Ice Hockey Fans in the Playground!

[Chunklets]

It being opening night in the NHL and all, it seems appropriate to get the annual hockey thread up and running! So feel free to leap in with prognostications, complaints, comments, etc. I'll start!

I honestly think that Pittsburgh can and will repeat this year, although there are about six or seven teams that will be contending. The Pens' talent pool is too impressive, and now they've got the experience to go with it. And I rather like San Jose to be the opposition in the finals. They've got to figure out this whole playoff thing eventually, right?

As far as my Oilers are concerned, I have some trepidation, although I am an enormous fan of the new coaching hires. The Oil have definitely got some holes (too many small forwards, for one), and those will need to be addressed. At this point, I'll be quite happy if they just squeak into the playoffs.

One last thing: I don't intend this to be strictly an NHL thread. Feel free to discuss whatever league you want!

[snoopy13a]

I'm a Rangers fan. Not really sure how this season will progress.

[Joran]

Newly minted Capitals fan here. As is traditional, I despise everything and anything to do with the Pittsburgh Penguins; too much bad history with the Pens.

Capitals should be fun; they play an entertaining brand of hockey and have some of the most dynamic young players in the league.

[Chunklets]

I'm a Rangers fan. Not really sure how this season will progress.

Yeah, I really don't know what the Rangers are going to be like this year. I guess the big question is whether Gaborik can stay healthy, since their defence and goaltending are both fine. If the offense comes around, I think they could go a couple of rounds into the playoffs.


Newly minted Capitals fan here. As is traditional, I despise everything and anything to do with the Pittsburgh Penguins; too much bad history with the Pens.

Capitals should be fun; they play an entertaining brand of hockey and have some of the most dynamic young players in the league.

The Capitals are a really easy team to like, unless one is a Pens' fan presumably. They play a nice style, fun to watch, and have interesting characters like Ovechkin and Varlamov around the place. Heck, even the coach is likable! The Caps had a great season last year, and I think that they can win the Stanley Cup, just probably not this season. That said, along with Boston and maybe Philadelphia I think they represent the biggest threats to Pittsburgh in the East.

How newly-minted a Caps' fan are you, by the way?

[skywalker]

Yes, I would be a Capitals fan, if I weren't a Pittsburgh fan. As it stands, I don't particularly enjoy their brand of hockey. I think that's the primary difference, honestly. I started paying attention to hockey again after the lockout during Crosby/Ovechkin's rookie year. I had every opportunity to like either team, and chose the Pens. Not sure why, just did.

That said, I'm a Penguins/Predators/Avalanche fan, at least two of those have to do well, right? I dunno, Preds/Avs... Not such a great choice, I guess. I really just like to see good hockey played.

And chunklets, the Sharks, really? Really?

[SensFan]

Pretty self-explanatory who I cheer for, I think ;)

Unfortunately, we're still going to be slowly climbing back up, as the youth movement continues. I'm guessing we'll compete for the 6-8 spots in the play-offs, then if we're clicking in Apripl could go on a run. If Cheechoo regains his old form, then we'll become the somewhat dominant team of a few years back.

The rest of the NHL, I think it will be Flyers over Pens in the East, 'Nucks over Sharks out West. Flyers in 6 for the Cup.

[Tharivol123]

I'm a Wing fan first and foremost, but I'm not too confident about the upcoming season since its near impossible to make to the finals three times in a row. Thinking the same thing about the Pens. The team that has me worried the most this year is the Blackhawks.

[Anuan]

I like the -idea- of icehockey...being in Australia I don't really get to watch it, though :smallsigh:

[blackfox]

*Ahem*...
WE'RE GONNA BEAT THE HELL OUTTA YOU! ROUGH 'EM UP! ROUGH 'EM UP! GO CU!
*disappears back into the sax section*

[Joran]

The Capitals are a really easy team to like, unless one is a Pens' fan presumably. They play a nice style, fun to watch, and have interesting characters like Ovechkin and Varlamov around the place. Heck, even the coach is likable! The Caps had a great season last year, and I think that they can win the Stanley Cup, just probably not this season. That said, along with Boston and maybe Philadelphia I think they represent the biggest threats to Pittsburgh in the East.

How newly-minted a Caps' fan are you, by the way?

Probably two years? I started right around the Bruce Boudreau turn-around and started watching them on TV. My friend has season tickets and had some extras, so I went to about 4-5 games last year and was hooked. The huge thing is that hockey is amazing in person; the energy at a Capitals game is electric.

[snoopy13a]

*Ahem*...
WE'RE GONNA BEAT THE HELL OUTTA YOU! ROUGH 'EM UP! ROUGH 'EM UP! GO CU!
*disappears back into the sax section*

Member of the Lynah faithful?

We used stronger language in that chant back when I on the hill.

[blackfox]

Member of the Lynah faithful?

We used stronger language in that chant back when I on the hill.Member of the pep band, even. :smalltongue: And this forum is supposed to be PG-13. xD

[SensFan]

Probably two years? I started right around the Bruce Boudreau turn-around and started watching them on TV. My friend has season tickets and had some extras, so I went to about 4-5 games last year and was hooked. The huge thing is that hockey is amazing in person; the energy at a Capitals game is electric.
That last part is very true, especially in the play-offs.

Having grown up a Sens fan, and been to many games in my youth, I thought I had seen the intense atmosphere of a hockey crowd up here in hockey country. Then we went on our Cup run a few years back, and I couldn't believe the intensity of the building.

And, unfortunately for you people below the border, I do really think that you haven't seen anything until you've seen a game in Canada, preferably Montreal. Consider Ottawa, where we've always had the rather unfortunate label of only being wagon-hoppers and cheering while we win, and the aftermath of that Cup finals, where Anaheim trounced us. Over 10,000 people showed up at the airport to see them back from Anaheim (they lost the Cup on the road), and the cheering was almost deafening when they got off the plane.

[SDF]

When I was young I used to go to Minnesota North Stars games, but I haven't really followed hockey for a while.

[Don Julio Anejo]

I strongly dislike Crosby.

No, let me rephrase that. I hate Crosby. I HATE HATE HATE HATE CROSBY. Sorry. /rant.

Now that I've got that out of the way... I like where Canucks are going. Except for the Mathieu Schneider signing... granted we need a QB defenceman, but seriously.... Schneider? He's only going to get worse. Not only as a hockey player (that one's a given considering he's 41 if not 42), but we already have one Sami Salo. Who plays two awesome games, scores an overtime winner with a 105 mph slapshot and breaks his knee in the process, putting him out for 6 to 8 weeks.

Since we're going to be playing crappy AHL pluggers instead of defencemen anyway, why not you know, just play them anyway and not bother throwing out several million a year on a player that'll barely play 30 games. This goes for both Salo and Schneider.

Now that I've finished my rant,

Go Wings Go! (The only team I like other than the Canucks). Datsyuk and Zetterberg are a big reason why.

[Chunklets]

And chunklets, the Sharks, really? Really?

A bit of a reach based on their previous playoff difficulties, I know, but they are immensely talented, and their big new acquisition has been deep into the playoffs before.

That said, they outshot Colorado by 20 last night, and still lost. The sight of Evgeni Nabokov giving up 5 goals on 20 shots could not have been a pleasant one for Sharks' management. Time will tell, I suppose, whether it was a one-off or the beginning of serious goaltending troubles for San Jose.


Probably two years? I started right around the Bruce Boudreau turn-around and started watching them on TV. My friend has season tickets and had some extras, so I went to about 4-5 games last year and was hooked. The huge thing is that hockey is amazing in person; the energy at a Capitals game is electric.

I agree with you and Sensfan; there is nothing really like being there in person. I still quite vividly remember the first Oilers game I attended, and that was some time ago - February of 1981, to be precise. And I've also heard that the atmosphere at Caps games in particular is pretty special these days!

Lastly: So just how screwed are the Canadiens? They gave up 45 shots to the Leafs last night, and lost Markov for four months. Yeah, it's only one game, and they won it in the end, but still...

[Talya]

I have been a big fan for years. I'm considering boycotting the NHL entirely this year, though. The owners voted 26-0 to be complete jackasses and keep the best possible team-owner from moving a team in a worthless location to the best possible location, and it really pissed me off.

[SensFan]

A bit of a reach based on their previous playoff difficulties, I know, but they are immensely talented, and their big new acquisition has been deep into the playoffs before.
They have talent, lots of it. What has always plagued them was grit and heart in the play-offs.
They traded away a guy who was a few years ago the best power forward in the league for a sniper that bailed on a team because the coach wanted him to play a team game. Something tells me they didn't address their weaknesses... :smallamused:


That said, they outshot Colorado by 20 last night, and still lost. The sight of Evgeni Nabokov giving up 5 goals on 20 shots could not have been a pleasant one for Sharks' management. Time will tell, I suppose, whether it was a one-off or the beginning of serious goaltending troubles for San Jose.
Personally, as someone who cheered for the Sharks (now I'm rather conflicted), I think the more worrying thing about last night was Heatley being held off the scoresheet, getting just 2 shots while being a minus-3. On the last goal in particular (I think it was), his man scored as Heatley was lazily gliding back into his zone.

Re: The Habs. They looked decent last night, but the loss of Markov probably takes them out of the 7-10 range they were going to finish in.

[Supagoof]

When I was young I used to go to Minnesota North Stars games, but I haven't really followed hockey for a while.I was too, until they left the state. Traitors!

*clap clap clapclapclap* Let's go Wild!
*clap clap clapclapclap* Let's go Wild!

There's a lot of excitement in MN for sports right now. New Football field for the Gophers. New Twins stadium. The Metrodome has been renamed the Mall Of America Field for the Vikings, who have shown a really good start this year. Some of this energy is bound to carry over to our beloved team and state sport of Hockey.

MN - Land of 15,000 Ice Rinks! :smallbiggrin:

[Joran]

I agree with you and Sensfan; there is nothing really like being there in person. I still quite vividly remember the first Oilers game I attended, and that was some time ago - February of 1981, to be precise. And I've also heard that the atmosphere at Caps games in particular is pretty special these days!

We have a pretty darn good video board guy. He packages up very entertaining videos for when we score goals and to pump up the crowd. One particular favorite around here is "Unleash the Fury", which is a montage of sports movie moments, wrapped around Tom Green of all people shouting "Unleash the Fury". It's an instant energy video and is used during a close game during the third period. Funny enough, I think an opposing player or coach said it was a competitive advantage for the Caps ;)

Another great thing about hockey is that they play music and all the entertaining stuff between the action, but never DURING the action. That's what turned me off from the NBA.


I strongly dislike Crosby.

No, let me rephrase that. I hate Crosby. I HATE HATE HATE HATE CROSBY. Sorry. /rant.

Well, as a Caps fan, obviously, I must assert that Ovechkin is a far better player than Crosby, as is Malkin ;) I realize that they play different games and different roles, but there's something off-putting about Crosby. His bland nature? The fact that he was anointed the Chosen One to save hockey?

I respect his game, but don't like his attitude.

P.S. Oh and the Caps looked really good during the first game. It can't go this well all season, can it? :(

[BritishBill]

Im a flyers fan, hopefully they will go to the cup, but not likely with Pittsburgh in
the way :smallannoyed:

[Talya]

I respect his game, but don't like his attitude.


I don't see that. Crosby has a very Gretzky-esque attitude. He quietly goes about his business and plays as hard as he can and remains as far under the radar as it is possible for someone playing as well as he does can do. He seems to be just a modest, mature hard working player.

That said, I can understand hating the media-hype, because while his attitude is Gretzky-esque, his talent-level, while certainly star-quality, is nowhere near what players like Gretzky or Lemieux were capable of.

[Joran]

I don't see that. Crosby has a very Gretzky-esque attitude. He quietly goes about his business and plays as hard as he can and remains as far under the radar as it is possible for someone playing as well as he does can do. He seems to be just a modest, mature hard working player.

That said, I can understand hating the media-hype, because while his attitude is Gretzky-esque, his talent-level, while certainly star-quality, is nowhere near what players like Gretzky or Lemieux were capable of.

Well, from my perspective, he seems to act the way he does because he thinks he's expected to act this way. So, you get situations where Crosby jumps someone right off a face-off, pulls his sweater over his head, and wails a defenseless center, because he thinks he's supposed to fight to pump up his team. BTW, I hate these kinds of fights.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c53DZ9iHrJE

This gets reinforced because Crosby is held up as the savior of hockey and the epitome of Canadian players. I almost never see an unguarded Sydney Crosby. He's a great player, probably a great leader for his team, but there's just something I don't quite like about him.

Contrast this with Ovechkin, who obviously plays with a lot of joy, zeal, and reckless abandon, and you can see why I like Ovechkin a heck of a lot. Never mind me living in D.C. ;)

Although, the man should not be driving himself and Mike Green around in a golf cart... That's 15+ million dollars worth of hockey players almost killing themselves.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFb0y7TrqHQ

[Chunklets]

I strongly dislike Crosby.

No, let me rephrase that. I hate Crosby. I HATE HATE HATE HATE CROSBY. Sorry. /rant.

I love watching Crosby play. That said, there is an element of petulance about him too much of the time to really make me a huge fan. Hopefully it's something that he'll grow out of; I recall Gretzky being kind of the same way in his early years in the league, and he later matured into an extremely classy guy.

Edit: Funny that both Talya and I compared Crosby's attitude to Gretzky's, while meaning fairly different things by it! :smalltongue:


I have been a big fan for years. I'm considering boycotting the NHL entirely this year, though. The owners voted 26-0 to be complete jackasses and keep the best possible team-owner from moving a team in a worthless location to the best possible location, and it really pissed me off.

I confess to being very conflicted over that whole debacle. First of all, I heartily approve of the idea of having another NHL team in southern Ontario; it's quite clear that the fan base could and would support a team there, and the history is present as well (Go, Hamilton Tigers!). Furthermore, things have obviously just not worked out in Phoenix, with apologies to the Coyotes' true fans, few though they may be.

On the other hand, what Jim Balsillie was suing for was the right to be able to move the team without any input from the league whatsoever, which would have opened up a very frightening can of worms for fans of small-market teams. I rather glad, in the end, that the courts did not give him that right.

As I said, I love the idea of the NHL coming to Hamilton (or Waterloo-Kitchener, or the like), and the sooner the better, but I'm glad it didn't happen this way.

[Don Julio Anejo]

That said, I can understand hating the media-hype, because while his attitude is Gretzky-esque, his talent-level, while certainly star-quality, is nowhere near what players like Gretzky or Lemieux were capable of.
Pretty much this.

A typical nhl.com front page goes like this:
SIDNEY CROSBY GETS ANOTHER ASSIST
on Malkin's hat trick

Now if it was only that... but I swear, every single Penguins game I watch he either takes a dive or has an interview along the lines of "omg he hit me, he should get detention." Then when people call him on it, he gets into a completely retarded fight over nothing the next game just to prove he's not a crybaby. And that's before I even saw the video Talya posted...

And all that when he's not even any better than either Malkin or Ovechkin (and I would argue that he is, in fact, worse, as a lot of the time he needs good players around him that he can set up).

[snoopy13a]

Pretty much this.

A typical nhl.com front page goes like this:
SIDNEY CROSBY GETS ANOTHER ASSIST
on Malkin's hat trick



Well, it doesn't help that Gary Bettman is the worst commissoner of any pro sport.

[SensFan]

Im a flyers fan, hopefully they will go to the cup, but not likely with Pittsburgh in
the way :smallannoyed:
The combination of Pronger going to you guys, and Pitts getting the hangover, the Flyers are actually the favorites to make it out of the East.

[skywalker]

A bit of a reach based on their previous playoff difficulties, I know, but they are immensely talented, and their big new acquisition has been deep into the playoffs before.

That said, they outshot Colorado by 20 last night, and still lost. The sight of Evgeni Nabokov giving up 5 goals on 20 shots could not have been a pleasant one for Sharks' management. Time will tell, I suppose, whether it was a one-off or the beginning of serious goaltending troubles for San Jose.

As an Avs fan, I was watching and having a conversation with a few random fans across the internet during the game. Somebody asked for predictions and I said "it depends completely on which Nabby shows up." This is how the Sharks entire season works, and has worked for years. If "Channeling Grant Fuhr" Nabby shows up more often, they have a good season. If "Second coming of the Swedish Sieve" Nabby shows up, then they have a bad one. Nabokov has an annoying habit of making incredible saves that Hasek and Roy would be jealous of, but letting in stupid little easy ones. I think that's why Colorado thrived against him in that game, they're very much a "garbage goal" team. The Western Conference seems to work that way (there's a lot more free-flowing talent in the East), and I think that might be the Sharks' problem, the entire team is a more Eastern team, trying to play in the wrong conference. I thnk Nabby would thrive against Crosby winding up wrist-shots and the like.


And all that when he's not even any better than either Malkin or Ovechkin (and I would argue that he is, in fact, worse, as a lot of the time he needs good players around him that he can set up).

I disagree for exactly the same reason. Crosby sets up other players and makes them better. This makes him the far more valuable player. Gretzky was the same way. Yes he scored a ton of goals but he always had more assists than goals. Ovie can't put the team on his back for 82 games and the playoffs, and he gets an easier pass playing in a much weaker division.

I think it's unfair to compare Gretzky's stats and Crosby's stats. First off, Gretzky himself has said that goalie technique has evolved significantly since his trophy-winning days, so has goalie equipment while "shooting technique" has stayed on the same relative plateau. The NHL has also opened up to more places providing more talent than Gretzky had to play against (also something Gretzky has said). Scores tend to be a lot lower in this era in general, and the Oilers' style of play also probably contributed to Gretzky's numbers. The '80s Oilers pinched the D-men on offense and this frequently got Grant Fuhr shelled. Gretzky would have 5-goal games because the Oilers allowed the opponent to score 5 and Gretzky had to keep playing. The modern NHL doesn't work that way.

I think the reason people tend to compare Crosby and Gretzky is because they play the game similarly. Analysts have always said that Gretzky's game was one of calculation and intelligence, he injected brilliance at just the right moment. Crosby has actually gotten away from that style of play, because he was criticized for not crashing the net, etc. But he's still not the perpetual motion device that Ovechkin is, and neither was Gretzky.

Gretzky did also have an attitude. The reason why it's a bigger deal for Sid is that people jam the camera in his face all the time because he's supposed to be the face of the league. But I don't know where people get off saying the opposing guy is defenseless. The guy in that video was the same size as Crosby, and the conversation in the faceoff before that probably made it well clear what was about to happen. The only thing I can fault Sid for there is for not taking off his helmet (it's considered honorable to remove your helmet so that the other guy doesn't cut/hurt his fists on it).

I think the reason Sid plays a little more chippy than Gretzky is because they made him Captain at 21 years old and that's a big deal for a kid to be trying to figure out how to fulfill his role. Notice that he didn't play that way before he got the C on his jersey. But now he thinks he's expected to show some camaraderie with the guys making a 10th his salary and get in the trenches sometimes (which he is).

[Chunklets]

I think it's unfair to compare Gretzky's stats and Crosby's stats. First off, Gretzky himself has said that goalie technique has evolved significantly since his trophy-winning days, so has goalie equipment while "shooting technique" has stayed on the same relative plateau. The NHL has also opened up to more places providing more talent than Gretzky had to play against (also something Gretzky has said). Scores tend to be a lot lower in this era in general, and the Oilers' style of play also probably contributed to Gretzky's numbers. The '80s Oilers pinched the D-men on offense and this frequently got Grant Fuhr shelled. Gretzky would have 5-goal games because the Oilers allowed the opponent to score 5 and Gretzky had to keep playing. The modern NHL doesn't work that way.

What you say is very true. However, there are ways around the problem, in particular something that I only came across quite recently called "adjusted statistics." Adjusted statistics are an attempt to remove the historical bias from stats, so that you can in fact make some sort of hard comparison between players of different eras. There's a really nice explanation of how adjusted statistics work here (http://www.hockey-reference.com/about/adjusted_stats.html) (and if you have not yet discovered hockey-reference.com, I heartily recommend it). Anyway, if you go with the adjusted stats, Crosby actually had a better offensive season at age 19 than Gretzky did at that age, but that Gretzky's numbers absolutely took off after that. His best years were in the stretch between ages 21 and 26, which Crosby is just entering. So watching Sid the Kid over the next few years is going to be very very telling in terms of comparisons with Gretz. Of course, there's always the possibility that the whole "adjusted stats" thing is hooey, but it seems to make mathematical sense.

And your Avs are off to a very nice start, I see!


They traded away a guy who was a few years ago the best power forward in the league for a sniper that bailed on a team because the coach wanted him to play a team game. Something tells me they didn't address their weaknesses...

I suspect that most Oilers fans and Sens fans can find some common ground in their opinions of Mr. Heatley. :smallamused: I suppose I shall have to put aside my dislike for him come the Olympics, though (ye gods, with Team Canada including both him and CFP, there are going to be some tormented Oil fans out there... :smallbiggrin:)

@Supagoof and SDF: Nice to see some Minnesota fans on here! For the record, I consider the moving of the move of the North Stars to have been just as stupid and sad as the recollections of the Nordiques and Jets - a great hockey town got ripped off.

[skywalker]

What you say is very true. However, there are ways around the problem, in particular something that I only came across quite recently called "adjusted statistics." Adjusted statistics are an attempt to remove the historical bias from stats, so that you can in fact make some sort of hard comparison between players of different eras. There's a really nice explanation of how adjusted statistics work here (http://www.hockey-reference.com/about/adjusted_stats.html) (and if you have not yet discovered hockey-reference.com, I heartily recommend it). Anyway, if you go with the adjusted stats, Crosby actually had a better offensive season at age 19 than Gretzky did at that age, but that Gretzky's numbers absolutely took off after that. His best years were in the stretch between ages 21 and 26, which Crosby is just entering. So watching Sid the Kid over the next few years is going to be very very telling in terms of comparisons with Gretz. Of course, there's always the possibility that the whole "adjusted stats" thing is hooey, but it seems to make mathematical sense.

And your Avs are off to a very nice start, I see!

Indeed they are! Beyond my wildest dreams...

I think it's obvious Crosby isn't going to ever be as productive on the goal scoring front, even with adjusted statistics. I was about to suggest something similar, however I probably wasn't going to be quite as mathematically rigorous.

[SensFan]

Unless Heaters puts up 30 by Christmas, I don't think he has a chance of cracking team Canada. There's more than enough skilled players to choose from for them to want an ego like his; the thing Team Canada always focusses on is a team-first attitude, since the team is literallly made only of superstars.

The only way I see him making the team is if they decide to treat the fiirst half of the season as practise with Thornton, and put them on a line together.

[MCerberus]

As a Blues fan, I approve of the third period thrashings given to the wings in Europe. Freaking octopi throwers.

[SensFan]

As a Blues fan, I approve of the third period thrashings given to the wings in Europe. Freaking octopi throwers.
As a fed-up-of-the-Wings-and-their-generally-arrogant-fans hockey fan, I approve of the thrashings given to the Wings in Europe.

[MCerberus]

It seems that nothing says "beacon of hatred" better than the central division.

[SensFan]

It seems that nothing says "beacon of hatred" better than the central division.
Not sure what you mean by "becon of hatred", but the Northeast does seem to give the Central a run for its money, if I am interpretting your post correctly.

[MCerberus]

What I mean is the constant general feeling of ill-will given between the teams of the central and those outside.

Blues fans hate the Wings
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Stars, especially Re: Hull
Wings fans hate the Blues

and so on.

[SDF]

@Supagoof and SDF: Nice to see some Minnesota fans on here! For the record, I consider the moving of the move of the North Stars to have been just as stupid and sad as the recollections of the Nordiques and Jets - a great hockey town got ripped off.

Yeah, the Wild were still a new team when I moved from MN. At least the Mighty Ducks form the movie were from MN. :smalltongue: I knew Jamie Langenbrunner when he was playing for Dallas while I was in MN, cool dude. In my town of 8,500 we had at least 13 public ice rinks, where here in Boise we have one big rink for a metro area of of 1,000,000. I was one of the best hockey players in the state for high school when I moved to Idaho, I was marginal in MN. That was fun, but not saying much. :smallamused:

[skywalker]

It seems that nothing says "beacon of hatred" better than the central division.

Nothing says "beacon of hatred" like a hockey league period.

[SensFan]

What I mean is the constant general feeling of ill-will given between the teams of the central and those outside.

Blues fans hate the Wings
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Stars, especially Re: Hull
Wings fans hate the Blues

and so on.
I don't know the central, but I doubt its as bad as the northeast. Especially as it relates to Sens-Leafs-Habs.

[Joran]

I don't know the central, but I doubt its as bad as the northeast. Especially as it relates to Sens-Leafs-Habs.

The SouthEast division really doesn't spark feelings of dislike. The Capitals' biggest rivals are probably the Penguins (long history in the playoffs, rivalry between great players) and the Flyers. For the fans, a lot of them remember the old Patrick Division days where we were in the same division as the Flyers and the Penguins.

The Lightning, Thrashers, Panthers, and Hurricanes are way too new for there to be much history with the Capitals.

[Chunklets]

Yeah, the Wild were still a new team when I moved from MN. At least the Mighty Ducks form the movie were from MN. :smalltongue: I knew Jamie Langenbrunner when he was playing for Dallas while I was in MN, cool dude. In my town of 8,500 we had at least 13 public ice rinks, where here in Boise we have one big rink for a metro area of of 1,000,000. I was one of the best hockey players in the state for high school when I moved to Idaho, I was marginal in MN. That was fun, but not saying much. :smallamused:

Only having one rink in Boise is rather strange, given the state's location. Do you ever get out to see the Steelheads play?


Unless Heaters puts up 30 by Christmas, I don't think he has a chance of cracking team Canada. There's more than enough skilled players to choose from for them to want an ego like his; the thing Team Canada always focusses on is a team-first attitude, since the team is literallly made only of superstars.

The only way I see him making the team is if they decide to treat the fiirst half of the season as practise with Thornton, and put them on a line together.

They may in fact be doing just that; it makes a certain amount of sense. I think that Heatley will have to play himself off of Team Canada, rather than on. However, if he does struggle early, his "character issues" are going to become front-and-centre when team selection time comes around!

Changing the subject radically, I think the Oilers actually did pretty well Saturday night, despite Khabi's big screw-up in the last minute. It was awfully good to see Penner and Gagner play as well as they did, and I can only hope that they manage to keep it up. The PK has got to be better, though, and soon!

[Don Julio Anejo]

Blues fans hate the Wings
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Hawks
Blues fans hate the Stars, especially Re: Hull
Wings fans hate the Blues

and so on.
Heh. Welcome to Canada...

Ottawa fans hate the Leafs.
Calgary fans hate the Leafs.
Edmonton fans hate the Leafs.
Vancouver fans hate the Leafs.
Montreal fans REALLY hate the Leafs. :mad:

...Toronto fans also hate the Leafs :amused:

[Ravens_cry]

As a Canadian I am legally obligated to enjoy this sport.
Due to a lack of cable I only watch the play-offs, but I do genuinely like it. I can't play it mind, me and skating get along as well as pepper spray and eyeballs. But for a fast paced free flowing game of terrific action and speed, it's a hoot.

[SensFan]

Due to a lack of cable I only watch the play-offs
CBC shows 2 games (7 and 10PM EST) every Saturday night. I don't think you need cable for CBC...

[Ravens_cry]

CBC shows 2 games (7 and 10PM EST) every Saturday night. I don't think you need cable for CBC...
I live in an apartment facing the wrong way, the aetheric waves reachest me not.:smallfrown:

[SensFan]

I live in an apartment facing the wrong way, the aetheric waves reachest me not.:smallfrown:
I'm confused. How do you watch the play-offs, then?

[Ravens_cry]

I'm confused. How do you watch the play-offs, then?
Bars or friends houses. I don't like to impose, and bars get expensive fast, but it's nice to catch those important games.
My general plan is to root for the Canucks till they are out, then root for the Canadians till they are out, then just root for any Canadian team still in the running.

[skywalker]

The Lightning, Thrashers, Panthers, and Hurricanes are way too new suck way too bad for there to be much history with the Capitals.

I fixed that for ya. Like I said, you play in an easy division. Another thing that breeds contempt is equal competition, which is why Pens-Caps is such a great rivalry right now. The level of competition has to be maintained for a while (usually) before it becomes an historic rivalry. For instance, Montreal vs. Toronto. Toronto has sucked for years, but since they both were really good around the turn of the 20th century for about 20 years, the rivalry has been a great one ever since.

Of course, you don't have to have equal talent for very long, the Avs were only good for a few years, but they managed to create a rivalry with Detroit that crackles to this day. Even if the Avs are the worst team in the West (like last year) they will still stand up and put the man pants on for one game to embarrass Detroit (like last year).

[MCerberus]

Have you tried bending a length of conductive metal wire into a funny shape and tying it to your antenna?

[Ravens_cry]

Have you tried bending a length of conductive metal wire into a funny shape and tying it to your antenna?
I tried that, I can only seem to pick up CityTV and even that only through a thrashing window of snow.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Bars or friends houses. I don't like to impose, and bars get expensive fast, but it's nice to catch those important games.
I watched a bunch of games as live streams on the internet when I didn't have cable... Check out CDC on game day, there's usually a couple of topics with links to the feeds if they're translated.

[MCerberus]

I tried that, I can only seem to pick up CityTV and even that only through a thrashing window of snow.

Well then tell your landlord to stop being paranoid about xray spying and take the lead out of the walls. :smallconfused:

I'm in the odd position that I can only get my team's home games, but I get every single one of them. This is in part due to a general lack of desire to watch hockey by my fellow countrymen and that the cable station that handles all local sports that don't make it onto the big networks is HQ'd right in south county, AKA Blues central.


Hell the network affiliates won't even air Friday night games from the Kiel (and I'm not calling it anything else damn it!).

[Ravens_cry]

I watched a bunch of games as live streams on the internet when I didn't have cable... Check out CDC on game day, there's usually a couple of topics with links to the feeds if they're translated.
Thank you, I'll check that out.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Oh, forgot to mention. If the game is on a Saturday, more likely than not, cbc.ca has a feed on their website.

[skywalker]

I watched a bunch of games as live streams on the internet when I didn't have cable... Check out CDC on game day, there's usually a couple of topics with links to the feeds if they're translated.

I generally do this since they (amazingly) don't often show Colorado's games in Tennessee (I was shocked too!).

[SensFan]

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/

The right bar, "CBC Sports Schedule", will have links to some events streaming live. At the very least, they'll have all the games being played on HNiC anywhere in Canada (Leafs game, Habs game, Sens game, late game).

[Joran]

I fixed that for ya. Like I said, you play in an easy division. Another thing that breeds contempt is equal competition, which is why Pens-Caps is such a great rivalry right now. The level of competition has to be maintained for a while (usually) before it becomes an historic rivalry. For instance, Montreal vs. Toronto. Toronto has sucked for years, but since they both were really good around the turn of the 20th century for about 20 years, the rivalry has been a great one ever since.

Of course, you don't have to have equal talent for very long, the Avs were only good for a few years, but they managed to create a rivalry with Detroit that crackles to this day. Even if the Avs are the worst team in the West (like last year) they will still stand up and put the man pants on for one game to embarrass Detroit (like last year).

Hey, the Lightning and the Hurricanes both won Cups! I will now huddle in a corner and cry.

P.S. For those in the U.S. (no idea if Canada gets ESPN), ESPN is running a documentary tonight entitled "King's Ransom" about the Wayne Gretzky trade from Edmonton to LA.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVL62QMAlpU

[SensFan]

Hey, the Lightning and the Hurricanes both won Cups! I will now huddle in a corner and cry.
The Lightning went on a magical run where their goalie and top 3 players all hit a massive hot streak at the same time. Not taking anything away from their Cup win, both both before and after those play-offs (even in the regular season that year), they have been mediocre at best.
The Canes would undoubtedly have lost in the first round if they hadn't just about taken Koivu's eye out. To recap for those who have no idea what I'm talking about, they lost games 1 and 2 of the series at home to the Habs, and were trailing 3-1 (I think) in the 3rd period of game 3 in Montreal. High stick hits the Habs captain, Koivu, in the eye and he's out for the series. Canes rally to win that game and steamroll over the Habs in future games to win the series in 6.

[slipnslide]

Just curious... what do fans in Canada and around the country think of Ovechkin? I live in DC, so I absolutley love him. Is he loved as much else where? I mean I laugh when people argue Crosby is better. Don't get me wrong Crosby is solid hockey player, but people do recognize that nobody plays like Ovechkin, right?

[SensFan]

Just curious... what do fans in Canada and around the country think of Ovechkin? I live in DC, so I absolutley love him. Is he loved as much else where? I mean I laugh when people argue Crosby is better. Don't get me wrong Crosby is solid hockey player, but people do recognize that nobody plays like Ovechkin, right?
Ovechkin is the best goal-scorer the game has (probably) ever seen. Off the top of my head, the only person I can think of that can even be in the same conversation is Rocket Richard.
Crosby is probably the best player in the league right now, and in the same group as names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Lafleur, Béliveau, Orr.

The difference is that Ovechkin is the best shooter bar none, and one of the best at most other things (other than stuff like face-offs, fighting, etc...). Crosby is one of the best at most things (including face-offs, but not physical play), but more importantly, makes everyone around him much better.

A trade of Ovechkin for Crosby probably makes both teams quite a bit worse.

[Joran]

The difference is that Ovechkin is the best shooter bar none, and one of the best at most other things (other than stuff like face-offs, fighting, etc...). Crosby is one of the best at most things (including face-offs, but not physical play), but more importantly, makes everyone around him much better.

A trade of Ovechkin for Crosby probably makes both teams quite a bit worse.

Eh, it sounds like you're implying that Ovechkin doesn't make everybody better around him either. I'd disagree just looking at the power play and within the offensive system, he'll make some pretty nifty passes and set up his teammates nicely. One of the things about Ovechkin that amazes me is that he can get off his shot no matter what, regardless if there's a defenseman between him and the goal, or if he's on his rear-end or if he can't even see the goal, he can and will shoot it on net and force the goalie to make a save.

Some Pens fans will swear that Malkin is even better than Crosby, but I haven't seen enough of them to evaluate it.

I'm happy enough with Nicklas Backstrom, who I think is an underrated center who is only going to get better.

[SensFan]

Eh, it sounds like you're implying that Ovechkin doesn't make everybody better around him either. I'd disagree just looking at the power play and within the offensive system, he'll make some pretty nifty passes and set up his teammates nicely. One of the things about Ovechkin that amazes me is that he can get off his shot no matter what, regardless if there's a defenseman between him and the goal, or if he's on his rear-end or if he can't even see the goal, he can and will shoot it on net and force the goalie to make a save.

Some Pens fans will swear that Malkin is even better than Crosby, but I haven't seen enough of them to evaluate it.

I'm happy enough with Nicklas Backstrom, who I think is an underrated center who is only going to get better.
Ovechkin only 'makes people around him better' as far as he forces the other team to concentrate on him (and still burns them, hense him being the best scorer).
When you're playing on the same team as Crosby (especially when on the ice with him), you play better. You pass better. You shoot better. His presense is enough to lift everyone to the next level, just like the players I previously mentionned.

Talking about pure skill, Malkin is probably second to Ovechkin in the league. Those two and Crosby are almost certain to be 1-2-3 in the Art Ross this year, and it probably goes Malkin-Ovechkin-Crosby.

[Chunklets]

Ovechkin is the best goal-scorer the game has (probably) ever seen. Off the top of my head, the only person I can think of that can even be in the same conversation is Rocket Richard.
Crosby is probably the best player in the league right now, and in the same group as names like Gretzky, Lemieux, Lafleur, Béliveau, Orr.

First of all, well done for including Le Gros Bill among the league's all-time elite players! Far too often, IMHO, he is overlooked.

I can, however, think of some other guys to be in the conversation about best goal-scorer ever. Brett Hull, Phil Esposito, Lemieux, and probably some others whom I'm forgetting (Edit: Pavel Bure, for example... :smallbiggrin: ). I'm not even including Gretzky and Mike Bossy, although I probably should; yes, their major exploits came during the offensive insanity of the 80s, but those exploits were still pretty stunning. I do fully agree with you though, that Ovechkin, on the evidence so far, is one of the all-time great goalscorers; Here are the top eleven single seasons in terms of Adjusted Goals (http://www.hockey-reference.com/about/adjusted_stats.html):

Brett Hull (90-91): 78
Alex Ovechkin (07-08): 72
Mario Lemieux (88-89): 71
Cooney Weiland (29-30) & Phil Esposito (70-71): 70
Wayne Gretzky (83-84): 69
Babe Dye (24-25) and Wayne Gretzky (81-82): 68
Howie Morenz (27-28), Dit Clapper (29-30), & Mario Lemieux (95-96): 67

So Ovechkin's already got the second greatest goalscoring season in history, and he's all of 24... (Plus, I would love to know what was going on in '29-'30 to produce those numbers)

To get back to slipnslide's question, I really like watching Ovechkin. Not only is he very very good, and exciting, but he seems to play with an incredible level of joy. Plus, he irritates Don Cherry... :smallamused:

[skywalker]

The Lightning went on a magical run where their goalie and top 3 players all hit a massive hot streak at the same time. Not taking anything away from their Cup win, both both before and after those play-offs (even in the regular season that year), they have been mediocre at best.
The Canes would undoubtedly have lost in the first round if they hadn't just about taken Koivu's eye out. To recap for those who have no idea what I'm talking about, they lost games 1 and 2 of the series at home to the Habs, and were trailing 3-1 (I think) in the 3rd period of game 3 in Montreal. High stick hits the Habs captain, Koivu, in the eye and he's out for the series. Canes rally to win that game and steamroll over the Habs in future games to win the series in 6.

+1

The Canes also profited from being well-built for the new type of hockey that was going on right after the lockout, and Edmonton playing HUGE before running out of gas so that the Canes didn't have to play a real Stanley Cup team (no offense to Chunklets and the Oilers).


Just curious... what do fans in Canada and around the country think of Ovechkin? I live in DC, so I absolutley love him. Is he loved as much else where? I mean I laugh when people argue Crosby is better. Don't get me wrong Crosby is solid hockey player, but people do recognize that nobody plays like Ovechkin, right?

Sensfan has already explained this pretty well, I'll briefly point to my post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7050644&postcount=28) on the first page.

Joran, it is less than perfect, but one of the ways to see how much someone "makes his teammates better" is to look at his assists. Anyone who is scoring more goals than assists (it is fundamentally easier to get an assist than a goal without trying) is rather suspect for this. Halfway through explaining how he makes everyone better, you go back to talking about how "he can always get his shot off." "Even if he's on his rear end." That's great, but that's not making everybody else better.

Yes, slipnslide, nobody brings his level of energy, his size, and his skill set to the game. But hockey is a game (and a culture) of teamwork. Canadians especially (since you asked) respect team work. Even tho Don Cherry is a jerk, he is also a decent representation of the way Canadians feel, IMO. Ovechkin is Russian, and he's very ostentatious. While Crosby may run his mouth on the ice and (maybe in press conferences), Ovechkin wears yellow laces and pretends his stick is too hot to touch. All that coming from a "foreigner" generates some ill-will from Canadians from what I can tell.

Chunklets, I want to point out that, altho Ovechkin is only 24, when you look at the great goal scorers, they did their best scoring young. Gretzky turned 22 halfway thru his 92 goal season. Brett was 24 in the season you list, and Lemieux was 23. Scoring titles seem to be a young man's game.

[Joran]

+1
Joran, it is less than perfect, but one of the ways to see how much someone "makes his teammates better" is to look at his assists. Anyone who is scoring more goals than assists (it is fundamentally easier to get an assist than a goal without trying) is rather suspect for this. Halfway through explaining how he makes everyone better, you go back to talking about how "he can always get his shot off." "Even if he's on his rear end." That's great, but that's not making everybody else better.


Sorry, I was trying to answer two questions, disputing the contention that Ovechkin doesn't make his teammates around him better, while trying to elucidate one thing that makes him unique.

One of Ovechkin's strengths is that he can get his shot off and on goal under almost any condition. This doesn't mean he always takes the shot if he gets it and Ovechkin still has a lot of assists to go with his goals. The implication that I read was that Ovechkin doesn't make his teammates better and simply put I don't think that is true. He's top 25 in assists 5 on 5, and top 10 in assists on the power play. That's pretty darn good.

http://www.japersrink.com/2009/8/11/984674/primary-thoughts-on-secondary

Sydney Crosby is great at making his teammates better; that's his job, he's a center. Ovechkin is a winger and is supposed score goals; however when it's the right play, he'll pass the puck. This is why the Ovechkin vs. Sydney comparisons drive me batty. They play different positions; it's not an apples to apples comparison.

That said, the thing that impressed me during the playoffs was that Sydney was in our crease constantly and we could not clear him out. He scored so many goals from 2 feet out =P

Anyone know where some more sophisticated stats can be found? Baseball has some truly exotic stats like VORP (value over replacement player) and win shares that are supposed to try to express exactly how good a player is supposed to be. Does hockey have anything similar to those stats?

[skywalker]

Sorry, I was trying to answer two questions. One of the things that makes Ovechkin special is his ability to get a shot-off in less than perfect conditions.

This doesn't mean he always takes the shot if he gets it and Ovechkin still has a lot of assists to go with his goals. The implication that I read was that Ovechkin doesn't make his teammates better and simply put I don't think that is true. He's top 25 in assists 5 on 5, and top 10 in assists on the power play. That's pretty darn good.

http://www.japersrink.com/2009/8/11/984674/primary-thoughts-on-secondary

Sydney Crosby is great at making his teammates better; that's his job, he's a center. Ovechkin is a winger and is supposed score goals; however when it's the right play, he'll pass the puck. This is why the Ovechkin vs. Sydney comparisons drive me batty. They play different positions; it's not an apples to apples comparison.

Anyone know where some more sophisticated stats can be found? Baseball has some truly exotic stats like VORP (value over replacement player) and win shares that are supposed to try to express exactly how good a player is supposed to be. Does hockey have anything similar to those stats?

No, we're not cool enough for stats like that, as far as I know.

It's not an apples to apples comparison, but when people ask, I compare. You make an interesting point. That's another problem Ovechkin has in the comparison, because, all glamor stats being equal, the center is far more valuable, and generally gets a lot more of the attention. Centers are leaders, face-off men (which is huge), and by and large make their teams better more often than wingers.

Related to this, new hockey fans tend to gravitate towards Ovechkin. His style of play, attitude, etc are all very fun to watch for everyone. You can watch one hockey game a year, watch Alex Ovechkin, and get excited.

Sidney Crosby, altho heralded as "the chosen one," is actually far more traditional, and makes older hockey fans happier, because we tend to have a taste for assists and "leadership."

Crosby and Ovechkin can have the same level of physicality or "grittiness" (which they don't, Ovechkin has a lot more weight to throw around and does so), but when Ovechkin does those sorts of things, he can be frowned upon for acting crazy because he really does enjoy it all. Crosby, on the other hand, is being a leader, the captain, making a stand for the team when it needs to be made, etc. What old-school fans used to say is "Man, I like Crosby but he's soft." So it really gives them chills to see him act "hard."

Finally, Ovechkin has never been injured. If he never is, he will go down as one of the most durable forwards in history. But being who he is with his style of play, he can't keep that up. How will he handle it? Crosby gritted his teeth thru a month of playing with a broken foot. That's the kind of play the old school go in for. I don't know how Ovechkin responds to injury, but I think it's safe to say that it might have a big effect on his public perception and it will certainly have bearing on how he is viewed within the league.

[Chunklets]

Anyone know where some more sophisticated stats can be found? Baseball has some truly exotic stats like VORP (value over replacement player) and win shares that are supposed to try to express exactly how good a player is supposed to be. Does hockey have anything similar to those stats?

Check out hockeyreference.com (http://www.hockey-reference.com/)and behindthenet.ca (http://www.behindthenet.ca/)! I'd also recommend hockeydb.com (http://www.hockeydb.com/); it doesn't have the really in-depth stats that the other two do, but it includes information about a large number of different leagues.

Hockey still isn't at the level of sophistication, stats-wise, that baseball is, but it's getting there.


The Canes also profited from being well-built for the new type of hockey that was going on right after the lockout, and Edmonton playing HUGE before running out of gas so that the Canes didn't have to play a real Stanley Cup team (no offense to Chunklets and the Oilers).

None taken, I assure you! :smallbiggrin: You've essentially hit the nail on the head, in my opinion. The Oilers made the '06 playoffs on or about the last day of the season, by one point, so it was a bit of a surprise when they turned up in the Finals. My only quibble would be this: I think Roloson getting hurt in Game 1 of the finals hurt the Oilers more than fatigue did.


Chunklets, I want to point out that, altho Ovechkin is only 24, when you look at the great goal scorers, they did their best scoring young. Gretzky turned 22 halfway thru his 92 goal season. Brett was 24 in the season you list, and Lemieux was 23. Scoring titles seem to be a young man's game.

That is a very interesting point, and one that I hadn't considered. So, I went and took a look at the top ten career goalscorers, and their ages during their best goalscoring seasons. Here's the list:

{table="head"]Player|Best Season (goals)|Age
Wayne Gretzky|81-82 (92)|21
Gordie Howe|52-53 (49)|24
Brett Hull|90-91 (86)|26
Marcel Dionne|78-79 (59)|27
Phil Esposito|70-71 (76)|28
Mike Gartner|84-85 (50)|25
Mark Messier|81-82 (50)*|21
Steve Yzerman|88-89 (65)|23
Mario Lemieux|88-89 (85)|23
Luc Robitaille|92-93 (63)|26[/table]

*Not that it's particularly relevant to anything, but I was at the game in which Messier scored his 50th that season. Against LA, IIRC.

I think that pretty much bears out what you said, skywalker! Esposito had his best goalscoring season at the ripe old age of 28, and all the rest were younger. So we might in fact be watching Alex Ovechkin at his goalscoring peak right now.

On a side note, what are people's takes on Luongo and his slow start to the season? Is there something actually wrong there, or are we just looking at a fluke run of bad results?

[snoopy13a]

Anyone know where some more sophisticated stats can be found? Baseball has some truly exotic stats like VORP (value over replacement player) and win shares that are supposed to try to express exactly how good a player is supposed to be. Does hockey have anything similar to those stats?

I suppose that plus/minus contributes somewhat to that. However, players who play against the other team's 1st line may end up having lower plus/minuses on average than their teammates who are playing against the other team's 3rd line.

[Chunklets]

I suppose that plus/minus contributes somewhat to that. However, players who play against the other team's 1st line may end up having lower plus/minuses on average than their teammates who are playing against the other team's 3rd line.

The QUALCOMP and QUALTEAM stats (Quality of Competition and Quality of Teammates) can help out with that, although they are quite "new" stats, and I think there are still questions about how accurately they reflect matters (fun fact!!!: According to QUALCOMP, Chicago's Adam Ladd faced the toughest opposition last year, of players who played at least 20 games. Toronto's Ryan Hollweg had the easiest go of it). Anyway, QUALCOMP and QUALTEAM are available at behindthenet.ca (http://www.behindthenet.ca/), and maybe elsewhere as well.

There is some interesting number-crunching at quanthockey.com (http://www.quanthockey.com/)as well, much of it dealing with player age and nationality.

[Don Julio Anejo]

On a side note, what are people's takes on Luongo and his slow start to the season? Is there something actually wrong there, or are we just looking at a fluke run of bad results?
Well, Luongo either plays great or he plays "average" (his "average" play is still better than 50% of starter goalies in the league mind you, but...). Well, when he plays average, our defence would usually bail him out.

However... This season not only did we change up half of our defensive core (out with Ohlund, in with Ehrhoff and Schneider), but it also got way too cocky after an almost perfect preseason. When we only dressed about half of our regular season D roster per game. So basically, they're too cocky but at the same time haven't gotten used to playing together.

Missing Demitra also doesn't help much. We're both down to one scoring line and we miss his backchecking.

[MCerberus]

The coyotes shut out the penguins 3-0. Honestly I didn't see that one coming. As for tomorrow, the game to watch I think will be Wings-Hawks. If the wings can shrug off their early jitters and play a full 60, It'll be interesting duke out between the two reputed contenders for the central.

[skywalker]

None taken, I assure you! :smallbiggrin: You've essentially hit the nail on the head, in my opinion. The Oilers made the '06 playoffs on or about the last day of the season, by one point, so it was a bit of a surprise when they turned up in the Finals. My only quibble would be this: I think Roloson getting hurt in Game 1 of the finals hurt the Oilers more than fatigue did.

I had forgotten this, but I agree with you completely. That was some bad times for them.


On a side note, what are people's takes on Luongo and his slow start to the season? Is there something actually wrong there, or are we just looking at a fluke run of bad results?

Well, of course he was injured last season (and it may have been more serious than they let on), and he played a lot of games the two seasons before that. Generally, starting goalies play about 60-65 games per season, and Luongo played 10 more than that. He also played 52 even with being injured last season. I've always thought the guy played a ton of games for a goalie and it might be starting to catch up to him. I've always known of him, but beyond his massive number of games (which I somehow gleaned), I don't know much about him. He's like this enigma up there in BC. Perhaps it's my longstanding apathy for the Canucks, I don't know, but he's never wowed me for some reason. But a million hockey pundits can't be wrong, I don't dispute that he's a great goalie. But he plays a lot of games and maybe that's starting to catch up with him.


The coyotes shut out the penguins 3-0. Honestly I didn't see that one coming. As for tomorrow, the game to watch I think will be Wings-Hawks. If the wings can shrug off their early jitters and play a full 60, It'll be interesting duke out between the two reputed contenders for the central.

Well, the Pens didn't exactly get inspired goaltending, did they? Brent Johnson is a career backup with a decent career save percentage but a few sub-.900 years. He saved 22 of 24 shots across from Bryzgalov who would also be playing back up for most teams. No the Pens didn't do enough to make Bryzgalov work, but 2 goals on 24 shots is not good play even out of a back up. I know Conklin is a number 1 goalie, deserves (and asked for) the salary. But IMO the Pens messed up by not keeping him around, especially since MAF is so often injured. Garon, also, I thought was ok, altho his stats aren't as good as Johnson's. Overall, ESPN says the Pens were "uninspired," but I'm more apt to blame the goalie (even tho I was one!) when he lets in 2 goals on 24 shots. Conklin has had 2 goals on 50(!) shots before. Keep in mind that I didn't watch the game at all, but I also point out that Max Talbot is injured. Talbot is one of the most important 4th-liners in the game, especially to his team. Pittsburgh feeds off their fourth line more than any other team I know of (which is shocking for a team that has such talent on the first 3 lines), and Talbot's absence could really be affecting that line, and the team as a whole by extension.

This is Chicago's year, I feel. They stole Marian Hossa from the Wings (what a hired gun that guy is turning out to be), lost very little, and they got older (in Chicago's case, getting older is a good thing, it means wiser). The Wings, in contrast, lost Hossa and a passel of other cogs (Detroit is a team that is centered around lots of decent cogs), and otherwise didn't gain much. They also got older, which in Detroit's case, is a bad thing (since it means more slower feet and more injuries). I think the Wings are about to go dormant again like they did after their two Cups in the 90s. Because of the team's strategy, they don't stay consistently great. What they do instead is bring in young, decent players, and bring them up in the system for years. These guys peak, and then age and decline, and the team's fortunes go along with them. Not saying it's a bad strategy, it probably beats hell out of Pittsburgh's strategy (sure, get Crosby, Malkin, Kunitz, and Staal! No, don't worry about how we'll pay them all later, along with all these other guys, let's just use 'em now while they're young!). Or the strategy practiced by Colorado (let's just buy the biggest free agent we can find, or trade away 8 draft picks at the deadline for him. Future-smuture, we have a sellout streak to extend right now!).

[Blackknight1239]

So, staunch Oiler fan here, ironically living in Calgary. Sadly I missed their first two games this year, but managed to catch the Canuck/Habs game tonight. And I gotta say, a 7-1 game is no fun to watch.

[Lucky]

So, staunch Oiler fan here, ironically living in Calgary. Sadly I missed their first two games this year, but managed to catch the Canuck/Habs game tonight. And I gotta say, a 7-1 game is no fun to watch.

Unless you're a Sens fan laughing your ass off at the plight of the Montreal Canadiens. :smallbiggrin:

Also, with regards to the "new stats" sites, www.puckprospectus.com and hockeyanalytics.com are two more sites to check out.

[Don Julio Anejo]

And I gotta say, a 7-1 game is no fun to watch.
Not when you're on the other side of the 7-1 :smallbiggrin:

Too bad I missed the first half of it. Stupid studying for midterms :smallfrown:

[Chunklets]

So, staunch Oiler fan here, ironically living in Calgary.

* gasps in horror and sympathy at the thought of a fellow Oilers fan stuck in Calgary * :smallbiggrin:

I think the Habs are going to have some games like last night, at least until they get their defence back in order (no disrespect to Marc-Andre Bergeron, but...). And Luongo looked a little more like his normal self; Montreal actually got some pressure on him, particularly during the second period, and he ended up stopping 27 of 28.

Of course, now Montreal's going to be all angry and fired-up when they play Edmonton on Saturday night... :smallmad:

[Walrus]

I'm not too worried about the Lollipop Guild (er, Canadiens) being fired up when they play the Oilers. This year's iteration of the Oil are a lot meaner and have goal-scorers on every line, not to mention more scoring defencemen than some entire divisions.

I'm an Oilers fan as well (which I imagine is evident from that last statement), and I like what I've seen from the team so far this year. Aggressive forechecking, grit, and more offensive punch makes for a fun team to watch. I'm very pleased that Dustin Penner seems like he's going to be the type of player that the Oilers thought they were getting when they got him from Anaheim, and he's got some good chemistry with Brule.

And he's a pretty good penalty killer. Who knew?

[Blackknight1239]

* gasps in horror and sympathy at the thought of a fellow Oilers fan stuck in Calgary * :smallbiggrin:

Hey, it'll just make it more fun when they win tonight.

Besides, from what I'm hearing the Oil are a much better team than years past. Plus with the coaching changes we've all been waiting for, I think it'll be a good season.

[Lucky]

* gasps in horror and sympathy at the thought of a fellow Oilers fan stuck in Calgary * :smallbiggrin:

I think the Habs are going to have some games like last night, at least until they get their defence back in order (no disrespect to Marc-Andre Bergeron, but...). And Luongo looked a little more like his normal self; Montreal actually got some pressure on him, particularly during the second period, and he ended up stopping 27 of 28.

Of course, now Montreal's going to be all angry and fired-up when they play Edmonton on Saturday night... :smallmad:

Markov means so much to the Canadiens, I just don't see how they really cover for his lose, especially with how bad Yannick Weber looked.

And Hal Gill is just so slow out there, it's amazing.

[skywalker]

And Hal Gill is just so slow out there, it's amazing.

The U.S.S. Gill needs time to bring its considerable girth to bear!

[Chunklets]

Besides, from what I'm hearing the Oil are a much better team than years past. Plus with the coaching changes we've all been waiting for, I think it'll be a good season.


I'm an Oilers fan as well (which I imagine is evident from that last statement), and I like what I've seen from the team so far this year. Aggressive forechecking, grit, and more offensive punch makes for a fun team to watch. I'm very pleased that Dustin Penner seems like he's going to be the type of player that the Oilers thought they were getting when they got him from Anaheim, and he's got some good chemistry with Brule.

I agree with both of you. But for a bit of bad luck, we'd be 3-0 right now, and we haven't even really heard from Hemsky or Horcoff yet, beyond Hemsky's goal last night. I don't know if the playoffs are in the picture for this season, but we should at least challenge for them, which is a lot better than some of the preseason predictions I read. It's a bit strange to watch an Oilers team that's actually dangerous going forward...

And Walrus, I believe that under the Quinn regime the term is "crust," rather than "grit." :smalltongue:


Markov means so much to the Canadiens, I just don't see how they really cover for his lose, especially with how bad Yannick Weber looked.

And Hal Gill is just so slow out there, it's amazing.

Yes, and their goaltending situation is still quite shaky. I thought Price opened the season really well, but he was a disaster against Vancouver. I'm betting we see Halak tomorrow night.

On a sad note, I've got to say that I wasn't really really surprised to hear what Theo Fleury had to say today (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=294301). I remember discussing it with a friend of mine when Fleury's substance abuse problems first came to light, and we both looked at those problems, and the fact that Fleury played for Graham James in junior, and we did wonder. All the best to Mr. Fleury, and to James' other victims, is all I really have to say on the issue.

[Walrus]

I'm reeeeally hoping that Nikolai Khabibulin gets back up to form soon, though. He was pretty good in the second tilt against Calgary (except for the shootout), so hopefully he can improve on that performance against the Habs. I heard that Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers is probably going to start against Nashville on Monday night, which seems like a good first test for him. He was great in the preseason, and if he performs at the same level I wouldn't be surprised to see him and Devan Dubnyk in the Oilers' net in two years or so.

[skywalker]

On a sad note, I've got to say that I wasn't really really surprised to hear what Theo Fleury had to say today (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=294301). I remember discussing it with a friend of mine when Fleury's substance abuse problems first came to light, and we both looked at those problems, and the fact that Fleury played for Graham James in junior, and we did wonder. All the best to Mr. Fleury, and to James' other victims, is all I really have to say on the issue.

Very, very sad indeed. I wish people like this could get a do-over :smallfrown:

[Chunklets]

I'm reeeeally hoping that Nikolai Khabibulin gets back up to form soon, though. He was pretty good in the second tilt against Calgary (except for the shootout), so hopefully he can improve on that performance against the Habs. I heard that Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers is probably going to start against Nashville on Monday night, which seems like a good first test for him. He was great in the preseason, and if he performs at the same level I wouldn't be surprised to see him and Devan Dubnyk in the Oilers' net in two years or so.

As long as it's not for another two years! :smallbiggrin: I do like both our up-and-comers, but Dubnyk's not ready, and Drouin-Deslauriers... well, we'll see. I'm a bit leery about the idea of him playing 30 games, but that may be what ends up happening. You're right that he looked sharp in preseason, and hopefully he can keep that going Monday night!

Khabibulin has been improving, and I as well thought he was very good against Calgary. He made some superb saves, and all three of their goals came on deflections. I hope he gets a little bit more help from his defense tonight, but I think in the long run he'll be fine.

I'd be interested to hear what fans of other teams think of their own goaltending situations. Are you happy, depressed, flat-out terrified, or what? :smallbiggrin:

[Blackknight1239]

So, first period over in the Oiler/Canadiens game, and I'm really liking Khabibulin's performance. It's the best I've seen him so far, and it looks like he's settled down and ready to play. It's a good thing.

[SensFan]

So far, Leclaire seems like the only 'tender we've had that's even come close to the dominance that Hasek had. And he would have got us the Cup had it not been for the Olympic Groin Fiasco.

In fact, so far, I'd say that Leclaire would have led us to a Cup if he was on our team of 2-3 years ago. As for now...we'll have to see if we get better offence than we did last year.

[skywalker]

I'd be interested to hear what fans of other teams think of their own goaltending situations. Are you happy, depressed, flat-out terrified, or what? :smallbiggrin:

Resigned to my belief that Roy's contract included a secret "can't sign a good goalie for 20 years" clause. Brutal road trip my boys are on right now.


So far, Leclaire seems like the only 'tender we've had that's even come close to the dominance that Hasek had. And he would have got us the Cup had it not been for the Olympic Groin Fiasco.

You really think so? By "Olympic Groin Fiasco," are you referring to Hasek's Olympic gold medal for "most groin fiascoes?" Because I'm pretty sure he deserved that one. I mean, great goalie, but seriously. If Hasek came to me and gave me a list of his injuries and asked me for advice, I'd say "Stop flinging your legs all over the place and learn to play positionally. Cripes. You wouldn't have to do that stuff if you could just pay attention and anticipate the puck only slightly better. And catch it! Rebounds are not your friend Dominik!"

Hasek seriously benefited from having a starter-quality backup (Osgood) in Detroit for him to alternate with. Neither one of those guys can play as many games as a typical starter, which is why Detroit worked out so well for them. That's why I don't think it ever would've worked out in Ottawa. If it hadn't been the Olympics, the regular season would've gotten him.

[Walrus]

Khabibulin's performance against the Habs has soothed my early fears that he may have been a significant downgrade from Dwayne Roloson. The only goals he allowed were brutal defensive gaffes (Brule's giveaway to Gionta and Horcoff scoring on his own net instead of just stepping a foot sideways and blocking it). The saves he did make were pretty brilliant (and he managed to make Scott Oake laugh so hard he could barely continue the interview after the game, which was pretty entertaining).

I think JDD is pretty underrated, personally. He was very good in the preseason, and most of his poorest games last season were the result of the team quitting on him (especially the ones where he was replacing the starter). 30 games might be a little much, but I think he can handle 20-25 and put up fairly good numbers.

I'm also annoyed that Dany Heatley is playing well. Out of spite, mostly.

[Thes Hunter]

GO WINGS!


I live within walking distance of the Jo, here in Hockey town. So let me know if you will be attending one of the games.

[KjeldorMage]

Is it just me or is the game even slower now than after the lockout.

Maybe I have been tainted by watching the first few games for my Sabres but it seems as if the trap is back and every team is using it too well.

The Sabres were built to score hard, fast and often, not to play the trap. This is going to be a long year...


-side note- Chunklets, how is Kotalik doing on the Oilers? I was trying to settle a bet that trading him actually hurt the sabres.

[Chunklets]

-side note- Chunklets, how is Kotalik doing on the Oilers? I was trying to settle a bet that trading him actually hurt the sabres.

Kotalik actually signed with the Rangers over the summer. He did have a good run down the stretch in Edmonton last season, and seemed to have good chemistry with Hemsky, so I was mildly surprised to see him go. He's had a good start to the year in New York: 3 G, 1 A in 5 games. I would say that his leaving has hurt the Sabres, and possibly the Oilers as well!

[Walrus]

I was disappointed that the Oilers let Kotalik go (stupid Dany Heatley grumble grumble), but I'm glad he's doing well in New York. I liked him better with Gagner than with Hemsky, though. He was also money in the bank in a shootout.

[Walrus]

Fun news for Oilers fans: Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers carried over his preseason magic against the Nashville Predators. 40 saves on 41 shots in a 6-1 in Music City? Works for me.

Bad news for Oilers fans: Sheldon Souray is on the injured reserve.

Hilarious weirdness: The Calgary Flames gave up a FIVE goal lead and lost to the Chicago Blackhawks in overtime, 6-5. That "best young defence in the league" doesn't seem to be working out too great for cowtown, so far. Not that I'm gloating, or anything.

I'm totally gloating.

[skywalker]

Hilarious weirdness: The Calgary Flames gave up a FIVE goal lead and lost to the Chicago Blackhawks in overtime, 6-5. That "best young defence in the league" doesn't seem to be working out too great for cowtown, so far. Not that I'm gloating, or anything.

Alberta: The only place on Earth where the two largest cities can have nicknames of "Cowtown" and "Oiltown" and the inhabitants are two busy hating each other to band together against the outside world that gave them those names.

[Chunklets]

I'm a Rangers fan. Not really sure how this season will progress.

Well, so far so good! I'm really impressed with this Del Zotto fellow - an early Calder candidate, perhaps?


Fun news for Oilers fans: Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers carried over his preseason magic against the Nashville Predators. 40 saves on 41 shots in a 6-1 in Music City? Works for me.

Bad news for Oilers fans: Sheldon Souray is on the injured reserve.

Hilarious weirdness: The Calgary Flames gave up a FIVE goal lead and lost to the Chicago Blackhawks in overtime, 6-5. That "best young defence in the league" doesn't seem to be working out too great for cowtown, so far. Not that I'm gloating, or anything.

I'm totally gloating.

Yes, that was just a nice, nice win. JDD was lights-out, Stortini(!) scored two goals and fought in the same period, and the Oil got two points out of a place where they almost never win. Chicago on Wednesday is going to be a big test, though. As they showed last night, the 'Hawks are not prone to giving up, and I can't see them spotting the opposition a 5-0 lead at home two games in a row.


Alberta: The only place on Earth where the two largest cities can have nicknames of "Cowtown" and "Oiltown" and the inhabitants are two busy hating each other to band together against the outside world that gave them those names.

Actually, I think both those nicknames are self-inflicted. I've never heard anybody except drunk Oilers fans refer to Edmonton as "Oiltown." :smalltongue:

[Walrus]

The Blackhawks on Wednesday are definitely going to be the toughest game so far. On the other hand, though, I think the Oilers match up a lot better with the 'Hawks than they did last year, and have a notable edge in the goaltending battle over Huet and Niemi. Should be a good one, either way. A win would put the Oil in a tie with Calgary on top of the Northwest Division, which would be rad. They haven't been out of the middle of the pack for quite a while.

It also appears that Vancouver Canucks players have started dropping like flies lately. Sami Salo just went down for 4-6 weeks, right after Daniel Sedin. Not that Sami Salo getting hurt is a surprise, really. Man, they'd better hope the Olympics don't take too much out of Luongo, or they're going to have a hard time climbing out of the division basement.

[skywalker]

I get to go to the Preds game tomorrow! (Well, later today, technically) And it's college night! Rejoice!

[BritishBill]

i want to go to the flyers panthers game tommorow but i work :(

[Chunklets]

The Blackhawks on Wednesday are definitely going to be the toughest game so far. On the other hand, though, I think the Oilers match up a lot better with the 'Hawks than they did last year, and have a notable edge in the goaltending battle over Huet and Niemi. Should be a good one, either way. A win would put the Oil in a tie with Calgary on top of the Northwest Division, which would be rad. They haven't been out of the middle of the pack for quite a while.

Well, it didn't go our way in the end, but it was a fun game to watch. I think the Oilers may actually have a couple of goalies this year... :smallsmile: And Dustin Penner may finally have arrived.


I get to go to the Preds game tomorrow! (Well, later today, technically) And it's college night! Rejoice!

Well, it'll be the 'Hawks' third game in four nights, so they could be vulnerable, and the Preds have every reason to be annoyed. That said, Chicago has a very good team, at least based on the little bit I've seen them this year. They seem very aggressive going forward, and very quick to punish opposition defensive errors (Jason Strudwick, I am talking to you, but not just you...). In any case - have a good time! It should make for some fun watching.


i want to go to the flyers panthers game tommorow but i work :( Phone in sick, wear a false glasses/nose/moustache thing to the game in case of TV cameras, and there you are! :smalltongue:

[Walrus]

I'm envious of you guys who have the option of just deciding to a go to a game when you feel like it. Oilers tickets are tough to come by, and cost a fortune.

I'm looking forward to seeing the new-style Wild in action. I haven't seen them play yet, but apparently they're a lot more mobile and actually, y'know, DO stuff.

[MCerberus]

Well that was a painful 3rd. After taking a 2-1 lead in the second, the Blues just kind of died. Hell their last power play took place mostly in the wrong side of the ice.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Sometimes I wish I lived in a place where no-one cares about hockey... You guys can actually go and see games and probably get half-decent seats. Here they're all sold out two months before the season starts unless we're playing someone like the LA Kings in a game no-one cares about against a team that no-one cares about (sorry LA, it's true :smallfrown:) that doesn't have players anyone cares about (well, LA is a bad example, I do like Kopitar and I'm quite pissed we drafted Bourdon (RIP) and not him, but you know what I mean).

On a side note, I'm curious to see how many more Leafs fans there are than Canucks fans when Leafs are in town next week..

[Chunklets]

I'm envious of you guys who have the option of just deciding to a go to a game when you feel like it. Oilers tickets are tough to come by, and cost a fortune.

I hear you on that one! I manage to get to about one Oilers game every couple of seasons, and that usually involves considerable pre-planning and penny-saving.

However, I got out to my first ever Oil Kings game earlier this season, and I'll definitely be back! Tickets are very reasonable in price, and you get to sit down in the lower bowl of the Coliseum, nice and close to the action. Also, junior hockey is a blast - there are some really skillful players out there, and it's fun to watch them and think "Yup, there's a future NHL career!" The U. of A Golden Bears/Pandas are also a good way to get one's live hockey fix, I've found.

Don Julio, you mentioned similar difficulties getting to see the Canucks; do you ever get a chance to go watch the Giants or the Thunderbirds?


Well that was a painful 3rd. After taking a 2-1 lead in the second, the Blues just kind of died. Hell their last power play took place mostly in the wrong side of the ice.

Yeah, that was a tough one for the Blues to lose. I'm actually starting to think, though, that there may be something good going on in Phoenix. I thought before the season that the off-ice chaos surrounding the franchise would likely torpedo their on-ice fortunes, but it hasn't happened, at least not yet. Much though I admire Wayne Gretzky, I have to think that the coaching change has played a large part in this.


I'm looking forward to seeing the new-style Wild in action. I haven't seen them play yet, but apparently they're a lot more mobile and actually, y'know, DO stuff.

I've heard that they're playing a more up-tempo style this season as well, but it hasn't yet translated into a lot of success, offensively or defensively. Here's hoping that the Oilers, themselves a group learning a new system, can take advantage of that tonight!

[MCerberus]

Well that's one way to break a losing streak. I hope the Blues come out to play when not facing 'projected' cup contenders.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Damn, I really gotta give it to Backstrom. 39 shots, only 2 goals. Minny IMO still seems the same Minny we know and (don't) love.


Don Julio, you mentioned similar difficulties getting to see the Canucks; do you ever get a chance to go watch the Giants or the Thunderbirds?

I went to a few Giants games, but it's just not the same after watching NHL. I'd rather go watch my friends shoot pucks with some random people, at least that way I'm cheering for my friends. You just see too many players who screw up (I know, I know, couch coach, but still) and you know it. And the games aren't as dynamic or exciting. Especially since I don't know the players or anything so I'm randomly watching random people shoot pucks.

Plus, their stadium being a good distance away in a part of town I don't like much that's also hard to get to by bus doesn't help things.

[skywalker]

However, I got out to my first ever Oil Kings game earlier this season, and I'll definitely be back! Tickets are very reasonable in price, and you get to sit down in the lower bowl of the Coliseum, nice and close to the action. Also, junior hockey is a blast - there are some really skillful players out there, and it's fun to watch them and think "Yup, there's a future NHL career!" The U. of A Golden Bears/Pandas are also a good way to get one's live hockey fix, I've found.

I, conversely, am very jealous of those of you who get to see good junior hockey whenever you feel like it. Because you see, you probably get the lower bowl, near the middle of the ice, for what I paid for "endzone," upper deck seats about 3 rows from the top. NHL prices aren't much different no matter where you are.

Also, going to the Preds game, while admittedly a spur-of-the-moment decision for the people I went with, was part of a trip involving 6 hours of driving to visit my best friend.

The quality of the fans is also much lower than I'm sure what you're used to being around. The difference between Preds fans and fans of my local minor league team is minimal, altho the Preds fans are more likely to know what icing and offsides are, and the Preds have a video replay screen (my local team does not). My point is, the local fans are happier with a loss and a fight than with a win and no fight.


Well, it'll be the 'Hawks' third game in four nights, so they could be vulnerable, and the Preds have every reason to be annoyed. That said, Chicago has a very good team, at least based on the little bit I've seen them this year. They seem very aggressive going forward, and very quick to punish opposition defensive errors (Jason Strudwick, I am talking to you, but not just you...). In any case - have a good time! It should make for some fun watching.

Yeah, that didn't quite go the way you predicted... 1 goal on 13 shots for the Preds, and the worst 2-man advantage execution that I've ever seen at the end of the game. Anyway, it was a fun game, altho I forgot the highway robbery perpetrated at some pro sporting events. $7.50 for a beer?! Cripes!

[Walrus]

Having now seen Minnesota in action twice, it seems like they really WANT to play a more exciting brand of hockey but don't have the personnel to do it. So now instead of playing stifling defence and being dreadfully boring, they play sub-par defence, sub-par offence, and are only effective on special teams.

I sure do like their new road jerseys, though.

I haven't been to an Oil Kings game yet, but I'm hoping to make it out soon. I saw the U of A Golden Bears play against the Edmonton Oilers rookie team a month or so ago, which was a blast. Watching the mascot in a slapshot contest with a six year old was hilarious.

[Chunklets]

The quality of the fans is also much lower than I'm sure what you're used to being around. The difference between Preds fans and fans of my local minor league team is minimal, altho the Preds fans are more likely to know what icing and offsides are, and the Preds have a video replay screen (my local team does not). My point is, the local fans are happier with a loss and a fight than with a win and no fight.

The local team you mention - that's the Ice Bears, right? I admit to knowing next to nothing about the SPHL; what's it like to take in a game?

I've actually encountered the "better a fight than a win" attitude even among NHL fans, and I find it irritating. I don't might seeing a fight or two, especially if they're the sort that add to the emotion of the game a bit, but if my team can win without fighting, that's absolutely fine by me.


I went to a few Giants games, but it's just not the same after watching NHL. I'd rather go watch my friends shoot pucks with some random people, at least that way I'm cheering for my friends. You just see too many players who screw up (I know, I know, couch coach, but still) and you know it. And the games aren't as dynamic or exciting. Especially since I don't know the players or anything so I'm randomly watching random people shoot pucks.

I hadn't realized until I went and looked it up that the Giants play at the old Pacific Coliseum - I can see how strolling around East Hastings late at night might not be a fun and relaxing experience!

There does seem to be a tremendous range of skills and abilities on display in junior hockey, which makes sense when you think of the difference, physically and experience-wise, between a 16-year-old fresh out of Bantam and 19-year-old who's been to an NHL training camp. I think that probably accounts for most of the (often hilarious) screw-ups.


Well that's one way to break a losing streak. I hope the Blues come out to play when not facing 'projected' cup contenders.

Ah, the old "playing to the level of our opposition" ploy, eh! I know it well... :smallbiggrin:


Having now seen Minnesota in action twice, it seems like they really WANT to play a more exciting brand of hockey but don't have the personnel to do it. So now instead of playing stifling defence and being dreadfully boring, they play sub-par defence, sub-par offence, and are only effective on special teams.

You're right, and I think trading for Kobasew will help them out, at least somewhat, in the short run. It will be interesting to see if they can stay in touch with the playoff spots long enough to let them get the new system sorted out.

And, well, another white-knuckle performance from the Oilies last night, and two enormous intra-divisional points. I suppose that if one is going to give up late-game goals, it's best to give them up so late that the game has actually ended... :smallbiggrin: Hopefully the flu bug doesn't ravage the team too badly; they've got a helacious schedule coming up (starting Thursday, they play Columbus, at Calgary, at Vancouver, Colorado, and Detroit in eight days). I'm thinking that we'll see Drouin-Deslauriers for at least one, and maybe two of those.

[Walrus]

I agree that Kobasew will probably help the Wild out, although they'll probably have to dump some salary relatively soon so they can afford to keep him. Although hopefully he doesn't help the Wild out TOO much. The Northwest division is tough enough already. The division seems to have gotten a lot more competitive this year (as opposed to last year, when it was pretty much Calgary and Vancouver battling for top spot and everyone else battling to stay out of the basement).

I'm not going to complain about a squeaker finally going the right way for the Oilers. I'm sure JDD will get one or two games in the next stretch, but I have no idea which ones. If it was my call I'd probably play him against Calgary and Detroit. Calgary because Khabibulin hasn't been great against them this season, and Detroit because JDD's best games last year were against very good teams (er, the Rangers were good during the stretch the Oilers played them in, at least).

I'm also pleased that so far this year I can look at the top scorer list and see some Oilers on there (Penner and Brule).

[Chunklets]

I'm sure JDD will get one or two games in the next stretch, but I have no idea which ones. If it was my call I'd probably play him against Calgary and Detroit. Calgary because Khabibulin hasn't been great against them this season, and Detroit because JDD's best games last year were against very good teams (er, the Rangers were good during the stretch the Oilers played them in, at least).

I agree entirely. I'd add that JDD faced Calgary three times last year, and the Oilers won two of those (ok, one of the wins was against Calgary's scrubs at the end of the season), so I'd have no problems with Quinn running him out there on Saturday night. Let Khabi face Luongo and the surprisingly very good Avs, and then put JDD back in to face Detroit, who are injury-plagued and whose goaltending is suspect (and, as you say, JDD has shown a habit of doing well against good teams).

I'd stick with Khabi for Columbus tomorrow night; he's been playing so well, and the Blue Jackets are one of those teams that the Oil need to overcome if they're going to make the playoffs.

Side note: I don't know why, particularly, but I actually quite like the Blue Jackets. Maybe it's the fact that I rather liked most of the ex-Oil who are over there now, (Torres, Garon, Roy, Hejda, and Chimera) and I admired Ken Hitchcock even when his Dallas teams were regularly shuttling the Oilers out of the playoffs in the first round.

Other side note: I wonder if we'll see Mr. Garon in the Columbus net tomorrow? Mason had a tough one last night against Calgary.

[skywalker]

The local team you mention - that's the Ice Bears, right? I admit to knowing next to nothing about the SPHL; what's it like to take in a game?

I've actually encountered the "better a fight than a win" attitude even among NHL fans, and I find it irritating. I don't might seeing a fight or two, especially if they're the sort that add to the emotion of the game a bit, but if my team can win without fighting, that's absolutely fine by me.

I actually got dirty looks during the 3rd period for explaining to my friend why the Preds weren't going to start a fight at that juncture in the game. The notion that hockey fights are carefully planned and orchestrated seemed to baffle the people sitting around me.

As for the Ice Bears (nice job by the way)... It's the SPHL... I mean, technically, they are a "pro" team, but it's not really even a minor league... As far as I know there are never any scouts around. It's a bunch of guys like me who lost the geographic lottery and were born hockey fans in the South... But unlike me didn't realize that lacrosse was the same concept and could be played around here. It's like if instead of the All-Star Game, the NHL had a "4th-liners only" game. I enjoy watching "big-heart hockey," but obviously the skill isn't really there.

As for the atmosphere, it's not much different from an NHL game. The people who care most about the game tend to get the cheap seats, and the seats on the glass become more like the "VIP" in a club. The staff were surprisingly knowledgeable about the game and one usher actually vowed to keep us in much better seats than we had tickets for. I attribute this to me having an actual understanding of the game as opposed to just being there for beer and a fight.

The arena... Is a multi-purpose arena that they have to clear out for the circus(es), Disney on Ice, and semi-major concerts. I actually escorted a girl to a ball there once. No replay was an interesting proposition. A couple of goals weren't called because they bounced out of the net too fast for the goal judge or the ref to see. That's bad.

[BritishBill]

Sometimes I wish I lived in a place where no-one cares about hockey... You guys can actually go and see games and probably get half-decent seats. Here they're all sold out two months before the season starts unless we're playing someone like the LA Kings in a game no-one cares about against a team that no-one cares about (sorry LA, it's true :smallfrown:) that doesn't have players anyone cares about (well, LA is a bad example, I do like Kopitar and I'm quite pissed we drafted Bourdon (RIP) and not him, but you know what I mean).

On a side note, I'm curious to see how many more Leafs fans there are than Canucks fans when Leafs are in town next week..

Yea in Florida its easy to get good seats lol. I loved Roberto Luongo when he was here :smallsmile:

[MCerberus]

I was watching parts of the Pens-Panthers game today during intermissions/commercials and something struck me: The Penguins announcers are boring. Really, really boring. Very ho-hum about a shootout of all things.


Or I'm just used to the local guys that have a heart attack every 3 on 2.

[Walrus]

Some teams just have really boring announcers. The late game commentators for Hockey Night in Canada last season were awful (Mark Lee and Mark Crawford). This year is slightly better, with Kevin Weekes replacing Mark Crawford, but that doesn't make Mark Lee less boring.

I was very impressed by the Oilers' comeback against the Blue Jackets. The Penner/Gagner/Hemsky line was SCARY. I can't really complain about the Oilers having two players in the top twenty in scoring, though. That hasn't happened in a loooong time.

[golfmade]

Preds fan myself, going home to Idaho for Christmas and will be taking a small trip to Nashville to catch a game against the Ducks. Can't wait, even though the Preds are really having a tough time so far in the season.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Colorado is finally doing great this year, something I'm happy to see :smile: Going to have to watch a few games of theirs if I have the time. Edmonton isn't too shabby (although It's a bit less of a surprise to me, they did a pretty good rebuild while Colorado I know nothing about).

On a side note, yay - we can (hopefully) kick the crap out of the Maple Leafs :biggrin:

[Walrus]

I think that, at this point, most Major Junior teams could kick the crap out of the Maple Leafs. The Leafs are AWFUL.

[Thes Hunter]

I live walking distance to the arena... and get $15 single seat tickets... the real question is do I take a study break and go to the Wings/Avalanche game, or do I just study some more. :smallamused:

[Don Julio Anejo]

I think that, at this point, most Major Junior teams could kick the crap out of the Maple Leafs. The Leafs are AWFUL.
How is it different from the last 20 or so years? :smalltongue:

[MCerberus]

Anyone catching any of the current Blues-Stars game? 2 fights in the first period and the Stars are getting hit. HARD. 0-0 after one, but the Blues are forcing penalties and running around the Dallas D with their usual pass game.

Old fashioned low-scoring physical hockey. Love it. Also, a Wings fan in this thread? *HISSSSS* :smalltongue:


Wow just had a real big bonehead "huh?" call. Check the highlight reel after the game, they'll likely put on the second period fight. Pay attention to the first blue to get punched in the head. Yah, the one who never drops his glove or stick. He was given a double minor for the fight. He didn't even !@#$ing participate, and the instigator got nothing.

[Don Julio Anejo]

I'm surprised.. Toronto actually really went it and Beauchemin, Komisarek and a few others actually looked better than anyone on the Canucks (except Raymond). Makes me really surprised they lost their last 7 games, and they only really lost this one because of a bunch of penalties.

PS: Raymond got a breakaway too.. too bad it was 0.5 seconds too late.
PPS: five missed shots from a few dozen feet away at the empty net was just too funny to watch :smallsmile:

[skywalker]

I live walking distance to the arena... and get $15 single seat tickets... the real question is do I take a study break and go to the Wings/Avalanche game, or do I just study some more. :smallamused:

*gloats*

Hard core gloating :smallamused:

[SensFan]

Please, someone, tell me that it was only a bad dream that had the Sens blow a 2-goal lead with 90 seconds to play.

[Shadowcaller]

I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXvy968BCs8&feature=PlayList&p=kWXQVDREuQI) video fits to this. :smallbiggrin:

[skywalker]

I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXvy968BCs8&feature=PlayList&p=kWXQVDREuQI) video fits to this. :smallbiggrin:

Oh SNAP! Detroit got burned!!!

EDIT:
Please, someone, tell me that it was only a bad dream that had the Sens blow a 2-goal lead with 90 seconds to play.

No, no dream. You are, unfortunately, still an Ottawa Senators fan :smalltongue:

[Thes Hunter]

So many Detroit haters in da house! :smallwink:

[Chunklets]

Please, someone, tell me that it was only a bad dream that had the Sens blow a 2-goal lead with 90 seconds to play.

'Fraid not... And Alfredsson didn't sound very happy about it afterwards, either. Still and all, though, the Sens have started decently this year, possibly due to having sent away the club's number one malcontent!


I think that, at this point, most Major Junior teams could kick the crap out of the Maple Leafs. The Leafs are AWFUL.

They sure are right now (although I'm kind of with Don Julio in that they played the Canucks well on Saturday), but I don't think we're going to have any real idea about what the Leafs really are until they get Kessel going, and sort out the goaltending. In terms of the latter, I think they've got to make Gustavsson their #1, and lean on him until and unless he shows he's not NHL calibre. Toskala looks like he's lost it, and MacDonald is pretty much a career AHLer, albeit a fairly decent one. I not sold on their coach, either; he's sounding and acting a lot like Craig MacTavish did last year, after the despair had set in.

Sort of a lost weekend for the Oilers, between back-to-back road games against tough opposition and the flu bug. Tomorrow, against the surprising Avalanche, is a another big one. And I never thought I'd find myself thinking "Wow, I'm really glad that Gilbert Brule is back!"


So many Detroit haters in da house! :smallwink:

A fair number of years as the best-run organization in the league will get you that... :smalltongue:

[Thes Hunter]

I think this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXvy968BCs8&feature=PlayList&p=kWXQVDREuQI) video fits to this. :smallbiggrin:

Speaking of which... they can't be *really* talking about Detroit, because we all know Detroit football isn't a real sport.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Okay, now Wellwood is out. Seriously, what the crap. I mean Salo we all know and expect. Demitra, while not as bad as Salo, isn't that much of a surprise either. Schneider is 40 something and pretty much just a pickup for the hell of it. But Daniel Sedin? Wellwood? And Rypien is just weird - what's the point of an enforcer if he's never there to play.

On the bright side, this gives Grabner a chance to show himself, and damn, that kid is good. On the downside - playing without half of your top scorers isn't exactly good for us since most of the prospects we've got playing will burn out sooner or later.

[skywalker]

So many Detroit haters in da house! :smallwink:

I bear a grudge against Michigan. Being a Volunteer fan was a bad start, and then I bear a personal grudge against Ann Arbor for... well, personal reasons. Add in being an Avalanche fan, and, well, Detroit never really had a chance.

Also:

Speaking of which... they can't be *really* talking about Detroit, because we all know Detroit football isn't a real sport.

You probably didn't watch to the end of the video. Just... watch to the end of the video.

[Thes Hunter]

I did. And it is humorous in that same way as people always dis on Detroit, from my own personal experience Detroit is cleaning up.


But keep up the dis, cause that is why I have affordable rent in a luxury apartment less than a block from the riverfront, with an astounding view from the 30th floor. :smallwink:


And it looks like we will just never see eye-to-eye given my wolverineness. :smallbiggrin:

[BritishBill]

I bear a grudge against Michigan. Being a Volunteer fan was a bad start, and then I bear a personal grudge against Ann Arbor for... well, personal reasons. Add in being an Avalanche fan, and, well, Detroit never really had a chance.

Also:


You probably didn't watch to the end of the video. Just... watch to the end of the video.

The Vols are the best....EVER

[Walrus]

'Fraid not... And Alfredsson didn't sound very happy about it afterwards, either. Still and all, though, the Sens have started decently this year, possibly due to having sent away the club's number one malcontent!



They sure are right now (although I'm kind of with Don Julio in that they played the Canucks well on Saturday), but I don't think we're going to have any real idea about what the Leafs really are until they get Kessel going, and sort out the goaltending. In terms of the latter, I think they've got to make Gustavsson their #1, and lean on him until and unless he shows he's not NHL calibre. Toskala looks like he's lost it, and MacDonald is pretty much a career AHLer, albeit a fairly decent one. I not sold on their coach, either; he's sounding and acting a lot like Craig MacTavish did last year, after the despair had set in.

Sort of a lost weekend for the Oilers, between back-to-back road games against tough opposition and the flu bug. Tomorrow, against the surprising Avalanche, is a another big one. And I never thought I'd find myself thinking "Wow, I'm really glad that Gilbert Brule is back!"



A fair number of years as the best-run organization in the league will get you that... :smalltongue:

I kind of feel sorry for Joey MacDonald. He keeps ending up on teams that are terrible and then looking bad because of it. Not that I'm saying he'd be a superstar, but I think on a better team he'd be a fairly respectable back-up goalie. I honestly don't think Gustavsson and Kessel are going to help the Leafs all that much, unless both of them prove to be absolute superstars. I also don't get why the media seems to think Brian Burke is such a genius. No, giving away four picks when you could have just signed the guy to an offer sheet isn't a terrible idea at all. Nope. Not one bit. And no, giving Colton Orr quadruple what he's worth wasn't a bad idea either. Yep, real smart.

The Oilers were pretty disappointing this weekend. I was impressed by JDD against the Canucks, but the rest of the team wasn't very good. Hopefully the illnesses clear up by tomorrow night. Brule did pretty well on Sunday, and hoepfully Comrie will be ready to go. I'm kind of hoping that the Avs decide that Peter Budaj needs a turn in net, though.

[Chunklets]

And no, giving Colton Orr quadruple what he's worth wasn't a bad idea either. Yep, real smart.

Wow - I went and looked up Orr's stats, since I'm not that familiar with him, and "quadruple" may be being kind. How does a flippin' forward with a grand total of 4 goals and 11 points in 254 games get offered a million dollars per year for four years? And a one-way contract at that? I mean, I've read and occasionally felt some angst over the Oilers holding on to Steve MacIntyre for this long, but compared to the Orr signing... Wow.


The Oilers were pretty disappointing this weekend. I was impressed by JDD against the Canucks, but the rest of the team wasn't very good. Hopefully the illnesses clear up by tomorrow night. Brule did pretty well on Sunday, and hoepfully Comrie will be ready to go. I'm kind of hoping that the Avs decide that Peter Budaj needs a turn in net, though.

I had my hopes for that as well, especially with the Avs playing back-to-back nights in Edmonton and Calgary. Sadly, it appears that Budaj has the flu, so Anderson is going to start tonight, and the Flames may get to face Tyler Weiman, the AHL guy, tomorrow evening. Geez, the Oilers are getting burned by the flu this year even when it affects the other team... :smalltongue:

[MCerberus]

But speaking of the AVs... wow that team was completely unexpected. At the time of my typing this, they're leading the league in points, topping the Pengs (by one point). No use crying that a team lost to the October AVs.

For StL, something weird started going on. Despite the good start, they lost to the stars (although sour grapes say that the officiating that game was horrible) in one of the most physical games in recent memory. 2 fights so far in the Blues-Hurricanes match, solidly won by the Blues players. Oshie will be back, and hopefully better for it. Insane passing + hulk smashing will make the mid-season months interesting to say the least.

[Don Julio Anejo]

And yet again I'm jealous of Detroit for having an awesome hockey team that plays, well, hockey. Skill hockey to boot.

[Walrus]

I'm less jealous of the Red Wings after seeing their goaltending this year. It wouldn't surprise me to see them going after a new netminder around midseason. Maybe look at acquiring Dwayne Roloson or Martin Biron from the Islanders, if Rick DiPietro ever gets healthy. So, by like the 2030 season. The Red Wings are still a ton of fun to watch, though.

There are rumours floating around now that the Canadiens and Oilers are working on a deal. Unsurprisingly, the Kostitsyns have been mentioned. Depending on what the Oilers give up that might not be a terrible deal. Andrei Kostitsyn has scored 20+ goals in his two full years in the league, and adds some good size to the forward corps. Sergei is about the same size, but seems like he needs an attitude adjustment. Maybe Pat Quinn can knock some sense into him. I've also heard that Tomas Plekanec and Kyle Chipchura have been come up, and that the Habs like Horcoff, Gilbert, and Grebeshkov. Sounds like there's some potential for something positive for everybody there.

[skywalker]

The Vols are the best....EVER

Another Vol fan in the house! I like it!


I had my hopes for that as well, especially with the Avs playing back-to-back nights in Edmonton and Calgary. Sadly, it appears that Budaj has the flu, so Anderson is going to start tonight, and the Flames may get to face Tyler Weiman, the AHL guy, tomorrow evening. Geez, the Oilers are getting burned by the flu this year even when it affects the other team... :smalltongue:

Tee, sorry. :smalltongue:


But speaking of the AVs... wow that team was completely unexpected. At the time of my typing this, they're leading the league in points, topping the Pengs (by one point). No use crying that a team lost to the October AVs.

2 points now. Sorry Alberta. :smalltongue: Calgary had to see Mr. Anderson as well.

I'm shocked by our performance. One regulation loss in 13 games? Who had that one picked out? Certainly not me... How about the youth for the Avs? Everyone expected Duchenne to be a star but he is being outshone by O'Reilly big time... Statsny seems to have really stepped into the leadership void Super Joe left (I know Foote is wearing the C, but everyone knows who the real leader is now IMO), and Wolski is experiencing some kind of renaissance. Poor Svatos is looking like the odd man out, with his ice time hovering around 12 minutes a game. Alas.


Maybe look at acquiring Dwayne Roloson or Martin Biron from the Islanders, if Rick DiPietro ever gets healthy.

Ahhahaha, the funny man put the words "Rick," "DiPietro," and "healthy" in the same sentence! You, sir, are a master of comedy!

[Walrus]

The Avs being good is both kinda cool and really annoying. It's cool because they turned things around so fast despite losing their best player, and it's nice that Calgary won't have a stranglehold on the top spots in the division anymore, but it's annoying because the Oilers have to play them 5 more times this year.

Detroit is in town tonight, which seems like a pretty winnable game. Jimmy Howard is starting in net, and so far he hasn't proved that he can do much. If the Oilers' sputtering offence is going to get back on track, a crummy goalie is the best way to do it.And apparently the Kid Line is being put back together because Comrie's illness flared up again. I kind of hope that they either tear it up or that management just admits that it was a flash in the pan and returns Gagner to the first line.

[MCerberus]

Over/Under on fights for the Blues vs Coyotes is set at: 2.

[Chunklets]

2 points now. Sorry Alberta. :smalltongue: Calgary had to see Mr. Anderson as well.

I'm shocked by our performance. One regulation loss in 13 games? Who had that one picked out? Certainly not me... How about the youth for the Avs? Everyone expected Duchenne to be a star but he is being outshone by O'Reilly big time... Statsny seems to have really stepped into the leadership void Super Joe left (I know Foote is wearing the C, but everyone knows who the real leader is now IMO), and Wolski is experiencing some kind of renaissance. Poor Svatos is looking like the odd man out, with his ice time hovering around 12 minutes a game. Alas.

I was really impressed with Colorado against Edmonton the other night, even given the fact that the Oil are flu-riddled at the moment. The Avs were pressuring the puck all game, and didn't give the Oiler forwards much time at all. Anderson was good, and the Oilers are sick, but that shutout was a team effort.

And the Avs had the courtesy and good grace to give Calgary the same treatment! :smalltongue:


Detroit is in town tonight, which seems like a pretty winnable game. Jimmy Howard is starting in net, and so far he hasn't proved that he can do much. If the Oilers' sputtering offence is going to get back on track, a crummy goalie is the best way to do it.And apparently the Kid Line is being put back together because Comrie's illness flared up again. I kind of hope that they either tear it up or that management just admits that it was a flash in the pan and returns Gagner to the first line.

Yes indeed on Howard.

That was a scary scary game. However, I've decided to take the positive view. Yes, we gassed a 4-goal lead, but we won in the end, and given who we were missing, given the fact that god-knows-how-many of the guys who did play were sick (and wasn't that obvious during the third period), and given the fact that we hadn't scored in seven periods going in, the victory is actually borderline miraculous. And even though they blew it, the fact that the Oilers managed to get themselves a four-goal lead at all is reassuring.

Sadly, though, based on last night's performance anyway, the Kid Line has had its day. All three of those guys went -3 on the night, and that's just ugly.

Again on the positive side, though, Comrie seems to be recovering, and there's word that we might see St. Fernando on Saturday against Boston!

[Joran]

That was a scary scary game. However, I've decided to take the positive view. Yes, we gassed a 4-goal lead, but we won in the end, and given who we were missing, given the fact that god-knows-how-many of the guys who did play were sick (and wasn't that obvious during the third period), and given the fact that we hadn't scored in seven periods going in, the victory is actually borderline miraculous. And even though they blew it, the fact that the Oilers managed to get themselves a four-goal lead at all is reassuring.

Sadly, though, based on last night's performance anyway, the Kid Line has had its day. All three of those guys went -3 on the night, and that's just ugly.

Again on the positive side, though, Comrie seems to be recovering, and there's word that we might see St. Fernando on Saturday against Boston!

What's the Kid Line? In D.C., we have the SOB line (Semin-Ovechkin-Backstrom), which obviously has a lot of firepower, but is a little weak in the defensive area and Ovechkin and Semin oddly overpass when they're together. Likewise, the Capitals seem to be doing pretty well, except they have a bad tendancy to let teams back in it. Last night was a good example, where D.C. staked a 3-0 lead and then gave up 20 shots and 3 goals in the third period to win 4-3.

Ovechkin is about 1/4 of the way to 50 goals in 50 games, which would be an utterly remarkable feat if he manages to do it, especially in this era of lower scoring games.

[Chunklets]

What's the Kid Line? In D.C., we have the SOB line (Semin-Ovechkin-Backstrom), which obviously has a lot of firepower, but is a little weak in the defensive area and Ovechkin and Semin oddly overpass when they're together. Likewise, the Capitals seem to be doing pretty well, except they have a bad tendancy to let teams back in it. Last night was a good example, where D.C. staked a 3-0 lead and then gave up 20 shots and 3 goals in the third period to win 4-3.

Ovechkin is about 1/4 of the way to 50 goals in 50 games, which would be an utterly remarkable feat if he manages to do it, especially in this era of lower scoring games.

The Kid Line is Sam Gagner, Andrew Cogliano, and Robert Nilsson. They got the name (and played tremendously well) a couple of seasons ago, when their combined age was, I believe, 58. The line was broken up early last season, and hasn't been seen much since.

Re: Ovechkin - Yes, and I think hockey fans should be paying attention, if they're not already. Ovechkin is currently on course for one of the great offensive seasons of all time.

[Walrus]

Now that Ovechkin has an absurdly good supporting cast in place I don't see his offence sputtering in any significant way any time soon. Can he be held off the score sheet in the odd game? Yeah. But I don't see him slumping for more than that, at the rate he's going.

I only caught the end of today's game against Boston, but it looked like another one of those games where theh Oilers tried to be too fancy and couldn't get anything going because their defence was too shaky. 19 shots on a rookie goalie is terrible. And as much as I'd like to see the up side of the game against Detroit (the win and the absolute barrage in the first two periods), the fact that they gave up five goals in the third period really points out how bad the Oilers are at team defence.

Hopefully now that Pisani is back, and with Comrie likely coming back soon, the Kid Line will finally be put to bed. I think the line-up would work nicely if it looked something like this:
Penner - Gagner - Hemsky
O'Sullivan - Comrie - Cogliano
Moreau - Horcoff - Pisani
Jacques - Brule - Stortini

Note the lack of Robert Nilsson. The Oilers could probably get a good shutdown d-man for him. I hope they do it.

[Joran]

Now that Ovechkin has an absurdly good supporting cast in place I don't see his offence sputtering in any significant way any time soon. Can he be held off the score sheet in the odd game? Yeah. But I don't see him slumping for more than that, at the rate he's going.

I only caught the end of today's game against Boston, but it looked like another one of those games where theh Oilers tried to be too fancy and couldn't get anything going because their defence was too shaky. 19 shots on a rookie goalie is terrible. And as much as I'd like to see the up side of the game against Detroit (the win and the absolute barrage in the first two periods), the fact that they gave up five goals in the third period really points out how bad the Oilers are at team defence.

Hopefully now that Pisani is back, and with Comrie likely coming back soon, the Kid Line will finally be put to bed. I think the line-up would work nicely if it looked something like this:
Penner - Gagner - Hemsky
O'Sullivan - Comrie - Cogliano
Moreau - Horcoff - Pisani
Jacques - Brule - Stortini

Note the lack of Robert Nilsson. The Oilers could probably get a good shutdown d-man for him. I hope they do it.

Are hockey lines always in flux? It seems like coaches, when they want a spark or just to change things up, mix up the lines and hope something catches.

Oh and I cursed Ovechkin, he caught whatever is injury bug is affecting all the Russian star players. Datsyuk, Malkin, Kovalchuk, Gonchar and now Ovie... Actually, an amazing stat, 110 NHL regulars sidelined, either through injury or illness, which is about 18% of players.

[Walrus]

Joran, you are correct that hockey lines change quite a bit, and pretty much for the exact reason you mentioned. If a particular player is doing very well he'll often be put on a line with players that the coach wants to improve. Likewise, when a player is doing poorly he'll often be slotted into the "4th" line, which typically plays a simple, physical style designed to put the other team on their heels and create momentum for the more talented scoring lines to build on. Players constantly talk about needing to keep their game simple, and putting somebody on the fourth line is a method of making them do that.

On Hockey Night in Canada last weekend, there was a really interesting viewer question that I think could make for interesting discussion.

If you were in charge of a start-up NHL franchise, and you had the chance to pick either Alexander Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby for your team, who would you pick, and why?

[skywalker]

Joran, you are correct that hockey lines change quite a bit, and pretty much for the exact reason you mentioned. If a particular player is doing very well he'll often be put on a line with players that the coach wants to improve. Likewise, when a player is doing poorly he'll often be slotted into the "4th" line, which typically plays a simple, physical style designed to put the other team on their heels and create momentum for the more talented scoring lines to build on. Players constantly talk about needing to keep their game simple, and putting somebody on the fourth line is a method of making them do that.

From what I understand, not quite true. They tend to be moved down to the second or third lines. Maybe it's just the teams I'm a fan of, but a lot of coaches seem rather protective of their "energy line." Some of the team's bigger names (for locals, anyway) can be on that 4th line. But yes hockey lines are always in flux, altho everyone seems to know who is on which except for me.


On Hockey Night in Canada last weekend, there was a really interesting viewer question that I think could make for interesting discussion.

If you were in charge of a start-up NHL franchise, and you had the chance to pick either Alexander Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby for your team, who would you pick, and why?

For reasons I've explained before, Crosby. At this point, Crosby seems to play a headier game, which will age better. He'll get better at avoiding injury, whereas if Ovechkin keeps playing the style he's been playing, he will probably be injured more and more frequently as his body loses the elasticity of his youth. Again, like has been said before, Crosby makes his entire line, the entire ice (definitely) and his entire team (arguably) better. Ovechkin does somewhat, but not to the degree that Crosby does. I also think Crosby will be a bit cheaper over the course of his career than Ovechkin. On the other hand, I've explained all this from the perspective of winning championships. From the true franchise perspective, Ovechkin puts butts in seats. From a dollars perspective, I think you would be hard pressed to find a more imitable team than the Caps.

[Don Julio Anejo]

On Hockey Night in Canada last weekend, there was a really interesting viewer question that I think could make for interesting discussion.

If you were in charge of a start-up NHL franchise, and you had the chance to pick either Alexander Ovechkin or Sidney Crosby for your team, who would you pick, and why?
As much as I hate to say it, Crosby. At least if I cared about winning and the long run. To add on to what skywalker has said, with Crosby you can get a mediocre line to be pretty good, if not very good. Set someone up in the slot, and they have to be an idiot not to score. If they actually are an idiot, at least they can keep the rest of the team away from Crosby for him to try and score. And if everyone is checking Crosby, well, he can set someone up in the slot.

With Ovechkin, if the rest of your first line is mediocre, he is going to get pretty much all the attention from the opposing team. He will take more hits (leading to more injuries), more shots from him will be blocked, more players will be checking him, etc... Which means that the other players will have to pick up the slack. But unfortunately, Ovechkin is only a mediocre playmaker - sure, he makes nifty passes once in a while, but it's not his MO, it might take a long time to change that and even if he does pass more, he's still not a true centre. Therefore, he's simply not as dangerous as Crosby if you put enough pressure on him.

Also, he's a centre. It's always easier to find a decent winger to play with than a decent centre to set up a winger.

[Joran]

For reasons I've explained before, Crosby. At this point, Crosby seems to play a headier game, which will age better. He'll get better at avoiding injury, whereas if Ovechkin keeps playing the style he's been playing, he will probably be injured more and more frequently as his body loses the elasticity of his youth. Again, like has been said before, Crosby makes his entire line, the entire ice (definitely) and his entire team (arguably) better. Ovechkin does somewhat, but not to the degree that Crosby does. I also think Crosby will be a bit cheaper over the course of his career than Ovechkin.

On the other hand, I've explained all this from the perspective of winning championships. From the true franchise perspective, Ovechkin puts butts in seats. From a dollars perspective, I think you would be hard pressed to find a more imitable team than the Caps.

Can't disagree with this assessment; it does depend though. If you're in charge of a franchise where there's no natural support for hockey, such as the poor Phoenix Coyotes, you want someone like Ovechkin to put butts in the seats. Most start-up franchises are going to stink in the first few years, the Capitals were somewhat like this when Ovechkin first came in, and you need some flash to maintain awareness and excitement of the team through the lean years.

That said, nothing gets attention like winning, especially a Cup.

[Don Julio Anejo]

That said, nothing gets attention like winning, especially a Cup.
Carolina Hurricanes would beg to disagree.

[slipnslide]

ha... add the Tampa Bay Lightning as well. Man the NHL needs to consolidate some teams.

[Walrus]

I totally agree, slipnslide. The NHL doesn't need 30 teams, 10 or so of which are barely treading water (or worse). Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Atlanta, Carolina, NYI, and of course Phoenix are all having trouble, from what I hear. I've also heard that Ottawa isn't in great shape, by Canadian team standards.

I can totally see why people are picking Crosby as their franchise player. It's hard to disagree that he's a more complete player. Crosby wins faceoffs, kills penalties, puts up points, and makes his teammates better. Unfortunately, he has about as much personality as blank cardboard. If I was starting up a franchise, I think I'd be inclined to go with Ovechkin. Starting franchises are typically not very good on the ice for a couple of years, and having a superstar with a big personality who oozes love of the game would be able to attract fans while the organization developed.

I agree that Crosby would probably help the on-ice team more in the long term, but Ovechkin would help people care about the team while it was developing, and ultimately allow the franchise to make enough money to operate comfortably in the long term.

[SensFan]

I've also heard that Ottawa isn't in great shape, by Canadian team standards.
Ottawa sells out every night, and has a far better product than Toronto.

They're fine.

[skywalker]

I totally agree, slipnslide. The NHL doesn't need 30 teams, 10 or so of which are barely treading water (or worse). Tampa Bay, Florida, Nashville, Atlanta, Carolina, NYI, and of course Phoenix are all having trouble, from what I hear. I've also heard that Ottawa isn't in great shape, by Canadian team standards.

Every team I bolded is a Stanley Cup winner. Kinda hard to consolidate those, eh? Little history lesson: Only one NHL Cup winner has ever folded or been relocated, the Montreal Maroons folded in 1938. Since then, not a one. So I think Tampa Bay and Carolina, despite what has been said about winning championships not bringing in revenue, will have a hard time moving/consolidating, if either team is actually interested anyway. I think if the Lighthouse Project falls through, you will see just as serious a fight to keep the Islanders on the Island as you saw to keep the Penguins in Pittsburgh a couple of years ago. Also, you're only a couple shrewd draft picks from some success, as the Avalanche are showing this season.


I can totally see why people are picking Crosby as their franchise player. It's hard to disagree that he's a more complete player. Crosby wins faceoffs, kills penalties, puts up points, and makes his teammates better. Unfortunately, he has about as much personality as blank cardboard. If I was starting up a franchise, I think I'd be inclined to go with Ovechkin. Starting franchises are typically not very good on the ice for a couple of years, and having a superstar with a big personality who oozes love of the game would be able to attract fans while the organization developed.

Crosby only has that little personality when compared to Ovechkin. He's a lot less grating, in my opinion. I find the Kid rather charming.


Ottawa sells out every night, and has a far better product than Toronto.

They're fine.

Even at this current level, can you imagine if someone suggested moving/consolidating the Leafs?

[Walrus]

Ottawa sells out every night, and has a far better product than Toronto.

They're fine.

I read an article on the Hockey News website a while ago that had a short anecdote claiming that the Sens were having problems selling out games, but that may have just been in there because Ken Campbell doesn't like to say nice things about teams that aren't Montreal.

And they definitely have a better on-ice product than Toronto (not that it's all that difficult to do that, but they're fun to watch and they win games, so more power to 'em).

[Chunklets]

Every team I bolded is a Stanley Cup winner. Kinda hard to consolidate those, eh? Little history lesson: Only one NHL Cup winner has ever folded or been relocated, the Montreal Maroons folded in 1938. Since then, not a one.

The Maroons are the most recent NHL Cup winner to go away, but they're not the only one. The Ottawa Senators, version 1.0, won Stanley four times in the 20s, but folded early in the Great Depression, after moving to St. Louis for a season (Actually, they kind of folded twice. They took a year off in the early 30s, and then returned for a couple of seasons before the move to MO).

I do like early hockey history... :smallsmile:

With regards to the discussion about mixing up lines: is it just me, or do coaches break out the line blender more often these days? It may just be faulty memory, but it seems to me that lines used to be a lot more "set".

[Walrus]

It seems like mixing lines up is a lot more popular now than it was in the past. I know that, at least with the Oilers and Flames, it's pretty much a nightly occurrence unless they're winning. Whenever I happen to watch a Flames game it seems like they're constantly trying to get either Jarome Iginla or Olli Jokinen going.

Also, Brent Sutter looks like a really angry, middle-aged elf. It never fails to amuse me when he gets his grumpy face on (which seems to be most of the time).

[skywalker]

The Maroons are the most recent NHL Cup winner to go away, but they're not the only one. The Ottawa Senators, version 1.0, won Stanley four times in the 20s, but folded early in the Great Depression, after moving to St. Louis for a season (Actually, they kind of folded twice. They took a year off in the early 30s, and then returned for a couple of seasons before the move to MO).

I do like early hockey history... :smallsmile:

Fair enough... Altho you gotta grant me that they eventually... "unfolded?" We can amend that to "only two Cup Winners have ever folded or relocated," which is almost as good. Also, the point still stands about it not happening since the 30s.


With regards to the discussion about mixing up lines: is it just me, or do coaches break out the line blender more often these days? It may just be faulty memory, but it seems to me that lines used to be a lot more "set".

I have only been watching hockey about 13 years. I think it depends vastly on the coach. I've only ever paid attention to lines vaguely, but I think in some ways you're right. Maybe it's because guys miss games more frequently these days? Coaches may also be more likely to experiment to try and get a win these days. I don't know. Lines are such a mystery to me. The only teams I follow seem to juggle lines only for injury and I still can't keep up.

[Joran]

I have only been watching hockey about 13 years. I think it depends vastly on the coach. I've only ever paid attention to lines vaguely, but I think in some ways you're right. Maybe it's because guys miss games more frequently these days? Coaches may also be more likely to experiment to try and get a win these days. I don't know. Lines are such a mystery to me. The only teams I follow seem to juggle lines only for injury and I still can't keep up.

Probably depends on the coach. Bruce Boudreau goes through the lineshift Cuisinart almost all the time.

He'll change the lines on a whim and to hopefully create a spark. During a game, he'll double shift Ovechkin and get more offense in there.

I think generally, he likes to have Ovechkin and Semin on different lines, to spread out the firepower, but if he needs a goal, he'll put them together.

Boudreau also sometimes has 13 forwards he likes and wants to keep them fresh, so baring injury, he'll just rotate people in and out and keep them all engaged and playing on a regular basis. He's doing that with our defense corps now.

[Walrus]

Boudreau's approach sounds pretty similar to what Pat Quinn and Brent Sutter do in Alberta. Spreading the big guns out makes it harder for other teams to shut them down, since they'll need at least two defensive lines to check them. Sometimes they just play so well together that it makes no sense to separate them, though (Hemsky and Penner, for an Oilers example, tend to get separated if the other team has a star defenceman like Chara, but usually stick together on the top unit otherwise).

Quinn also loves the line blender, especially once he cuts down to three lines in the third period.

[skywalker]

Boudreau's approach sounds pretty similar to what Pat Quinn and Brent Sutter do in Alberta. Spreading the big guns out makes it harder for other teams to shut them down, since they'll need at least two defensive lines to check them. Sometimes they just play so well together that it makes no sense to separate them, though (Hemsky and Penner, for an Oilers example, tend to get separated if the other team has a star defenceman like Chara, but usually stick together on the top unit otherwise).

I've never really held with the theory that you ought to play your 4th line against the other team's top line. Then again, I've always had big appreciation for true two-way centers, and I think the top line should be run out against the other top line. You don't want your goalie shelled because some checking-line doof can't keep up with the big guns. But I'm kinda weird about strategy. I say of course you should put your second best player on your second line, because your second best player should be your second-best center (careful attention will indicate what I think about who the best player should be :smallwink:). The Penguins are a good example of this. But if you somehow screw that up and your two best players play different positions, they should definitely be on the same line. I like to stack my power. Don't build two decent lines, build one killer line, you see?

Another thing to consider is how guys play together. I think the "line blender" is stupid because in some ways it kills cohesion among linemates.

My real strategy gripe, however, is the current fad for putting a forward at one of the D spots on the Power Play. How many times a year do we see a forward get embarrassed for a short-handed goal or at least a chance by a quick thinking PK-er?

Maybe both fads are symptoms of the trend towards "create a chance hockey." What I mean by this is that when guys are on a cohesive line, they know what to expect from each other. When the lines keep getting jumbled up, you just try to create a chance and hope the other guy capitalizes. I think there's a lot more "create a chance" theory right now. You hear a lot of guys say "we just gotta get pucks on net, create a chance, and hope it goes in," which is not something I remember hearing as much 10-12 years ago. The forward as "defenseman" thing is the same concept. We really need that extra forward to keep the PP straight and give us more chances? Why did we hire defensmen who are such an offensive liability? Did we forget that we weren't playing football and don't get subs when we switch possession?! It always baffles me that there are teams out there who won't sign good, offensively skilled defensemen.

[Don Julio Anejo]

I'll try my best to address chunks of your post even though you didn't ask me :smallfrown:

I've never really held with the theory that you ought to play your 4th line against the other team's top line. Then again, I've always had big appreciation for true two-way centers, and I think the top line should be run out against the other top line. You don't want your goalie shelled because some checking-line doof can't keep up with the big guns. But I'm kinda weird about strategy. I say of course you should put your second best player on your second line, because your second best player should be your second-best center (careful attention will indicate what I think about who the best player should be :smallwink:). The Penguins are a good example of this.
Well, if you've got two killer or at least above average lines, you can usually field a killer checking line (usually the third line). If you think they suck, you haven't seen them in action. Heck, Anaheim won it's Stanley Cup two years back in large part to Sami Pahlsson's checking. Seriously, if you already have people who can score (in this particular case for the 06-07 Anaheim team - Chris Kunitz, Andy McDonald and Teemu Selanne), you're 1. Close to the cap, 2. Can afford to dedicate a line to defence and 3. Probably don't have anymore good scoring players. Then why not get great checkers whose only point is to play against an opponent's uberline with the sole intention to constantly screen and harass the star player and hopefully also the same time maintain puck possession. It doesn't matter if you won't score with the puck, you just want to keep it away from the other line. For all I care, take the damn puck away from Ovechkin or Malkin and skate in circles around your net until they decide to do a line change.

My real strategy gripe, however, is the current fad for putting a forward at one of the D spots on the Power Play. How many times a year do we see a forward get embarrassed for a short-handed goal or at least a chance by a quick thinking PK-er?
From what I've noticed, teams usually only do this when they're already pretty screwed (e.g. down two goals with 5 minutes left) so they don't have much to lose, or when they're playing 5 on 3 so there's much less chance of a breakaway. Then they set it up in a diamond so it's kind of like 6 players on the ice but with only one D-man as a quarterback. Not a bad idea really - makes for some really nice cross-ice passes, especially if you've got a power forward in the slot or someone with a wicked wristshot.

Maybe both fads are symptoms of the trend towards "create a chance hockey." What I mean by this is that when guys are on a cohesive line, they know what to expect from each other. When the lines keep getting jumbled up, you just try to create a chance and hope the other guy capitalizes. I think there's a lot more "create a chance" theory right now. You hear a lot of guys say "we just gotta get pucks on net, create a chance, and hope it goes in," which is not something I remember hearing as much 10-12 years ago.
I think jumbling the lines is more often than not a way to get a cold player started up. E.g. you haven't quite clicked with Johny Canuck, so coach is going to put you with Mats the Swede or Ivan the TerribleRussian in the middle of the game to see if you do any better. The coaches who do it just to jumble lines and confuse the enemy are more likely doing it as a response to checking lines by spreading the firepower on the fly.

Why did we hire defensmen who are such an offensive liability? Did we forget that we weren't playing football and don't get subs when we switch possession?! It always baffles me that there are teams out there who won't sign good, offensively skilled defensemen.
Well, defencemen are hard to come by in the last few years for some reason. If you have a chance to sign an experienced NHL defenseman who has an offensive upside vs. a guy on your farm who's going to suck just as bad defensively, you'd usually go for the experienced guy. Of course some GM's are also complete idiots.

[Walrus]

The reasoning behind having a forward on the point on the power play is to get a big shot back there. Ideally you would have a defenceman with a big shot (Sheldon Souray, Zdeno Chara, Mathieu Schneider, etc.) who could pound a puck at the net and either score or create a scramble in front of the net for the rebound. A lot of teams don't have a d-man with that kind of offensive firewpower, so they get one of their forwards to do it. Ales Kotalik has practically made a career out of being a forward who can play the point, and has done it on each of the last three teams he's played for (Buffalo, Edmonton, and now NYR). They do sometimes get made to look foolish by a good penalty killer, but in all fairness so do a lot of defencemen. The bottom line, is they want five guys on the ice who are either going to be a threat to score or move the puck to open up space for one of the scoring threats. If four forwards and a d-man meet those criteria better than three forwards and two defence, then that's what they go with.

On the issue of stacking a top line, Don Julio pretty much nailed why that's not necessarily a good idea. The third line is typically designated the checking line, and a good checker can make a superstar look like a chump. Stacked top lines are also vulnerable to dominant defencemen. If you're relying on one big line to score, a smart defensive team can shut you down and control the game. If the offence is spread out, you've got a better chance of somebody being able to find a bad match-up and capitalize.

[SensFan]

On the subject of Forwards on the point, as a fan of a team who does it every PP, I happen to love it. You get a ton more chances, and if the Forward is sufficiently skilled defensively (like Alfie), there's no real threat of a increased chance of shorthanded goals, which again, I'm familiar with, since the Sens are one of the better teams for scoring short-handed.

Alfie's shot is one of the best on the team's. Why wouldn't you want him on the point, where he has the best chance to score?

[skywalker]

I'll try my best to address chunks of your post even though you didn't ask me :smallfrown:

Huh?


Well, if you've got two killer or at least above average lines, you can usually field a killer checking line (usually the third line). If you think they suck, you haven't seen them in action. Heck, Anaheim won it's Stanley Cup two years back in large part to Sami Pahlsson's checking. Seriously, if you already have people who can score (in this particular case for the 06-07 Anaheim team - Chris Kunitz, Andy McDonald and Teemu Selanne), you're 1. Close to the cap, 2. Can afford to dedicate a line to defence and 3. Probably don't have anymore good scoring players. Then why not get great checkers whose only point is to play against an opponent's uberline with the sole intention to constantly screen and harass the star player and hopefully also the same time maintain puck possession. It doesn't matter if you won't score with the puck, you just want to keep it away from the other line. For all I care, take the damn puck away from Ovechkin or Malkin and skate in circles around your net until they decide to do a line change.

Fair enough. To each his own. Like I said, I'm weird. I was always the kid in the strategy games beating the crap out of people by stacking all my units together and letting it ride on the movement dice.


From what I've noticed, teams usually only do this when they're already pretty screwed (e.g. down two goals with 5 minutes left) so they don't have much to lose, or when they're playing 5 on 3 so there's much less chance of a breakaway. Then they set it up in a diamond so it's kind of like 6 players on the ice but with only one D-man as a quarterback. Not a bad idea really - makes for some really nice cross-ice passes, especially if you've got a power forward in the slot or someone with a wicked wristshot.

The Penguins, unfortunately, do this all the time with Malkin on the point. The Stars do it frequently as well (Modano, I'm looking at you). So do a few other teams. If you can set it up with a D as QB, that makes a lot more sense. But this crap of the standard formation with a forward on one point (and him frequently pinching in cuz he forgets he's the defenseman) is just annoying. I know some teams only do it "desperation" but some do it all the time.


I think jumbling the lines is more often than not a way to get a cold player started up. E.g. you haven't quite clicked with Johny Canuck, so coach is going to put you with Mats the Swede or Ivan the TerribleRussian in the middle of the game to see if you do any better. The coaches who do it just to jumble lines and confuse the enemy are more likely doing it as a response to checking lines by spreading the firepower on the fly.

I don't doubt it. But like I say, I think that's more likely to impair production than spark it. Some guys respond well to this, others not so much.


Well, defencemen are hard to come by in the last few years for some reason. If you have a chance to sign an experienced NHL defenseman who has an offensive upside vs. a guy on your farm who's going to suck just as bad defensively, you'd usually go for the experienced guy. Of course some GM's are also complete idiots.

Why do you think they're hard to come by? I agree with your logic but again it seems like there should be enough hockey players around to get a guy who can play both ways, even from the d-man spot.


The reasoning behind having a forward on the point on the power play is to get a big shot back there. Ideally you would have a defenceman with a big shot (Sheldon Souray, Zdeno Chara, Mathieu Schneider, etc.) who could pound a puck at the net and either score or create a scramble in front of the net for the rebound. A lot of teams don't have a d-man with that kind of offensive firewpower, so they get one of their forwards to do it. Ales Kotalik has practically made a career out of being a forward who can play the point, and has done it on each of the last three teams he's played for (Buffalo, Edmonton, and now NYR). They do sometimes get made to look foolish by a good penalty killer, but in all fairness so do a lot of defencemen. The bottom line, is they want five guys on the ice who are either going to be a threat to score or move the puck to open up space for one of the scoring threats. If four forwards and a d-man meet those criteria better than three forwards and two defence, then that's what they go with.

As I was saying, why not just get a guy with decent firepower (every defenseman should have a decent slapshot, IMO) instead of endangering yourself? I think we are approaching this from different directions. You want the best 5 guys on the ice to score a goal. I want the best 5 guys on the ice to not get a goal scored on me. Whereas in 5-on-5 I'm in favor of loading up a line to score, on PP it's a bit different. The best power-play in the League usually scores about 25% of the time. That's one out of 4 trips. The psychology is weird. You aren't expected to score a goal. However, if you do score a goal, it's "of course we scored, we had a PP." But, if you get scored on, it's terrible! How could you get scored on when the opposition has one less player? Since I consider short-handed goals to be a huge momentum swing, I think they're one of the most important things to prevent. YMMV.


On the issue of stacking a top line, Don Julio pretty much nailed why that's not necessarily a good idea. The third line is typically designated the checking line, and a good checker can make a superstar look like a chump. Stacked top lines are also vulnerable to dominant defencemen. If you're relying on one big line to score, a smart defensive team can shut you down and control the game. If the offence is spread out, you've got a better chance of somebody being able to find a bad match-up and capitalize.

I guess so. If you stack the top line, tho, you raise the chances that the opposition will simply be overpowered, or you can get a chance to get your top line out while the defensive line and/or top defensive pair is tired out. When you put 3 great forwards on the ice together, you force the other team to put 3 great defenders out there as well. Generally speaking, your better defensive center isn't as good at offense, so you're forcing the other team into either playing weaker wings, or squandering talent as well.

I also draw a distinction between the "defensive line" and the "checking line." For example, the 3rd line for the Penguins is the defensive line. The 4th line is the "checking line."

[Walrus]

Clearly you aren't going to have your mind changed about disliking a forward on the power play, but unfortunately the NHL doesn't exist in an ideal world. Not all defencemen have a good enough shot or puck-moving abilities to quarterback a power play. Even though a good power play still only cashes in about 25% of the time, you want to keep the opponent hemmed in with good puck movement and constant pressure. A lot of d-men who are very solid in their own end aren't quite good enough with the puck, so a forward gets the nod, since keeping up pressure can lead to a goal after the power play expires or get the other team scrambling too much to spark their own offence. As much as giving up a shortie can hurt, I don't think most teams are especially worried about it. Statistically, they're pretty rare.

Daniel Alfredsson was mentioned earlier as a forward who plays the point, and I think just about any team in the league would love to have him on their power play.

[skywalker]

Clearly you aren't going to have your mind changed about disliking a forward on the power play, but unfortunately the NHL doesn't exist in an ideal world. Not all defencemen have a good enough shot or puck-moving abilities to quarterback a power play. Even though a good power play still only cashes in about 25% of the time, you want to keep the opponent hemmed in with good puck movement and constant pressure. A lot of d-men who are very solid in their own end aren't quite good enough with the puck, so a forward gets the nod, since keeping up pressure can lead to a goal after the power play expires or get the other team scrambling too much to spark their own offence. As much as giving up a shortie can hurt, I don't think most teams are especially worried about it. Statistically, they're pretty rare.

Well, let's examine that. They want to have someone who is good at moving the puck, keeping it in the zone. In my experience, a defenseman is a better choice, since they are trained to hold the blue-line, etc. If you're a defenseman with no slapshot or can't hold the line (among other things), in my opinion you should change that. You get paid to play hockey, for cripes sake. Then again, I'm also the guy who says "You get paid to play basketball. Make your damned free throws." I think it's the same concept. You don't have to agree with me, I'm just explaining my position. Like, what are they doing all day that they can't keep up with this stuff. In the summer especially. Instead of playing golf 5 days a week, play 4 days a week and practice that extra day. It's not 1925, there's an indoor rink open year-round just down the road from me in Tennessee.


Daniel Alfredsson was mentioned earlier as a forward who plays the point, and I think just about any team in the league would love to have him on their power play.

Some are better than others, I will grant you that.

[SensFan]

Well, let's examine that. They want to have someone who is good at moving the puck, keeping it in the zone. In my experience, a defenseman is a better choice, since they are trained to hold the blue-line, etc. If you're a defenseman with no slapshot or can't hold the line (among other things), in my opinion you should change that. You get paid to play hockey, for cripes sake. Then again, I'm also the guy who says "You get paid to play basketball. Make your damned free throws." I think it's the same concept. You don't have to agree with me, I'm just explaining my position. Like, what are they doing all day that they can't keep up with this stuff. In the summer especially. Instead of playing golf 5 days a week, play 4 days a week and practice that extra day. It's not 1925, there's an indoor rink open year-round just down the road from me in Tennessee.



Some are better than others, I will grant you that.
If the forward in question is responsible defensively (again, from my experience, the best example I know of is Alfie), then he can hold the line, won't pinch too much, and isn't a huge liability to give up shorties. Also, you're forgetting the benefit that if you have a few forwards who can play the point, it allows you to rotate them, if the situation calls for it, without being stuck with a defensemen at the face-off circle.

Also, if your best defensemen isn't tied down on the PP, he's availible right after it, when your opponent has their best scorers (usually) well-rested, and ready to mount an attack of their own. And if you're blessed with a D-man good enough to QB a PP better than a forward, with 2 more D-men capable of handling the top guns of the other team, this conversation really doesn't apply. (Though funnily enough, Ottawa had that back in the day, and still had Alfie on the point...)

[Joran]

If the forward in question is responsible defensively (again, from my experience, the best example I know of is Alfie), then he can hold the line, won't pinch too much, and isn't a huge liability to give up shorties. Also, you're forgetting the benefit that if you have a few forwards who can play the point, it allows you to rotate them, if the situation calls for it, without being stuck with a defensemen at the face-off circle.

Also, if your best defensemen isn't tied down on the PP, he's availible right after it, when your opponent has their best scorers (usually) well-rested, and ready to mount an attack of their own. And if you're blessed with a D-man good enough to QB a PP better than a forward, with 2 more D-men capable of handling the top guns of the other team, this conversation really doesn't apply. (Though funnily enough, Ottawa had that back in the day, and still had Alfie on the point...)

For the Caps, we ran a four forward, one defenseman power play unit (Ovechkin and Green) at the points, until both got hurt. It was pretty infuriating to allow so many short-handed chances. I don't think Ovechkin belongs at the point, but then again, he scored a ton of Power Play goals last year at the point, so it seems to work =P

We're running Poti and Pothier (both defensemen) in the power play now; they're your prototypical puck moving defensemen, but their shots aren't quite as hard as Ovechkin's or Green's.


I think there's a lot more "create a chance" theory right now. You hear a lot of guys say "we just gotta get pucks on net, create a chance, and hope it goes in," which is not something I remember hearing as much 10-12 years ago.

Well, goalies are a lot better now than they were before. If they can see the puck, more often than not, they're going to make the save. So, scoring "dirty goals" by screening the goalie, getting goals off of deflections or rebounds is more dependable than trying to score "pretty goals", goals relying on precision passes and pinpoint shots. This is an item of emphasis for the Capitals. As Brooks Laich said, "If you want money, go to the bank. If you want bread, go to the bakery. If you want goals, go to the net."

P.S. Alarmingly enough, I've noticed a trend in D.C.; what someone dubbed the "Washington Hat Trick". We've thrown hats on the ice twice now for players who scored two goals in regulation and one goal in the shootout =P

[Walrus]

Speaking of players talking about creating chances, I'm always kind of amused that the hockey media even bothers to interview players at all. Even the most entertaining ones usually just string together a bunch of cliches ("we've gotta create more chances", "gotta get pucks on net", "had a good effort out there", you've all heard 'em). Aside from the fact that being good at hockey and being an engaging speaker really have no reason to be complementary skill sets, these guys are all being asked to talk about people that they work with (in a sense, anyway). Saying anything but good things about individuals or teams that you might have to play with/for later isn't going to do you any favours, so they just spout the same answers that everyone else does. Which leaves me to wonder what the point of the hockey media is...

[SensFan]

Speaking of players talking about creating chances, I'm always kind of amused that the hockey media even bothers to interview players at all. Even the most entertaining ones usually just string together a bunch of cliches ("we've gotta create more chances", "gotta get pucks on net", "had a good effort out there", you've all heard 'em). Aside from the fact that being good at hockey and being an engaging speaker really have no reason to be complementary skill sets, these guys are all being asked to talk about people that they work with (in a sense, anyway). Saying anything but good things about individuals or teams that you might have to play with/for later isn't going to do you any favours, so they just spout the same answers that everyone else does. Which leaves me to wonder what the point of the hockey media is...
Once in a decade or so you'll get something like Messier's Guarantee.

[skywalker]

Once in a decade or so you'll get something like Messier's Guarantee.

Generally the captains from English-speaking countries do better than most. Messier, despite this gem, was not among those. :smallbiggrin:

[Chunklets]

Generally the captains from English-speaking countries do better than most. Messier, despite this gem, was not among those. :smallbiggrin:

I've been enjoying the wit and wisdom (and goals and overall play, but that's another discussion) of Dustin Penner quite a bit this season - particularly his line about cutting back on the "wheat-based beverages" over the summer. He's got a very dry sense of humour. The worst speaker on the Oilers right now has got to be Sheldon Souray.

Part of the problem, I think, is that we usually see the players being interviewed either right before games, when they've got other things on their minds, or during period breaks and after games, when they're exhausted. When they're able to sit down and concentrate on interviews, a lot of them are quite erudite.

And no discussion of hockey players and the media would be complete without reference to this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_w4MV_LwMw)!

[Walrus]

Penner is definitely the most entertaining speaker on the Oilers. I liked when early in the season the Hockey Night in Canada got offended when Penner jokingly called Scott Oake on the fact that the media kept asking him the same questions over and over again to hear the "wheat-based beverages" joke.

I don't mind Souray that much, actually. He's not great, but his voice sounds cool, so I don't even really care what he says. Cogliano and Gagner definitely fit into the "string together cliches" mold. I like JDD, too, since he seems to be pretty honets about how he feels games went. Which is nice, after years of "we've just gotta look forward to next game".

[SensFan]

Penner is definitely the most entertaining speaker on the Oilers. I liked when early in the season the Hockey Night in Canada got offended when Penner jokingly called Scott Oake on the fact that the media kept asking him the same questions over and over again to hear the "wheat-based beverages" joke.

I don't mind Souray that much, actually. He's not great, but his voice sounds cool, so I don't even really care what he says. Cogliano and Gagner definitely fit into the "string together cliches" mold. I like JDD, too, since he seems to be pretty honets about how he feels games went. Which is nice, after years of "we've just gotta look forward to next game".
I must say, I did like the way Penner, Cogliano, and (I don't think it was Gagner, but whoever the third guy is) handled the questions they got leading up to the game in Ottawa.
I would have liked their answers even more if the lead-up to that game had been a story on them facing their former team :P

[Joran]

An ode to a grinder:

Quintin Laing isn't known outside of D.C., but dedicated fans of the Capitals know him primarily for his gritty play and tough luck. He came up to the Capitals two years ago, during the dark days right at the same time as Bruce Boudreau led the turnaround. He seemed to energize the team, not by sterling passes or fancy goals, but by doing the most dangerous of all plays in hockey, getting on the ice and blocking shots. The Caps went from last to first that season and haven't looked back since.

Due to salary cap issues, Laing didn't get back to the Capitals until midway through last season, and his first game back, he suffered a lacerated spleen. He didn't heal fast enough to help the Caps on their playoff run, but was a key component on the Caps AHL affliate, the Hershey Bears, on their Calder Cup run.

Quintin Laing started the season on the Caps, but suffered one of the first cases of swine flu. Last game, he took a shot right on his jaw, doing what he does best, giving up his body to block a shot and is out for a few weeks. Come back soon Quintin.

Edit: Great quote from our Captain, Chris Clark: ""He plays the game with somebody else’s body. It’s amazing. But teams need guys like [Laing] and teams with guys like him win games and win championships because they put their bodies on the line. He’s unbelievable."

Do you happen to have anyone who doesn't make the highlight reels, but quietly does the dirty work to help your hockey team win?

P.S. Ovie's back, REJOICE.

[SensFan]

Anton Volchenkov rarely makes the highlight reels, but does more dirty work than anyone I've ever seen. I think he's been in the top5 in shot blocks in the league every full year he's played.
Chris Neil is our resident grinder, though still manages some goals every now and then. I think it was a great move to resign him this year, even though some gawked at the 2-million pricetag.
Mike Fisher probably makes the highlight reels more often than you mean for these purposes, but he is absolutely the heart and soul of this hockey team. He does absolutely everything. Some playmaking, second-unit PP, first-unit PK, centers the 'energy line', still manages 20-30 goals every year. In my mind the no-brainer captain when Alfie eventually steps down from hockey.

[skywalker]

Do you happen to have anyone who doesn't make the highlight reels, but quietly does the dirty work to help your hockey team win?

As I've said before, hockey has a culture of respect for the guys in the trenches. Ian Laperriere (I hope I got enough r's and e's in there, silly French Canadians) makes highlight reels quite frequently exactly for this sort of play, and quotes like "It's been a tough year for the face." Priceless.

[Chunklets]

Do you happen to have anyone who doesn't make the highlight reels, but quietly does the dirty work to help your hockey team win?


As far as the Oilers are concerned, up until a couple of weeks ago I'd have mentioned Fernando Pisani here. Apart from the 2006 playoffs, when he was suddenly possessed by the vengeful ghost of Glenn Anderson (note: Glenn Anderson = not actually dead), he's played most of his career as a steady, under-the-radar, defensive forward. However, he's on the long-term injured list due to a flare-up of ulcerative colitis, and I kind of suspect that he won't play hockey again. If so, he'll be greatly missed, but that's another post.

So, in terms of active Oilers, I give you Zach Stortini. Stortini is best known for fighting (that, and for his matinee-idol good looks (http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/91390047.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921CC759DF4EBAC47D0EB295216DF0922DD 2C8835D0C376A824428D3B3A5A7FA024E30A760B0D811297)) , but he's also a very effective fourth-line forward. He skates hard, forechecks and backchecks tenaciously, and is willing to go into the nasty areas on the ice. He sat in the pressbox a fair amount under MacTavish, but has been given a bigger roll by Olde-Timey Coach. He's played every game this season, averaging ten minutes of icetime per game.

The other fellow I'd like to mention is Ladislav Smid. He was a throw-in in the Pronger trade and hasn't scored a goal in, I think, about 150 NHL games. However, he's a very solid defensive defenceman. He's been playing alongside Visnovsky recently, allowing the latter to confidently move up and support the attack, and that arrangement seems to me to be working just fine. Smid is also surlier than two surlies and another surly, which is a useful trait in a defenceman.


I must say, I did like the way Penner, Cogliano, and (I don't think it was Gagner, but whoever the third guy is) handled the questions they got leading up to the game in Ottawa.
I would have liked their answers even more if the lead-up to that game had been a story on them facing their former team :P

The third guy was in fact Smid.

Is there any kind of consensus among Ottawa fans about the outcome of the Heatley trade? I have heard from some (and it sounds like your in this group, Sensfan) who wish that the Oilers-Sens deal had been the one to go through, but I've also heard statements like "I'd take Michalek over Penner any day."

I think we can take it for granted that most Oilers fans are happy, or at least happy now, that the trade didn't happen.

[SensFan]

Is there any kind of consensus among Ottawa fans about the outcome of the Heatley trade? I have heard from some (and it sounds like your in this group, Sensfan) who wish that the Oilers-Sens deal had been the one to go through, but I've also heard statements like "I'd take Michalek over Penner any day."

I think we can take it for granted that most Oilers fans are happy, or at least happy now, that the trade didn't happen.
Michalek's great offensive start goes a long way to filling the void you get when a team that finished near the bottom in goals last year loses a 50-goal scorer.

Cheechoo is overpriced and useless, though. So overall, I would have preferred the Oilers deal. And not only because I'd have more chances to boo Heaters.

The way I see it: The Oilers offered a competitive deal because they were interested in getting dealt Heatley; the Sharks put together a weak offer, because they knew Murray needed to trade him, so would have to accept.

[Chunklets]

The way I see it: The Oilers offered a competitive deal because they were interested in getting dealt Heatley; the Sharks put together a weak offer, because they knew Murray needed to trade him, so would have to accept.

I think that's probably a fair analysis of the situation. I know there was a certain feeling here that the Oilers' initial offer for Heatley was a bit steep (yes, Heatley's an elite scorer, but he's also clearly a head-case), and that was even before Penner decided to do his Frank Mahovlich impersonation. But yes, by first publicly demanding the trade, and then rejecting the trade to Edmonton, Heatley put the Sens' management in a really tough spot.

And speaking of the Oilers, Khabibulin is now apparently hurt, so JDD gets the start tonight, with junior (Oil Kings) goalie Torrie Jung backing him up. Against Chicago, who hung seven on the Flames in Calgary a few nights ago. I think this game will require a lot of beer.

[Walrus]

I'm definitely glad that the deal didn't go through. Heatley has finally managed to get ahead of Penner in the scoring race, but overall I think that deal not happening was a win for the Oilers. Smid has been our best defenceman so far this year, and Cogliano is one of the few players who goes hard every game.

Well the first period is over and I feel bad for JDD, since he really didn't have a chance on two of those three goals. The Kane breakway was stoppable, but one of them Deslauriers actually stopped and Souray accidentally batted it into the net trying to push it over the top of the net. Ugh. Way to play defence, team. I seriously hope Steve Tambellini is trying to engineer some kind of deal to get rid of some of the dead weights while they still have value. And sweet mother of crap why didn't they sign Blair Betts when they had the chance? We need a shutdown centre BADLY.

[Chunklets]

Well the first period is over and I feel bad for JDD, since he really didn't have a chance on two of those three goals. The Kane breakway was stoppable, but one of them Deslauriers actually stopped and Souray accidentally batted it into the net trying to push it over the top of the net. Ugh. Way to play defence, team. I seriously hope Steve Tambellini is trying to engineer some kind of deal to get rid of some of the dead weights while they still have value. And sweet mother of crap why didn't they sign Blair Betts when they had the chance? We need a shutdown centre BADLY.

I agree that JDD was much better against Chicago than he was early against Colorado. Even the Kane breakaway was mostly the fault of Reddox and whoever was supposed to be in the defensive spot that Reddox found himself occupying (Souray, maybe?). I do like Liam Reddox - he's a hard worker, and seems to know his role - but one-on-one against a guy like Kane was never going to have a happy ending for him.

I've been seeing increasing calls in the Oilogosphere for Tambellini to do something, anything, to fill some of the lineup holes on this team, and I fully agree with you that a Betts/Malhotra type would have been an excellent acquisition. I don't know if the team can really afford to wait until Stone and Pouliot come back, and hope one of those two can step into the role. As far as clearing guys out is concerned, well, I suspect it will soon be arriverderci to Robert Nilsson, and maybe to Ethan Moreau as well, but I really don't know who else they can spare at the moment.

Speaking of the hockey blogs, I think we've got a pretty good lineup of them here in Oilerland. I spend a fair amount of time on Lowetide (http://lowetide.blogspot.com/), The Copper & Blue (http://www.coppernblue.com/), and Oilersnation (http://oilersnation.com/). Walrus, have I missed any? And fans of other teams on here, are there good internet reads about your particular teams?

[Walrus]

After the last few games, I think JDD is legit. He was stellar against Phoenix and, Matt Greene's goal aside, very good against LA. I think Chicago and the other game where he wasn't very good (Colorado, I think it was?) were anomalies. It'd be nice if the Oilers would play defence in front of him, though. Or Khabibulin. Or ever. DId I mention it'd be nice if they'd play some defence?

I can't see Robert Nilsson lasting here until the end of the season, or even to the trade deadline, really. I think he'll either be a throw-in as part of a bigger deal or get sent somewhere for a pick or something. If Brodziak was worth two third-rounders (or was it fourth?), Nilsson should be able to get us a second, maybe. I've heard that the Oilers might make a play for Patrick Sharp, since Chicago needs to drop salary like crazy to re-sign a bunch of guys. I think that would be a VERY good move, especially at his price tag. Chicago probably wouldn't want salary back either, so we could possibly deal Nilsson somewhere for picks, then package those with some the picks we have already and flip them to the 'Hawks for Sharp.

I can't think of any other Oiler blogs off the top of my head, looks like you've got all the big ones.

[Joran]

For Caps Centric blogs, I think the best one is Jaspers' Rink. It uses a lot more statistical analysis than any other place I can find.

http://www.japersrink.com/

Outside of that, I usually check the Washington Post's Insider blog for most of my major news: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalsinsider/

And finally, our owner, Ted Leonsis has his own blog. He's pretty accessible and will respond to emails from fans. Thankfully, he doesn't seem to take offense to the crazy ramblings of some of the more "enthusiastic" fans.

http://www.tedstake.com/

Seriously, I'm not sure what it's about the Capitals but there's a vocal minority who thinks that the Caps stink, the GM and Coach should be fired, despite leading the Eastern Conference in points and being one of the top 4-5 teams in the league...

[Walrus]

Just about every team with a big enough fan base has the vocal crazies who think everything is a disaster. On the Oilers message boards you can tell whether the last game was a win or a loss based on the mood: if there's talk about how we're going to take a run at the Cup, we won. If there's talk about Kevin Lowe being an idiot and that we should just blow up the whole team and rebuild, we lost.

There's also a segment of fans who want to see 1980s Oilers firewagon hockey, which is pretty much impossible nowadays. When the Oilers were playing hard-nosed defensive hockey to shut down Detroit, San Jose, and Anaheim in the 2006 playoffs there were fans whining that they weren't playing Oilers hockey. Then they tried to play Oilers hockey... and 2006 was the last time they made the playoffs.

Oh, and the Oilers just lost Ales Hemsky for the rest of the season. I think we've now lost more man-games to injury than most of the other teams COMBINED.

[Joran]

In Washington, we're the exact opposite. We have a high powered offense, with some questionable defense and there are some people who think we can't win playing aggressive, offensive hockey and need to lock it down. Also, some people still want an enforcer on our team to replace Donald Brashear.

So, here's something that's going to attract some attention. Does Ovechkin deserve to be suspended? What's the line between finishing your checks, playing physical and playing reckless and being a danger to yourself and others on the ice?

Personally, I'd say a 2-3 game suspension seems about right. Ovechkin has been fined twice already, one for a slew feet (whatever the heck that is) and one for a boarding major (even though that was a questionable call). I don't think Ovechkin is malicious, but instead is just reckless. He doesn't aim high, doesn't head hunt, and doesn't seem to attack people with his stick. Instead, he seems like he wants to go for the big hit and is a bit too aggressive in doing so.

[SensFan]

In Washington, we're the exact opposite. We have a high powered offense, with some questionable defense and there are some people who think we can't win playing aggressive, offensive hockey and need to lock it down. Also, some people still want an enforcer on our team to replace Donald Brashear.

So, here's something that's going to attract some attention. Does Ovechkin deserve to be suspended? What's the line between finishing your checks, playing physical and playing reckless and being a danger to yourself and others on the ice?

Personally, I'd say a 2-3 game suspension seems about right. Ovechkin has been fined twice already, one for a slew feet (whatever the heck that is) and one for a boarding major (even though that was a questionable call). I don't think Ovechkin is malicious, but instead is just reckless. He doesn't aim high, doesn't head hunt, and doesn't seem to attack people with his stick. Instead, he seems like he wants to go for the big hit and is a bit too aggressive in doing so.
My problem with the whole thing is that a knee-on-knee hit is just about the easiest way to seriously injure someone in the NHL.
What if it's [insert 'goon' here] that does that to Ovechkin, and Ovechkin is hurt for 2 months? I bet most people would be outraged at a suspension of just 2-3 games.

Should the degree of injury that the victim has affect a suspension length?
Should the 'star player' factor affect a suspension length, whether it's the start doing the hit or getting it?
My answer to both questions is no.

[Joran]

My problem with the whole thing is that a knee-on-knee hit is just about the easiest way to seriously injure someone in the NHL.
What if it's [insert 'goon' here] that does that to Ovechkin, and Ovechkin is hurt for 2 months? I bet most people would be outraged at a suspension of just 2-3 games.

Should the degree of injury that the victim has affect a suspension length?
Should the 'star player' factor affect a suspension length, whether it's the start doing the hit or getting it?
My answer to both questions is no.

Factors that should affect suspension length:

Intent to Harm
Previous infractions
Severity of Injury


No harm, no suspension. It's already somewhat codified in the rules: a double minor is called if a high stick draws blood, only a regular minor if just a normal high stick. On the flip side, just because someone's injured on a play, doesn't mean a suspension should be handed down.

If the other guy kneed Ovechkin and he was unhurt, I wouldn't want a suspension, maybe a fine. If it was a two month injury, then I'd want blood. It's a results driven business.

I think Ovechkin got suspended because he received two majors in three games and had a similar knee-on-knee collision with Sergei Gonchar in the playoffs last year. If they didn't suspend Ovie, then it'd look like the NHL was favoring him.

To my biased eyes, Ovechkin looked like he was trying to make a hard check, had his knee out in front, and Tim Gleason dodged at the last minute and their legs connected. If Gleason didn't move suddenly and Ovechkin didn't have a wide stance, then nobody gets hurt. It wasn't a situation where Ovechkin was skating past Gleason and stuck out his leg. I'm actually unsure why these types of collisions don't happen more often. Is it because other players are smarter about not trying to make an open ice check?

So, by my criteria, no intent to injure, several previous infractions (including one just two games ago), and no injury to Gleason (he returned to the game). Two game suspension to send a message to Ovechkin to tone it down and that the next time they'll come down harder.

P.S. Is it just me or are hockey rules particularly vague? Hockey seems like the most random in terms of fouls and calls of all the sports that I watch.

[SensFan]

I just don't see why it should matter whether the guy I send flying head-first into the boards happens to break his neck, get concussed, or just get winded.

Otherwise, 'durability' or 'resistance to injury' won't be a good trait for players to have, since it just means opponents get more leeway in knocking them around.

I mean, imagine if I made a team of guys like Havlat, Hossa, Gaborik, etc? All skilled players, and if you happen to hit them hard, you may get suspended because they break easily.

[Walrus]

Could you imagine if Gaborik, Hossa, and Havlat WERE all on the same team? Sure, you wouldn't have all three of them in the line-up very often (although Gaborik has been far more resilient this season than usual), but even with two of the three, that's a whole lot of firepower. It'd be like using a nuke against guys with BB guns.

On the issue of Ovechkin's hit, I think his suspension was fair. He's a repeat offender, and was just thrown out of a game for boarding, so a suspension is warranted. I don't think he intended to hurt Gleason (and certainly not himself, since he took the worst of that hit), and I don't think he intends to hurt people in general when he's throwing himself around like a missile. I DO think that he plays a very sloppy physical game, though. If you look at most checkers, they turn sideways when they throw a hit in open ice. You generally don't see those guys get hurt from that, because there are no limbs sticking out that can collide with something unintentionally.

I also think that if Tim Gleason collided with say, Sidney Crosby, in similar circumstances (and was the aggressor, like Ovechkin was), he would probably have gotten three to five games, as opposed to the two that Ovie ended up with. I also wouldn't have been surprised if, had Ovechkin not gotten hurt and had to miss time anyway, they would have just fined him again. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they suspsended Ovechkin for games he was going to miss anyway just to make it look like they're a little more balanced than they actually are.

[SensFan]

Could you imagine if Gaborik, Hossa, and Havlat WERE all on the same team? Sure, you wouldn't have all three of them in the line-up very often (although Gaborik has been far more resilient this season than usual), but even with two of the three, that's a whole lot of firepower. It'd be like using a nuke against guys with BB guns.

On the issue of Ovechkin's hit, I think his suspension was fair. He's a repeat offender, and was just thrown out of a game for boarding, so a suspension is warranted. I don't think he intended to hurt Gleason (and certainly not himself, since he took the worst of that hit), and I don't think he intends to hurt people in general when he's throwing himself around like a missile. I DO think that he plays a very sloppy physical game, though. If you look at most checkers, they turn sideways when they throw a hit in open ice. You generally don't see those guys get hurt from that, because there are no limbs sticking out that can collide with something unintentionally.

I also think that if Tim Gleason collided with say, Sidney Crosby, in similar circumstances (and was the aggressor, like Ovechkin was), he would probably have gotten three to five games, as opposed to the two that Ovie ended up with. I also wouldn't have been surprised if, had Ovechkin not gotten hurt and had to miss time anyway, they would have just fined him again. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they suspsended Ovechkin for games he was going to miss anyway just to make it look like they're a little more balanced than they actually are.
I guarantee you that if Tim Gleason (to borrow your name) is the aggressor on an identical hit againt Ovechkin, and the latter is out for months, people around the league would be calling for Bettman's resignation if the penalty is just 2 games.

Let's take another example. Say Gleason gets an elbow up on Chara. It probably hurts a little. The same elbow on Havlat concusses him and he's out for the season.
If it's the same hit with an elbow, why should one guy pay a higher price because he hit a toothpick?

[Joran]

I guarantee you that if Tim Gleason (to borrow your name) is the aggressor on an identical hit againt Ovechkin, and the latter is out for months, people around the league would be calling for Bettman's resignation if the penalty is just 2 games.

Let's take another example. Say Gleason gets an elbow up on Chara. It probably hurts a little. The same elbow on Havlat concusses him and he's out for the season.
If it's the same hit with an elbow, why should one guy pay a higher price because he hit a toothpick?

To discourage him from illegally hitting toothpicks. A player intentionally injuring another player is a direct harm to the opposing player, team, and league and should be punished so that a message is sent that it's unacceptable.

Proportionality of punishment to harm caused is a basic principle of punishment.

[SensFan]

To discourage him from illegally hitting toothpicks. A player intentionally injuring another player is a direct harm to the opposing player, team, and league and should be punished so that a message is sent that it's unacceptable.

Proportionality of punishment to harm caused is a basic principle of punishment.
A dirty hit is a dirty hit.

All that these punishment:injury rules accomplish is that players have more grace when going after the Charas and Phaneufs of the league.

[Chunklets]

Factors that should affect suspension length:

Intent to Harm
Previous infractions
Severity of Injury



Let's take another example. Say Gleason gets an elbow up on Chara. It probably hurts a little. The same elbow on Havlat concusses him and he's out for the season.
If it's the same hit with an elbow, why should one guy pay a higher price because he hit a toothpick?

Both good points, I think. Severity of injury should be taken into account, but it's got to count less than intent and previous record. I think it's more important to look at the injury situation when the offense occurred out of carelessness rather than malice (the message being, hopefully, "have a bit of concern for the other players out there). If, however, a player deliberately attempts to injure an opponent, his punishment shouldn't be mitigated simply because he doesn't succeed. Anyway, them's my thoughts on the issue.

One other thing to keep in mind; little guys are not necessarily more injury-prone than big guys, especially when it comes to concussions. Take Brett Lindros for example; he played at 6'4", 215 lbs, and lost his career to a head injury at age 20.

So what do you all think of the Carcillo suspension? I was ok with it, myself.

On an entirely unrelated note, I was watching HNIC Saturday night, and heard Glen Healy going on in favour of renaming some of the NHL trophies (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/12/05/sp-hotstove-nhl-hnic.html)to honour more recent, better-known, names. I found this to be a somewhat distressing notion, myself; I don't think you can honour the history of the game by, you know, throwing out the more obscure bits of the history of the game. That said, though, I'd love to hear others' opinions of the idea!

[skywalker]

A dirty hit is a dirty hit.

All that these punishment:injury rules accomplish is that players have more grace when going after the Charas and Phaneufs of the league.

But he knows who he's hitting. I think the point is that it's "dirtier" when you do it to... I won't even say Gaborik, I'll say Paul Kariya. It's dirtier because you know it's more likely to be destructive.

I think Ovechkin's suspension was justified. "Don't act like an idiot on the ice" seems like a good message to send when 10 guys are flying around with sticks, skates, and no face masks (which is an entirely different issue, but also completely stupid IMO. Frozen rubber, sharpened metal blades, and big wooden sticks. Protect your freakin' face!).

Boarding is a far worse issue IMO. Which could also maybe be partially solved by facemasks.


One other thing to keep in mind; little guys are not necessarily more injury-prone than big guys, especially when it comes to concussions. Take Brett Lindros for example; he played at 6'4", 215 lbs, and lost his career to a head injury at age 20.

The Lindros boys were just fragile. Never did like Eric because he was one of those who never shied from throwing the big hit, but couldn't take it.


So what do you all think of the Carcillo suspension? I was ok with it, myself.

How about some background on this one?


On an entirely unrelated note, I was watching HNIC Saturday night, and heard Glen Healy going on in favour of renaming some of the NHL trophies (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/12/05/sp-hotstove-nhl-hnic.html)to honour more recent, better-known, names. I found this to be a somewhat distressing notion, myself; I don't think you can honour the history of the game by, you know, throwing out the more obscure bits of the history of the game. That said, though, I'd love to hear others' opinions of the idea!

Stupid. Stupid stupid stupid. Imagine renaming the Cy Young award?

[Chunklets]

How about some background on this one?

Sorry, here's the link (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=301359)!


Stupid. Stupid stupid stupid. Imagine renaming the Cy Young award?

Pretty much my thoughts on the issue. I certainly have nothing whatsoever against honouring Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Beliveau, et al, but this is not the way to do it.

[skywalker]

Sorry, here's the link (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=301359)!

I 1000% agree that suspension was justified. I thought that was a terrible play. I had seen this, forgot it was Carcillo. Bradley still has his stick in his hands when Carcillo throws the punch. The fact that his gloves came off as he was hit is no excuse for Carcillo. Carcillo threw one glove and then grabbed onto the jersey with that hand, while he got his other (still gloved hand!) into Bradley's face. The he chambered the fist, dropped the glove, and punched all in one motion. Terrible. Protip: If your opponent is still dropping their gloves and you already have hold of their jersey, you're fighting dirty. I can't stop typing because there were so many things wrong with that.

That really pissed me off when I saw it. Totally deserved.


Pretty much my thoughts on the issue. I certainly have nothing whatsoever against honouring Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Beliveau, et al, but this is not the way to do it.

There's not a Michael Jordan trophy either. Was retiring Gretzky's jersey league-wide not enough? I agree, nothing against it, but make it a new trophy.

[Don Julio Anejo]

On an entirely unrelated note, I was watching HNIC Saturday night, and heard Glen Healy going on in favour of renaming some of the NHL trophies (http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/story/2009/12/05/sp-hotstove-nhl-hnic.html)to honour more recent, better-known, names. I found this to be a somewhat distressing notion, myself; I don't think you can honour the history of the game by, you know, throwing out the more obscure bits of the history of the game. That said, though, I'd love to hear others' opinions of the idea!
Ah, so I take it now we'll be going to the playoffs to win the coveted Bettman Cup?

Edit: I actually wouldn't mind adding a Bobby Orr trophy, for the best offensive defenceman. Kind of like we have Selke now for the best defencive forward. But not as a replacement for Norris.

[SensFan]

I had been waiting for this to be bumped for a few days now :P

I had what is probably the chance of a lifetime on friday night, as I was in montreal to see the Habs game, given it was their centennial celebration, and what a show it was. I doubt that I'll ever forget watching that 'warm-up', and the rest of the ceremonies. Well worth the daytrip, especially as I spent some time with family there.

[Walrus]

Oh man, SensFan, that must have been a fantastic experience. I watched it on TV, and thought it was a great spectacle. My favourite part was Ryan O'Byrne taking off his No. 3 jersey and handing it to... Elmer, was it? I don't recall the guy's name, but seeing the look on his face when O'Byrne handed him the last No. 3 jersey to ever be worn by a Montreal Canadien was beautiful.

I think the Carcillo suspsension was more than fair. If anything, it was too short. I saw him interviewed the other day and he was complaining that when he grew up watching hockey "hockey was hockey and men were men" and claimed he wasn't a dirty fighter. No, of course not, you're a manly man who grabs guys and punches him before he even knows what's going on. In retaliation for a hit that was completely clean. Moron.

Glen Healy's trophy rant also bugged me, mostly because he spent his entire speech acting like a self-righteous douche and harping on that other guy to tell him who Hart or Lady Byng were. I didn't play in the NHL for years, and I know who Lady Byng is. Maybe Glen Healy should crack a book once in a while?

I think Gretzky's league-wide jersey retirement was enough, really. An Orr Trophy would be a good idea, I think. Make it for the top-scoring defenceman, and the Norris can be for the best overall defenceman, like it is now.

[Don Julio Anejo]

I had been waiting for this to be bumped for a few days now :P

I had what is probably the chance of a lifetime on friday night, as I was in montreal to see the Habs game, given it was their centennial celebration, and what a show it was. I doubt that I'll ever forget watching that 'warm-up', and the rest of the ceremonies. Well worth the daytrip, especially as I spent some time with family there.
That sounds... awesome! :smile:

[skywalker]

Glen Healy's trophy rant also bugged me, mostly because he spent his entire speech acting like a self-righteous douche and harping on that other guy to tell him who Hart or Lady Byng were. I didn't play in the NHL for years, and I know who Lady Byng is. Maybe Glen Healy should crack a book once in a while?

Wait, you mean "Lady Byng" isn't just a mean nickname they give to the nanciest player of the year?

[SensFan]

Wait, you mean "Lady Byng" isn't just a mean nickname they give to the nanciest player of the year?
Quoth the Wiki: "The trophy is named in honour of Marie Evelyn Moreton (Lady Byng), wife of Viscount Byng of Vimy, a Vimy Ridge war hero who was Governor General of Canada from 1921 to 1926. Lady Byng, who was an avid hockey fan, decided to donate the trophy to the NHL in 1925."

[Walrus]

Wait, you mean "Lady Byng" isn't just a mean nickname they give to the nanciest player of the year?

That actually reminded me of an article I saw in the newspaper last year about the Lady Byng race. It was a joke piece from a Vancouver writer about Kyle Wellwood all of a sudden being a Lady Byng candidate because Nick Lidstrom, Pavel Datsuyk had gone on rampages throughout the first half of the season, leaving only carnage and weeping families in their wake. I think they both had in the neighbourhood of 15 penalty minutes. XD

[Chunklets]

Quoth the Wiki: "The trophy is named in honour of Marie Evelyn Moreton (Lady Byng), wife of Viscount Byng of Vimy, a Vimy Ridge war hero who was Governor General of Canada from 1921 to 1926. Lady Byng, who was an avid hockey fan, decided to donate the trophy to the NHL in 1925."

Not only was she an avid hockey fan, she was an avid Sens fan! And, speaking of Lady Byng and her trophy, I think that the NHL must be the only league, at least in North America, that recognizes individual sportsmanship with a regular award. I know that European soccer rewards teams for fair play, but I don't think it does so for individuals.


I had what is probably the chance of a lifetime on friday night, as I was in montreal to see the Habs game, given it was their centennial celebration, and what a show it was. I doubt that I'll ever forget watching that 'warm-up', and the rest of the ceremonies. Well worth the daytrip, especially as I spent some time with family there.

I am officially very very jealous... :smallbiggrin:


I think the Carcillo suspsension was more than fair. If anything, it was too short. I saw him interviewed the other day and he was complaining that when he grew up watching hockey "hockey was hockey and men were men" and claimed he wasn't a dirty fighter. No, of course not, you're a manly man who grabs guys and punches him before he even knows what's going on. In retaliation for a hit that was completely clean. Moron.

Ye gods. I hadn't actually heard the "men were men" quote... That's got to be one of the dumbest things I've heard said in a long while. I wonder just how much longer Carcillo will be a Flyer; his new coach apparently hates fighting (http://phourforphour.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/laviolette-hates-fighting/).


Glen Healy's trophy rant also bugged me, mostly because he spent his entire speech acting like a self-righteous douche and harping on that other guy to tell him who Hart or Lady Byng were. I didn't play in the NHL for years, and I know who Lady Byng is. Maybe Glen Healy should crack a book once in a while?

True enough, and I was pleased with both MacLean and Milbury for stepping up and expressing displeasure with Healy's rant, especially because it was pretty clear that MacLean did know his hockey history.

By the way, I think that the idea of the Bobby Orr Trophy being awarded to the highest-scoring defenceman is an excellent one!

[SensFan]

By the way, I think that the idea of the Bobby Orr Trophy being awarded to the highest-scoring defenceman is an excellent one!
By this, do you mean awarded as the Art Ross trophy is (most points), Rocket Richard (most goals), or Hart (panel judging), to decide on the best offensive defensemen?

[Chunklets]

By this, do you mean awarded as the Art Ross trophy is (most points), Rocket Richard (most goals), or Hart (panel judging), to decide on the best offensive defensemen?

Hmm. I guess I would go with the "most points" idea. My impression is that a lot of, though not all, the defencemen who put up big offensive numbers do so because of they have a really good slapshot, often deployed from the point. While those guys do get their share of goals, they also get a lot of assists from tip-ins and juicy rebounds, and that should, I think, be recognized.

Ironically, Art Ross was himself a defenceman during his playing days in the very early years of the 20th century. I gather that he was a sort of proto-Bobby Orr - a guy who loved to rush the puck in an era when defencemen simply didn't do that. He scored a lot of goals (http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/r/rossar01.html).

[SensFan]

Hmm. I guess I would go with the "most points" idea. My impression is that a lot of, though not all, the defencemen who put up big offensive numbers do so because of they have a really good slapshot, often deployed from the point. While those guys do get their share of goals, they also get a lot of assists from tip-ins and juicy rebounds, and that should, I think, be recognized.

Ironically, Art Ross was himself a defenceman during his playing days in the very early years of the 20th century. I gather that he was a sort of proto-Bobby Orr - a guy who loved to rush the puck in an era when defencemen simply didn't do that. He scored a lot of goals (http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/r/rossar01.html).
I guess my thought is that it would neccesitate a change in how the Norris is judged, since the Norris winner is often up among league leaders in points from the blueline, unless I'm much mistaken. And while it may be a good idea to have one specifically for offence, so another one can be for the best defensive DMen, it seems silly to take what the Norris is now and call it the Orr, then give a new meaning to the Norris.

[Walrus]

I always find the Norris judging a little odd, since it's a weird combination of statistics and opinion. Usually the Norris winner does have a pretty good point total, and for quite a while it was pretty much automatically handed to the highest scoring D-man, but there must be some kind of consideration given to their defensive ability, which there aren't really stats for. I guess +/-, but that stat has all kinds of things wrong with it.

[SensFan]

I just heard that the Norris is named after an owner, not a player.

In that case, I support changing the name to Orr (and keeping it offensive), and introducing a trophy for most defensively reliable Defensemen, though no name comes to mind. In the spirit of the centennial year (and because they've produced far more great players than anyone else), maybe go with a Habs defensemen from a while back?

[skywalker]

Quoth the Wiki: "The trophy is named in honour of Marie Evelyn Moreton (Lady Byng), wife of Viscount Byng of Vimy, a Vimy Ridge war hero who was Governor General of Canada from 1921 to 1926. Lady Byng, who was an avid hockey fan, decided to donate the trophy to the NHL in 1925."

I was, y'know, jokin'... :smallwink:


Ye gods. I hadn't actually heard the "men were men" quote... That's got to be one of the dumbest things I've heard said in a long while. I wonder just how much longer Carcillo will be a Flyer; his new coach apparently hates fighting (http://phourforphour.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/laviolette-hates-fighting/).

Dude, as that link indicates, I wonder how long Laviolette will be a Flyer, since when does Broad Street hire coaches that "hate fighting?"


I always find the Norris judging a little odd, since it's a weird combination of statistics and opinion. Usually the Norris winner does have a pretty good point total, and for quite a while it was pretty much automatically handed to the highest scoring D-man, but there must be some kind of consideration given to their defensive ability, which there aren't really stats for. I guess +/-, but that stat has all kinds of things wrong with it.

Generally speaking, recently, the trophy has been awarded to Nicky Lidstrom, who is a consistently high scorer and an excellent defensive d-man. So really, guys like Chara, Lidstrom, etc, are arguments against the new trophy, from what I can see.

EDIT: I also support voting, if we were to have a new trophy. Since it's not "highest scoring," it's "most offensively valuable." Similar to how MVP isn't based squarely on stats, neither should this.

[Don Julio Anejo]

From what I gather, point total is only a part of the Norris trophy. The most important parts are +/- (technically speaking, the true "point total" of a defenseman) and consistency over the last couple of seasons (so a one hit wonder won't get it unless he's good for or so years straight and then has an outstanding season). It's still a subjective trophy mind you, and point totals and +/- are pretty highly correlated, especially if the defenseman is a powerplay quarterback.

As for the "best defensive defenseman", IMO it wouldn't really work. It would pretty much be the same as Norris, except awarded to a guy who can't rack up more than 5 points per season.

Also, for the hypothetical Bobby Orr trophy, I personally agree with awarding it by panel judging. Why? Well, if you're Dan Boyle, all you really have to do is pass the puck to Thornton who will then pass it to Marleau or Heatly and you're set to be in the top 5 for points. On the other hand, if you're Jay Boumeester (sp?) or Scott Niedermeyer, well, I'd take you any day of the week over Boyle if I was building a team from scratch and needed someone to set up plays and join the rush.

[Chunklets]

I just heard that the Norris is named after an owner, not a player.

In that case, I support changing the name to Orr (and keeping it offensive), and introducing a trophy for most defensively reliable Defensemen, though no name comes to mind. In the spirit of the centennial year (and because they've produced far more great players than anyone else), maybe go with a Habs defensemen from a while back?

I don't know that I'd change the name - while Norris may have been a bit of a sketchy character, he was tremendously important to the early development of the NHL (the Norris clan ran the Detroit Red Wings for half a century). If a new trophy for defencemen is called for, I'd prefer simply retiring the Norris trophy to an honoured spot in the HHOF and introducing an entirely new award named after Orr.


As for the "best defensive defenseman", IMO it wouldn't really work. It would pretty much be the same as Norris, except awarded to a guy who can't rack up more than 5 points per season.

I actually think it could be made to work, Don Julio. There are enough advanced stats out there now that it is probably possible to actually measure who the best defensive defenseman is. It would take a bit of thought, though, to make sure the criteria were drawn up correctly.

If an old-time Hab is what we're looking for to name it after, I would think that Doug Harvey (http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/harvedo01.html) fits the bill admirably. One could, I think, also make a case for Harry Howell (http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/h/howelha01.html), the long-time Rangers blueliner.


Dude, as that link indicates, I wonder how long Laviolette will be a Flyer, since when does Broad Street hire coaches that "hate fighting?"

Good point, especially given that Paul Holmgren, who was never afraid to drop the gloves during his playing career, is the general manager...

To go back to the trophy thing for a second: forgive the shameful and shameless plug, but in the wake of hearing about the plot to rename the trophies, I've been doing a bit of blogging (http://koboldorum.blogspot.com/search/label/NHL%20Trophies)about it, and about the historical background to the trophies in general. Clarifications, comments, and corrections are more than welcome!

[Walrus]

Thread revival is GO!

Has anybody watched any of the World Junior Championship action this year? The first tournament games were today, and they've been playing pre-tournament games for a few days now. So far it seems like the pools are set up pretty brutally (apparently based on last year's finishes?). Canada is in pool A, which everyone expects they'll steamroll through without much trouble, while pretty much all of the other contenders are in the other pool. I watched part of the Canada vs. Latvia game this afternoon, but by the end of the second period it had gone from being a blowout to just being sad. I don't usually feel bad for the other team when my side is winning, but those poor Latvian kids must have felt awful about themselves after getting pounded 16-0.

The WJC seems to be looking good, Oiler prospect-wise, though, which I'm pretty happy about. Especially since the Oilers are currently dead last in the Western Conference. Jordan Eberle and Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson both had multi-point outings in their opening games. I'd imagine Eberle will find himself in an Oilers uniform next season (ideally in a spot vacated by Patrick O-Sullivan), and possibly Magnus in the next year or two. At this point, I'm hoping the Oilers either go on a big run and get into the playoffs or tank and manage to pick up Taylor Hall in the draft.

[Chunklets]

Thread revival is GO!

Has anybody watched any of the World Junior Championship action this year? The first tournament games were today, and they've been playing pre-tournament games for a few days now. So far it seems like the pools are set up pretty brutally (apparently based on last year's finishes?). Canada is in pool A, which everyone expects they'll steamroll through without much trouble, while pretty much all of the other contenders are in the other pool. I watched part of the Canada vs. Latvia game this afternoon, but by the end of the second period it had gone from being a blowout to just being sad. I don't usually feel bad for the other team when my side is winning, but those poor Latvian kids must have felt awful about themselves after getting pounded 16-0.

Hooray for thread revival! I didn't actually get a chance to see any of the Canada-Latvia game, and I'm sort of glad. I mean, "go Canada" and everything, but 16-0 is a bit much (even the Canadian players seemed a bit embarassed by the end of it). I think they need to do something to take goal-difference out of the picture as a tie-breaker; it just encourages, or even forces, teams to run up the score.


The WJC seems to be looking good, Oiler prospect-wise, though, which I'm pretty happy about. Especially since the Oilers are currently dead last in the Western Conference. Jordan Eberle and Magnus Paajarvi-Svensson both had multi-point outings in their opening games. I'd imagine Eberle will find himself in an Oilers uniform next season (ideally in a spot vacated by Patrick O-Sullivan), and possibly Magnus in the next year or two. At this point, I'm hoping the Oilers either go on a big run and get into the playoffs or tank and manage to pick up Taylor Hall in the draft.

Option B is looking more likely at this point... I do agree with you about the proto-Oilies at the WJC - Anton Lander and Teemu Hartikainen have been doing alright so far as well. I think will see Eberle in Edmonton next year, although I wouldn't mind at all if he started 10-11 in the AHL. I also wouldn't mind if he got traded from the Pats this season. Regina is going nowhere, and I'd like to see Eberle on a playoff team (apologies to any Regina Pats fans who happen to be about!). I also read somewhere that Linus Omark may come over from the KHL next year, which is a move with some potential for the Oil.

[Walrus]

After it was about 8-0 in the Latvia game I was seriously contemplating some kind of rule where games ended before regulation time in the event of such a brutal beating. My dodgeball league has a rule where once a team is winning by 8 points the score is frozen and then we just play for fun. Maybe not ideal in a major tournament, but there should be some kind of mechanism to prevent games that lopsided.

I've never seen Anton Lander play, but I've heard a lot of pretty positive comments about him. Apparently he's really good in the face-off circle and a defensive specialist, but he's got a slick touch around the net. Based on the preseason this year, I think it's a pretty good bet that Eberle will be in Edmonton next year, although I agree that AHL time wouldn't hurt him. I read that Omark's KHL contract has a clause that would let him jump to the NHL next year if he makes a team. I still can't really get a read on how valuable Omark will be. I've seen him shoot the lights out in Sweden, but he's pretty small and I don't know if his skill level is going to translate to the NHL. I really hope it does, though. I want to see him making goalies wonder what the heck just happened while wearing an Oilers crest.

[skywalker]

Wanted to see if the Canadian hockey fans knew the meaning of an expression:

"putting on the foil"

What does this mean and where did it come from?

[Lucky]

Wanted to see if the Canadian hockey fans knew the meaning of an expression:

"putting on the foil"

What does this mean and where did it come from?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW1Grq1r3l0

[SensFan]

Eh Oh Canada Go!

[Don Julio Anejo]

Me => happy!

Reason:http://s55.radikal.ru/i149/1001/2b/d076ecd0e672.jpg
- Source. (http://www.nhl.com/ice/statshome.htm#?navid=nav-sts-league)

[SensFan]

I bet all you Oiler fans must be pretty stoked about some guy named Eberle. :smallamused:

[Walrus]

Holy crap yes, SensFan. If that translates to the NHL level I might poop myself with joy. And right now we're looking at the #2 pick in this year's draft, which should result in good times in the future. Which is good because right now is awful, except for Gilbert Brule, Dustin Penner, and Ladislav Smid.

[Chunklets]

Holy crap yes, SensFan. If that translates to the NHL level I might poop myself with joy. And right now we're looking at the #2 pick in this year's draft, which should result in good times in the future. Which is good because right now is awful, except for Gilbert Brule, Dustin Penner, and Ladislav Smid.

Yup, and I don't think that anybody picked those three to be the Oilers' bright lights this season! I've been somewhat impressed with young Master Samwise lately as well; Gagner still makes the odd boneheaded mistake, which is probably forgiveable in someone as young as he is, but overall I like his game.

I can't imagine that it was a real fun weekend for the Oil; instead of a team outing to play golf in California, they got to go through two-a-day practises under the baleful gaze of Pat Quinn. And good for Quinn for reminding them all who's in charge.

[Walrus]

I really like Smid, especially the way he responded to the Heatley trade stuff. I remember one of his first comments was somethin along the lines of "I'm glad he didn't want to come here, because I don't want to leave. But why wouldn't anyone want to play here? I love it here!" That's the kind of attitude I like in players for my hometown team. Turns out we had the shutdown D-man we needed all along. Wouldn't mind another one, though.

At this point I really want the Oilers to improve, but not in terms of results. I don't want another repeat of playing out of the playoffs and into a mediocre draft pick. Maybe make some room at the trade deadline and allow some of our veterans a shot at the playoffs in their waning years. I've heard that Sheldon Souray is potentially on the trade block. I'd miss him, but I'd love to see him win a Stanley Cup, which I don't think he's going to be able to do here.

[Chunklets]

TSN is reporting that Jean Beliveau has had a stroke (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=307119), although apparently not a life-threatening one. All the best to one of the NHL's greatest, and classiest, players.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Sweet, I got my jersey signed by Mason Raymond today :smile:

To quote Barney Stinson, "You know name dropping? That's like the opposite of that." But still... I'm quite happy!

[SensFan]

Time for a BUMP, thanks to Mr. Burke.

Two big trades today. In the salary-exchange one, Giguere comes to Toronto for Blake and Toskala. As the guys on TSN put it this morning, "I heard Blake and Toskala got packaged in the same deal. That's a very good trade for the Leafs. Oh, by the way, is there anyone coming the other way in the trade?":smallbiggrin:

Then there's the big one. Phaneuf and two smaller names that escape me right now for Stagan, Hagman, White and Mayers. You have to think Toronto got the better end of this deal, given that it's players from one of the league's worst teams for one of the best young defensemen in the game.

I think today was a big step in Operation Avoid-Giving-Boston-First-Overall-Pick.

[Don Julio Anejo]

Hm. Good trade for both Calgary and Anaheim IMO. Especially Calgary - an upper echelon offensive/puck moving D + a 30+ goal scorer in exchange for Phaneuf. As for Toronto... IMO it's another bonehead trademark Toronto move. Trade away anything you may have for a temporary fix that may or may not pan out in the near future and will certainly not help them in the long run.

Phaneuf is overrated for what he offers and is certainly overpaid. No doubt he's a good defenseman that is the definition of grit (in fact, when you look up "grit" in a hockey dictionary, his picture is right next to it), but he's not really something Toronto needs. 6.5 million compared to Ian White's 950k with the only big upgrade being more grit, and that's before you factor in the loss of Stajan and Hagman, your #2 and #4 scorers... Seems like the only point of this trade was to bring in another big-name defenseman. Filip Kuba anyone? Seriously, this is like San Jose giving away Marleau, Clowe and Rob Blake for, well, Phaneuf. Sure, he's an upgrade over Rob Blake, but giving away two of your best scorers for that?

Toskala for JSG and Blake I just plain don't understand. Toskala = JSG. So basically you trade an apple for an orange and give away a watermelon in the process. May I ask why?

By now I have to guess the ownership in Toronto doesn't care about winning, they just care that the team isn't dead last in the NHL and has a few big names, to keep ticket prices high. If they wanted to win, they would do a frackin rebuild by now. They suck as it is and they won't get any better with trades like that, so might as well sell your team and get a bunch of picks and prospects for it.

Just look at what teams have been consistently good or have greatly improved over the last few years: Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, Vancouver, San Jose, New Jersey, Anaheim... Almost all of them did so through smart drafting and development of their own players. Simply because if you're constantly developing players, even if only a few of them actually become good, you lose nothing in the process. But if you want to get good, already established players in the new NHL, you lose too. Either because you have to trade away other good, already established players, or because you have to give them humongous 10 year contracts, eating up your salary cap and hence opportunity to sign other good, established players.

[SensFan]

Hm. Good trade for both Calgary and Anaheim IMO. Especially Calgary - an upper echelon offensive/puck moving D + a 30+ goal scorer in exchange for Phaneuf. As for Toronto... IMO it's another bonehead trademark Toronto move. Trade away anything you may have for a temporary fix that may or may not pan out in the near future and will certainly not help them in the long run.

Phaneuf is overrated for what he offers and is certainly overpaid. No doubt he's a good defenseman that is the definition of grit (in fact, when you look up "grit" in a hockey dictionary, his picture is right next to it), but he's not really something Toronto needs. 6.5 million compared to Ian White's 950k with the only big upgrade being more grit, and that's before you factor in the loss of Stajan and Hagman, your #2 and #4 scorers... Seems like the only point of this trade was to bring in another big-name defenseman. Filip Kuba anyone? Seriously, this is like San Jose giving away Marleau, Clowe and Rob Blake for, well, Phaneuf. Sure, he's an upgrade over Rob Blake, but giving away two of your best scorers for that?
You're right, Toronto traded away pretty much all their offence. Except for one small thing: they didn't have an offence! Toronto didn't trade away anyone that would be a top6 forward on a decent team, they traded away what amount to good depth scorers, which is exactly what Calgary (or any contending team) needs, and in return picked up one of the dominant defensemen in the NHL. Phaneuf is having an off year, obviously, but he's only 24! This reminds me of a while ago, when there was another young physical defensemen with a good shot, but that wasn't good enough or hockey-smart enough to ever become a great NHL defensemen. Some scrub named Chris Pronger.


Toskala for JSG and Blake I just plain don't understand. Toskala = JSG. So basically you trade an apple for an orange and give away a watermelon in the process. May I ask why?
It makes a good deal of sense if that watermelon in question is on lease from the grocery store and costs you 10bucks a day for the rest of the week.

[Don Julio Anejo]

You're right, Toronto traded away pretty much all their offence. Except for one small thing: they didn't have an offence! Toronto didn't trade away anyone that would be a top6 forward on a decent team, they traded away what amount to good depth scorers, which is exactly what Calgary (or any contending team) needs, and in return picked up one of the dominant defensemen in the NHL. Phaneuf is having an off year, obviously, but he's only 24! This reminds me of a while ago, when there was another young physical defensemen with a good shot, but that wasn't good enough or hockey-smart enough to ever become a great NHL defensemen. Some scrub named Chris Pronger.
I'm not saying Phaneuf is bad, I'm just saying I don't see why Toronto needed him, especially with all the rumours going around of trading Kaberle. I'd rather go for picks and prospects than trading one big name for another when you're not in the running for Lord Stanley the Tool and it doesn't do much to improve your team this season _or_ the next one. Also, seriously. How many $6-7M defencemen does Toronto actually need?

It makes a good deal of sense if that watermelon in question is on lease from the grocery store and costs you 10bucks a day for the rest of the week.
Yes, but why not just... not touch apples and oranges and instead get some pumpkin seeds for your watermelon? They won't make the harvest anyway this year, so why even bother?

PS: where do you think Kovie is going to end up? Especially since he's apparently looking for a permanent team to sign with and doesn't just want to be a rental. Not sure who could afford it with the 10 year/$10M contract though..

[SensFan]

I'm not saying Phaneuf is bad, I'm just saying I don't see why Toronto needed him, especially with all the rumours going around of trading Kaberle. I'd rather go for picks and prospects than trading one big name for another when you're not in the running for Lord Stanley the Tool and it doesn't do much to improve your team this season _or_ the next one. Also, seriously. How many $6-7M defencemen does Toronto actually need?
I dunno, I think Burke has the right idea. Get a winning goalie, then some strong defense. Forwards can come as an afterthought, just ask the Devils.


Yes, but why not just... not touch apples and oranges and instead get some pumpkin seeds for your watermelon? They won't make the harvest anyway this year, so why even bother?
I'm guessing its because no one actually wants even a great watermelon that has such a high price tag. And really, Giguere is a massive improvement over Toskola. One is a Conn Smythe winner (in a losing cause to boot!), the other a useless goalie.


PS: where do you think Kovie is going to end up? Especially since he's apparently looking for a permanent team to sign with and doesn't just want to be a rental. Not sure who could afford it with the 10 year/$10M contract though..
No clue. As long as he comes nowhere near the Sens, I don't particularily care, either. Though it'd be nice if he went to another contender, since I'm betting he takes them out of contention almost immediately.

[Walrus]

I think Calgary got the better of Toronto in that trade. I think Toronto won out on their deal with Anaheim, though.

Phaneuf is big, physical, and has a very good shot from the blueline, but he's positionally inept, even with Robyn Regehr and Jay Bouwmeester around to cover for him. I don't think losing White and gaining Phaneuf makes Toronto's defence substantially better, since the rest of the D-corps isn't nearly as good as Calgary's, so there won't be as many guys to cover Phaneuf when he blows an assignment. Losing something along the lines of 40% of their scoring isn't going to help Toronto a ton, either.

Calgary improved themselves, I think. Stajan and Hagman should give the Flames some secondary scoring, and with Bouwmeester, Regehr, and Giordano, Calgary's defence is good enough that losing Phaneuf isn't going to hurt them too badly. I'm glad the Oilers don't play them any more this year.

In the Toskala/Blake for JS Giguere deal, I think Toronto won out easily. The Leafs clearly have no confidence in Toskala, and Blake's contract is terrible, so shipping him out for a Conn Smythe winner who can mentor Gustavsson is hard to argue with. I don't really see what Anaheim gets out of the deal. A shaky back-up for Jonas Hiller and an aging winger who doesn't score up to his price? Yay Ducks?

I honestly have no idea where Ilya Kovalchuk is going to end up. If he's looking for a long-term home, I'd love for the Oilers to make a play for him. Hopefully one that involves Shawn Horcoff. I like Horc, but he makes waaay too much money for his "production." If a Hossa-like situation emerges with Kovalchuk, teams pitching for him might not even need to send a ton of quality the other way.

[skywalker]

You're right, Toronto traded away pretty much all their offence. Except for one small thing: they didn't have an offence! Toronto didn't trade away anyone that would be a top6 forward on a decent team, they traded away what amount to good depth scorers, which is exactly what Calgary (or any contending team) needs, and in return picked up one of the dominant defensemen in the NHL. Phaneuf is having an off year, obviously, but he's only 24! This reminds me of a while ago, when there was another young physical defensemen with a good shot, but that wasn't good enough or hockey-smart enough to ever become a great NHL defensemen. Some scrub named Chris Pronger.

I really like the first part of your post. There's no way either of those guys even close to compares to Marleau, maybe to Clowe.

As for Phaneuf, I can't comment on the Chris Pronger comparison. I don't get to watch a whole lot of games and I'm probably not too great at analyzing whether someone is positionally deficient anyway.

BUT...

One of the ESPN hockey columns about the trade brought up some stats. Phaneuf scores. A lot. He shoots a lot. He hits a lot. He is Calgary hockey, and with Iginla getting up there in age, I'm really surprised they moved him. He was looking like he could be the next face of the franchise. Perfect age, native Albertan (altho of Edmonton) etc. That's the surprising part.


I dunno, I think Burke has the right idea. Get a winning goalie, then some strong defense. Forwards can come as an afterthought, just ask the Devils.

[QUOTE]I'm guessing its because no one actually wants even a great watermelon that has such a high price tag. And really, Giguere is a massive improvement over Toskola. One is a Conn Smythe winner (in a losing cause to boot!), the other a useless goalie.


In the Toskala/Blake for JS Giguere deal, I think Toronto won out easily. The Leafs clearly have no confidence in Toskala, and Blake's contract is terrible, so shipping him out for a Conn Smythe winner who can mentor Gustavsson is hard to argue with. I don't really see what Anaheim gets out of the deal. A shaky back-up for Jonas Hiller and an aging winger who doesn't score up to his price? Yay Ducks?

I'm gonna address these two together. For Toronto getting a winning goalie, let's back up a minute. Jiggy's Conn Smythe was in 2003. That's ancient history, pre-lockout. He did win the Cup in '07, but it's safe to say he wasn't an integral part of that victory. He didn't even play all the playoff games. I'm having a hard time finding his stats for that run, too.

He's just as old as Toskala (32), and his career save % is only 10 points higher. He is, in short, a far cry from that Conn Smythe season.

Finally, and the biggest one, is this: Jiggy told the media before the season he'd rather retire than be a back-up. When he signed his last contract, he was a starter. Now, instead of paying him starter salary to back up a phenom and whine about it, they can pay Toskala back-up goalie salary and not care what he acts like, for the most part. Giguere gets to hang with his buddie Burke and the goalie coach he had in Anaheim too. Giguere is a bit of a prima donna, always has been, and French Canadian goaltenders get worse at that, not better, as the age.

Toronto can't just win. That isn't enough. Toronto is like the LA Lakers of hockey. They need big names for their big market.

So, to summarize, Toronto gets some big Canadian names to go with their big Canadian market. They give up some guys who weren't putting butts in seats anyway. Anaheim gets rid of a festering potential problem with a big salary. And Calgary gets some decent young talent. That's the win they all saw, from how I see it.

EDIT: Oh hey look, the Flames just traded another big name:

Jokinen and Brandon Prust for Kotalik and Christopher Higgins. Two guys needing fresh starts, I guess. Calgary needed rid of Jokinen but Kotalik, really?

[SensFan]

RE: Phaneuf
From Calgary's perspective, it's clear that something absolutely had to be done, and something more than moving a role player or someone in a depth position. Iginla is untradeable, and Bowmeister does a much better job of being the top offensive defencemen for Calgary, they need someone that can be the first pass out of their zone. In addition, Regher already provides that big physical impact. And let's face it, Phaneuf will probably grow into a dominant dman in the league in a few years, but that's a few years too late for Calgary. They have a team they feel can contend now, and trading away a slumping budding star for some much-needed scoring depth is exactly the trade that needed to be made. Not top mention the effect it has to everyone in the dressing room, they now know that if they don't play well, they will leave town.

RE: Giguere
Toronto doesn't need a dominant goalie, heck they don't even need a good goalie at this point. They're at least 2-3 years away from even thinking about the playoffs, so they just need a veteran that can provide solid goaltending for a year or two while the rest of their team can devellop. Giguere's history as one of the best goalies in the league, and more specifically the amazing young goaltenders he has produced from behind him, is a tremendous asset to the Leafs, though. Giguere was brought to Toronto to close the floodgates during the rebuild, and to fine-tune the Monster into a goalie of the same level of Bryzgalov or Hiller, both of whom were young back-ups to Giguere.

---

On a completely unrelated (and shameless plugging) note, how bout them Sens right now? I'm super stoked about the team this year, and we finally seem to be ready to make another long playoff run. I legitimately think they're a deadline deal away from becoming a very serious threat to come out of the East.

[Joran]

The great thing about the Phaneuf trade is that he stays away from the Capitals now. He was one of the names being floated around for a "stay at home defensemen" that many people want to come to DC.

Now, I just want Kovy to be traded so I don't have to worry about the idiotic trade of Semin for Kovy =P


Just look at what teams have been consistently good or have greatly improved over the last few years: Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, Washington, Vancouver, San Jose, New Jersey, Anaheim... Almost all of them did so through smart drafting and development of their own players. Simply because if you're constantly developing players, even if only a few of them actually become good, you lose nothing in the process. But if you want to get good, already established players in the new NHL, you lose too. Either because you have to trade away other good, already established players, or because you have to give them humongous 10 year contracts, eating up your salary cap and hence opportunity to sign other good, established players.

The Caps had the good fortune of sucking early enough in the year before the lockout to know that they could trade all of their good pieces away for picks and prospects. They weren't burdened with any long-term deals and the prospects got to play in Hershey, our AHL affliate, during the lockout to get accustomed to each other. The Hershey Bears won the Calder Cup the next year and a lot of the players on that team now form the second and third lines of our team.

Of course, it helps to have a superstar fall into your lap like Alexander Ovechkin. Now, we're signing the humongous 10 year contracts for our established players. I'm somewhat worried that we won't be able to keep Semin, not with both the KHL and some crazy NHL team out there being able to top us.

[paddyfool]

If nobody has linked to it already, this thread might amuse you (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=137855).

[skywalker]

RE: Phaneuf
From Calgary's perspective, it's clear that something absolutely had to be done, and something more than moving a role player or someone in a depth position. Iginla is untradeable, and Bowmeister does a much better job of being the top offensive defencemen for Calgary, they need someone that can be the first pass out of their zone. In addition, Regher already provides that big physical impact. And let's face it, Phaneuf will probably grow into a dominant dman in the league in a few years, but that's a few years too late for Calgary. They have a team they feel can contend now, and trading away a slumping budding star for some much-needed scoring depth is exactly the trade that needed to be made. Not top mention the effect it has to everyone in the dressing room, they now know that if they don't play well, they will leave town.

RE: Giguere
Toronto doesn't need a dominant goalie, heck they don't even need a good goalie at this point. They're at least 2-3 years away from even thinking about the playoffs, so they just need a veteran that can provide solid goaltending for a year or two while the rest of their team can devellop. Giguere's history as one of the best goalies in the league, and more specifically the amazing young goaltenders he has produced from behind him, is a tremendous asset to the Leafs, though. Giguere was brought to Toronto to close the floodgates during the rebuild, and to fine-tune the Monster into a goalie of the same level of Bryzgalov or Hiller, both of whom were young back-ups to Giguere.

I don't disagree with any of this. I don't think you were intending to disagree with me either. Just mentioning.


The great thing about the Phaneuf trade is that he stays away from the Capitals now. He was one of the names being floated around for a "stay at home defensemen" that many people want to come to DC.

The labeling of Phaneuf as a "stay at home defenseman" is probably one of those things that makes people question your fanbase's hockey IQ. Just so you know where it comes from.


Now, I just want Kovy to be traded so I don't have to worry about the idiotic trade of Semin for Kovy =P

That would be idiotic in the monumental extreme. Are people really looking for the Caps to make any deals at all? They've won 11 straight and have a ten point stranglehold on the East. Granted, they might be the only team from their division in the playoffs (translation: they play in the weakest division in hockey), but still, this is a very solid team. Read just the other day that their top-6 producers were all under 26. No way anyone's going to blow that up.


The Caps had the good fortune of sucking early enough in the year before the lockout to know that they could trade all of their good pieces away for picks and prospects. They weren't burdened with any long-term deals and the prospects got to play in Hershey, our AHL affliate, during the lockout to get accustomed to each other. The Hershey Bears won the Calder Cup the next year and a lot of the players on that team now form the second and third lines of our team.

Of course, it helps to have a superstar fall into your lap like Alexander Ovechkin. Now, we're signing the humongous 10 year contracts for our established players. I'm somewhat worried that we won't be able to keep Semin, not with both the KHL and some crazy NHL team out there being able to top us.

The problem is, as you said, one of money. You can grow all the young talent you want, but a lot of it will run off for more money if it can. You're right to be worried about keeping them both. I don't think you can do it. Or, just like the Pens might try to do with Sid and Geno, you can keep both, but you'll not have any money leftover for them to pass to besides each other.

Also, take note that Detroit, lauded for developing their young talent, have now fallen off as their real talent have declined. They were really good second and third liners, but Detroit's real talent is getting old.

[Joran]

The labeling of Phaneuf as a "stay at home defenseman" is probably one of those things that makes people question your fanbase's hockey IQ. Just so you know where it comes from.


I misspoke, my apologies, I meant more of a physical presence. Would "crease-clearing" defenseman be a better name? The fans would like to see a defenseman capable of playing on the PK and be a more physical defenseman; we don't really this kind of player on our team at the moment.

I will acknowledge that I'm a newbie fan that's still mostly a fan of the Capitals. I don't really know anybody outside of the Caps other than the top names like Crosby, Malkin, Lidstrom, etc.


That would be idiotic in the monumental extreme. Are people really looking for the Caps to make any deals at all? They've won 11 straight and have a ten point stranglehold on the East.

Exactly, I fall in the camp of "if it's ain't broke, don't fix it". The forward combos are lighting it up now, to the point that Boudreau hasn't tried to shift around the lineup up front at all. Maybe a mid-round pick, or a mid-prospect for a rental defenseman, but I wouldn't want to commit long-term money. We're in year 2 of a Stanley Cup window; I'd prefer to try to keep that window open as long as possible, especially in a sport as random as hockey.

[SensFan]

Exactly, I fall in the camp of "if it's ain't broke, don't fix it". The forward combos are lighting it up now, to the point that Boudreau hasn't tried to shift around the lineup up front at all. Maybe a mid-round pick, or a mid-prospect for a rental defenseman, but I wouldn't want to commit long-term money. We're in year 2 of a Stanley Cup window; I'd prefer to try to keep that window open as long as possible, especially in a sport as random as hockey.
At this point, to be honest, Washington might as well start selling the farm, in my opinion. As you said, the window isn't very large to begin with, so you might as well throw prospects and draft picks at anyone willing to give you players to help your team win the Cup now.

[Joran]

At this point, to be honest, Washington might as well start selling the farm, in my opinion. As you said, the window isn't very large to begin with, so you might as well throw prospects and draft picks at anyone willing to give you players to help your team win the Cup now.

It depends on the deal. I think we could have had Pronger last year, but it'd have required throwing in Karl Alzner (one of our top D-prospects) and Michel Neuvirth (one of our top goalie prospects). Sometimes the best deal is no deal at all. But two years ago we got Huet, Fedorov, and Matt Cooke at the deadline, who helped ignite a playoff run, but we gave up very little. I like our prospects enough to not want to give them up and I'm happy with the team as composed to be a Cup favorite.

What I meant was that hockey seems like one of the sports where upsets in the playoffs are extremely common. Home-ice doesn't seem like it's much of a factor; hot goaltending is most important, but hard to predict.

So, in this case, why bother trying to gather the pieces for a one-time shot at the Cup, when you can keep your important pieces and be consistently good for 5-6 years and in the Cup hunt?

[SensFan]

It depends on the deal. I think we could have had Pronger last year, but it'd have required throwing in Karl Alzner (one of our top D-prospects) and Michel Neuvirth (one of our top goalie prospects). Sometimes the best deal is no deal at all. But two years ago we got Huet, Fedorov, and Matt Cooke at the deadline, who helped ignite a playoff run, but we gave up very little. I like our prospects enough to not want to give them up and I'm happy with the team as composed to be a Cup favorite.

What I meant was that hockey seems like one of the sports where upsets in the playoffs are extremely common. Home-ice doesn't seem like it's much of a factor; hot goaltending is most important, but hard to predict.

So, in this case, why bother trying to gather the pieces for a one-time shot at the Cup, when you can keep your important pieces and be consistently good for 5-6 years and in the Cup hunt?
Post-lockout the NHL has had virtually no long playoffs runs by a team just because of hot goaltending. It's the contrapositive you're looking for: teams without solid goaltending rarely win. In my mind, goaltending is the one main hole on the Caps, and if I were a fan I'd be looking for them to trade some of the future away for a solid goalie, and perhaps a physical d-man, if the price is right. Your offence should be good enough to keep you in the mix for a few years.

As an example of my point about hot goalies not being everything, lets look at the finalists since the lockout:

2006 - Hurricanes over Oilers
Alright, this one is two teams that got hot at the right time.
2007 - Ducks over Senators
Don't think anyone would argue that either team wasn't one of (if not the) best team from their conference. Ottawawith merely decent goaltending, Anaheim got good goaltending, though not great.
2008 - Red Wings over Penguins
Best team from each conference, neither goaltender is outstanding.
2009 - Penguins over Red Wings
Best team from each conference, neither goaltender is outstanding.

---

The Sens are actually a prime example of why having a good goalie is so important in the NHL. For several years we had one of the best teams in the league, but it all meant nothing without solid goaltending. Just look at that 07 team. Other than in net, its probably the best roster I've ever seen. And they rolled up and died in the finals, not putting up a fight at all.

[Joran]

Post-lockout the NHL has had virtually no long playoffs runs by a team just because of hot goaltending. It's the contrapositive you're looking for: teams without solid goaltending rarely win. In my mind, goaltending is the one main hole on the Caps, and if I were a fan I'd be looking for them to trade some of the future away for a solid goalie, and perhaps a physical d-man, if the price is right. Your offence should be good enough to keep you in the mix for a few years.



I'd guess the plan for the Capitals at the moment is Jose Theodore until the end of this year. After this year, they'll turn it over to the kids, Michel Neuvirth or Semyon Varlamov, or maybe even Braden Holtby depending on who wins the starting job. I'm comfortable with any of Neuvirth, Theodore, or Varlamov in the playoffs this year; I think the improved team defense and discipline should be good enough. I think the Caps are good enough offensively with four lines that can score that we just need solid goaltending and not exemplary goaltending.

Goaltenders have a weird shelf-life and can go bad extremely quickly. J.S. Giguere was king of Anaheim for a few years but they found someone who could do the job better for cheaper and kicked him to the curb. I'd be hesitant committing large money to anyone other than a sure-fire hall of fame goalie. It seems like big free agent goalies tend to be busts. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[SensFan]

Goaltenders have a weird shelf-life and can go bad extremely quickly. J.S. Giguere was king of Anaheim for a few years but they found someone who could do the job better for cheaper and kicked him to the curb. I'd be hesitant committing large money to anyone other than a sure-fire hall of fame goalie. It seems like big free agent goalies tend to be busts. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Giguere took a bad Ducks team to the Finals one year, then won a Cup with another Ducks team.
Luongo turned Vancouver into a contender ever since they picked him up from Florida.
Osgoode and Hasek have been key pieces in Detroit's recent Cup runs.
Patrick Roy, well, I'm assuming I don't need to go into specifics in that particular case...:smallamused:

[Joran]

Giguere took a bad Ducks team to the Finals one year, then won a Cup with another Ducks team.
Luongo turned Vancouver into a contender ever since they picked him up from Florida.
Osgoode and Hasek have been key pieces in Detroit's recent Cup runs.
Patrick Roy, well, I'm assuming I don't need to go into specifics in that particular case...:smallamused:

Aha, here's the list that I was looking for:

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2010/01/27/the-league%e2%80%99s-10-highest-paid-goalies/

Basically, this is the list of the current top 10 highest paid goalies in the sport, and how at least four of them are overpaid and outplayed by cheaper teammates.


Every single year, some cheap and hitherto unknown backup or some veteran, undrafted European goaltender shows up in the NHL and outplays an assortment of the money guys; it seems to me that it makes a lot more sense to run with a capable looking tandem and a good AHL goalie, as Detroit has done, and hope that one of the three catches fire in any given season.

Theodore and Varlamov are a capable tandem (assuming good health for Varlamov) and Neuvirth was the MVP of the Calder Cup team last year, so I think we're in pretty good hands going by that metric.

[SensFan]

According to TSN

To NJ:
F IlyaKovalchuk
D Anssi Salmela
Atl 2nd-round pick 2010

To Atl:
D John Oduya
F Niclas Bergfors
F Patrice Cormier
NJ 1st-round pick 2010
NJ 2nd-round pick 2010

[Don Julio Anejo]

Is it just me or did Atlanta get screwed? Even Canucks could have offered more - Demitra, Bernier (roster players) and prospects in Schneider (the goalie, not the 41 year old washed up Dman) and Hansen. Plus, they'd send him away to a different conference...

Funny move on the part of NJ to trade away their probably 25th or so 1st round pick for what's probably going to be a much higher one from Atlanta.

Aha, here's the list that I was looking for:

http://blogs.thescore.com/nhl/2010/0...-paid-goalies/
Luongo's cap hit is actually 5.3 million, which... well, places him well off the list.

PS: Sensfan, good game today. We got badly outplayed, and the Sedins were all but invisible.. Painful to watch, even (well, for me). I also think we played better without Salo in the lineup, despite his slapshot and stay-at-home skills..

[skywalker]

At this point, to be honest, Washington might as well start selling the farm, in my opinion. As you said, the window isn't very large to begin with, so you might as well throw prospects and draft picks at anyone willing to give you players to help your team win the Cup now.

This is what I was going to say. Semin is, most likely, gone after this year, since Ovie and Green are signed to multi-year deals and he isn't. I don't think the Caps can put together the kind of money he wants. Realistically Joran, your window is closing. It opened season before last, and this is the end, most probably.

Also, I want to apologize, I did not intend to criticize you, belittle you, or make you feel like you weren't hockey smart. I'm certainly not smart enough about hockey to make you feel that way.


As an example of my point about hot goalies not being everything, lets look at the finalists since the lockout:

2006 - Hurricanes over Oilers
Alright, this one is two teams that got hot at the right time.

But, neither team had particularly hot goaltending. They got hot, but it wasn't the goalies in either case.

About the 07 Sens, yes, I am terribly sorry that you had to deal with that. "Rolled up and died" is a great description. Wasn't that Ray Emery?


I'd guess the plan for the Capitals at the moment is Jose Theodore until the end of this year. After this year, they'll turn it over to the kids, Michel Neuvirth or Semyon Varlamov, or maybe even Braden Holtby depending on who wins the starting job. I'm comfortable with any of Neuvirth, Theodore, or Varlamov in the playoffs this year; I think the improved team defense and discipline should be good enough. I think the Caps are good enough offensively with four lines that can score that we just need solid goaltending and not exemplary goaltending.

You should fear Jose Theodore. Having watched him as an Avs fan for several years, I advise that, IMO, he would crumple behind a lesser team. The Caps average over 3 goals a game this season. When you can have a GAA of 3 and still win, you are in goalie heaven.

And the plan in Washington is not Jose Theodore til the end of the year. The plan is pray like crazy that Varlamov is ready by the playoffs. I don't think anyone reasonably expects Theodore to backstop them thru a potential 7 game series against the Penguins, or the Sharks or Hawks if they get that far.


Goaltenders have a weird shelf-life and can go bad extremely quickly. J.S. Giguere was king of Anaheim for a few years but they found someone who could do the job better for cheaper and kicked him to the curb. I'd be hesitant committing large money to anyone other than a sure-fire hall of fame goalie. It seems like big free agent goalies tend to be busts. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

What you have to remember is that a lot of really good goalies have won Stanley Cups (even multiples) and not been elected to the Hall of Fame. There are 238 players in the Hall, but only 35 goalies. Realistically, the only current goalie I see being elected is Marty Brodeur. Can anybody think of anyone else?


Giguere took a bad Ducks team to the Finals one year, then won a Cup with another Ducks team.
Luongo turned Vancouver into a contender ever since they picked him up from Florida.
Osgoode and Hasek have been key pieces in Detroit's recent Cup runs.
Patrick Roy, well, I'm assuming I don't need to go into specifics in that particular case...:smallamused:

Giguere took a bad Ducks team to the Finals one year, and then played a role on the Cup winner.
Luongo converted Vancouver but technically he went to Vancouver in a trade.
Roy was offloaded by the Canadiens for Jocelyn Thibault. I suppose it seemed like it could have been even at the time, but boy, did Montreal get the wrong end of that deal. Then again, he hated them, and they probably couldn't have gotten Roy out of Roy anymore anyway. Kinda like the Ducks offloading Jiggy, except Roy was a bit younger and had twice the Cups and Conn Smythes Jiggy had.

I think if the Caps made a goalie move right now, it would completely screw up their chemistry. Adding/subtracting/swapping out a minor piece or two is fine. But swapping in goalies from outside this late in the season is not a good idea.


Is it just me or did Atlanta get screwed? Even Canucks could have offered more - Demitra, Bernier (roster players) and prospects in Schneider (the goalie, not the 41 year old washed up Dman) and Hansen. Plus, they'd send him away to a different conference...

Funny move on the part of NJ to trade away their probably 25th or so 1st round pick for what's probably going to be a much higher one from Atlanta.

Luongo's cap hit is actually 5.3 million, which... well, places him well off the list.

Atlanta screwed themselves. Their actions seem to follow a pattern of surrender to being the laughingstocks, the team that plays hockey in "Hotlanta." (never mind the hockey teams in Florida, Florida is the land of do-as-you-please)

But there was no reason to deal Kovie. There was every reason to surround Kovie with more young talent, like Ovie.

Also surprising that he went to the Devils. I thought they were allergic to scoring?

[Don Julio Anejo]

But, neither team had particularly hot goaltending. They got hot, but it wasn't the goalies in either case.
Huh? IMO that was actually the case where both goalies carried their teams to the finals. Not as much as JSG, but still enough to make a significant difference.

You should fear Jose Theodore. Having watched him as an Avs fan for several years, I advise that, IMO, he would crumple behind a lesser team. The Caps average over 3 goals a game this season. When you can have a GAA of 3 and still win, you are in goalie heaven.
:biggrin: Well, we had a good run with Cloutier a while back. Had. Until he started letting in random beachballs. Then not even the Naslund-Morrison-Bertuzzi line (think Ovechkin-Marleau-Kovalchuk on the same line...) could make up for it.

And the plan in Washington is not Jose Theodore til the end of the year. The plan is pray like crazy that Varlamov is ready by the playoffs. I don't think anyone reasonably expects Theodore to backstop them thru a potential 7 game series against the Penguins, or the Sharks or Hawks if they get that far.
Not gonna happen. Varlamov could very well be the next MA Fleury, but not just yet. Maybe next season. This year, they better prey for 5 goals per game in the playoffs.


What you have to remember is that a lot of really good goalies have won Stanley Cups (even multiples) and not been elected to the Hall of Fame. There are 238 players in the Hall, but only 35 goalies. Realistically, the only current goalie I see being elected is Marty Brodeur. Can anybody think of anyone else?

I can see Fleury making it there in 15-something years. I mean he's 25 and he's already got 2 Stanley Cup finals and a cup and he was a key part of that.


But there was no reason to deal Kovie. There was every reason to surround Kovie with more young talent, like Ovie.

The problem is, Kovie himself didn't want to stay there. He basically wanted a rudiculous (even for his caliber) contract of 10 years/$100 million. That's Ovechkin money for 1/3 less impact. Why? Well, if your team fails to surround you with anything resembling talent save for a few years with Hossa (with no-one to center or backstop you), you'd want out anyway.

[SensFan]

About the 07 Sens, yes, I am terribly sorry that you had to deal with that. "Rolled up and died" is a great description. Wasn't that Ray Emery?
Haha, yep. On the one hand, he didn't blow a playoff series on his own, which is quite frankly an improvement over most goalies we've had. On the other, he couldn't win a Cup with a lineup that featured the best line in the game (Alfie/Spezza/Heatley), so much depth up front that Vermette wasn't a top6 forward, and probably the best defense in the league (Redden, Mezaros, Phillips, Volchenkov, Corvo, Schubert).

To contrast, look at this year's team. Considerably worse on paper, but 2 goaltenders playing much better than Emery did, and we're now pushing for the division and on an 11-game win streak.


PS: Sensfan, good game today. We got badly outplayed, and the Sedins were all but invisible.. Painful to watch, even (well, for me). I also think we played better without Salo in the lineup, despite his slapshot and stay-at-home skills..
It was a good game for us, yes. Unlike the media here and most other fans, I'm actually quite happy that the Sens haven't been blowing everyone out for 11 games now, and that they could easily have lost several of those games. This isn't the playoffs; one or two losses won't change much in the long run, especially when you look at how cemented we are in 5th - not much chance of going up or down. But showing the ability to suck it up and win close game after close game? If that keeps up, we could be in for another long playoff run.