eva unit zero

If you go back and have the voters vote with Lidstrom as a Canadian, he might have 10 or 11 Norrises by now.

You are wrong to point the finger at Zetterberg, bud. The last three games feature the first time Zetterberg has been held off the scoresheet in consecutive games this season. He has been carrying the team offensively all season; you choose now to call him out for not carrying the team because suddenly nobody can score if Z isn't the one creating the offense?

Lindros had a PPG of over 1.3 before his last four seasons, and finished with a PPG of 1.14. That puts him between Bryan Trottier and Phil Esposito. His PPG before the injuries took their toll is virtually identical to that of Marcel Dionne, and well ahead of Esposito. Lindros was far more physically dominant than any of those guys, and only Trottier played better defense. Yes, Lindros played a far shorter career, so PPG is hard to use as a comparison tool. But his career was shortened because he was one of if not the most singly dominant player in the league for a period of several years, so defensemen generally keyed on him and he took tons of physical abuse.

"Well you said..." Man, it must be comfy in your box of "This is how I want things to work."

It wasn't charging. Ovechkin did have to skate a while over as he was close to center when Kaleta started to break out. But Ovechkin's hit wasn't a "pump my feet for the length of the ice and hit you" kind of hit. He skated into the area and hit him with a normal bodycheck. Kaleta saw him coming, and instead of attempt to avoid him, he turns towards the boards and passes the puck blindly towards the middle of the ice. So now Kaleta has not only put himself in physical danger, he has put his team in a potentially bad position by dumping the puck blindly towards several opposing players at center ice.

50 goals in 49 games is pretty amazing, but it's not an 'official' "50 in 50" because it wasn't done in his team's first 50 games, which is the criteria.

I'd like you to please back up me having ever said this, or admit you are wrong, you little instigating s***.

We all know how the NHL loves expansion recently. We also know how they appear to be interested in getting teams back into Winnipeg and Quebec. Plus, we know that Jimmy B is more likely to start marketing sausages than give up having a team in Hamilton. Furthermore, the talent pool is deeper than it has been since the days of the Original Six, and players are better trained overall. Right now there are about 13 teams worth of Canadians in the NHL, and if you packed the top Canadians onto six teams you could probably challenge most Original Six teams. Think about lines like this for six different teams: Toews/Getzlaf/Doan Lecavalier/Crosby/St.Louis Cammalleri/Savard/Iginla Heatley/Thornton/Marleau Tanguay/M.Richards/Spezza B.Richards/Carter/Staal Sure, there are some teams in today's NHL that might have one line that strong. But most of them don't have strong depth and three or four very good defensemen plus an elite goaltender backing that up. But there's more than enough Canadian talent in the league right now to put six teams like that together. And Americans and Europeans in the league are matching that talent level and taking a higher and higher percentage of the roster spots. Meaning either Canadian talent is getting worse (unlikely) or the overall talent is getting better. So here's a crazy idea for expansion that would satisfy all of that, and clean up the divisions in the process. I've also included modifications to the playoff and regular season schedules, as well as rules for the expansion draft. Expansion locations: Hamilton, Houston, Kansas City, Quebec, Seattle, Winnipeg. NHL expanded to 36 teams. Division realignment: Atlantic: Carolina, Florida, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay, Washington Central: Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Kansas City, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg Northeast: Boston, Buffalo, Columbus, Detroit, Hamilton, Montreal, Ottawa, Quebec, Toronto Pacific: Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Seattle, Vancouver Regular season scheduling: No conferences, just 4 divisions. Teams play 4 games against teams in-division and 2 games against everyone else. 86 total regular season games. Playoff scheduling: Top 4 teams from each division make the playoffs. Teams play 1v4 and 2v3, and then winners play for division championship. Division champs are seeded 1-4 and play 1v4 and 2v3. Winners play in Cup final. Expansion rules: Teams can protect 12 skaters and one goaltender. All skaters under 26 who have appeared in under 300 NHL games are exempt. All goaltenders under 26 who have appeared in under 150 games are exempt. All skaters under 30 who have appeared in under 100 games are exempt. All goaltenders under 30 who have appeared in under 75 games are exempt. All teams must expose at least two players. Drafting is a snake draft in a randomly determined order. No team may lose more than four players, and drafting will continue until all teams have drafted a roster of 14 skaters and 1 goaltenders. If the list of exposed players is exhausted, all teams (except those who have already lost four players) will be required to expose an additional player. This process will continue until the draft is completed. What do you guys think?

Why doesn't San Jose get moved? Why are we moving teams based on location and past success rather than actual interest and financial stability of the team? The Isles and Blue Jackets have less interest and are less stable financially than Nashville or Los Angeles. Your plan to move teams is pretty much a random decision based on "I don't like having teams in this area. Since they haven't won a Cup, they never will and fans will never be more interested in that team than they are in watching the animations on the screen at the bowling alley. Move 'em!" Also, playing teams an odd number of times per year isn't a good scheduling tool. It results in what could be considered unfair scheduling. Teams play different at home and on the road, and there is a defined-by-rule advantage given to the home team in certain aspects. Say Montreal and Toronto are racing for the division title. They end up one point apart, Toronto winning. Toronto played two home games against the Islanders, who are the top team in the league by 15 points, and won both in a shootout, while losing the away game by three goals. Montreal played one home game against the Isles and won it, while losing one away game in a shootout and one in overtime. Do you think the team that came in second in the division might have a complaint about the scheduling? Had the situation been reversed, it seems likely that Montreal would have one more point, and Toronto would have two fewer; thereby swinging the division in Montreal's favor with a two-point margin of victory.

How am I being biased? I picked a roster for the US Olympic team. I left Kane off because I don't want him there because of his personal attitude, and acknowledged that he will probably be on the actual team. Where do you get bias in this?

If you take away Eric Lindros' last four seasons, he still has more points than Cam Neely, in 100 fewer games, with a comparable number of goals. That doesn't even account for the fact that Lindros actually won major awards and stuff. Lindros joined the league and was instantly one of the league's best players. He remained so until injuries caused him to have to miss large portions of seasons and then retire at the age of 34, having played only 760 games in his career. There was never a point in Neely's career where he was better than Lindros was at any point before his second year in New York when he was suffering massively from the concussions and other injuries.

A snake draft is where the draft order in the odd rounds is reversed in the even rounds; meaning the team at the end of the round will pick again immediately afterwards to start the next round. Say I was Houston's GM, and picked 6th and of the top players available, there were two I thought were equally talented. Instead of having to make a tough decision, I would be able to pick one 6th in the first round, and one 1st in the second round.

I'm glad I'm not Burke, because I like not being a big fat ******* with a s***ty reputation and a s***tier team. I still say the team could get along fine without Kane. On my roster he'd plug into Gionta's spot...we'd be changing out Gionta for a small, quick winger with a very good shot and 40-goal potential. Wow, big change there. Total difference from what was there before. Like...completely changes the shape of the team.

I still would not personally select Kane. He'll probably be on the team, but I wouldn't pick him and don't want him there.

Parise, Ryan, Kesler, Miller are all better. Rafalski is perhaps better as well; he's certainly far less of a liability. Connolly is not far off of Kane if at all, and the same for Stastny or Kessel. Carle is also up there in skill and performance. Kane is good, but he's right in there with a lot of other players at the same level and he is a one trick pony.

I've gotten to the point of ignoring this..but in a thread about mispronouncing names... Federov= Feh-durr-ov Fedorov=Feh-door-ov Just saying...while we're talking about Brad Lebda and Darren Meech, can we try and get rid of the Sergei Federovs?

Kane is the USA's 3rd, maybe 4th best winger. His only skill is his shot, and he hasn't shown that he is a good enough player to make use of that shot without a playmaker or some kind of additional threat on his line. Same kind of criticisms Kessel was slammed with in his negotiations this summer, except the only 'attitude problem' comments you ever hear about Kessel are about the fact that he wanted in the kind of money a 40 goal RFA gets paid, and Boston couldn't pay it. Kane, OTOH, beat up a cabbie over $0.20 despite the fact he's a god damn millionaire and should be giving the cabbie a $20 tip. So no thanks to a selfish child who is a defensive liability and whose contributions can be replaced by players who fit better as part of a, get this, TEAM.

Too slow Drake. Maybe next time.

Man, I sure am glad we used the 42nd overall pick in 2005 to draft Latendresse instead of Abdelkader just like everyone here except me was saying!

After some more time to actually put thought into it, I have made some modifications to my Team USA: Parise/Kesler/Ryan Blake/Connolly/Kessel Brown/Stastny/Gionta Langenbrunner/Drury/Rolston Rafalski/Carle Goligoski/Greene Johnson/Suter Miller Anderson Taxi: Dubinsky, Wheeler, Whitney, Thomas As far as Kane goes, I didn't forget him. I left him off intentionally because I don't want that little s*** representing my country.

Neat games.

Team USA: Parise/Kesler/Ryan Blake/Connolly/Kessel Brown/Gomez/Gionta Langenbrunner/Drury/Dubinsky Rafalski/Carle Goligoski/Greene Johnson/Suter Miller Anderson Taxi: Pavelski, Wheeler, Whitney, Thomas

ES: Lidstrom-Ericsson Rafalski-Meech Lebda-Stuart PP: Lidstrom-Rafalski Ericsson-Stuart PK: Lidstrom-Rafalski Ericsson-Stuart

You know the saddest thing about the UM/OSU game? Michigan outplayed OSU for the majority of the game, and just made a couple stupid mistakes. OSU's interception near the end zone was Matthews not watching for the ball. Forcier's 4th INT was locking on to one receiver and the defensive player seeing that. Of course there was the missed FG from peewee range. Michigan gave that game away.

Move 'em up to Ann Arbor.