eva unit zero

Nick Lidstrom could very well be considered the best defenseman ever when it's all over. The reason Bobby Orr was able to be so far ahead of the competition had much more to do with the lack of NHL-level talent in the 70s and early 80s than Orr's top-end talent. Orr is ahead of Lidstrom, but if Lidstrom wins three or four more Norrises that might not be the case. Lidstrom was a first-team all-star nine of the past ten seasons, and nine of sixteen total in his career. Orr was the best in eight of twelve seasons. People often cite longevity and health as the reason Gretzky was better than Lemieux. If Lidstrom plays five more seasons, and is a first team all-star every one of them...that gives him the same 2/3 ratio Orr had of first-team selections. In that case, the longevity argument would then rank Lidstrom ahead of Orr. No, right now, Lidstrom does not rank above Orr. But to say he could not finish as the best ever is naive.

Best part is, the classiest Av in that video is Foote, who is the one who high sticked Yzerman.

That's Buffalo, not St. Louis.

If your mention of Ranford and Ward's Smythes had nothing to do with Ozzie, than WTF were you talking about? I said that outside of one good playoff run each they have never been elite level goaltenders. This is a fact. It's not like asking if Henrik Lundqvist should have been a Vezina finalist this year. It's like asking if Johan Holmqvist should have. There is only one answer to the question.

Grant Fuhr entered the 89-90 season as a top-five goaltender in the league. He missed a good chunk of games injured and this resulted in his being unable to play in the postseason despite his team's best efforts to get him ready. The team considered him the starter as he played a LARGE majority of games when healthy that season. Ward didn't even start the playoffs, was pulled twice during the postseason, and has yet to post a .900 save percentage or a GAA below 2.90 for a full season. Neither Ward nor Ranford's Smythe performance - as of yet their only notable postseason performance - was as good as Osgood's 98 Cup run. Ozzie's 98 run was his SECOND best Cup-winning performance. Do you guys just not get the difference between Ward/Ranford and Osgood?

The lunacy in that article: Saying that Satan+Fedotenko=Hossa+Malone, or the comment about 'Hossa not buying in' to the hometown discount philosophy when he took FORTY MILLION LESS than Pittsburgh offered to go to a team that had a much better shot at winning. After all, The Wings without Hossa beat the Pens with Hossa....so the Wings WITH Hossa should be even further ahead of the Pens without Hossa.

The day after we see the Wings swap Datsyuk for Marc Savard.

The way it read was as if the data from home games was ignored. If different data sources are used, that is better, BUT: It still is basing a purportedly objective, statistic-based ranking on a completely subjective data set. And you know the major difference between Chris Osgood and Cam Ward or Bill Ranford? Cam Ward and Bill Ranford have never been elite-level goaltenders in their career outside of one stellar cup run that happened because their team's starter was unable to perform. They are guys who weren't even the best goalie on their team in the year they won the Cup, they just happened to be the guy in net and playing well. Osgood has for the most part of his career been one of the better starters in the league. And ultimately, it comes down to this: Most people feel you can't win the Cup without great goaltending. Your "statistical analysis" gives the best numbers to goaltenders who perform decently on bad teams, and do not give good numbers to goaltenders who perform very well on very good teams. That list is much more about a player's value to his current team than about a player's ability, and cannot be used to provide a list of who the best goaltenders are. Why? Because every team's players are rated based on what the author calls 'marginal goals' referring to the margin of victory. In other words: In a game between Detroit and Columbus, if Henrik Zetterberg scores one even strength goal one two shots in 19:05, and Rick Nash scores one even strength goal on two shots in 19:05, and the final score is 1-1, Rick Nash has made more of a statistical contribution than Henrik Zetterberg. The list you posted is an attempt to quantify how valuable a player is to his team in relation to how valuable another player is to his team. It does not say anything about which player is better, and except in the case of teammates does not say anything about who is more valuable to a given team. As Osgood only played half the season, his number is artificially low because he can't have been as valuable as someone who played 70 games and performed similarly. Had Osgood put up those kinds of numbers over 65 or 70 games instead of 43, he'd have definitely, without a doubt, been in the top ten goaltenders in VALUE. Of course, my ranking wasn't about value; it was about ability...so your list is pretty meaningless in that regard. I'd like to see what puckloo thinks of your list claiming Hasek would have only been good enough to be a minor league backup had he been a Penguin last season.

Sorry, I misread your post; you made a comment about the Rockies being bad, and led into the thing about the division.

It states in the 'explanation' of what the metrics are that goaltenders are rated based on their stats, but their stats are then modified by a weighted metric representing team defense based on 'shots faced' and 'shot quality' that is completely unreliable because the author states that he threw out 'home' data because of biased reporting as compared to the road data. That invalidates it further than the fact that it is already a purportedly 'statistical' measurement that uses SUBJECTIVE measurements to determine which player had better stats. It's like trying to use Hits as an indicator of who the most physically dominant player in the league is. Every arena records them differently...so what do you do? Do you take the raw stats? No. Do you use road stats only, like the author in question? Well, that gives you a more objective approach, but it completely removes the fact that many players play differently at home and on the road. A metric that arbitrarily throws out part of the data 'just because' is completely and totally invalid. It would be like a restaurant tracking what percentage of every chef's meals were sent back, but not counting Bob's because one of the regular patrons didn't like him. It changes the statistical set arbitrarily and with no real reason. Oh, and as far as legitimate grounds to stand on:

The Rockies didn't come from the WHA. The Avalanche did. The Rockies were the former Kansas City Scouts, and are currently known as a the New Jersey Devils.

Fedorov's total contract value, including all bonuses, was $38m over 6 years. For the best player in the world at the time, it was a perfectly reasonable contract offer. It would have resulted in five first-round draft picks had the Wings not matched. Instead, Fedorov was key to two Cup wins in the next five seasons.

That metric seems to be more concerned with how valuable a player is to his team than how good he is. Not the same thing. The fact that it uses manufactured stats and throws out half of the data recorded that would otherwise be used because the person who wrote the paper felt the data was 'inaccurate' completely destroys the credibility of it. Sorry.

Osgood had a winning record everywhere he played. The .894 and .888 you bring up? Those are separate portions of the same injury-plagued season. He finished the year with a .892, which was his worst performance of his career. He bookended it with .910s in each of his full seasons away from Detroit, earning team MVP honors both times. Osgood has never had a losing season in the NHL. Ever. Not once. Most 'Great' goaltenders have. But the most important thing? Those Blues and Isles teams Osgood played for? They were worse than Luongo's Vancouver team. Yet Osgood is the goaltender who didn't miss the playoffs. Luongo was widely criticized for comments towardsthe end of this season about not caring. Osgood, OTOH, was praised by his teammates towards the end of the 2004 season. Keith Tkachuk even said they should have carried him off the ice, because he carried them to the playoffs. But just for your reference... Since you are so hung up on save percentage as the 'only' indicator of goaltending prowess... I clearly stated that my ranking was based on October to June. Luongo's save percentage over that period was .917 in 4233 minutes, while Osgood's was .919 in 3569 minutes. Luongo's record was 35-29-9 against Osgood's record of 41-13-4. Luongo had 6 shutouts, Osgood had 7. Luongo played 73 games, Osgood played 62. And most importantly, the best games of Osgood's season came in the playoffs, while the worst games of Luongo's season came leading up to them. Osgood won the Cup, Luongo missed the playoffs by a hair. I am not saying Luongo can't be argued to have a higher top level. I am saying that Luongo hasn't proven the ability to play at his best when under the ultimate pressure. Osgood has been a key member of two Cup teams. He has willed lesser teams to the playoffs; teams that missed the playoffs before he got there and then again after he left. Luongo has yet to prove he can perform in the clutch. He has gone to teams that were either perennially in the playoffs or on the playoff bubble before his arrival and has made the playoffs exactly once in his career; suggesting that perhaps his presence might not be so beneficial to the team?

I'm more imagining a 'Franzen/Hudler/Hossa/Kronwall/Samuelsson' second unit going against other teams' second PK units! HOLY CRAP!!!!

Shane Doan, who is six years older, scored comparably to Penner in the 06-07 season. Both players signed five year deals of similar value. Penner scored more goals and was a key player on a Cup winner while playing on the second line. Doan scored fewer goals, his team did not make the playoffs, and he was the first liner. Todd Bertuzzi scored fewer goals per game and similar points per game to Doan and Penner, is the oldest of the three, and had health issues. Doan signed for $4.5m per year for 5 years. Bertuzzi signed for $4m per year for 2 years. Penner clearly performed at a level between the two in 06-07...so his contract value should be between the two...like, say $4.25m. His durability and potential for improvement is the highest, so a five year deal like Doan's is reasonable. Ryan Smyth, who scored 36 goals and 68 points, received a $6.25m deal. He's six years older than Penner. He received slightly less per-point than Penner did, but Penner again is not even in his prime yet, while Smyth is towards the end of his. I argue that based on these three similar style players with similar performance, Penner received fair value on his offer without factoring in that he is considerably younger and the most likely to improve his value on his current contract. Doan is the only other player I listed who I expect to earn a raise over his current cap hit; the other two may be retired by then. As far as Vanek is concerned...many felt he was Buffalo's best forward in 06-07. Daniel Briere received an offer worth $6.5m per year, Chris Drury received one worth $7.05 per year. If Vanek was the best forward, his deal should be worth that much. Now consider that Briere and Drury are at their peak, and Vanek was just breaking out. Vanek scored more goals than either Drury or Briere this year, and more points than Drury (almost as many as Briere) and he can be expected to get much better as he is still what, 23? Vanek's contract could turn out, long term, to be a good deal for Buffalo. Lowe made two shrewd moves last summer; he tried twice, once successfully, to poach a promising, versatile young winger who he could build his team around. More to blame for high UFA costs are teams that have signed second tier veterans who have ALWAYS been second-tier veterans with one sudden good season to top-end contracts in the hope that they are just late bloomers who will reach another level, or signing washed up vets to big contracts in hopes that they can find what they had a few years ago. Todd Bertuzzi in Anaheim, Ed Jovanovski in Phoenix, Scott Gomez in NYR, Bryan McCabe in Toronto, Daniel Briere in Philadelphia, Dan Boyle in Tampa Bay, Manny Fernandez in Minnesota, Robert Lang in Chicago, Kevin Bieksa in Vancouver, are a few examples of this kind of thing. Briere especially. His deal runs through 2014-15 with a cap hit of $6.5m. He'll be 36 at that point, and is a player who relies primarily on speed. Only one other deal is that long or longer for that much or more. That would be Alexander Ovechkin's deal. Briere, Boyle, Gomez, and Miikka Kiprusoff are the only players currently over the age of 25 who are currently signed through the 2013-14 season...Briere is the only one whose deal extends beyond it. A deal where you are signing a player long term for high money in likely his best season of his career, and you are overpaying him, is always going to be a bad deal. Penner has many career years ahead of him and will be a bargain for the deal lowe signed him to. Vanek also. Lowe is a good GM who didn't have a lot of options. Burke is a mediocre GM who has managed to inherit good cores in two cities and take most of the credit for the team's successes. If the Wings had to replace Holland with one of the two, Lowe in a heartbeat.

Offering the best player in the world below market value per year for a long-term contract is psychotically ignorant???

Every team in the NHL averages better attendance than the Winnipeg Jets ever did. Hartford is a worse choice for an NHL team than Ann Arbor would be; the only reason there was ever a team there is that the WHA had to compete for Boston Bruin fans. Regina, Saskatoon, Halifax, and Fredericton are all too small to support an NHL team. Even if they are in Canada. The NHL is likely to expand by at most two teams in the foreseeable future. Additional teams may move. Seattle/Portland, Milwaukee/Madison, Houston, Las Vegas, Kansas City, Indianapolis, and Hamilton are by far the most likely destinations for new or relocated teams. Any other suggestions (such as Hartford or Winnipeg) are based on nostalgia, bigotry, or both. Please note; only one WHA team has survived without relocation. It's also the one that won five Stanley Cups. If the Oilers had never won the Cup, do you think Edmonton has a team right now? No way in hell would there still be a team there given that they almost lost it with all that success.

Big difference, though? All of our roster signings have been players in their 20s, rather than players approaching 40.

Orpik what? Orpik will be making $3.75m per season. He's not worth that kind of money. He is slow, poor offensively, and tends to get caught out of position defensively. He would be overpaid if he made a million less per year.

Kariya's deal wasn't about winning. It was about positioning himself for free agency, as well as getting revenge on the Ducks. Bryan Murray declined to pick up Kariya's 10m option in hopes of getting him to take a deal worth 7m so that the team could afford to add Selanne. The Ducks, if you recall, had just been to the Cup finals. Such a deal might have made the Ducks the 2004 champions; adding Teemu Selanne to a team that was a period away from winning the Cup. Instead, Kariya took far less to sign with a worse team that had a better group of forwards but less chance of winning because they would give him a one-year deal that would hopefully allow him to post a huge season going into UFA. Kariya's signing with Nashville and St. Louis as the highest bidder further reinforces the fact that Kariya was more interested in gold than silver. If Kariya was truly about winning as some of his fanboys seem to suggest, he'd have taken a cheaper deal to play for a contender rather than sign the deal that had the best moneymaking potential as he saw it, or to sign with a rival because he felt slighted by his GM asking him to take less so his team could add another elite level player. I have always felt Kariya is a selfish ******. Everything everyone was saying about 'selfish Sidney' during the finals is much more applicable to Kariya, and always has been.

I would disagree with you wholeheartedly...Game 5 vs Nashville was won only because Ozzie stole the game. The goal at the end was of the 'unstoppable' variety. And given the fact that Osgood had SIGNIFICANTLY superior numbers to Nabokov, I don't see how you can claim 'Nabokov would have made the save' when statistics suggest he makes the save less often than Osgood. Nabokov played more than 70 games this year, yes. That alone doesn't make him great. He was very good, but not great.

From October 2007 to June 2008, only Martin Brodeur was better than Chris Osgood. Ozzie was 11th in Vezina voting playing only half a season. With "starter time" he is top five without a doubt. And then he was the top goaltender in the postseason; which has typically been make or break for elite level tenders. Roberto Luongo, btw, has yet to prove he can be a clutch netminder or is the kind of guy who will find a way to make his team win, something Ozzie has done his entire career. Luongo is a very talented goaltender. Ozzie is a great goaltender. EDIT: Forwards: Detroit has three of the ten best forwards in the league. Detroit has nine forwards who could be considered 'top-six' forwards, all of whom are capable defensively and several who are top-notch defensive forwards. Best forward unit in the league. Defensemen: Detroit has three of the top ten defensemen in the world. All three are very capable at both ends of the ice. Brad Stuart would be a top-pairing defenseman on a lot of teams, and would play on the first unit for both PP and PK in many places. He's #4 in Detroit. Best defense unit in the league, EASILY. Goaltending: Chris Osgood is one of the five best goaltenders in the league, and plays his best in the clutch. Ty Conklin is as good a backup as you will find in the NHL; and he will have to compete with top prospect Jimmy Howard for the job. Top-three goaltending tandem. And furthermore...the Wings have EASILY the best GM in the league, so it's not like any holes will fail to be addressed.

I know now why Ken Holland has often been left out of 'best GM' discussions. Because it would be unfair to everyone else to include him. It's like including Lidstrom in a discussion titled 'who is the best defenseman.' It's not really fair.

Incorrect. Doug McKay (1950) and Chris Hayes (1972). McNab played 128 regular season and 25 playoff games, and Langlois played nearly 500 NHL regular season games and 53 playoff games. What was the first spelling correction made on the Stanley Cup?