Buppy

Almost too close to call really. Hard to find fault with one opinion over the other; all 8 are fantastic players. I'd switch Stevens and MacInnis, and probably move Francis ahead of Mac too. Possibly move Hull to third, goal scoring being such a valuable skill...and none better in this group. I'd also have to think about putting Mess in front of Stevie. Don't know if it's homerism telling me to keep the Captain on top, or trying to hard to avoid being a homer telling me to bump Messier. I think Yzerman was a tad better, but Messier's playoff numbers are tough to ignore. Overall, I'd probably give '09 a very slight edge, but maybe that's just being a Wing's fan.

Clone him. That way we can fire him twice.

I still contend that both players share responsibility. You have to protect yourself to what degree you can, and also avoid putting other players at risk. You're acting like only one player can be at fault. Like saying Liambas was wrong completely excuses Fanelli. Both players made mistakes. Fanelli by turning, Liambas by committing to such a hard and high hit. (And for the record, I don't think this hit was all that egregious. Comparable to the Richards hit I think, though deserving of a harsher penalty because of the league. I don't think he deserved a full season suspension.) (And also for the record, I think Fanelli and the league both share some blame for not having the helmet properly strapped on.) I would also argue that the kid had to be vulnerable in order to retrieve the puck. He just made it worse by turning. He also began his turn when Liambas was at the goal line. That should have been enough time for Liambas to let up a little at least, or try to avoid full contact. But he either didn't, or couldn't. Either way, he shares some blame for failing to be responsible. And it isn't about what I like. It's about a 16 year old child that nearly DIED over the GAME of god damn hockey. You can have hitting without players committing to high hits from 50' away. Without guys saying, 'that guy doesn't see me so I'm going to smoke him'. You can have hitting while still trying to minimize injury. That means making sure the equipment is properly protecting the player, players are protecting themselves, and players avoid needlessly putting others at risk. Again, I understand the intimidation of the big, brutal hits. You can also intimidate someone by saying 'if you score a goal I'm going to beat you with a 2x4', but that will get you a racketeering charge instead of a spot on a highlight reel. I also understand the excitement. But if you need so badly to slake your bloodthirst; turn on a movie. Hockey is just a game.

I think a better solution is to demand that players show some respect and regard for the safety of other players. It would certainly take some time for players to adapt to a headshot rule, or stricter charging calls, etc. But the same can be said of any rule change, including 'putting a little clutching and grabbing back'. I can understand the intimidation factor of the big hits. But I think that should be less important than player safety. It says right in the rule book that players should not take advantage of other players in vulnerable positions, right next to where it says players shouldn't put themselves in vulnerable positions. Most of you ignore the former and say 'keep your head up' after every hit. That would be fine, but too many players are also ignoring that first part. Neither cancels out the other. The onus is on both players. The injured kid made a dumbass move turning his back, but the guy that hit him was just as dumb for commiting himself to such a brutal hit and not giving himself a chance to let up. What if the kid had stumbled and fallen away from the boards? The guy trips over him, goes face first into the boards, maybe breaks his neck. And you'd all be talking about how tragic it was, but the guy should have been in better control of his momentum. It's a big ice surface, and there's more than two people on it. It's impossible to avoid leaving yourself vulnerable. If you always blame the vulnerable player, it amounts to little more than 'well you shouldn't have worn that dress'. Both parties have to be held accountable. Do something stupid, you probably get hurt, or at least look stupid when you get taken out of the play...that's your punishment. Take advantage of someone else's stupidity and hurt them...you still should be punished. Players need to be taught that it isn't OK to try to blow someone up just because you can.

Kopy has every bit of Homer's speed and defensive ability. Combined with Jiri Hudler's toughness and Aaron Downey's playmaking. He's like three players in one. Superstar.

I didn't (and still don't) really like the Bert signing. I just don't think the team needs an injury-prone, mid-30s player who's lost most of his goal scoring ability. But I do like the effort he's been putting in, at both ends of the ice too. For the price, I don't mind the occasional mistakes that much.

It's your logic that's flawed. With your hypothetical foam-filled ball, the mass behind the foam does not (can not, in fact) travel through the foam. That energy propagates around the shell and is delivered to the point of impact. A more accurate example would be to take a rigid surface like a piece of hard plastic, place it on the floor, place a piece of foam on top of it, then drop a bowling ball on it. Then reverse the foam and the plastic and drop the ball again. Provided the amount of foam that gets compressed stays the same, the impact when the ball hits the floor is identical. The initial force exerted against the ball will be less if it hits the foam first, but I believe that is rather trivial in comparison the large impact when the two masses collide. The other difference is the area of impact. A hard shell is more likely to cause soft tissue damage like cuts or bruises, since less soft tissue absorbs the energy. Could maybe be more likely to cause broken bones, even. (If the materials generate enough resistance.) A concussion though, comes from the brain striking the inside of the skull. The area of impact that generates the g-forces is irrelevant (as long as it doesn't actually damage the skull). You could get a concussion from being hit in the legs, provided enough Gs are delivered to the head. (Of course, the amount of force required for that would probably do fatal damage to the rest of your body, but that's beside the point...) Anyway, interesting physics debate aside, my point was that if you want to look at equipment to prevent head injuries, the logical place to start is the equipment designed to protect the head.

That fact that some of us make assumptions and overgeneralize makes some of us, well... I said (in the Wisniewski thread I think) that I don't like Kronwall's headhunting. Do a little research before you try to label me. Thanks.

Ok, I'm not a physicist, but... The mass carrying all the momentum is not the surface of the shell, but the player behind the shell (and also behind the padding beneath it). Therefore, the transfer of that momentum energy still has to travel through the absorbant layer of padding. The padding absorbs the same energy whether inside or outside of the shell. The difference would come in the return energy generated by the resistance from compressing the padding. The shell diffuses energy from a small area on the stiking side, to a larger area on the opposite side. With all the padding inside the shell, the player on the outside of the shell would take half the return energy from compressing all the padding beneath it (and that concentrated in a smaller area). With padding on the outside, they would take only half the return energy from whatever amount of padding is compressed at the impact point. (Maybe 10-20%) Given the amount of force in hard body check, I can't imagine that the resistance of the padding would be all that significant.

I don't buy that. It's not any harder to catch a head shot than it is an elbow, trip, or high stick. I'm not saying any contact with the head should be a penalty. Only where the head is hit first, or primarily. Of course, they couldn't be perfect; some calls would be missed, others made that shouldn't...just like any other penalty. The refs wouldn't be the ones to determine intent either, that would be done by review from a disciplinary committee, same as it is now. Players haven't stopped trying stick-lifts for fear they'll miss and get a high-sticking penalty. Haven't stopped tying up or clearing the crease for fear of slashing or cross-checking calls. They won't stop hitting over a headshot rule. They'll just be more careful, and maybe stop trying to make highlight reels by taking advantage of vulnerable players...you know, show some class, sportsmanship, and respect for their fellow athletes.

Not to nitpick...but Datsyuk now leads the team with 10 assists. This should be a real test for the Wings, assuming San Jose isn't too worn out.

Unless you're talking a large difference in the total amount of padding, hard or soft cap isn't going to make much difference in the amount of energy transferred. The forces involved are too great for a 1/4" or 1/2" of foam/fiber to be significant. And some of that would probably be offset by the greater deflective properties of a smooth surface. It wouldn't hurt, but it wouldn't be a solution. I remember reading a while back that very few helmets actually meet established safety standards...players wear them too loose, and for too long. That would be the first place to look if you want to look at equipment. But as Stevekrause said, the dirty hits need to be punished. I think we all feel that way, we just have different opinions on what constitutes 'dirty'. Personally, I would add a headshot penalty, specifically defined as a hit where the head/neck is the initial or primary area of contact, with a possible exception to allow for players moving at the last second. A two, four, or five minute penalty, depending on the severity of the hit. Suspensions/fines for repeat offenders or cases where intent seems likely.

I forget which announcer was doing it, but in the Finals I got really tired of hearing the phrase 'subtle interference' 20 times a game.

So here's a hypothetical: Say Datsyuk had been healthy. Add a normal start to the series instead of the silly back to back on short rest...giving some of our banged up players further time to heal. Also add a healthy Lilja...Wings win the Cup. Where would you rank that team? Personally, I'd put them 4th, '08 Wings 5th, followed by the Ducks. The rest stay the same.

The forearm to me screams 'intent'. So I agree with the suspension. The Richards hit I think is an example of a misplaced, unintentional hit to the head. Worth a penalty, but no suspension. If that "effects the passion of the physical aspect of hockey" then so be it. These are human beings, not characters in a TV show. You have no right to ask that they take needless risks with their health for your entertainment.

Hard to tell from the video, but it does look like the elbow caught Doan in the chest. Even so, it's another example of disrespectful play. Players just want to make highlight reels and would gladly end another player's career to do it. As big and fast as players are today, the league has to crack down on the head hits before someone ends up dead. And yeah, that goes for Kronwall's headhunting too.

You have your opinion and nothing I or anyone else says is going to change it, so I won't bother. But I would like to point out that the line was 'shaken up' already. The game before his injury Flip was switched to play with Cleary and Bertuzzi. A game and a half isn't really enough time to tell if a line will click.

Now that Crosby has a cup, the NHL hype machine is working double-time for OV.

And for the sake of making it even more confusing, they could still go over the cap by $1.25m, by adding another $10,000 in salary somewhere else. Say, demoting a player then adding another player that makes 10k more. But they couldn't add a single player that made $1.26m.

For clarification, that should say 'NHL roster'. That includes the active roster, injured reserve, and for the sake of ultra-confusion...some non-roster players as well. (ie, a player claimed on recall waivers).

Both you and the previous poster are mistaken. Even on LTIR, a players salary still counts against the Averaged Club Salary. The CBA is very clear on that part at least.

FWIW...section 50.10 D from the CBA Confusing as all get out, especially since there's no set disignation for 'replacement' players (something else that gets people confused). edit: Bolded a portion of the above for emphasis

Those stats for Flip are far from indicative of the quality of his play. He was our best forward for the first 6-8 games. If he had a quality finisher, he'd likely have another 4-6 assists. Most of the goals against have been breakdowns in other areas. That -6 is pretty much just the last two games, not his best, but still he only made a few mistakes. And for every poor play, he's made probably 5-6 good ones. Like Franzen, losing Flip hurts every aspect of this team. Our offense and defense both rely heavily on puck possession and our breakout. Neither have been particularly good, and both will be worse without Flip. The only reasons for optimism is that it's still early, and the past few games I think we are starting to work harder. We're had stretches where we're starting to get things going: Offense the last two, a couple solid games from Howard, some good defense to start the road trip. If we can get them all going at once, we could still win despite the injuries. In regards to LTIR exemption... Players on LTIR still count towards the cap, but you are allowed to add salary over the cap, up to the amount of the injured players total salary while on LTIR, but only while the player is on LTIR. For example, if a team had a player making $10,000 per day miss 50 days, it would allow them to spend over the cap by $500,000 in those 50 days. But if they only spend $300,000 of that, they don't get to keep the rest to use after the player comes back. That's something they should change in the next CBA. It works well for season-ending injuries, but doesn't do much for situations like ours, since we don't have much in GR worth calling up.

Somewhat like the Twins logo.

FORWARDS * Jonathan Toews ($5.500m) / * Patrick Kane ($5.500m) / Marian Hossa ($5.275m) Patrick Sharp ($3.900m) / Dustin Byfuglien ($3.000m) / Kyle Beach ($1.200m) Tomas Kopecky ($1.200m) / Troy Brouwer ($1.025m) / Dan Bertram ($0.850m) Akim Aliu ($0.846m) / * Andrew Ebbett ($0.500m) / * Danny Bois ($0.500m) * Mark Cullen ($0.500m) DEFENSEMEN Brian Campbell ($7.143m) / * Duncan Keith ($5.500m) Brent Seabrook ($3.500m) / Cam Barker ($3.083m) Brian Connelly ($0.875m) / Simon Danis-Pepin ($0.850m) * Richard Petiot ($0.500m) GOALTENDERS Cristobal Huet ($5.625m) / Alec Richards ($0.875m) CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS ROSTER: 22; PAYROLL: $57.747m; CAP ROOM: $0.265m BONUSES: $1.212m Some of those additions are just players already on ELCs, or random names from their FAs that I plugged in at minimum. Just using them as generic roster fillers. Basically, fill out the bottom 4 forwards and bottom 3 defensemen with cheap players. You lose Versteeg, Bolland, Madden, Ladd, Hjalmarsson, and a few guys who don't really matter. You could get rid of one of the big three, and keep one of Versteeg or Bolland plus maybe a couple role players. The difference isn't that great. No matter what, they'll be losing some players. They could also move Sharp instead of Versteeg or Bolland (or in additiona to) and pick up more depth. Either way, they could come out with a solid top 4 D, and a decent top 6 forwards. Still a decent team, and possibly better if some prospects pan out. Of course, if the cap goes down, or they have to pay much in bonus overage, they'd be even worse off and probably would have to give someone up.