dobbles

why don't you just shut up you stupid idiot! your overuse of commas in that sentance makes me want to puke!!!!!!!!1111 on topic, i agree with the OP that the result ended up more important than the action. heck remember in the playoffs a couple years ago when ribeiro 2 handed osgood after the buzzer? yet, because osgood wasn't injured, no one cared. i would much rather punish ribeiro who intentionally did something very dangerous compared to bertuzzi who accidentally injured moore when just trying to fight with the guy like every night in the hockey season.

this is a bad idea. the reason for it? the owners are greedy and shortsighted. the winter classic has shown to be successful on its limited basis. so lets take one of the few positives the nhl has going for it and run it into the ground! the reason they have been successful is that they were held rarely and these first couple featured marketable teams, players, and stories. sure there was a ton of hype last year with original 6 teams playing at wrigley. you had marketable young stars like kane and toews going up against the dynasty of the red wings. that is a marketing plan that sells itself. but what the nhl will soon do is run this into the ground. they will have too many games which will make casual fans once again not care. additionally, because they are playing so many of these games, they will end up having to to include more teams that no one cares about. do you honestly think that there would be any sort of ratings to see the wild play the hurricanes? because the nhl owners are ultra greedy and shortsighted, they will try to cram as many of these things into the next few seasons. people will get tired of the idea after a few years and they will get scrapped. then the nhl will have lost what could be one of its biggest marketing tools because of it. but then again the people arguing that 2 games is fine were the same ones arguing 18 months ago that they should have a winter classic every year. and in another 12 months i am sure they will be arguing that 4 games is fine. and then 8, and then 16...

another thing regarding depth is that most preseason projections had abdelkader in grand rapids this year. so thats another roster spot that freed up a lot of minutes for younger guys.

fair enough. i would post here more if it wasn't for the things you mention.

how did i hijack the thread? someone posted false information about bertuzzi having 2 50 goal seasons. i pointed out that it was false. then carmen started comparing him to datsyuk so i responded. that is not thread hijacking, that is allowing the conversation to flow as it should. heck maybe if there weren't 50 different bertuzzi threads, then there wouldnt be a problem with all the posts being bertuzzi related!

while that is unfortunate, it really has nothing to do with whether or not bertuzzi was a superstar... heck, how many montreal players are hall of famers just because of being part of a well oiled machine that the canadians had going? and in all fairness, the canucks had some decent teams. they made the playoffs 4 years in a row while bert was there. unfortunately cloutier was not that great so that held them back from being more successful. i think the context of the teams they played for would be much more valid if we were trying to debate who was the better player or who had the better career. i was not the one that brought up dats, i just wanted to note that while they may have both been top 5 in scoring twice, there isn't a whole lot of other similarities in their careers.

good point in theory. however, i believe that datsyuk has done more than bertuzzi. datsyuk has won the selke, was nominated for the hart (i dont recall bert doing that, but its been a while since those seasons!) and won a cup. none of those things bertuzzi accomplished. additionally, datsyuk still has the ability to put together a few more statistically dominant seasons. datsyuk has been a PPG player for the last 4 years and is just shy of being a PPG player for his career. and i know you don't like +/- but pavel is a +163 for his career while bertuzzi is a -44 so while bertuzzi put together 2 good seasons, datsyuk has been a very good player for 5 or 6 seasons now. i think that qualifies him for superstar status much more than bertuzzi.

while i realize this has been moved on from, i really feel there is faulty logic here. correlation does not mean causation. detroit decided to build around yzerman, it was a pretty no brained choice there. and when he was getting ready to leave, they had the best defenseman of his generation waiting in the wings to take it. they were both shoe ins for the spot. had lidstrom been drafted by the islanders and traded to the wings before his career got going, i have 100% confidence that he still would have been captain. (assuming all other things remained the same)

like i said in one of the million other bertuzzi threads... i actually think its kinda sad that in 28 hours bertuzzi managed to score as many goals as he had in the previous 2+ months. he played great in this back to back, not even the most ardent bertuzzi haters could deny that. however, many here contend he was flat out bad for long stretches of the season. like i have said before, players like hudler, lang, williams, etc have been hated for much less than bertuzzi.

i couldn't let something like this go. thats not at all true. not at all. he has NEVER scored 50 goals in a season in the nhl. and only ONCE has he ever scored 40! only twice has he ever been a point per game player. thats not a superstar. for 2 seasons he was near the top of the league statistically. the worst part? he was arguably never the best player on his line! naslund was better statistically both years! i think bertuzzi is a great example of a guy that can live off of a misplaced reputation. he has played 15 seasons now, and in all but 2 of them he was pretty much a role player.

yeah, gotta love the overreactions. while i would be more than happy to eat crow if he has a great year, he has managed to score as many goals in 2 games as he did in the previous 30! so while its a good indication of how he has played in the last 28 hours, its also an indication of his piss poor output for 2+ months...

i take it all back!!!!

you bring up good points. let me preface things by saying i don't think that any of the stats given are particularly damning for or against bertuzzi. however, from reading the thread, i got the impression that the pro-bertuzzi stats 'won' the argument for him being a good player. and i wanted to try and put some perspective and counter arguments to the stats that were provided. with that said, here goes... shooting percentage... i agree, its not his forte and we shouldn't expect to see it insanely high. as a matter of fact, when i was looking at the stats, it seemed at first glance that his shots attempted was up and his goals were still pretty much on pace compared to the last couple years. the last 2 years he has averaged about 2 shots a game whereas this year he is getting closer to 3. to me it says this: that he is shooting more for the sakes of shooting. whether its his role on a line or some other reason, he seems to take bad shots just to make him look productive. so when i saw someone claim that his high number of shots meant he was having a good year, it made me wince. +/-... i agree its a super tough stat to gauge players with. however with many types of players (grinders, defensive dmen) it is really one of the more important meters of success. while i do find it hard to hate on guys for specific instance of minus games, i was just trying to note that over the last season and a half he has consistently been the worst minus player on the 2 teams hes been on. so to me that is a big enough range to really start saying it means something. thats why i included it. the salary... i don't think salary in general is a straw man. however, time and time again in this thread, it is used to totally dismiss arguments. if i bring up his +/-, then soemone replies that he only makes 1.5 mil and i should shut up. if i bring up his giveaway takeaway ratio, someone replies he only makes 1.5 mil and i should shut up. people use it as an excuse. and they use it as reasoning to dismiss any criticism. as for role vs. production... while bertuzzi may not have been signed with the intention to play the top line or anything, its not like he should be incapable of it. heck you are the one that said he used to be a superstar. so all of a sudden he can't even be expected to play in the top 6. i think it was probably realistic that he was going to get PP time regardless of health issues. so i really don't see why it is so absurd to assume that a guy should be able to put up some points when playing lots of minutes with 2 of the best forwards in the game.

i appreciate this post. i enjoy well thought out posts. you mix fact with opinion to give info for both types of people. but since several bertuzzi worshippers think your posts seems to end the discussion in your favor, i felt the need to respond rationally to standup for my fellow bertuzzi haters! let me start first with the stats... i have tried to talk about them before but people choose to ignore my stats as they don't paint the same pictures. its like a few pages back when someone tried to include defensemen in the takeaways stat to make bert look better. first thing i noticed was shots. in your post you specifically namedrop datsyuk in regards to that stat in order to make bert look really good. but you know what i notice? that even after 2 goals last night, bertuzzi is still 11th among forwards in shooting percentage and 13th overall. the best part? before his 'awesome' game last night, his shooting percentage was only 4.9%!!! that ranked him a few spots lower behind sharpshooters like darren helm! so while getting shots is somewhat nice, his awful shooting percentage really makes it inconsequential. in regards to points and goals, the guy should be near the top. not because he makes 1.5 million in salary (which is pointless and a total straw man argument for most of this thread) but because he has played a ton of minutes. he is 4th for forwards in total ice time. additionally, a lot of his ice time is on the PP, and a lot of it has been with datsyuk. actually, if you remove cleary's SH ice time (which has a pretty low chance of scoring points) then bertuzzi ties cleary for 3rd in ice time behind only datsyuk and zetterberg. so, i really don't think the fact that he is 5th on the team in points is all that impressive considering all the quality ice time he has. also, before last night, he only had 4 goals and was on pace for like 11. and i just don't think that is very good for someone with as many quality minutes as bertuzzi. some may be happy expecting 15 goals and 40 points from the guy, but for someone with PP time and top line minutes, its just poor output. one last stat is +/-. while he currently is out of last, he has consistently been near or at the bottom of the team in that stat. additionally, i believe he was last in calgary for that stat last season. so while some may think he skates hard and plays good defense, you don't get to last in that category 2 years in a row for 2 different teams without some poor play. and that leads me to the more impression based analysis. and when i watch bertuzzi, i see a guy that is lazy defensively. i see a guy that doesn't skate hard. i see a guy that ruins offensive chances with stupid back passes, holding the puck too long, and taking those poor angled shots that drive his shooting percentage down. i see a big guy that doesn't use his body very well (despite his recorded hits #. that stat is super objective and unreliable anyway.) i would also like to note that i hold all of these opinions independently of the moore incident. i was actually a bertuzzi backer in that situation as i believe that he shouldnt be punished for the bad luck of moore falling awkwardly. so its not residual anger from 6 years ago, it really isn't. and i realize that his salary is moderate. and i also realize that with injuries we have few options. however, that doesn't mean we can't criticize poor play when we see it.

lump me in with the group that thinks trading datsyuk is just dumb. i am all about calling out players and not being a homer, but c'mon he is still an elite player in this league. sure his playoffs weren't the best last year, but he was nominated for the f***ign hart trophy, what else do you people want? he's still a plus player and on pace for over 60 points even with a below average start. i will take that when several key forwards have been out for large chunks of the season. there are too many trolls on this site. it drives the post quality way, way down.

you could use hockeydb to see who has played for the team: http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/display...rs.php?tmi=5898 you can then sort by games played, seasons played, or points to see who has the best combination of time spent there and is a name you like/recognize

i am not sure if your post was more directed at others or what, but you pretty much made up a ton of straw man characterizations that are not at all what i said or believe. for what its worth, i could care less if we win the cup this year. as a fan, i am not selfish. we have won a lot of games and cups recently, so i can accept that other teams need their shot. of course i would love for us to win, but i don't expect it by any means. as a matter of fact, i have a motto that i tell people. i just want the wings to win 6 playoff games a year. to do so, you have to make it out of the first round and then make the 2nd round competitive. to me that makes it worth it. that means the wings didn't choke or get embarrassed in the playoffs. and that makes me happy. anything more than that is icing on the cake. additionally, my post was more pointing out the issues with statistics and standings. while i personally bash bertuzzi whenever possible, i love every other red wing. i still like leino (though he could be a lot better) have always supported maltby, like lebda and meech, and love osgood. i rarely , if ever, bash wings players. for me, bertuzzi is the exception. i just don't like him as a player. (and its not because of moore, but totally off topic so i will leave it at that) you get into the wings sucking and being pathetic, once again, i never said that. i respect what they have done with so many injuries. however, you will not see me talking about how happy i am with our current position. because, as stated before, its not that great. really all we have to cling to is "at least we're above .500!" and as i stated, thats a pretty empty statement these days. so like i said, i am not sure where you got all this crap from my post. because none of it is what i said. maybe you were just venting what you have read from others and happened to quote me, i don't know. for someone that talks about the lunatic fringe being gone, you are acting an awful lot like them by mischaracterizing others for the sake of trying to be right.

first off, LTIR cap relief does not work how you think. it allows you to put someone on the roster to replace the injured salary. its not as if teh wings are able to collect the daily salary difference and keep it for the end of the year. their abilities are still limited. also, why would jokinen ever get moved? calgary is one of the top teams in the league right now, they will be adding at the trade deadline, not dumping players. i doubt st louis will be too open to trade away kariya either. especially to a division rival. thats not likely either.

just to add to it: last year 23 teams finished above .500 2 years ago 24 teams finished above .500 3 years ago 21 teams finished above .500 4 years ago 22 teams finished above .500 this year, 26 teams are at or above .500... only florida, anaheim, toronto, and carolina are 'under .500.' the loser point makes .500 much less meaningful than any other sport. meaningless statistic - a team has not finished with 82 points since buffalo did it in 2001-02

the whole "at least we're above .500" crap is made up to make fans feel good about their team even though they still suck. while you can look at the math either way, fact of the matter is that most teams end up at over .500 because of the loser point. many of those teams miss the playoffs. many of them aren't very good either. so if thats the type of team you want to group the wings with, go for it. because either way you look at the math fact of the matter remains that the wings are closer to the bottom of the standing than they are to the top. also, i gotta side with the folks who think threads like these are far more annoying than threads that pick on players.

i would just like to echo what icesurfer said... though i agree that the wings are doing decent for the injuries they have, to think things are ok because we are abovei .500 is absurd. because of the stupid loser point, pretty much everyone ends above .500 each year. so while the healthy players have been battling hard, i think people need to realize we are in for a tough season. there are several statistics out there that show most playoff positions really are locked up early in the year. someone mentioned 36 games playes, i have also seen a specific date used that has been super accurate even though it doesn't even take into account that teams have played different amounts of games when choosing an arbitrary date. i agree with the concept of this thread that we should all be appreciative of the effort the healthy players give, but i certainly think we should hold off on praising the team for how well its doing.

and in all fairness, i haven't been harping as much on bertuzzi as others with all our injuries. i understand that we are all fubar right now. however, I in no way think bertuzzi is a good player even at his salary. and i also was way against the signing initially. to me though its one thing to defend bertuzzi, but it seems like this thread is starting to paint him as a good player. and thats something i totally disagree with.

here's the thing. the bertuzzi supporters keep going back to the salary. thats great his is only making 1.5mil. but the problem is he is getting loads of ice time and not producing. for total minutes, he is the 4th highest forward. only datsyuk, zetterberg, and cleary have played more minutes. so in theory he should rank really high in all stats. but he really doesn't. also, when you factor in that he has played a lot with datsyuk he should be doing better. look at atlanta - they managed to turn rich peverly into a badass when playing with kovalchuk! bertuzzi also has played a lot of PP minutes. that giveaways stat is super misleading. defensemen almost always lead in giveaways. so really the only person with more is datsyuk. he also plays a lot more minutes and has the puck a lot. its funny though that the stats used are only for forwards when it makes bert look better, but includes everyone when you need to sway the story. overall the giveaway/takeaway think is pretty interesting. i look at it this way, when looking at a players difference between giveaways and takeaways, the bottom 7 players on the team include 6 defensemen and todd bertuzzi.... so while you can try and say he is better than datsyuk because he has less giveaways, pavel has enough takeaways that he finishes with +7... it is worth noting that only 4 wings have positive aggregate numbers. like i said, giveaways are heavily swayed towards defensemen so its not surprising that they all have bad aggregate numbers. he ends up with a -9. williams had -6 and no one else was worse than -4. so please stop trying to use giveaways and takeaways as somehing that validates bertuzzi. and like i said above, he is 4th for forwards in minutes so being towards the top in hits and points is expected. and also like i stated, he has played a lot with pavel, and a lot on the PP, so his numbers should be higher. heck draper also has 4 goals and 5 assists yet he gets nowhere near the quality minutes as bert does. i understand our options are limited right now. but having watched bertuzzi the last few years quite a bit, i have seen enough to see him as a lazy player that doesn't play defense very well and is a turnover machine. sure he will put up some points, but i still would rather have someone else in his spot.

ok, you are dumb. my post actually did contribute. it gave the opinion that these goalies were good. and its based onactually seeing them play. and while the goalie issue was tertiary, it does contribute to the topic at hand because the point of contention was that the team wasn't necessarily playing poor, but running into hot goalies. while i am not sure i agree with that initial point, i was agreeing that those goalies are better than some realize as they are not big names yet. so while i was contributing, you were trolling. so just shut your mouth until you have something to actually say.

ok, i know its just a suggestion, but why would the flames ever move bourque? he has been huge for them. i think if you have some realistic trade options it would make for a better discussion. but with what you give there as an example, we might as well propose trading for tavares or hedman or something...