Wombat

I altered this one slightly... IMO it's strange to get a point for losing in OT while getting 1 point for a SO win and 0 for a SO loss. So the last game of the season, a team needs 1 point to make it into the playoffs. If they get to OT, then it would be best for them to lose the game on purpose to guarantee the 1 point rather than risk losing it all in the SO. Instead, here is Regulation win = 3 points, OT win = 2 points, SO win = 1 point, any loss = 0 points: 1. SJ - 117 2. DET - 115 3. CAL - 110 4. CHI - 100 5. VAN - 90 6. NSH - 86 7. CBJ - 84 8. EDM - 84 9. ANA - 84 10. MIN - 82 11. PHX - 80 12. DAL - 77 13. STL - 71 14. LA - 71 15. COL - 66 Phoenix shoots up the standings and is only 4 points out of the playoffs (thanks to them not having many OT games). Dallas falls 7 points out of the last playoff spot instead of being tied for it. I have to say, although I am a proponent of having each game be worth 3 points, I actually like this system too. It rewards teams for winning earlier. It does not provide any loser points. It makes the SO give a point but it is not equal to a win. This one has a lot of advantages I think in actually ferreting out which teams are the best. The soccer system gives 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie... therefore they have an uneven number of points per game (some 3, some 2). It really rewards winning outright. The above system would really reward winning in regulation, reward winning in OT, and only sort of reward winning a shootout. It would have a stupid 4-column record (W-L-OTW-SOW) but then you just need to put the number of points in bold.

1. SJ - 88 2. DET - 88 3. CAL - 80 4. CHI - 77 5. VAN - 72 6. NSH - 69 7. CBJ - 69 8. EDM - 66 9. DAL - 64 10. ANA - 64 11. MIN - 64 12. STL - 61 13. LA - 61 14. PHX - 58 15. COL - 57 Edmonton separates by 1 win away from the Dallas/Anaheim/Minnesota pack. St. Louis falls a point further back from the playoffs, and Columbus/Nashville inch a point closer towards Vancouver.

You're right... if you only have wins and losses, and losses = 0 points, then it doesn't matter what wins are worth. Basically it'd be the same as the W/L record of every other sport. I do think those subtle changes can be important as well. Clearly, Dallas under the current system is getting a bit of a bonus over other teams in that tier by being in so many OT/SO games (5 more than EDM, 4 more than ANA/MIN). And it does seem to me that making each game worth the same value (all 3 points, winner take all, etc) does pull out separation between the teams which is artificially missing thanks to extra points for OT games. While outwardly the Top 8 doesn't really change, it does change the race for the last couple playoff spots. Perhaps we can revisit this issue once the final standings are complete (or if I'm really bored, I can look at last year's data).

I just ran a few scenarios with the Western Conference: -Current 1. SJ - 94 2. DET - 94 3. CAL - 84 4. CHI - 81 5. VAN - 74 6. NSH - 70 7. CBJ - 70 8. EDM - 68 9. DAL - 68 10. ANA - 68 11. MIN - 67 12. STL - 64 13. LA - 63 14. PHX - 61 15. COL - 57 - Regulation Wins and OT wins = 3 points. SO Wins = 2 points. SO Losses = 1 point. Regulation Losses and OT losses = 0 points. 1. SJ - 127 2. DET - 125 3. CAL - 117 4. CHI - 111 5. VAN - 102 6. NSH - 98 7. CBJ - 97 8. EDM - 93 9. ANA - 92 10. MIN - 91 11. DAL - 89 12. STL - 84 13. LA - 84 14. PHX - 84 15. COL - 77 In this scenario, Edmonton falls a few more points behind Nashville and Columbus. Dallas goes from being tied for the last playoff spot to being 4 points out of it because they have fewer regulation wins (point totals buoyed by 5 shootout wins and 4 OT losses). There is also more separation between the bottom of the conference and the playoff contenders as St. Louis/Los Angeles go from 4 and 5 points out to 9. -Regulation Win = 3 points, OT and SO win = 2 points, OT and SO Loss = 1 point. 1. SJ - 130 2. DET - 129 3. CAL - 118 4. CHI - 111 5. VAN - 101 6. NSH - 94 7. CBJ - 94 8. EDM - 94 9. ANA - 93 10. MIN - 91 11. DAL - 90 12. PHX - 87 13. STL - 84 14. LA - 84 15. COL 75 With this scenario, Nashville/Columbus/Edmonton are all tied for the last 3 playoff spots. Dallas again falls 4 points back from the last playoff spot. St. Louis and Los Angeles again fall further from playoff contention. - Regulation, OT, and SO win = 2 points. Regulation, OT, and SO Loss = 0 points. 1. DET - 86 2. SJ - 84 3. CAL - 78 4. CHI - 72 5. VAN - 66 6. NSH - 66 7. CBJ - 64 8. EDM - 62 9. ANA - 62 10. MIN - 62 11. DAL - 60 12. STL - 56 13. PHX - 56 14. COL - 56 15. LA - 54 Detroit overtakes San Jose for the #1 spot. Nashville ties Vancouver for the #5. Edmonton/Anaheim/Minnesota are tied for the last spot and Dallas drops 2 points behind that. Interestinly enough, the biggest shakeup is at the bottom of the conference as Los Angeles takes the lead in the Western Conference chase for Tavares (thanks to Colorado being an amazing 10-1 in OT/SO). Those are the major options I've seen people post. Personally, I think there should be no shootout and go back to W-L-T. I don't like 'winner take all' in shootout games so I'd rather see either the 1st or 2nd scenario I have listed here... each have their pluses and minuses but overall, there HAS to be a move towards making every game be worth the same number of points regardless of how it finishes. The extra point in some games just artificially bunches up the standings and makes it so fewer teams are willing to be sellers at the trade deadline.

I have no beef with the Nashville crowd... I think they have a good number of diehards at that arena and they make great noise and support their team. If they were saying "you suck" to the Wings, well... winning 8-0 they can say that, they earned the chance to be a little overbearing that night. It remains to be seen whether there are enough fans/corporate support to ensure long-term success in the market, but saying stuff like, "they don't even deserve a team!" after that drubbing is just as bad as all the "you don't have jobs/economy/etc" type chants Detroit fans face.

I think the first poster was spot on. The pairings on D need work. Kronwall and Stuart for the most part were good last playoffs (mostly because Kronwall was playing out of his mind), but this year they just have not been good together. If they aren't trying to pound guys, they just look like two guys standing around in their own zone. I think Lidstrom and Kronwall should be the first pair. The 2nd pair could be Rafalski/Stuart if it clicks well, and if not, then Rafalski/Lilja. They played well together and Lilja has been excellent this year. The last pairing would then be Lebda/Lilja (or Lebda/Stuart) when fully healthy, assuming no trades happen this week. One principle that works well on the forward lines is spreading everything out. Of the top 3 lines, when healthy they roll a net front presence on each line (Homer/Franzen/Cleary), a shooter (Zetterberg/Hossa/Sammy) and a playmaker (Datsyuk/Fil/Hudler). They don't try cramming 3 of the "same guy" on the same line. I think the same philosophy should be used on the back end. Don't put two "hitters" together (Kronwall/Stuart/Lilja). Don't put two slow guys together (Lilja/Chelios). Don't put two small, faster guys together (Rafalski/Lebda/Meech). Spread it out so that each pairing has at least one guy with adequate speed, one guy that give a threat of hitting, one guy that can carry the puck, etc. It was stated by people above and it shouldn't be understated that the team is having defensive breakdowns because they aren't playing the intense, hungry hockey of last year. I'm not going to complain too much... they have still be good more often than not this season as a team. But we'll see if they can find that switch this year for the playoffs. There have been hints at it during the season on games that "matter" so I think they can find it.

Starting the home stretch of the season seems to be part of it, but I think the rotation and playing of Helm/Leino has done a lot of good for the whole of the team. Helm is adding so much energy, and the 4th liners are being forced to match it.

Yeah, I can't see them getting a goalie. With so little cap space left, they'd have to trade a significant piece that makes money to get any goalie worth a damn. I just don't see them doing it.

Seemed like a nice, defensive game last night. I think I'm in the minority here, but I want the Sharks to finish 1st in the West this year. I'd rather they take on some of the "favorite" pressure. Trying to repeat is tough enough without having other weights on you. Let the Sharks see if they can go wire to wire.

You're exactly right. They were giving Ozzie 10 days without starting and having him not dress for the two weekend games (so that he didn't have to worry to be prepared to play as a backup). From the start it really wasn't like Ozzie got "Kovalev'd" or anything. I sure hope he took it seriously and is on his way to being refocused and ready. If not, I think Conklin can do what's needed.

It seems like there are few goalies that are year-in-year-out great players for more than 5 seasons or so. In that way they are sort of like NFL running backs. Every year we see a few goalies come out of nowhere and they are the new flavor of the month that everyone loves (Mason comes to mind this year). Remember Jim Carey winning the Vezina? Theodore had a great season and otherwise has been sort of average. I find it hilarious that the top 3 goalies in the league according to this list haven't accomplished squat. Mason is a rookie, Thomas and Backstrom have had a couple nice seasons and no playoff success. That Holland quote is perfect... outside of the top 5 guys, the next 15 or so guys are basically the same. Build a strong defense/team around them and hope everyone gets hot!

Hudler has only taken 20 faceoffs according to espn.com... so his 55% winning rate isn't that significant if he's only taking about 1 faceoff every 3 games. He's taken roughly .5 percent of the team's faceoffs. And why compare him to Hossa's stats? Hossa isn't a center either. Right now Kronwall has a 100% faceoff win percentage... so clearly there are things other than faceoff % (especially with players with very low numbers of faceoffs) that make a center. I do agree that Hudler is a very good playmaking forward for the Wings. But that does not mean he should be a center. He's doing a great job playmaking from the wing. In the offensive zone the Wings cycle a great deal so all the forwards move around to set up plays. The center however has extra defensive responsibilities and right now, Hudler is not great at that part of the game. Overall, having this many pieces is a great problem to have!

I don't see any advantage to making a major move on a team with this much talent already. Major moves are for teams that lack veteran experience and talent, both of which the Wings have in abundance.

Excellent post. Hudler is a very good winger on the team and is not suited for the center position. I agree that Maltby/Leino/Kopecky are probably going to be the 3 guys that rotate in and out depending on how well they are playing and the opponent match-ups. In a lot of ways, I think a Leino-Helm-Draper would be an excellent 4th line. Leino and Helm played together a lot in GR so they could have some good chemistry. Moving Draper to wing would free him up from some of the responsibilities of a center that he has been struggling with but still allow him to use his speed to forecheck (and he could still take the faceoffs).

Absolutely not. Nothing major is needed. This team is really good... they might need a small tweak but nothing major by a longshot.

Exactly. The Wings need his speed and forechecking.

I couldn't agree more. The team defense has been better in front of Conklin than Osgood. That was what I was trying to imply... for whatever reason, Conklin starting more often leads the team to playing like last year's squad than Osgood starting. Personally I think the team has more confidence in Conklin and therefore plays a looser, stronger, puck possession game. Some might say it's coincidence.

The Wings don't need to tell the guys to fight more... but a lot of those players do need to step up and protect their teammates more often. Those are guys that should be finishing checks more often rather that pulling off to chase the puck. And you need to go on more than just size. Filpula?? Dude when get snapped if he dropped the gloves. Guys like Theo Fluery were tiny but they could still throw their body around. The team last year did not win with guys bullying teams and pounding with their fists. They won with an overall team grittiness, when everyone committed to finishing checks and protecting teammates in scrums.

In reading this thread, there is one question that comes to mind... how is there a big problem this year with opposing forwards parking in front of the net against this defense when it is exactly the same defense that shut everyone down last year? RusDRW I think hit it on the head. It's the little things that are missing. Stick lifts, tying up opposing sticks just outside the crease, making the smart, simple play instead of the riskier play. I don't think the Wings need someone to cross check guys in front of the crease, but what they need to do is a better job controlling what that player can and can't do. When the skaters don't do the little things, and the goalie is not playing as well, you end up with all these extra goals allowed. That said, I think the Wings still CAN play like last year because we've seen it multiple times. 6-0 vs SJ, 4-0 vs CHI, 6-1 vs DAL, 3-1 vs BUF, 3-0 vs PIT... those are some of the games that most remind me of last year's team. They play even during the first period, and simply ratchet up the intensity and puck control as the game goes on and they just choke out the other team. The obvious thing that sticks out to me for those particular 5 games? Conklin started 4 of them.

Anybody can waste Derek Roy on a legal check. I agree with The Secret... they need the current players to play a bit more like last year in terms of physicality, but I also wouldn't mind if they could add a Drake-like piece at the deadline.

I love hearing that sentiment. Lidstrom to me is easily the least replaceable Red Wing. The Wings would be fine playing with any other 1 Wing injured. If Lids is injured... they have no chance at going far in the playoffs.

I'm not sure... it could be that with less confidence in the goaltender, they may play tighter and "think" more instead of reacting and playing loose in the system. Didn't Osgood a couple weeks ago say that the team needs to play looser and Babcock said there was one way to do that (get better goaltending being the implication)? I think last year the team was more comfortable with Ozzy back there than Hasek, and this year, they are more comfortable with Conklin. With comfort comes looseness and the ability to play the system as it needs to be. I don't know... either version is debatably true.

Hudler doesn't have many of his points in 14-15 games on the PP, so I'm not sure that is how he's cashing in. Unless, the couple extra PP shifts rev him up for 5x5 play and then he scores. Let's keep up the fight for efficiency... we can't be the Bill James' of hockey, but maybe we can be one of his minions!

It would be great if he could do it, but I just can't see him getting that many points the rest of the season. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if the Wings find themselves in a place where they can't catch SJ and CAL/CHI can't catch them and Lidstrom gets a game or two to rest before the playoffs.

I was going to say the same thing roughly... it will be interesting in seeing where everyone ends up at the end of the season. It could end up being similar as in the NBA when they were just tired of giving Jordan the MVP every year even though he clearly was still the best player. Most probably Lids won't be clearly better but it looks like he should still be in the running.