stormboy

i really would like lillypads in the lineup this postseason, but if somehow he can't make it, i THINK we should be okay. but the way he's played this year, i think we'd really miss his presence on the PK. c'mon lils!

i've got to give this setup my stamp of approval, given the way each particular player is going right now, although leino is going to be tough to sit, and malts has been playing better lately too, IMO. thing is, though, it's unlikely to me that EVERYone is going to be healthy for very many playoff games. this will all get jumbled up if injuries present themselves which, unfortunately, they likely will. fortunately, babs has got mad options to work with, as long as everyone is actually playing well. right now, i'm fine with kopy on either of the bottom two lines, cleary and huds on any line on the team, and helm on any of the bottom three lines.

to me, this is sort of an insoluble problem. i'll explain why. i understand that ties are perhaps more "pure" to the game...but you have to admit that it's a bit disappointing to play 65 minutes of hockey and have no team walk away the winner. and it makes sense that you can't do unlimited overtimes in regular season b/c you don't want players getting too fatigued/injured in super long games. hence, the shootout. but then: the problem with this is that a shootout is a pretty quirky/random/individual-based (rather than team-based) way to win a game. for me, getting zero points for losing in a shootout is not justice. it's too random and not at all based on the overall team's play. while in theory i like the all-or-nothing approach, and hate three point games, i just can't bring myself to be okay with a team getting zero points for losing by shootout, in which the vast majority of either team is in no way involved. this does make sense to me, but as silly as it sounds, i'm hesitant to get really complicated standings. there's something nice about, say, baseball standings, where it's simply wins-losses. having the standings look like 5-3-2-1 just doesn't sit well with me. again, not that these things really matter, but say a coach has worked in all three eras, his life-time records would be something like 200-12-42-150-80, for wins-OT wins-OT losses-losses-ties. again, maybe not a reason to NOT change it, but something i don't like. further, and again, maybe not a linchpin reason, but season points have been somewhat consistent for a long time (e.g. "it takes about 90 points to make the playoffs). obviously that's already a little bit skewed, but moving all games to three points (especially three points for a win) really throws those off. while these might all be somewhat superficial reasons, i think together they make a descent case for not switching to three point games. i guess my personal view is something of a compromise position that would be as mentioned before: keep ties, but make 4-on-4 OT a bit longer. if it was 15 or even 10 minutes for 4-on-4, there would be very few ties, i think. i understand the time considerations, but baseball gets unlimited OT (extra innings) and somehow the networks make it work. also, the ONLY time this would really be a problem is for the few games that are on major networks. since the vast majority (i think) of regular season games are carried on the local sports channels, with some being on versus, it shouldn't be a big deal. what comes on after red wings games? maybe fox sports final score or a re-run of a bull-riding contest? honestly, you have to think that the fox sports channels and versus would get more viewers for longer (which means more commercials which means more money) if the games went longer than from whatever comes on after most hockey games? this way you can go to the straight 2/0/1+1 point system of yore, and with longer 4-on-4 OTs, i think the benefits would be: - all games are worth the same - all games are decided by the TEAM, not a small selection of players - no team would get a point for losing - most games would still likely end with a victor - OTs would be very exciting, and sense they'd be long, i think it would make up for the "excitement" factor of the shootout - simple standings (i agree that casual fans are going to be confused by four- or five-number standings) anyway, that's just what i think. i mean, sure, when the wings make it to OT, i'm like, "well, at least they got a point," but it really pisses me off when, say, i see that the sharks lost and get excited, only to find out they lost in OT aGAIN, and that it's really not as good as i thought it was. plus, if you've got a log jam for a playoff spot, and two teams that are very close to you in the standings end a game in OT, you just got shafted because you cannot possibly get more than two points in a game, but three points were just doled out to your opposition in one game. i ultimately agree that, no, you have NOT earned ANYthing by simply making it OT. sorry for the long post...hopefully my thoughts make sense.

yeah, the atlantic is the only other division with four teams represented in the playoffs at this point. i'd have to say right now the pacific is the worst division in the league, the sharks' record not included. it's always tough to make an argument against the south east as the league's worst; right now both have two of the bottom three teams in their conferences (though neither have the last place team), but at least the south east has two teams in the top eight right now, and another only two points out. stars and ducks are both within striking distance, and the ducks' GP is starting to even out (we have played as many games as them now). anyway, yeah, i don't mind having a stronger division. i miss playing the 'hawks. seemed like we played them a ton early on, then had a big break from them. looking forward to closing out the year in a home-and-home with them.

bill clement is alright in my book. you can't expect every commentator to favor the wings. a) it would be boring and b) i think there is some truth to the idea that *some* people really love to see us lose. *shrug* it would be hard for me to care less what he or anyone says. it matters what the wings DO, and that's all that matters.

yikes. this is going to be awkward...

i don't think i could watch the wings if we signed hasek next season. my heart simply could not take even half a season's worth of him in goal. oh, the nerves!

interesting post; never heard of this kid before. hudler has, by i think most accounts, gotten to a point skating-wise that his 5'9", 178 lb frame hasn't prevented him from doing well on an NHL level. sounds like pare also struggles with small size and poor skating skills, but there's nothing saying those won't improve. obviously he and hudler are different players, but i think after watching hudler's development i'm less likely to write off someone with those potential drawbacks. someone to keep an eye on for sure!

very cool. while i don't hate the national announcers as much as some (it's actually kind of fun to make fun of mike emerick) i really wish ken daniels did the pxp for the playoffs. very cool that ken cal got that last call. good stuff. on an only-slightly-related note, i've looked long and hard for the audio of dan dickerson's call of justin verlander's no hitter, particularly the double play that was turned late in the game. obviously that's baseball, but that was some of the most stirring play by play announcing i've ever heard. it's the kind of stuff that you'll ONLY get from local sports coverage because national broadcasters get paid to be neutral (or at least try to be). as much as i wouldn't want to hear that if i were a pens fan, it's great when the announcer is on your side.

howard at number seven? that seems a bit surprising to me. does the ranking represent best overall or best at what they do...if that makes sense? because while helm will never score as many points as some of the other prospects, it seems like he'll be a better grinder than mursak will be a scorer, even though mursak may be a "better" player in the way that iginla is better than ott even though they have very different roles...but it seems to me like helm should be higher up on the list. i guess i haven't seen a lot of the younger prospects play at all, so i have no idea what they'll be like.

except he's the best goal scorer in the league, and he's earned it. i have no problem with ovie...i wish our players would show more enthusiasm at times.

really? hudler with part time 4th line duty? yikes. i love helm, but i feel like you have to put huds with cleary and sammy. helm is a great checker, and i think we'll see him more in that role. my guess is that we'll have a few injuries to deal with during the playoffs (most teams do) and helm's and leino's places will really depend on that. with everyone healthy, it will probably be the normal top two lines plus cleary-huds-sammy as the third with some combination of leino/kopy/malts/drapes/helm as the fourth line. but say cleary, or sammy or god forbid dats, z, or hossa go down, we'll probably see helm and especially leino getting bumped up to the top six with our standard fourth liners getting their normal time.

i know argument is that "this year" has been "the year" for the sharks several years in a row now...not i'm not willing to dismiss them based on past experience. they have a much better coach this year and a better blueline. both great for playoff runs. anyway, i'd probably most like to meet up with edmonton or dallas. really, anybody out of the top four or five western teams don't really scare me, although i don't think a series against anyone will be easy. i'd like san jose to meet columbus in the first round. cls has played them tough this year, especially later in the year. that would be a good series, i think. honestly, columbus is probably the team i'd least like to meet given that nash always KILLS us and, as others have noted, we have a tendency of making hot goalies red ******* hot.

actually the thread WAS about zetterberg, although no one's talking about that now. i saw draper had the A last night, and he actually scored! although Z had three point with the game winner without the A. so whatev.

one thing i have noticed is our play below the goal line and behind the net has been awful this year. add to that our seeming inability to clear players from the front of the net, and it seems like any time an opposition player has the puck behind the net, it's going to result in a goal. interestingly, this has seemed to be much more the case with osgood than with conklin. i don't see any explanation for why that is, other than conks is just staying in better position on those plays to make the quick saves more just by being in the way of the puck than actually moving to make a save. that's all impressions by me, though...i don't have any data to back it up. it just seems like, especially with ozzie, any play from behind the net results in a goal. when ozzie's in goal, i always feel much, much, much more nervous when somebody loads up from the blueline than when conks is in net. that might have to do with your screening theory. i don't know why, but it seems like an extremely high percentage of blueline shots go in against ozzie. but, yeah, at the same time, he does seem to make some pretty big saves. i can't forget that san jose game where he let in two back-to-back breakaways, though. it just seems like there are enough different kinds of bad goals going in against ozzie that the only encompassing theory is that he's playing poorly, though ideas like your screening theory might have some validity on that particular type of goal.

wow, he made that look really easy.... i haven't watched him much, but that dude's got some great speed. he had five points tonight against buffalo, and another shortie (though this one was the boring, 5-on-4 kind )

i agree with this post. OP, i guess i'm confused. as others have stated, names like "dats" etc. are really just shorter versions of players' names used for convenience. i guess maybe the coaches and his teammates call hossa "hoss" and someone on here is calling him "hosser" and that annoys you? if that's the case, i feel like you're kind of splitting hairs. why is "hoss" okay but "hosser" is not okay? i think that some of our players do have cool nicknames that aren't just shortened versions of their names. obviously the mule is a great one, along with franzenstien, which i think is sweet. pain train = excellent. people call kronwall "junior" which isn't amazing but i think is fine; people call datsyuk "houdini" or "pasha" sometimes, both of which i like...but you're obviously not going to yell out "houdini" when you're looking for a pass. *shrug* i guess i don't understand your discontentedness with the nicknames.

yeah, it seems like from the perspective of the people giving out the award, if lidstrom isn't CLEARLY the ONLY person who could even be CONSIDERED for the trophy, at this point they're going to give it to someone else. if he's in with the pack, so to speak, and gets the trophy anyway, people might think a) he's getting it just on reputation rather than how well he played this year or b) he's getting because he playes on the yankees of hockey. the people that choose these things probably don't want to be accused of either of these things, and so will pick someone other than lids unless it's absolutely undeniable that he must win it again this year. i don't get to watch enough hockey to know how well other d-men are playing, and of course numbers don't tell the whole story. i've heard that green's +/- rating is inflated just because he plays with ovechkin, though it should be noted, i suppose, that lids plays with our best players as well. anyhow, i've noticed nick's defensive play getting a lot better lately after a brutal first half, and he's also gotten really hot points-wise as well. if he keeps up this pace he might force himself to be considered once again.

i haven't read through most of the GDT, but i just thought i'd dig this one out. obviously you couldn't have known at the time that he wouldn't let in another goal, but i think it's worth mentioning that the times people get on ozzie are when he IS letting in 3-5 or six goals a night while not controlling rebounds, etc. conks had one bad deflection (probably COULD have made the save) and a big-time breakaway initiated by a bad line change and compounded by bad defense. again, a great goalie COULD have made the save, but the point is those were his only two (costly) f***ups all night. i would LOVE for osgood to make that many mistakes a night.

the selanne-sewell one is really creepy. i've always thought kris draper looked just like chuck norris, but i'm too lazy to find pictures where they have similar hair/facial hair. i don't know who josh duhamel is, but he looks like a douchebag, so i'd say he and getzlaf look exactly alike.

i completely agree with this assesment. it doesn't seem to be an ego thing--i don't get the impression that he needs to be the one big guy in the dressing room...just that his style of play works better when he knows he's the big guy on the line. i would guess that knowing he's playing with world-class players makes him less inclined to just do it all his own because he knows he can and maybe feel that he SHOULD make plays with the other guys. hank and dats, that's just how they play, but i don't think hossa is the same way. he's still probably looking for opportunities to make a play (note how he let the puck go to rafalski on his tip-in goal last night instead of just taking the puck himself there) but feel really comfortable just doing it on his own, which i think is when he's playing best. that being said, i'd be really surprised if he hits 50. if he stays amazingly hot and gets, say, seven goals in the next five games (throw in a hattie here or there) then i wouldn't put it past him to get 10 in the last fifteen games. but seven if five is really tough, and even 10 in fifteen would be hard at that point. i'd love to see it, though. go hossa!

i agree with your post, and i think the bolded part really spells it out. they more or less *can't* question the NHL or express any beefs with the league or its administrators in general. it's frustrating because i never feel like i get good, honest coverage from vs. at the same time, if vs. is the only national exposition of hockey (other than the occasional NBC game and the last four games of the finals) then i guess i have to wish them well and hope their viewership grows, just because it's good for the sport. i didn't get to watch the game, but i sure as hell wanted to...i think any NHL fan would have loved to see that game. i think if they did a better job of playing up rivalries and making big games feel big, they'd be in better shape.

holy crap...when i read the title of the thread i thought there was actually a chance of this happening. there's about 0.001% chance that it does, and that's a good thing. look, i've been perturbed by the goaltending as much as the next guy, but a 4m dollar toskala is NOT the answer we need. hell, TOSKALA period is probably not the answer we need. i would hesitate if it were for a pick AND we had the cap space. it's for probably our best prospect and we don't have the space. DO NOT WANT.

i'm honestly surprised by those stats. the points per minute stat is a bit questionable, since it doesn't PROVE that dats would score more with more minutes, it simply suggests it. still, i am surprised by all those other stats. (those being all only among the top ten point-getters, right? b/c pav is only second in +/- overall?) anyhow, i'm alright with him flying under the radar a bit (though he's certainly not an unknown out there). makes him feel more like a home-town boy.

good for him. great story.