eva unit zero

I see a good chance of Hudler returning next year as the Wings will have cap space available and will need his presence offensively. Hudler has said in the past he would rather have a spot with top-six ice time in Detroit than be 'the guy' in the KHL. Next season, Detroit will absolutely need Hudler's presence offensively, and with the increased ice time he will be producing significant numbers.

Those of you saying Lebda has been playing at the same level since his rookie season are wrong. His rookie year may have been his best overall season. My thoughts on Lebda? Waive the f*****. Someone will take him. Meech is much better defensively; he is often the guy or one of the guys in the defensive zone when the other team gets an odd-man rush, instead of always being the last man back, and he typically makes good decisions in that situation. For those who don't recall, Meech stopped a 3-on-1 against St. Louis the other night when Stuart was caught pinching. He played the puck carrier towards the outside while staying low with his stick out to impede pass attempts. The carrier eventually moved to shoot from the top of the circle, and Meech's position allowed him to drop and block the bottom half of the ice, allowing Howard to focus on a high shot. Perfect defensive play. Lebda would have challenged the puck carrier every single time and given up a 2-on-0... every single time. Lebda. Off the team. As soon as possible.

Hudler wouldn't be leading the team in scoring. But his PPG last year with ten minutes per game was 0.7, which over 30 games is 21 points. He would probably have better than 20 points, which is what Williams and Bertuzzi have contributed offensively combined, although Williams has been injured. Also, it would have allowed Dats to play on a line with a better build, further extending the offensive production. It would have provided the Wings with a great playmaker to place on the second PP (Hudler absolutely directed the unit last year) and another forward capable of either creating a goal for teammates by playmaking or creating one for himself. Hudler instead of Willy/Bert would have absolutely been better for the Wings. Better offense, and you take away two defensive liabilities in favor of one player who is above average defensively. The only thing you lose is Bertuzzi's size, which he doesn't use.

I'm just sick of the "The NHL ruined its tradition when it renamed the conferences! Waaah" stuff. Because we all know that the Original Six was divided up with Detroit and Chicago in the Norris, Toronto in the Smythe, New York in the Patrick, and Montreal and Boston in the Adams.

The NHL has spent more time with Western and Eastern than it did with Wales and Campbell. Be pissed all you like, but renaming the divisions and conferences, all of which were named for people who also have a trophy named for them, is a far cry from renaming trophies dedicated to honor specific people and/or donated by certain people for a specific purpose.

It became Ovechkin vs Crosby because we're trying to figure out whether to rename it the Crosby Cup or the Ovechkin Cup.

I didn't say never. I said not as often. This is a true statement. How many times do we see goalies take shots off the mask or nearly off the mask nowadays? 25-30 times a season for a starter? Sawchuk played for a long time. If he were hit in the face that often, he'd have had to get stitches in seven seasons. Now, if we're talking actual number of stitches, as your post suggests, that's only maybe 25-40 hits to the face. Serious difference in high shots.

To be fair, Sawchuk and others lacking a mask was also in an era with far fewer shots towards the upper half of the net. Just something to consider. There are a lot of factors one must consider when crossing eras.

Watch the video, and look at Bert's left hand. He is holding onto Moore with his left hand when he delivers the haymaker, and as he drives him into the ice. If he's not holding on, Bert doesn't fall on him and Moore might still be playing to this day. McSorley's actions were terrible, but a major difference? Bertuzzi's left hand prevented Moore's head from being able to absorb part of the blow because it was being held in place. Try this: take two candles that are, say, 2" thick. Place one in a candle holder, and place the other on a platform that allows it to be the same height. Cut it if you have to. Now use a wooden spoon or something to hit the held candle with just enough power to break it. Hit the loose candle with, say, 25% to 50% more power. It's knocked over. And that doesn't even include the fact that Bertuzzi pounded Moore into the ice, while Brashear simply fell. Try letting a candle fall from that height, and then try pressing one into the table and compare the damage. There's no comparison. Bertuzzi's actions against Moore were far worse and far more intended to do significant damage.

Ovechkin does have a couple decent offensive teammates up front. But the Caps had less forward depth offensively and less all-around talent at forward than the Pens the past couple seasons. And on the blueline, the Caps had far less talent. And even the talent they did have had no clue how to play defense. To compound that, the Pens have one of the league's better netminders, while the Caps have a tandem of two borderline starters. Teams aren't just top-end offensive support. As I stated, Ovechkin has played just as well as or better than Crosby in the postseason, but Crosby's teams have been significantly more talented. Even if you look just at high-end talent, Crosby playing with Malkin AND Hossa on the roster in 2008 is more than anything Ovechkin has even come close to.

FTR, I was calling Zetterberg as a future superstar before he played a day in the NHL.

Crosby scored 33 more points in 28 more games. Ovechkin's pace over another 28 games would be 40 points. So Ovechkin could dip well below his current playoff pace and he still outscores Crosby over that number of games. But the thing is, Ovechkin hasn't had the teammates to help him win rounds the way Crosby has. You play more games and have more opportunity to post numbers if your team is better. Ovechkin would have absolutely crazy playoff stats if he had a Malkin on his team like Crosby does.

Sidney Crosby playoff stats: 49 GP, 24-39-63, +16, 30 PIM Team playoff record in those years: 32-16 Alexander Ovechkin playoff stats: 21 GP, 15-15-30, +9, 8 PIM Team playoff record in those years: 10-11 Ovechkin has better numbers than Crosby does in the postseason. Crosby's team has a better won-lost record. The clear answer here is that Ovechkin has outperformed Crosby in the postseason, but has been playing on a worse team. So that "Better at winning Stanley Cups" holds no water. As for Osgood...you don't win 400 regular season games, go your entire career without posting a losing record, put up playoff numbers that are comparable to Patrick Roy, and post numbers in general that are comparable to the greatest goaltenders of all-time and have that be called 'no accomplishments.'

You shouldn't smoke so much crack. It impairs your ability to comprehend what people write.

Bertuzzi's assault of Steve Moore is the most goonish moment in recent memory. He chased Moore around for an entire shift trying to fight him. Moore responded to a challenge to fight earlier in the game regarding the Naslund hit, for those of you goon-lovers who feel that if lay a dirty hit that you should man up and fight the opposing player. Moore did that. Bertuzzi simply couldn't let go. He followed Moore around, often grabbing his jersey and 'waterskiing' on Moore. Bertuzzi grabbed Moore by the shoulder at the base of the neck with his left hand, punched him in the side of the head with his right and drove him facefirst into the ice with his right. Moore was unconscious from the punch, so he couldn't respond or resist what came after. What broke Moore's neck was having his head driven into the ice by Bertuzzi with his right hand while his left hand was holding his neck, not the pile-on that ensued.

People generally consider Malkin, Crosby, and Ovechkin all on a similar level. How would Washington have done last playoffs if Ovechkin had another teammate as skilled as he is? Probably would have won the conference, excellent chance at winning the Cup. Number of Cups alone is meaningless in evaluating a player; if the player played on horrible teams and did well in the postseason, or played on Cup winning teams and performed poorly in the postseason, Cup wins tell you incorrect stories about those players.

At passing. Not at hockey.

Osgood was a Vezina contender in 1995, 1996, and 1997, and should have won it in 1996. He played very well in the 1996 playoffs. Bowman still went with Vernon in the 97 playoffs. While there's still plenty of season left, Howard hasn't yet shown play up to the level of Osgood's rookie season. Unless he suddenly goes lights out, I would not want to put him in in the playoffs unless Ozzie was giving his best Legace impression.

Anyone saying anything about Laraque not being a dirty player, which has been mentioned a couple times that because he apologized it means it wasn't really a dirty play, is whacked out of their minds. It was a dirty play. He was beat clean and put his leg into Kronwall's. It's different than Richards or Ovechkin because the Richards hit, Booth tried to avoid and couldn't, and the Ovechkin hit, Kaleta chose to turn towards the boards and endanger himself. Had the "victim" simply taken the hit, there would have been no injury. In Kronner's case, he would have skated past Laraque had Laraque not kneed him. MAJOR difference.

I would rank Hainsworth a hair above Vezina. That right there only serves to add to my point that Vezina is one of the greatest goaltenders or all time. And the fact that the Vezina was donated in his memory further points to the fact that it should not be renamed.

Vezina was considered the greatest goalie over the last two decades of his life. He played his entire career without being pulled; 328 regular season games and 39 playoff games. He was considered Montreal's best player and led the league (NHA and later NHL) in GAA seven times over a fifteen year career (unless you include the opening period of 1925-26), and carried the team to the Cup finals five times, winning twice. He was one of the twelve players inducted to the Hockey Hall of Fame when it was first created. Personally, I consider Vezina among the top ten, if not top five goaltenders of all-time.

The difference being that the HNIC theme was hockey tradition on the level of the Calgary Flames logo, and went away due to a monetary reason that had nothing to do with the NHL. Not hockey tradition that goes back through the early years of the league where the trophies' names have a specific reason for being named as such. And again, the PoW conference and Campbell conference and the corresponding division names, while it's what most of us are used to, only go back to the WHA merger. Some tradition. West/East has been the division of the league for more years than the Adams/Norris/Smythe/Patrick setup which lasted for 19 total seasons, and that was the case until 80-81, and became the case again in 2006-07. The named divisions were also divided geographically anyway, and named for people who also have awards named for them. If you want to honor more recent greats, name the divisions with great players, coaches, etc. who do not have awards named for them. I would say create a Gretzky award for assists, Orr for defensive scoring, Langway for defensive defenseman, and Howe for best forward; equivalent to Norris, basically. That would leave names such as Steve Yzerman, Ray Bourque, Jean Beliveau, Bobby Hull, Ted Lindsay, Mike Bossy, Guy Lafleur, Dominik Hasek, Denis Potvin, Patrick Roy, or Marcel Dionne as recent great retired players who could potentially have a division or conference named after them. Beyond that, there are always past league presidents or influential league officials.

Here are some reasons why renaming these trophies are not only a slap in the face of tradition, but offensive in general: Art Ross trophy: Donated to the NHL by HHOFer Art Ross in 1947 to be awarded to the league leader in points. Hart: Donated in 1923 by Dr. David Hart, father of HHOFer Cecil Hart, to be awarded to the league MVP. The NHL retired the original trophy in 1960 and replaced it with a new one in memory of Dr. Hart. Lady Byng: Donated in 1925 by Lady Byng, the wife of the then-Governor General of Canada, to recognize the player who best represents the values of sportsmanship combined with a high level of playing ability. The original trophy was given to Frank Boucher in 1935 after he won it seven times in eight years, and another was donated. In 1949, when Lady Byng died, the NHL presented a new trophy in her memory. Also of note: Pat Burns holds the record for Adams wins at 3. Jacques Demers is the only coach to ever win two Adams awards in a row. The Adams award, Selke trophy, Norris trophy, etc. were named for people who were extremely influential in taking the league and building it into what it was and is today. The Richard trophy was so named because Maurice Richard defined the idea of what an elite goal scorer was for generations. Renaming any of these trophies would be an affront to hockey tradition and fans should be outraged at the idea.

Which is all I was trying to say. Crosby is one of the ten best players in the world, but he's not even close to that when you list them based on how complete a player they are.

So you consider Wayne Gretzky more complete than Jari Kurri or Glenn Anderson?