kipwinger

Lol. Good one.

Yeah, but how hot are their girlfriends? Because if Riley Smith and Loui Eriksson have hotter girlfriends then isn't it a wash? Also, who's better at math?

Vermette scratched for game 1. Lol. Remember when he was the "top player available" at the trade deadline?

I can think of about 3.8 million reasons per year why he'd want to continue as long as he possibly can.

He uses spray tan. Screw that guy. Next thing you know he'll be saying "Gentlemen, start your engines!" at the Daytona 500. If that hillbilly's organization wants a rivalry, I'll give them a rivalry. My "hate dial" is turned up to 11 and I'm gunning for Stevie Y, his pretty boy goal scorer, and the rest of his grisly pack of philistines.

So you think that he'd have been fired for anything short of another Cup this season?

It's hard for me to idolize a man who turned his back on Detroit and walked away from the organization in order to become a general manager in the world's biggest trailer park. Might as well be the general manager of a Cinnabon, its more prestigious. It's even harder for "fans" of that trailer park team to understand why they suck, given their measly 45 chromosomes and their Type II diabetes. Lay off the Mountain Dew you swamp rats! I know, I'm just having fun. Sleep on a cardboard box under an overpass. You'll fit right in with the locals.

Interesting thought from Elliotte Friedman: "Nugent-Hopkins, after leading most of the way, ended up second behind John Tavares in ice-time per game among forwards. Why is scoring down? Tavares’ total was 20:40. If you go back to 1997-98, the earliest season available on NHL.com, that number would have placed him 28th in the league, 4:17 behind leader Theo Fleury."

Per some smartass on twitter... "Bad day to be a Boston sports figure who made a horrible mistake when they pulled the trigger in 2013" Lol.

Sure, but that's a risk they seemed willing to take in order to win a Cup. He delivered their Cup by (in part) sacrificing the "later" for the "now", which everyone seemed fine with when Chara was hoisting Lord Stanley. And as I've said already, all of this is immaterial because he didn't get fired for losing Boychuk or Iginla. He got fired for missing the playoffs. If Andrew Hammond doesn't go all "Rain Man" in net, Boston makes the playoffs, and Chairelli keeps his job.

Because the Tampa Bay lightening and their turd fans are now the opposition. And every thing they do is therefore stupid, sucky, and asinine. Whereas everything we do is absolutely right on a cosmic (almost divine) level. Because it's the playoffs...and they're stupid, and we rule.

I know he did. And I would have said the same about him if we'd been playing his team in the playoffs. My point, however, is that Yzerman doesn't get "Red Wings Legend" levels of devotion from me while he's actively trying to beat our team. When he retires from the sport altogether, he gets to be a Wing again. Until then, f*** that guy and his garbage ass team. I hope his entire team, family, and friends all get the mumps. Punk ass *****.

Who was it that said there was no clear #1 center in our system? Granted, no prospect is a sure thing, but this kid is about as close as it gets. He's the real deal. Someone else also said that Zach Hyman was the one "driving the play" on that line in Michigan as well. Lol. Nah.

Agreed. If Ottawa doesn't go on the insane run that they did, Boston would have made the playoffs without a problem. You're not going to finish tops in the conference every year. Sometimes you're going to be at the bottom end. And usually you're pretty safe, barring some kind of insane Cinderella season from a bottom feeder. No need to s*** can a (reasonably) competent GM over it. Hell, there's a real possibility that we would have missed the playoffs the last couple years if any team below us had gone on a run like that. It happens. Edit: If I was San Jose I'd hire him tomorrow. Since they're stuck with Thornton and Marleau, might as well get a GM who knows how to build a team around them.

I absolutely hate the Boston Bruins and I want them to fail. Still, this is stupid. They should definitely not have done this. It's not too different that L.A. firing Lombardi because they missed the playoffs this year. Who's available that's better than Chiarelli and Julien?

f*** Steve Yzerman. He's not the Red Wings, and the Red Wings aren't him. He stopped getting the Gordie Howe treatment the second he associated himself with another active NHL hockey team. Particularly with one that we're playing in the playoffs. I hope we crush Stevie, the Lightening, the city of Tampa, and the whole state of Florida for that matter. Let an earthquake crumble it, let the fires rage, let it burn to ******* ash and then let the waters rise and submerge the whole rat-infested place, Stevie right along with it. This is playoff hockey.

Not a bad idea, and definitely a fun way to add something to the game experience. I've tried, on occasion, to track different stats myself. Gets hard if the game is exciting lol. Anyway, as I said before, wouldn't really surprise me if NHL.com is a little off on their advanced stats right now. Until recently they never kept track of these stats and only just started reporting them. Seems reasonable that you'd have some issues to work out when beginning to report significant amounts of new content.

Where does it say that hockeyanalysis gets its data from NHL.com? Because hockeyanalysis was keeping track of zone starts WAY before NHL.com started doing so. It's also much more comprehensive and actually gives you the total number of faceoffs a player has taken in each zone. I don't know where they'd get that number if they relied solely on NHL.com considering the league doesn't report out this number. To be clear, I don't think you're being deceptive or anything. I'd just like to understand the discrepancy. I've used hockey analysis for a couple of years and have never had a problem with the veracity of their data. NHL.com has only just started reporting on advanced stats, and if there's an inaccuracy I'm inclined to believe it's on their end. But I'd like to be sure. Edit: Nevermind, I just found it in the FAQ. This is just a theory, so don't take it to the bank. But hockeyanalysis says they get their info from "play by play, TOI tables and event summary pages". He accesses those from NHL.com. However, chances are that official score keepers employed by the home teams are the ones who generate this data, and then kick it up to NHL.com to analyze, as well as share. It doesn't seem like the raw data is flawed, but that the analysis (either by NHL or by hockeyanalysis) is flawed because the math being done on the same data, by two different sources, is yielding two different results. Again, I'm inclined to think the problem is with NHL.com, because across the board theirs seems to be backward. Unless you really think Pulkinen starts in the d-zone more than Glendening (for example).

Agreed. I just did the math on it, and there's no way those numbers are right. Smith started in the o-zone 391 times, out of a total of 1006 total starts...38%. Kronwall started in the ozone 419 times out of 1289 total starts...32%. They have them listed as 48% and 51% respectively. Not sure what's going on with NHL.com, but I suspect they're having some issues considering they've only just started tracking advanced stats in the last month or two.

It seems to be the exact inverse of what mine says. No way is Smith, Ouellet, or Kindl less sheltered than Kronwall, Dekeyser, Quincey, and Ericsson. That same stat says Pulkkinen starts in the offensive zone LESS than Glendening and Andersson. I don't know what the issue is. But those number contradict every zone stat I've ever seen regarding zone starts for this team. Maybe because it doesn't account for neutral zone starts. But I honestly don't know.

Not really sure where you're getting that. He starts in the offensive zone 38% of the time. That leads all our defensemen. Dekeyser (33%), Ericsson (30%), Kronwall (32%), Quincey (33%), and Zidlickey (35%), all get fewer offensive zone starts as a percentage of the total starts. Not surprisingly, he also starts LEAST in the defensive zone (26%). See for yourself (the second table down is 5 on 5 stats and zone starts are at the end). Smith: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1560 Dekeyser: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=1764 Ericsson: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=909 Kronwall: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=96 Quincey: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=898 Zidlicky: http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=263 Again, if you adjust for zone starts his individual corsi regresses to near the bottom of our regular defensemen. While I can't find a stat for zone start adjusted SAT, it's not hard to imagine that a guy who starts in the offensive zone 38% of the time, and the defensive zone 26% of the time while have a significant regression. He starts on top of the opposing goalie more than any other defenseman we have. It's easier for him to get a shot on goal than any of our other defensemen, and harder for the opposition to get one against him (because they have to go the length of the ice). Edit: Adjusted for zone starts, here's our defense's individual corsi. Smith: 125 (down from 161) Ericsson: 123 (down from 155) Kronwall: 93 (down from 114) Zidlicky: 160 (down from 185) Quincey: 159 (down from 202) Dekeyser: 144 (down from 159)

Smith doesn't have the highest corsi on the team. Here's his individual corsi. http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=5v5&pos=skaters&minutes=50&teamid=11&type=individual&sort=icorsi&sortdir=DESC What he has is a high "SAT" score. Which is a team measure. http://www.nhl.com/stats/advancedstats?season=20142015&gameType=2&team=DET&position=D&country=&status=&viewName=advancedStatsSkaterShooting&sort=&ord=&gp=1 And the reason why he has a high SAT, and not a high corsi, is because he gets put on the ice in situations where the team is likely to get a shot on goal anyway (i.e. he plays in the offensive zone a lot, like Zidlicky). Highly sheltered players are likely to have a high SAT (Kindl is third on the team by the way), but a low Corsi (Smith 11th, Kindl 20th) because they reap the benefits of playing in the offensive zone while not actually generating much offense themselves. The very definition of sheltered. Smith has 88 shots on goal. That's not much for a guy who gets favorable matchups all season long. That's why his corsi is low. The fact that his SAT is high is the product of sheltered minutes, not because he's a quality possession player. Edit: Also, when you adjust for zone starts, Smith's corsi plummets even lower, as does Kindl's.

He's given more offensive zone starts than anyone one the team. He's asked to defend against the other teams' worst players. How is he not being used to his strength? Babcock already shelters him more than every other defender we have. Despite this, he's our lowest scoring regular defenseman, and our second worst regular defensiveman in his own zone (behind Kindl). What's Babs supposed to do that he's not already doing? 100% offensive zone starts? 75%? 60% How sheltered does he need to be in order to be effective, and at what point are there diminishing returns on a guy like that?

Stephen Weiss will never play center for Mike Babcock. I don't know why, but he won't. So I don't even bother letting myself think about scenarios in which he hypothetically does.

Off topic question. Who wins in a back alley street fight, McGratton or Lesnar? Note: Paul Heyman does not get to interfere in this hypothetical altercation.