PavelValerievichDatsyuk

Oops, I meant the city is something special when they are on a run. Just the environment of everyone paying attention to the team. There was a class a University of Montreal on how The Canadiens have taken the place of religion as Quebec went through the quiet revolution. It is a dedicated following haha. I agree about the actual team, though.

Cum on feel the noize - Quiet Riot P.S. I LOVE Bad Brains! Kind of feel bad answering a great song with glam metal.

Not really my thing, but they're definitely impressive players. I saw them when I was younger with Joe Satriani and King's X. My main memory from the show was when someone threw a soccer ball on stage and Petrucci and Myung kicked it back and forth as they soloed.

Habs. Great history and Montreal is something special when they are on a run. I can just open my apartment window and listen for the screams and profanity to keep track of the score come playoff time.

Bad pass by Nyquist. Nice cover by Smith!!

Kronwall!! Helm with a good screen (which many here have said he can't do)

I was talking about why they were better. If you look at my original posts I was mostly talking about the playoff inexperience of our rookies that year. And, yes, I thought injuries were a factor that made us worse. I like looking in depth at the individual factors. You can call me a homer or question my ability to understand your stance if you want, but I'm not arguing that if we had Z we would have beat them - This is all in the context of discussing the current team. Somebody brought up then 13-14 playoffs and I shared my reasons why I thought we lost (or why we weren't as good as the Bruins) and why I think our current team is in a better position to do with those factors. Then you jumped on the injury comment and now we're sidetracked in this discussion. If we have 2 of our top 6 out of the lineup and they have none, we are more injured in most people's view, I would think. You're arguing against the fact that having top 6 players out of your lineup hurts your team? Nowhere have I said that just because the Bruins "didn't doesn't mean they weren't injured." injured is not a yes or no question to me. It's levels of injuries - I have do doubt that everyone is somewhat injured at playoff time (to paraphrase the initial cliche), but that has no bearing on my point. We had players missing and some other significant injuries that players were dealing with that year. I'm not claiming it's the only reason we lost, but to look at the whole picture you have to consider it.

There's some very straight forward raw data we do know: Z missed 3 games and Alfie missed 2 games due to injury. Who from the Bruins missed games? None that I can see. The only players who didn't play their full 12 playoff games that year were prospects (Mezaros, Kevin Miller) and were most likely scratched Excuse vs. Explanation is the difference of view point we have. I don't get why many don't want to look at injury as a consideration. I assume you think having Z is a good thing. If yes, not having him might have made us a worse team and played a part in us losing. Why do most people think the Habs have sunk in the standings? Should we not consider their lack of Price?

It just doesn't feel right to calculate Nyquist's percentage of the goals and not take into account the fact that he only played 57 games. Then again, Franzen, Datsyuk, and Z, Helm, Sheahan, Jurco, and Bertuzzi all played close to half the year so It would be a hard case to account for these things for scoring percentage. It was a year of injuries and call-ups so it doesn't lend itself to clear stats in this consideration. Also, perhaps it's not an issue we can seperate from injury since Z, Alfie, missed playoff games that does put more load on those remaining - and that's what we're talking about - the load on rookies. But, yeah, we're agreeing on the same issue - relying on rookies with no playoff experience. This year we are relying on Larkin, but Tatar has just as many goals and Abby and Nyquist have 1 less. Plus Z and Pav are still there to contribute. That seems somewhat insulated from the effect of playoff inexperience. Pulkkinen could get amongst our contributors, but he would be another inexperienced in the NHL playoffs. I stand by my original point, though: that year we had Gus, Tat, Sheahan, Jurco, Glendening, Dekeyser, Oullett(1 game) all playing in their first NHL playoff series. This year we'll have Larkin and Pulkinnen. I don't think many will count playoff inexperience as a factor as much this year as for 2013-14. Yeah, but some are 65%, some are 90%, and some are 0% because they aren't able to play. Some are playing with bone shards in their ankle some might just have bruises. GMRWings had a thread a while ago comparing team's success and man games lost and showing how much it correlates. In these days of parity, levels of injury will matter more and more for success. If you're team's captan plays less than half the games and is just coming back from back surgery that's going to be a hit to your team. Alfie (a 18 goal scorer for us that year) also missed games and was dealing with injuries. The Bruins were pretty healthy and had no major players missing from their lineup. From a health standpoint, they had the advantage. I know some don't want to acknowledge injuries, call it an excuse, and have the "suck it up" attitude, but that's not a realist view. To say " but everyone is banged up at that point of the year" just glosses over those considerations.

Nyquist only played half of that season so if he scored 22.% of the total year's goals that a lot more of the team scoring than Larkin currently who has played roughly the same amount of games as the rest of the team. But I agree that the rest of the team needs to start producing That's just a cliche - some team's have more injuries. Bergerons' broken ribs were a little more banged up in that final than the usual aches and pains of the playoffs

That's true, but that's only one player who doesn't have playoff experience as oppose Ny, Tat, DK and I think Sheahan and Jurco that year vs. Boston. Also, Larkin jumped into the NHL without transition problems and the WJ and WC - He seems pretty good at jumping into pressure situation and performing. Hopefully that continues in the playoffs.

To an extent anything can happen, but I think there were things that can explain those changes of fortune against certain teams in the playoffs. Especially against Boston - weren't we incredibly banged up when it got to playoff time that year? I think that was the year of Z's back, Some key injuries, and we were riding Goose and Tats, DK in the season - who were rookies and all disappeared in the playoffs. Those players now have experience so there shouldn't be any drop off in the playoffs.

Sweet! I had to leave in the middle of the 3rd when we were down 2-0. Nice surprise to see we pulled this one out in the end. Also great to see Pav have a 3 point night! And Nyquist with a goal and an assist - maybe some of the goose hate will simmer down around here now that he put some points back on the board.

Not saying we're a contender, but who is in the East other than Washington? If Habs have Price back then, sure, they could do it, but I think they're still lacking pieces. I think NYR are a contender, but any other team we could give run for their money. Even of the teams I mentioned, Washington is the one who I would be really worried about. So I actually think we're not far from taking the east despite our struggles. It would take the best from Mrazek and our offence finding a higher gear, though.

Ouch. A past girlfriend of mine had that surgery and her knee was never the same. She had a lot of pain from it and it was years after the surgery. We used to run a lot and the doctor told her that she should stop. But then we ran a marathon together so maybe it's not that debilitating.

Yeah, he just slid a bit too fast. his stick is in good position to take away the pass until the last second then open up the lane. Larkin should have been back covering and the timing would have worked out. Anyway, the next play in the NHL.com highlights Green does a good job covering a 3-on-1 so he learned from the mistake, took away the passes and let Howie play the shooter.

People said that when Kindl when he's been scratched for extended periods, when he was sent down last year for a conditioning stint and scored a bunch. Then we hoped for a resurgence under Blashill. I think he is as good as he's going to get - he has good stretches and bad. He's a good bottom pairing guy, but now that Marchenko and Smith have leadfrogged him in the depth chart I don't see him getting any more chances. There would have to be 2 injuries and even then we have other options for call ups I was thinking about that comment. It would be a team in need of defence and close to the cap so that they needed to clear salary to bring him in. I'm thinking it could have been the Canucks - They had Hamuis and Sbisa injured and this website: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/canucks-hamhuis-opens-up-about-gruesome-injury-recovery/ says that some of their advance stat defensive numbers are amongst the worst in the league. Also, they are the closest team to the cap with only 0.555 capspace so they couldn't take on any salary without sending some out. And they are 9th in the west so they want some help to get them in the playoffs.

- Kronwall (34) = Jones (21) ????? also K has NTC or maybe NMC - 10 mill probably wouldn;t have landed P+S IMO, but I wouldn't want Parise for 10 mill anyway. - Your DK rebuttal also applies to P+S - Free agents are free to choose - It's not always certain GMs fault for not getting them. Sometime it's for money, sometime's it;s hometown, sometimes it organizations reputation... Not going into the coattail argument. You have no idea what goes on behind the closed doors of the organization and your claims just show a personal bias. Anyway, I know you won't change your mind. I think the team is in a great position as our strategy of building from the draft is coming to fruition. We did some placefiller deals in these transition years (Sammy, Tootoo, coliacovo, Weiss, cleary). I'm glad we didn;t trade away our draft picks or get tied up overpaying UFAs (Other than with Weiss). Good night.

Very true. The aging part were actually Bill's words when he said "And Dallas cant just land a fututecentl for an old winger and pick up another #2C who recently was a #1C for prospects" The Seguin deal was more complicated than Bill suggedted though. It was Seguin/Peverley/Button for Eriksson/Joseph Morrow/Reilly Smith/Matt Fraser. Not sure what that would be for us. Not sure Boston would take and older player (Z) instead of Erikkson. Who knows.

Who are the people/conversations that you are bragging about being right to? From what I remember, you've argued with people about how bad you thought Howard was. I don't think anyone around here has been anti-Mrazek. I can't think of anyone who has said that Howard should be playing over Mrazek - just a bunch who like the tandem. But, anyway, Mrazek is looking great. With Larkin, DK, Mrazek, possibly include Tat/Ny it's great to see these pieces falling into place that the team can build around for the next decade.

- Who do we have that's equivalent to Jones on D that you would have been willing to trade? - Suter and Parise were a very rare case of UFA sweepstakes. They picked their destination based on personal connections to the area. We could have moved the team to Minnesota, but I don't fault Kenny for not going with that decision. - Yes, we missed Niskanen, but we picked up Green, Alfie, Dekeyser, Richards. It's the nature of free agency - you miss on some, you get some. It's clear Nisky wanted to go to a cup favourite - we're not one because we've been rebuilding and transitioning to youth (lark, ny, tat, mraz, DK, etc). The price of success - WHo's our equivalent to Erikkson for the Dallas trade? ...aging top line winger...Franzen...no way would they take him with injury concerns and a serious contract (does RAM voice)...Zetterberg? I would personally gather the pitchforks to head to Holland's office. Maybe you're talking about a different trade though since you said Winger + a pick and the seguin deal was a 7 player deal?

How long before McDonalds realize that most people think Dick Pick when they hear McPick?

You're arguing against your own position here. It is a stat that can say something with context (comparing to other players on a team) or, yes, over a longer period of time. When a player has played around, say, 39 games like Larkin has, it can often be inflated one way on the other. For instance, Mr. Nyquist was +16 in 57gp in 13-14. Last year, he was -11. Which one tells his story? both do. You have to wait a longer period of time.

To me, when you eat salary, you're only trading a fraction of a contract - so I think that's different, but it's just semantics. I would agree that no player is untradeble due to creative deal making, but for players like Kindl on the fringe of the roster it often depends on the luck of another team being in need or to want to take a chance on them. Anyway, at the beginning of the year there was battling opinions between Smith and Kindl being the castoff and Smith has made a case for himself. Once Q is back, I think the D are pretty deep. E's game still worries me, but Bill reminded me that he's only signed for 3 more years so that contract really isn't that bad.

We agree on most things, but I have to strongly disagree with this line. Weiss, Bryzgalov, Mike Richards (2nd contract) etc. There are contracts that people won't take on as shown by the history of buyouts and buried contracts. Now, Kindl isn't in the same category of these guys, but their are definitely contract that you can't trade. Realistically we're only trading him if we eat some of that contract. KIndl isn't a bad player and should find a spot on another team, but 2.4 is hefty for a guy who's in his seventh year and has only held onto to a consistent roster spot for like less than a year's time in that span. I don't think you'd take on that salary and give up any kind of asset. I see your point about the GR roster. Maybe Wings would be more inclined to leave Marchenko up even if he is the 7th guys since they're well stocked there. Then Kindl would go down and either get claimed, replace Lashoff or Paetsch, or sit.