derblaueClaus

And no Vasilevsky and Lightning play back to back. It's not getting any easier.

Yeah, Wings basically need to win out to lose best odds for first overall. That still only gives us an 18.5% chance of first overall, 81.5% chance of 2 - 4. I wish the odds were better, even having the best odds, the odds aren't in our favor.

Fight! 
 
 
 

Hedman out for tonight.

I do. Would be way more fun to watch.

Hey, A!  I am watching, not sure who else... you know where I hang out.
Blots should be tired and out of sorts with travel and time change, and all.   We can hope!  LGRW!!!!

Go Wings !!!

Fight! 
 
 
 

You're the most miserable bunch on the Internet I know. And I mean that as a compliment.

That was entertaining!  It's nice to mess with the Hawks' playoff chances.

Ottawa actually sent this out to their fans

Welcome to the D *****

I like some of you sometimes
Happy 1.5 LGW

Just imagine the average Wings game at the LCA, but in the playoffs.  

Huh?  Why are you arguing with yourself.  If you read through my posts, I never ranked either player.  If you want to rank Ovechkin as a better goal scorer, that's your opinion.  An argument can certainly be made.  I don't care.     
People started diminishing Gretzky's accomplishments during the 1980's, Bobby Hull's era and the goalies in it, etc.  Ovechkin would score 100 goals in the 1980's, etc.  I responded with what I think about player sizes during Hull's era vs. today and what I think about the 1980's in general and Gretzky's peers.
You said you couldn't judge Gretzky's totals based on the era he was in.  I told you what I think about that.  There's nothing wrong with Gretzky's era and no reason why it cannot be judged fairly.
  

Agreed. It's Ofechkin.

Who was the next highest goal scorer that year? 
I'll answer that for you.  It was Mike Bossy with 64 goals.  If it was an easy era to score goals, how come Bossy didn't score more?  Why did only two other players score 60 besides Gretzky? 
When has Ovechkin ever dominated his peers like that?  
The fact is, Ovechkin in his best years never dominated his peers in goal scoring like Gretzky did.  He never finished with 25 or 30 more goals than the next player.  All the people bringing up the high scoring in the 80's have no reply to that.  We're supposed to believe that Ovechkin would score 100 goals, while the next highest guy not counting Gretzky would have 60.  When has Ovechkin ever shown that kind of statistical gap versus his peers?  
You guys are full of it.   

It's GretZky not Gretsky... How the f*** can you misspell the greatest hockey player of all time 99 times in the span of 24 hours?

Is wrestling just murican anime?

I have no words about the rollercoaster that was the first 4 pages of this thread, holy hell. I don't even know what to do here. I'm just as bored as you guys are at this point of the season. 
Thanks for sticking around all year to most of you who have consistently posted. We reached a giant height of strange here, let's settle it down a tad and i'll move along. Have fun, just remember it's a hockey thread also.
 

To CAR: Jonathan Bernier, Evgeny Svechnikov
To DET: Dominik Bokk
do it

That's the assumption. He isn't at the moment. And I'd rather trade AA for someone who isn't a winger or a pick. Otherwise you trade one 3rd nipple for another, potentially worse 3rd nipple.
 
I'm not arguing that he will bring a king's ransom. But to trade a Winger for a maybe better or slightly worse Winger, while we already have a logjam of those isn't my preferred option. It's simply an unnecessary risk. We have other positions that we need to strengthen.

It isn't the fact that AA isn't scoring. It's the fact that he brings literally nothing else to the table. Vanek put up lots of points his first season in Detroit. Guess what he fetched? A third rounder. Turns out one-dimensional wingers aren't worth much. Glendening is a more important part of this team than AA is.   

AA is a 30 goal scorer, he's had a tough year, both on the ice and injury wise.  Prior year's have proven he is very dynamic and there's no reason not to believe, given the right situation (like maybe play with McDavid) that he won't be a 30 goal scorer again and again.  Puljujarvi or not, I'm getting either a 1st or a high prospect along with him.  Who's to say Pulj wouldn't give us the same problems playing here? I'd trade AA straight up and ask for Bouchard, if Holland wanted to deal more, I'd ask for a 3rd and thrown in Svech or Lindstrom. To me Pulj just seems like a problem child. He should be a throw in in any trade package just because of his uncertainty.  If Holland wants AA, then I am getting the value in return, because there may be more than one team asking about AA in a couple of weeks, I'm asking high and accepting the highest value....or I am just keeping him and letting him attempt to flourish under a new coaching staff and the possibility of  playing with whomever we get at 1,2,3 or 4...if we draft center.
I just question whether he'd give us the same problems as he is giving Edmonton.  Is it just a money issue or is it the team? Maybe he wants to NOT play on a bottom team, that would eliminate us all together.