lets go pavel

ummm ... hockey tickets for a family of 4 or even for 2 is not the same as candy bars and bubble gum ... is it disposable income ... yes ... but people aren't standing in the middle of the grocery store going "hmm ... candy bar, hockey game, candy bar, hockey game ... i think i want candy bar" ... dropping $1 for a candybar is a lot easier to do than dropping $200+ for a hockey game ... i often have a dollar i don't need, but i can't remember the last time i had $200 i didn't need ... the decision to go to a hockey game is more than just disposable income, it is a bigger occasion than purchasing candy and one where finances do figure in ...

Your argument doesn't work ... you are comparing the # of Canadian top sixers in 1987 to the # now and saying that since the # goes down the talent level must have risen in spite of expansion ... but you are assuming that the talent level of the Canadian forwars is the same now as it was in 1987, and there's no basis for that ... if anything, the fact that there are fewer Canadian top sixers now would lead one to think that there is more competition for the top spots and Canadians aer no longer the dominant nationality. However, it doesn't mean that these players are better or worse than those, and it doesn't mean the quality o fplay is better or worse either. It's kind of a silly argument anyway, because people have different ideas of what makes good hockey ... some people like high-scoring, some people want more physical, some people want higher skill ... i personally prefer the latter, and logically if you want to concentrate the talent then contraction would accomplish that. It doesn't mean scoring would go up, it would just be a different product on ice ...

you might be right, expansion may lead to an increase in scoring ... also because it thins out the quality goaltending ... but does that mean an increase in quality? i guess it's a matter of personal preference, but i'd rather watch a group of top-tier players in a potentially low-scoring chess match than a bunch of lower level players eating up icetime because goals come a dime a dozen ...

Except it doesn't work that way ... if Dats was going to get that much icetime he'd already have it, but no matter how many teams you have you'll still be rolling 4 lines, just the quality would deteriorate more ... plus you'd have to add a lot of teams to water down the talent level as much as you're talking about ... contraction on the other hand would increase the number of talented players on each team, true, but isn't that more exciting to watch? Plus I would think having more talented players on each roster would encourage teams to open things up and shoot it out, rather than play conservative knowing they don't have the firepower ... and a wealth of talent doesn't necessarily mean a wealth of defensive specialists ... I think you'd end up with a concentration of offense before defense ...

Parity doesn't bother me, it makes the games more competitive ... but I think on most teams there is a significant dropoff in talent from 1st and 2nd line to 3rd and 4th lines because teams can't afford to stock up on talent anymore ... as a result, I think a lot of the 3rd and 4th liners slow the games down, make them sloppier, and break their rhythm. A solution? One would be to trim active rosters so teams could only dress 3 lines and maybe 1 reserve ... that would get the top players more ice time. Getting rid of a couple teams might help too ... but that'll never happen.

fair enough ... i know what you mean with malts, i like him but he does start stuff and skate away a lot, i would like to see him mix things up a bit more too ... i don't know, Lids may not be quite the fiery leader that Stevie was but he has a quiet intensity to him that I think the rest of the team can still feed off of ...

so who do you like? drake ... lilja? ... malts and drapes ... anyone else? you make it sound like dropping the gloves is the only way to stick up for each other, and if a player doesn't do that he isn't a loyal teammate ... every time there is a scrum somewhere on the ice i see all of our players skating over and getting involved, sticking up for each other ... not the laissez faire you seem to think most of our team has ...

i believe flip is a natural center and babs wants to try him on his own line, strength down the middle and all that ...

I like Flip on the top line, I think they'll have a lot of jump ... only issue is who's going to shoot the puck? Both Flip and Pavs seem to be pass-first playmakers, and with Homer set up in front of the net he won't be shooting first either ... c'mon boys, pull the trigger!

seriously, what the hell? if you watch it, it wasn't even an intentional trip ... he was reaching for the puck but the other player was moving faster and while he accelerated Dats' stick caught a skate ... was it tripping? yes. was it intentional or reckless? no. do you seriously want players to not reach for pucks with their sticks because they might accidentally trip someone and cause injury? come on ...

how about Double D ... after all, he can be quite a handful ...

no, he doesn't drive any of those newfangled contraptions ... this is how cheli rolls ...

Actually I think we'll be a more exciting team to watch this year than last ... with Dats and Z split up we have 2 top lines with good energy and scoring potential (especially in contrast with Bob Lang's slow and easy second line approach last year), plus Flip should log more ice time on the third line and he brings a lot of energy too ...

seriously, how are we ever going to win a cup when our fans lack grit and toughness? come on Kenny, we need to sign some new fans!

Can't say I blame him ... I understand Sopel's got to look out for himself, but if you're trying out for a team and supposed to play that night, it's a bit s***ty to just say "sorry dudes, i'm outta here" ... if he wants to go to chicago that's fine, he'll probably have more opportunity there, but it sounds like he could have handled it better ...

What is toughness and grit? 2 years ago when we lost in the first round to a more physical Edmonton team everyone said we lacked toughness and grit because when the games turned physical we folded. Well last year we didn't do that. When the games turned physical we played through it, we brought some hits of our own, we held our own, and we almost made it to the SCF. To me that's toughness and grit. I think we have both. What I think is missing is a physical presence, and I think that's what Bucci is partly talking about when he says we don't make anyone uncomfortable. It's not about penalty minutes, but the penalty minutes come with that style of play. He's not talking about an enforcer that plays 4 minutes a night. What we're lacking is that third or fourth line of big, young, fast, skilled bodies that fly around the ice hitting people and make the opposing team try to figure out how to match up. Do you play your heavies against them and be overmatched in the skill department, or do you play your skill guys and have them overmatched in the physicality department? It's the Penner/Perry/Getzlaf? line from last year's Ducks, it's our Grind line with McCarty from years ago. Unfortunately these lines aren't a dime a dozen, and they don't usually come together from free agency. Drake isn't a bad pickup, but Drake is not going to keep opposing coaches up at night. I think if we want a young, physical line like this we're going to have to start drafting with this in mind. If Ryno bulks up a bit he'd be a nice start ...

Not only will Pronger wear the C, but rumor has it the 2 A's will be worn by his left and right elbows ...

OK, I don't see this happening, but what the hell ... ... how about Miika Kiprusoff? I honestly think Calgary will get him signed at any cost, but it's possible he prices himself out of their range, and it's also feasible that they will be on the playoff bubble come the deadline ... if so, do they keep him and make one last run, knowing they'll likely lose him for nothing after the season, or do they scuttle the year and try to get something in return for him? I don't know what we would have to give up for him, probably a lot, and it wouldn't make sense to get him at the deadline anyway unless (knock on wood) something happens to Dom ... I'm not sure we could afford him either, but I sure would like to see him in red and white for a few years.

No, we don't need a negative story. None of those stories you mention above are going to help their respective leagues ... in the case of NBA and MLB their respective scandals have the potential to undermine the very premise of their existence, which is to showcase the best talent in the world competing to see who is best. If fans cannot trust that the results are valid (NBA) or that the athletes are actually competing without unfair advantage (MLB) some of them will tune out. People want to celebrate victories and achievements in sports, but to do so they must believe that such things have been hard fought and won. In the case of the NFL, I don't think more people will watch Atlanta without Michael Vick because chances are they won't be very good, and it shouldn't really affect the other teams. I also think back to the Bertuzzi incident, and while the NHL was in the news for a while then, debating the role of fighting and such, none of it was good attention. Does anyone know if attendance or viewership changed at all following that incident?

sounds good to me too ... a proven backup goalie who's had both regular season and playoff success, has history with the organization, and comes at a reasonable price ...

Actually to me, the consumate hockey player has to make the team hard to kill, but doesn't feel like he's above the law. He maintains composure under siege, so that standing on the ice never feels like standing on deadly ground. He's not afraid to make an executive decision on the ice, and when you look in his eyes you can tell he's got that fire down below. Of course I'm talking about the glimmer man himself ...

if the Wings were an organized crime family ... Domink Hasek - Dom "The Groin" Hasecco Niklas Kronwall - Nicky "The Gimp" Kronorino Nicklas Lidstrom - Nicky "Norris" Lids Andreas Lilja - Andy "Pads" Lillito Daniil Markov - Danny "The Monk" Marconi Pavel Datsyuk - Paulie "The Duke" Datsucci Valtteri Filppula - Val "Boom Boom" Flipooli Johan Franzen - Johnny "The Mule" Franzini Tomas Holmstrom - Tommy "The Gun" Holmstromboli Jiri Hudler - Jeff "Pee Wee" Hudlerone Tomas Kopecky - Tommy "The Pecker" Kopecci Mikael Samuelsson - Mikey "Wrister" Samuelsoni Henrik Zetterberg - Hank "The Bone" Zataboni Chris Osgood - Chris "Number 2" Osgoli Jimmy Howard - Jimmy "The Kid" Howarti Derek Meech - Derek "Meatball" Meechi Chris Chelios - Chris "Cannoli" Chellioni Brett Lebda - Brett "Ladies' Man" Lebduce Brian Rafalski - Brian "The New Guy" Rafalcci Daniel Cleary - Danny "Clutch" Cleareone Dallas Drake - Dallas "Double-D" Dracone Kris Draper - Kris "One Dollar" Drapino Kirk Maltby - Kirk "Milkshake" Maltbino

If you want to find a pattern, or "formula", if you will, for how many PIMs = Stanley Cup success, I think rather than look at all of our teams we should be looking at all of the SC-winners to see if there is a pattern between them ... but again, it takes a lot more than that to win a championship, and the real question isn't whether we need more PIMs or fighting majors but whether the players in question make us a better team ...

I don't think there will be a pattern for a couple reasons ... first, PIMs don't necessarily correllate to toughness (see Robert Lang). Second, obviously it takes more than toughness to win. Third, there is also a difference between toughness/grit and fighting ... we displayed toughness and grit in the playoffs last year, but not much fighting. That said, to answer your question, I don't think we would need both Kocur and Probert in today's NHL, there aren't as many fights and unless these guys are skilled as well that's too much roster space. As for whose spot they take ... Drake's. I think we got him to fill that role, not so much the fighting, but the 4th line grit and toughness, as well as be a mentor to our more physical up-and-comers (Kopecky). Is he a better fit than Kocur or Probie? He doesn't bring the intimidation factor, but more skill. While there are games (and opponents) where I'd love to have a Kocur or Probie on the ice (where did Tootoo go?), I'm not sure that over 82 games they'd be as consistently valuable as a Drake.

Rory Fitzpatrick is available?? Dude, let's get Rory! He was almost an allstar, right?!? He's gotta be good ... Seriously, I don't think we need another D guy, the D looks pretty good right now. A top-6 scoring forward would be nice, but we have enough forward depth to go into the season, and then let's see what we can get at the deadline ...