eva unit zero

Gerard Gallant spent more time at the top of his position than Ciccarelli did. More postseason all-star selections (1 second team to no selections), more times in the top five in voting (3 to 2) and Gallant was top 7 four years in a row while Ciccarelli's best streak was two top-fives in a row, although he did place top-seven four times, non-consecutively. Ciccarelli was a much worse defensive player, however, and never received a Selke vote, unlike Gallant or Primeau. Primeau received fewer postseason all-star selections, but this is because he was a center he was competing against much tougher competition; evidenced by early appearances in the all star selection ballots while playing out of position as a left winger before he had entered his prime. Primeau was a very solid all-around player and would likely have a consistent 120-130 point player in the 80s while playing strong defense. I would have taken him over Ciccarelli every single day of the week if I had to choose; he was better at everything in hockey except sucker punching. Dino doesn't deserve to get into the hall before Primeau. Not ever. EDIT: Please be sure to realize that I brought these names up because Ciccarelli was mentioned, and I feel these are all more deserving names than Ciccarelli.

Sold!

How are you going to mention Franzen and not point out that former 'elite winger' Tomas Sandstrom was on the first line on the 97 team? Sandstrom has a better chance at the HHOF than Franzen does. Sandstrom was one of the best wingers in the league and was a very good two-way player in his prime in the late 80s and early 90s. Whether he makes the HHOF is hard to say because he was competing directly with Luc Robitaille, Kevin Stevens, Gary Roberts, Brendan Shanahan, etc. but he was the guy right behind that group. Sandstrom also was a two-way winger and played both sides, which detracted from his vote total...as did his nationality at the time. Franzen is less likely to join that group than Sandstrom is. Other names who could be mentioned.... Since Ciccarelli was brought up, we can bring up: Sheppard Gallant Ogrodnick Primeau And probably others as well.

Lundqvist, Price, Vokoun, Giguere, Backstrom, Bryzgalov, Fleury, can all miss a few games next while Ozzie gets back in form and blows the league away a la last season.

The Wings can't really accomodate Sundin, even at a significantly reduced salary, without giving up a player like Cleary or Holmstrom as WELL as a player like Lilja or Samuelsson, and possibly more. If Sundin can be had for $500k, then waive Brett Lebda and sign him up. If it'll take removing a guy who should be playing significant minutes and contributes to the roster like Cleary or Homer? No dice.

Sundin probably asked to meet with Burke to find out about the Burke/Toronto rumors because Sundin is unsure about retirement, and if a guy like Burke with a strong reputation is coming in then that might tip the scales and move Sundin back onto the Leafs' roster. It would also allow the Leafs to simply send down one of their defensemen rather than trading one for a forward. Sundin would rather win in Toronto than anything else, and if he thinks there's a chance of that happening, he'll come back.

If the Frolov/O'Sullivan scenario is a legitimate situation as far as value being thrown around and what the Wild are looking for...then the only other similar trade scenario I can see in a quick look is to Nashville for the combination of David Legwand/Martin Erat, to St. Louis for Brad Boyes/Lee Stempniak, or possibly to Buffalo for Tim Connolly/Jason Pominville. In any of the above scenarios, we're likely to see a pick or two in there to fill out the value, and those are the only low/mid20's, center/winger combos on teams with cap space that have room to add a top-line winger and the combos are signed for a season or two at a reasonable level; in other words, won't immediately cost the Wild more than keeping Gaborik and signing a space-filler would, as the idea of trading him seems to be fueled by his large price tag. Gaborik is expected to cost upwards of $8.5m, so anything above $9.5m within a year or two was deemed too expensive; as was anything likely to cost that involving summer 09 RFAs. Frolov and O'Sullivan are likely to combine for close to $9.5m cap hit on their next deals also.

Jiri Hudler might be the only player in the league under 6 feet who can be one of his team's most skilled players, get two assists in a single game by forechecking and dishing the puck to teammates who score, while playing for a coach whose primary stated values are hard work and skill, yet he still gets demoted during the game to the fourth line. Babcock loves Hudler much.

Ozzie>Luongo.

Not when he did it because of when in the year his birthday fell. The real question is, if Alexander Ovechkin had been born two days earlier, would he hold all of those records, unbreakably? He would have been able to play in the 2003-04 season, and would have been a younger rookie than Crosby, whose birthday is August 7th (the draft cutoff is Sept 15th, which explains why so few players can contend with Crosby's birthday records)

Better for the team to have Hudler on the second line and Flip on the third than the reverse if you have to choose; Hudler is better suited to an offensive role than Filppula is...Filppula is better suited to a defensive role than Hudler is. Saying you have to have Flip on the second and Hudler on the third is kind of silly given the fact that DRAPER is currently centering the third line. Flip has not proven he can be a legitimate scoring threat like you are suggesting despite being given that kind of ice time; Hudler has been a scoring threat despite NOT being given that kind of ice time. Ultimately, Babcock's lack of patience with Hudler; the "I can't wait until his line isn't perfect so I can demote him in the name of experimenting with changes" attitude is really bugging me. Hudler is one of the best forwards on the team. Other guys get tons of slack for missteps they might make...Hudler doesn't fire on all cylinders and isn't exactly what Babcock wants, and he's demoted. It's like he was never really being given a chance; that his playing with Zetterberg was simply for show; to say "Hey, I gave the kid a chance on the second line and he didn't stick." when it really never happened.

His scoring last year during the regular season and playoffs, independently and overall made him top-six caliber in raw numbers and in per minute numbers. He is better than average defensively. What is it exactly you would qualify as a top six caliber forward? 60+ points and a strong penalty killer? Because I'll tell ya what, if that's your definition...There are fewer than 90 "top-six" forwards in the NHL. As far as top six on the Wings? He's the fourth-best offensive forward on the team. Putting guys like Cleary and Filppula on the second line above Hudler while Hudler plays with Draper seems like a poor move to me. Flip and Cleary are defensive stalwarts with some offensive skill. Hudler is our best offensive player after the big three, and can play defense. Which player should be the winger on Zetterberg's line? Which should be the winger for Draper's? Seems obvious. Hudler has the best shot of the three. Hudler's the best playmaker of the three. Hudler belongs on the scoring line. There are a lot of teams where Hudler would be playing on the first line with the amount of skill he has, and many fans here complain and think he isn't good enough to be on the second or third and should be on the fourth or in the press box. Serious reality check is needed. Hudler is seventh (technically, tied for sixth) in team forward scoring despite the fact that he has spent most of the season seeing #10 forward ice time. I still call for trying a second line with Hudler centering Hossa and Cleary or Franzen. Hudler's primary instincts seem to be as a playmaker. Yes, he can shoot, and is respectable defensively...but let's see what happens if you give him two wingers who can score goals and play defense. I think the result would be pretty awesome.

I would make a couple minor changes. Swap Hudler with Samuelsson or Filppula. Swap Kronwall or Stuart with Rafalski.

Favorite? Chris Osgood Other guys I have liked a lot: John Vanbiesbrouck Kirk McLean Mike Vernon Andy Moog Sean Burke Martin Brodeur Tom Barrasso Ed Belfour Dominik Hasek

It went down more like this: Quincey didn't outplay Lilja or Chelios, or Meech. Lilja's cap hit prevented the Wings from carrying 23 players. Meech can also play forward. Babcock preferred Lebda to start the season because Lebda had been with the team. This left Quincey, rightfully or wrongfully, at the bottom of the pile.

You're talking about right after Weight came back from a knee injury, and Mush laid him out clean at center ice, right? So clearly clean that Laraque was told by coach Craig MacTavish not to go after him? And then when Weight went nuts, speared him, and went after him with the stick and started hitting him and the refs basically went 'oh well.' and went about their business like it was nothing. EDIT: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2000/12/29/march001229.html

The Wings should have dumped Lebda because he brought no upgrade in skill in either direction over the guys competing for his job; he didn't utilize his speed meaningfully and his experience did not provide any sort of significant boost to the team. Furthering that, he was a young player who had effectively hit his peak as a third pairing defenseman and has shown that he can't really handle top-four minutes in the NHL. The other guys who were competing for his job; Quincey, Meech, Ericsson, and Lilja all brought more to the team. Only Lilja is older and Lilja is a very good PKer while Lebda is incapable of playing on special teams. The others are all better than Lebda at special teams to varying degrees, younger, and have all played better in limited time in a top-four role in the NHL than Lebda has in a similar amount of time in such a role. This offseason I argued that Lilja was the logical defenseman to trade or waive based on comments made by Holland about the Wings planning on carrying 13 forwards, 8 defensemen, and 2 goaltenders, and that Lebda was the other defenseman that would be considered because he was the most worthless. Had I known they would end up carrying the 22-man roster they ended up with, I would have argued that Lebda made the most sense for the reasons I stated above. Lebda is the eighth-best defenseman on the roster right now, and this is only because Ericsson is in Grand Rapids. If Babcock really means his 'the best players will be playing' comments, Lebda will be sitting in the press box once our defensemen return from injury.

A picture from a recent test camp the Washington Capitals and hosted using rules suggestions, including changes to net and rink sizes. At the end there was a 5 minute scrimmage. Alex Ovechkin scored 12 goals in his one shift.

We need to have a defenseman on the third pairing capable of clearing the crease. I said it before preseason that the defenseman who leaves should either be Lilja or Lebda; Lilja because he is the logical choice based on the GM's intent to carry 23 players (which didn't end up happening) and Lebda because he is defensively deficient, his primary skill is speed, yet he doesn't seem to create offense or handle the puck well. Even if he is better than Quincey now, (and I said this then) keeping him over Quincey is a bad decision because Lebda's skills and positioning haven't really improved much since he joined the team, while Quincey is much younger and is already more the kind of defenseman we needed to have in Lebda's spot anyway.

I am shocked nobody has mentioned the following combinations: Kozlov-Larionov-Fedorov 1995-96 Kozlov-Fedorov-Ciccarelli 1993-94 Primeau-Yzerman-Sheppard 1993-94 And of course the fastest skating line I've ever seen iced... Laplante-Roest-Butsayev...aka the Roaring 20s line.

Colorado, Dallas, and New Jersey all have pretty solid draft lists aside from Detroit. Shocking, I know. The best managed teams drafted the best players. What a stunner. Anaheim also has a pretty solid group; Philly would have some decent forwards but Joni Pitkanen would be their top defender and Brian Boucher their starting goaltender. Pens would of course have some good players via several top 5 picks recently. So the balance of power probably wouldn't look too terribly different on a yearly basis as it has; the teams that have done well have done so due to good management and drafting and how they have used those assets. The teams that haven't, obviously have not managed their teams well in any aspect. EDIT: The Islanders would have G: Luongo, Dipietro D: Mezei, Brewer, Chara, Redden, Tarnstrom, McCabe F: Connolly, Pyatt, Torres, Dumont, Hlavac, Bertuzzi, Weinhandl Plus other forwards who currently are prospects that have yet to establish themselves. Weak up front...but more than made up for on the back end.

I included London merely because it was a large population center in Southern Ontario. I leave Hamilton out because if you assume that there truly is this mythical "Toronto Overflow" that would justify having a second team, then currently it should be helping prop up the Sabres, right? Hamilton is halfway between the two, so it's reasonable to argue that hockey fans from Hamilton who cannot get Leafs tickets should go to Sabres games instead, right? Well, Buffalo has consistently had trouble filling their arena. Imagine what happens to that team when you add another team in Hamilton? I'm not concerned about the welfare of the Maple Leafs. They'll be fine. It's the Sabres who are the team that will suffer. If a team is to move to Hamilton, the ONLY logical choice is the obvious one; the Buffalo Sabres. Here's an analogy. Two patients are in the hospital. One is a senior, has several chronic illnesses, has been a severe alcoholic all his life and only has his left kidney. The other has kidney cancer, localized to the same kidney and causing the kidney to fail. The cancer patient is otherwise the paragon of health. What you are basically suggesting is removing the cancer patient's right, healthy kidney and giving it to the senior, thus directly and imediately placing the cancer patient's life in danger.

You argued in such a way that it seemed like you were arguing that Jagr deserved it over Lemieux. My point was that Jagr's point totals were inflated by his playing with Lemieux. Had Lemieux played the same number of games as Jagr at the same points per game, he scores 189 points. That's a 40-point margin over the second place person in the scoring race, who was also the second place person on his team and line. Jagr didn't belong anywhere near the voting...but Lemieux certainly was a valid candidate. Who else would you have given the Hart to that year? The other finalists were Lindros and Messier. Messier was about 15th in scoring and IMHO should not have been anywhere NEAR the Hart. Lindros scored 115 points. Fedorov scored 107 and won the Selke also; he finished 5th in Hart voting with Jagr 4th. Lemieux ended up with more than 50% of the first place votes.

Maybe they can get Bryan Murray back...

That was the only season in which Jagr scored those kind of gaudy numbers, and he finished second in scoring, well behind Lemieux. Lemieux exceeded that scoring total several times, and that season he was playing out of position as well. Third in scoring was Ron Francis, who centered Lemieux and Jagr. While I don't know if Lemieux truly was the most valuable player that year, Jagr certainly was not. Speaking of that year, IMHO Yzerman should have won the Selke that season instead of Fedorov...but that was an extremely close decision and I can't really say Fedorov wasn't deserving also. In a given year, each team has their most valuable player, who by one definition could be considered a Hart candidate. In 1995-96, Jagr was not the MVP for the Pens. Typically, a good way of defining "MVP" is as the player who has the biggest impact on a team that had some level of regular season success, whose absence would have been the most noticeable. A team that finishes at the bottom of the standings doesn't have a Hart candidate because if he were injured and lost for the season, what's the difference in how the team would fare? Would they drop in the standings? Nope. A team like Detroit that is stacked, what happens if their best player misses ten games? Do they suffer as much as a weak team losing the same caliber of player for ten games? If not, then isn't the weak team's player thusly more valuable to that team as more of that team's chances for success are riding on his shoulders? Anyone who complains "Waaah, Detroit gets shafted in Hart voting because we have great players!" clearly does not understand what the difference between "Best Player" and "Most Valuable Player" is and can blame your own thought process for the fact that Yzerman did not win the 89 Hart as I mentioned earlier.