kipwinger

It's cool guys and gals, it's just fate. There was LITERALLY NOTHING that Holland could have done since 2009 to improve this club. Nothing. Sometimes you have to face facts.

Given the way they're playing that's a pretty big "if".

Every professional athlete wants to win. Do you think they want to lose? It's a team full of mediocre plugs, rookies, and Datsyuk and Zetterberg. They get outclassed in these games because the opposing teams actual deal in real talent, and put together competitive lineups. We, on the other hand, always look for the cheap "if" solution. "Well if Miller can find some offense...". "Well if Abby can play like Homer...". "Well if Kronwall can tighten up defensively...". And on and on and on.

If they made the playoffs they weren't all that awful. Ya know?

No team doesn't want to make the playoffs, and they all didn't suddenly forget how to play the game. They are, however, out manned at nearly every position on nearly every line. Plugs can't beat quality players, no matter how much they "want it".

Unreal.

I'll agree with that, but you have to consider that a good portion of those GWGs are in fact what they say they are...game winners. And if you've got a lot of them, then you're scoring in clutch situations. Your example of Franzen scoring the fifth goal in a game but getting the GWG after the opposition comes back to score four times does happen. But Franzen also scores a ton of actual GWGs, and that's fairly clutch. Are their other factors? Sure. But this is a stat that is actually kept, and it is indicative (though not the complete picture) of clutch performance.

Wasn't Semin still available?

I'm not in love with the first, second, or fourth lines. But I sort of like the third. Putting Brunner with a pass first playmaker seems like a good idea and has all season.

Seriously, you accuse me of manipulating stats huh? What are you doing here? Their respective ages don't matter considering they both came into the league the same year. Also, as I've stated several times already, Crosby does have a marginally better ppg average but it doesn't really make any difference because he plays so many fewer games. I'll concede shooting percentage, Crosby's is better. So to recap, Crosby has a better ppg average, is better in the faceoff circle, and has a better shooting percentage. Ovechkin has everything else. IF, and it's a big if, you want to say Crosby is better that's fine, but originally you made it seem like he was far and away the best player in the NHL which simply isn't true.

I agree in part with your assessment of game winning goals, but I have two main retorts. 1) The stats COULD mislead the way you say, or it COULD represent actual game winning goals. The fact that you've pointed out a flaw only means the stats not perfect, not that it doesn't also measure what it says it does. 2) If there is indeed a statistical bias in the way you've claimed, the bias would inflate everyone's numbers equally and there's no reason to believe the bias would disproportionately benefit Ovechkin and not do the same for Crosby. Points per game does matter but it's not the be all and end all of stats. It's particularly misleading when the guy you're talking about is CONSTANTLY injured. I can't believe that you're using Ovechkin's durability against him. Ovechkin scores a lot and plays a lot. Crosby scores a lot and plays a little. Again, I'll take the former over the latter.

I don't think it's as clear cut as you guys are making it seem. 1. In five on five play: Crosby has 427 assists to Ovechkin's 358. Meaning Crosby assists roughly 17% more often than Ovechkin. Conversely Oveckin scored 365 goals to Crosby's 238, for a difference of roughly 35%. So Ovechkin's a 35% better scorer and Crosby's a 17% better passer. 2. Power play: Assists (Crosby 186, Ovechkin 151) so again Crosby's a roughly 19% better PP passer. Goals (Ovechkin 125, Crosby 70) so Ovechkin's a 46% better scorer on the PP. 3. Ovechkin averages more ice time and has played more games. So he's more durable and less prone to injury. 4. Neither have played significant PK time, and neither have been recognized in any way for their defensive play. 5. Ovechkin is more clutch, having more than twice as many game winning goals. 6. Ovechkin has taken fewer penalties in over 100 more games. 7. Ovechkin hits more, has fewer giveaways, more takeaways. Crosby has slightly more blocked shots and is obviously better at faceoffs. 8. Ovechkin is dirtier in the sense that he questionably hits people a lot. Crosby dives more and is known for cross checking. So I'd say it's a wash. So in summary, Crosby passes better (but less than 20% better) while Ovechkin scores better (over 35% better). Ovechkin plays much more often in both games played and time one ice. Ovechkin hits more, takes the puck away more, and turns it over less. Crosby is better in the faceoff circle and has a marginal leg up in blocked shots. Neither is notable for their defense (except that Crosby has fewer take aways), and neither is any dirtier than the other guy.

Sure it's a rivalry, both came into the league in the same year. Both high end talents. And both playing in the east. The only thing that makes me wonder about the merits of the rivalry is that Ovechkin was more durable, scored more, and didn't cry as much. Say what you want about Sid and his ring, but if you hold hockey players to the Gordie Howe or Steve Yzerman standard then Ovechkin wins that rivalry hands down.

I'm going to address #5 only, because I mostly agree with you on everything else. I do think Holland has a problem with paying for potential, but perhaps not in the sense that Custance was talking about. Custance spoke about paying young guys more than they've show they're worth. Holland did this in the case of Ericsson, who has since played well enough to earn his raise, so no problems there. But he does have a tendency to pay guys for past potential. Sammy, Colaiacovo, Quincey and to a lesser extent White, Gustavsson, and Tootoo are all getting paid for what they'd done in the past, in hopes that they'd be able to recreate that success. Sammy is getting paid more than he ever has in his career and is two years removed from his career high seasons with Van...and he's 36. Colaiacovo is getting paid more than he ever has and he's two years removed from his career best 32 pts. and hasn't played more than 67 games in four years. Quincey is getting paid more than he ever has and he's three years removed from his career best 38 pts. White is making slightly less ($100,000) than his career best and (when signed) was four years removed from his career best 26 pts. It should be noted that last year he outperformed all his previous seasons so one could argue he exceeded expectations, but that was not a given when he signed. Gustavsson is making more than he's ever made, and is coming off a season that is roughly average for him in his short career. Finally, Tootoo is making more than he's ever made, though he is coming off a career year, it was statistically an anomaly considering he'd never put that kind of production up at any point during his career. Obviously some of these aren't as bad as others, but in every sense these guys got raises based on past play or random success. Nothing proven with any of them.

Straight from the gut...

Well at least you didn't go out an buy it like I did. I'd say you're in good shape haha. http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/blog/_/name/custance_craig/id/9155893/nhl-seven-deadly-sins-nhl-roster-construction

How many NTCs do they have though? http://www.thefourthperiod.com/trade_deadline/notrades.html According to this we're about average, most teams around the league have roughly six contracts like this, which is where we're sitting. The only teams that really have trouble in that area are Pittsburgh, Philly, and Tampa Bay. Other than that it's not that big of a problem around the league. I'd still like to see what else the article has to say about roster construction though.

It's funny because when months ago, before the season started there was a thread in which people were making predictions about how well he would do in the shortened season. Mine was 12 goals and 18 assists, so I'll probably fall a bit short. But some people (admittedly in the minority) were suggesting 20+ goals this year. I wonder if those are the same people that are disappointed now? I have no idea where these expectations came from.

Damn, I seriously just cancelled my insider account about a month ago. Hopefully someone else has one and hasn't yet come to the conclusion that it's a huge waste of time and money haha.

Because given the same opportunity, neither of them scored in the NHL the way Brunner did. And both of them were developed here. That's why. Without any seasoning or development, without knowing the system, without a training camp or any knowledge of his teammates Damien Brunner has scored more goals than Nyquist and Tatar have combined...in their entire NHL careers.

Again, not really sure that he's going to get 5 million. Of course his agent asked for that much, why wouldn't you? It's a starting point for negotiations. But I don't really see Flip wanting to walk, and I don't see the Wings letting him walk if they can help it. So I'd imagine they'd get him for between 4-4.5 million on a longer term deal, which isn't that big of a problem after next year when the cap will start to go back up. We all keep throwing this 5 million number around like it's set in stone and it probably isn't. Remember the starting figures for both sides during the lockout and you'll quickly realize that it's just a tactic.

Because I love hockey and I live in Michigan, and have always done both.

They might be giving another one to Ovie. He was screening the goalie and it looked like he tipped it but they gave it to the defenseman initially. Announcers called it for Ovechkin and thought it would probably be reviewed.

Wow, that got bad quickly. Thornton's line was benched for the majority of the third.