GMRwings1983

Good question. Someone told me a few years ago that there's more balanced scoring now across teams and more guys hitting 40 and 50 points throughout the lineup, but I've never bothered checking that. It could very well be right.

I've been saying that for years. Big goalies with big equipment and great fundamentals have made the game a lot more boring. So have better defensive systems. There's not a lot of 40 goal scorers and even fewer 50 goal scorers and 100 point scorers. It has made things less enjoyable. This, along with the lack of fighting and old fashioned rivalries is hurting the game. I guess if you enjoy watching 6'6 goalies wearing giant pads and stopping everything except deflections, screened shots and breakaways, then this is the golden age of hockey for you. Otherwise, if you grew up watching hockey in the early 90's, this is excruciating.

How many players that came into the league after Ovechkin will hit 1,000 points? Kane? Stamkos? Who else? What a strange metric. Why is Bobby Hull ranked below Shanahan and Iginla?

You think Vanek is a masochist?

I didn't post in this thread until after the game, and my post ended up on page 2.

Exciting game. Good to see the offense score a lot, even though the Pens were battered on defense and lost Letang during the game. The defense for the Wings is terrible, but there's no way to fix that without changing personnel across the board. AA's goal was the goal of the year so far in the NHL.

I'd rather see a Pittsburgh vs. Chicago final, where terrorists seize the building in game 7, preventing a clear winner.

Franzen will make a shocking comeback around the trade deadline, and channel his 2008 playoff form to get us into the postseason

No player in the 30's or 40's could defend Gustav Nyquist, if he was transported to the past via time machine. Rocket Richard transported to today's NHL would not score 20 goals in any season. You're looking at this all wrong. You have to compare relative to the era. Anyone with a brain should be able to see that.

Tayes is declining every year offensively. If we're just looking at the early part of their run, I'd be more inclined to vote for him, but if we're looking at the entire last 7 years, he's behind Kane and Keith.

Well, last year the playoffs lasted a week, so it shouldn't affect your viewing habits that much.

Why should Blashill be fired first? (although that is what will happen)

I voted for Kane, but Keith is a good candidate also. Tayes would be behind those two, no matter what the hockey media wants us to think.

Is Brian Lashoff supposed to be chopped liver? Why can't he get a shot on the PP?

Nielsen's stats being low are a reflection of our crappy defense. Fewer tape to tape passes from the defense make it harder for forwards to put up points. He's a skilled player to boot. Not a dump and chase grinder.

This guy can't hit water from a boat. The only good news is that we can't fall out of last place. May as well try something different.

That's not fair. He was a good player before he came to Detroit.

I'm guessing you haven't watched since this happened.

We should all be ashamed that we didn't "John Scott" Riley Sheahan into this game.

For a moment, I thought you were talking about Lilja.

He's overrated for sure. Just last year, NBCN ranked him second on their all-time captain list. I don't mean right now. I mean all-time! Ahead of anyone besides Beliveau. Chicago fans have dumbed down the league for everyone. He's a good two-way player, but his offensive game is not very good considering he should be in his prime years.

That's why you don't use All Caps. Although, in Slapshot 2, they said Bobby Orr had the biggest one in NHL history.

Good for him. Poor guy must be traumatized playing on this team. Let me guess, even at this game, he'll probably have Sheahan or Glendenning stuck on his wing.

Hockey writers and experts don't penalize Lidstrom by ranking him behind Orr. They just look at Orr's peak years and has impact on the NHL and his position by always ranking him so high. It's not that they don't respect Lidstrom's longevity and ability to play a long time. They just value Orr more because of how spectacular he was. I've always felt that if Gretzky retired in 1988, he'd still be unanimously considered better than Gordie Howe.

Esposito was an outlier when it came to SOG. Same with scoring. He was a great player that often gets overlooked because of Orr. I don't believe there was more scoring in the 70's, but I could be wrong. Even if I'm wrong, if you adjust Orr's numbers, he'd still score more than Lidstrom and lead the league in scoring for his era. Point is, he's a defenseman that led the league in scoring. Era has nothing to do with that. Era only influences exactly how many points the player scores. Gretzky wouldn't score 237 points if you adjust his numbers for this era. However, I bet he'd still score way more than anyone else and win the Art Ross trophy comfortably. BTW, Orr was by accounts, very good defensively also. He's not just some guy that scored goals and didn't try in his own end, like Coffey or Leetch.