seabrook and Keith will get hammered for what they used to be, and their paycheck.
The same guy who has been calling Seabrook a fat piece of shit for years now, even when the team was winning the Stanley Cup, is now all "O this cruel world we live in, try to remember the human being." That's to say nothing of the contempt he regularly shows for
all players, at least any player who's not a bantamweight from Europe or is P.K. Subban, who are all spoiled rich kids, middle school dropouts, probably untalented, likely rapists, definite cokeheads, and in all ways inferior to NBA players. But now we're supposed to lament that the hard cap makes us resent our players? Where were you on this, like, eight to ten years ago? And why is it unfair to do this to fans? You think any fans who don't post on Twitter with you are just as shitty as the players they like. Ugh.
_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.