eva unit zero

I was merely debunking the suggestion that great coaches take MEDIOCRE teams and win CHAMPIONSHIPS with them. That doesn't happen. Great coaches take STRONG teams and win championships. You don't win without both; at least not consistently. A good example of this is the Blues. Mike Keenan built a great roster, but he was unpopular and run out of town for trading Brendan Shanahan for Chris Pronger (how'd that work out again?) When he left, the Blues had possibly the best collection of talent in the league. Yet their team was never able to achieve postseason success. Why? Because the coaching was subpar. Quenneville got tons of credit for the Blues' 2000 President's trophy, but IMHO he was the LEAST significant factor in that season, as the Blues had two of the top five defensemen in the NHL at the time. Keenan turned Pronger from a drunk neverwillbe into an elite player. Keenan traded Phil Housley for Al MacInnis. Keenan acquired Pierre Turgeon. In fact, every key player on that 2000 Blues team was acquired by Keenan. Quenneville was simply the beneficiary of a good roster of skilled veteran players and an elite young defenseman in his best year.

Lemieux put up 199 points in Yzerman's 155 point season. Yzerman won the Pearson that year, and was 12th in Selke voting.

Yzerman and Lidstrom are both top-5 All-Time in their respective positions. The major difference between the two can be pinpointed to a couple of things: Yzerman, in his breakout season in 1988, suffered a freak injury that would hinder him the rest of his career, when he went crashing knee-first into the goal post. Lidstrom has been able to avoid missing time to injuries. Yzerman's injury prone years at teh end of his career were all extensions and reaggravations of the same injury. Despite that injury, Yzerman would post what I consider the greatest single season performance by any NHL forward ever the very next season. Had Yzerman suffered no injury...he might have won several Hart trophies in the 90s. How good would he have been if not for that nagging knee injury? Another thing people forget about Yzerman; Yzerman was very good defensively, especially for the numbers he was putting up offensively, for his entire career. People like to say that Bowman taught Yzerman defense. But 1988-89 was the second consecutive season Yzerman would score 50+ goals, 100 points AND finish top-20 in Selke voting.

Below are who I consider the five most important players of each Cup run that Draper has been a part of, in order by position (F, D, G) 97: Yzerman, Fedorov, Lidstrom, Konstantinov, Vernon 98: Yzerman, Fedorov, Shanahan, Lidstrom, Osgood 02: Yzerman, Fedorov, Lidstrom, Chelios, Hasek 08: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen, Lidstrom, Osgood Twelve names show up there. Draper is not among them. That's argument enough for me why he doesn't deserve jersey retirement.

Ok, let's review: Scotty Bowman coached the Blues, Canadiens, Sabres, Penguins, and Red Wings. Let's look at how well those teams performed the years before he was hired: Blues; Bowman was their first coach. They have never won a championship. Made three finals appearances in four seasons with Bowman as coach. Canadiens; Won the Stanley Cup the year before Bowman was hired. Won four Cups in eight seasons as coach. Sabres; Lost in round 1 the year before Bowman was hired. Never made the finals with Bowman as coach. Penguins; Won the Cup the year before Bowman was hired. Won one Cup in two seasons as head coach. Red Wings; Among the league's best teams in the years leading up to Bowman's hiring. Won three Cups in nine years with Bowman, with one finals loss. In none of those situations did Bowman inherit a poor team and turn them into a Cup winner. In fact, he twice inherited a Cup winning team. The only truly mediocre teams he was hired to coach were the Blues and Sabres; his postseason results there were decent, but not championships. Bowman isn't a great coach by your definition; meaning your definition is wrong, as Bowman is definitely a great coach. Here's a better definition: A great coach is able to consistently get the best results possible from the players he has. A good coach will consistently get the results expected of his players (assuming they are reasonable expectations) and a poor coach will consistently get results that would be considered underachieving. Take a look at the rosters in the NHL, and then think how that team stacks up on paper against the rest of the league, compared with how well they actually did. That gives you an indication of their coach's ability, and that is why the Adams rarely goes to the coach of the team that is picked in preseason as the President's trophy winner; because a 'good' coach will get them to that result.

He is a HOF lock. You don't win 400 games (which will happen either next year or the year after) in the NHL, as well as start for two Cups, and NOT make the Hall. Brodeur was considered a HOF lock when he had 324 wins, two Cups, and no Vezinas. Why doesn't 363 wins, two Cups, and no Vezinas put Ozzie in the same seat? Brodeur's team has been just as good as Osgood's; better defensively, in fact. How come Osgood with comparable career accomplishments is a 'maybe if he wins another Cup' yet Brodeur was an absolute lock? And as far as Ozzie's GAA, in many seasons he has either lead the league or been among the league leaders in GAA. Say what you want about 'dead puck' era...but his GAA is still better than most guys to play in the same period of time.

No players' numbers were retired in the 50s. Of numbers hanging from the JLA rafters, only Howe and Delvecchio were retired before 1990. Howe's in 1971 when he left the Wings. Shortly thereafter, Delvecchio's was retired and then later unretired, and then retired again in 1991. Lindsay, Abel, and Sawchuk were all retired in the 90s. The only two players after Lidstrom who even get a look are Fedorov and Osgood. Shanahan left the club in the same fashion as Fedorov did, but wasn't villianized for it because he wasn't the team's best forward at the time. Fedorov had HOF stats when he left Detroit, and would be a lock had he stayed. The popular sentiment regarding him is enough to keep it from happening, but if he comes back that may change. Osgood is the only player who has been important enough in the regular season and playoffs long-term AND is currently in good standing with the organization. Draper is a career third liner who has had a couple notable seasons but has basically been a support player. If you hang Draper's number, you have to do the same for the following guys that he played with who played on the top two forward lines or defensive pairs, or were the starting goalie during a Cup season: Larionov, Kozlov, Fedorov, Shanahan, Sandstrom, McCarty, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Holmstrom, Devereaux, Hull, Filppula, Franzen, Samuelsson, Konstantinov, Lidstrom, Fetisov, Murphy, Eriksson, Rafalski, Kronwall, Stuart, Vernon, Osgood, Hasek. In other words...please NEVER bring up Draper's name in the context of seriously suggesting jersey retirement. He's not that good or important to the team, never has been, and never will be.

Because it shows how long a guy has played well with one team. If a guy wins a lot of games in one team's jersey, then he was good enough to be a starting goaltender on a good team for a long time. It doesn't say whether a guy is a better All-Time player..but does give one indication of whether that player is worthy of jersey retirement with one particular team. Oh, and btw...Osgood is the only goalie to truly contend for the title of 'best goalie in the NHL' in a Wings uniform since Terry Sawchuk. Just for those of you throwing out (or getting ready to) things like "Ozzie=Cheveldae" and "Hasek is the second best Wings goalie in everz!!!" Fact: Chris Osgood is first or second in every important goaltending category in Red Wings history. The fact that he is challenging or beating pretty much every Wings goaltending record is a pretty strong indication of the fact that he has been the best Wings goaltender after Sawchuk. Ultimately, if Ozzie hadn't been stuck with the undeserved 'average goalie on a great team' tag early in his career, he would have at least one Vezina by now. And he might have won three Cups instead of two.

Career third liners do NOT get their numbers retired. No matter how popular they are.

The Wings will be carrying 13 forwards and 8 defensemen. Lidstrom, Rafalski, Kronwall, Meech, and Lebda are signed; meaning they have to pick three more of Stuart, Chelios, Lilja, and Quincey. HOWEVER; forward Tomas Kopecky is injured and will likely be on IR when the season starts. Derek Meech has shown he is capable of playing forward. So the likely solution is that, unless Lilja or Stuart chooses not to return, then Meech will be playing forward as a fill in for Kopecky to start the year. And as popular as Lebda is around here...he's the most expendable defenseman of the ones who could potentially be leaving.

Osgood with Detroit already has one of the highest single-team wins records ever. After a full season next year, he will pass Mike Richter (NYR), Patrick Roy (Mtl), Turk Broda (Tor). That will leave only Jacques Plante (Mtl), Martin Brodeur (NJ), Terry Sawchuk (Det) and Tony Esposito (Chi) as guys who have won more games in a single uniform. Brodeur is the only one that could be considered out of reach for Osgood. If he finishes as the all-time wins leader on the Wings, and second only to Brodeur among single-team wins...how can he NOT get his number retired? For all the talk about 'Osgood played on a great team' there is no talk comparing the 90s/00s Wings to the 80s Oilers or Islanders, the 70s Canadiens, or any of the other 'best teams of all-time' that many of the other goaltenders on that list played behind. So it's unreasonable to say his numbers came from great teams when other "better " goaltenders who played on better teams didn't post Ozzie's numbers, isn't it? HHOF lock...and if he keeps up his play (which is likely) then he should have his jersey hanging from the rafters.

IIRC, no numbers were hung until after the team moved to the Joe.

Ok...do you anticipate Staal being worth $5m on average over the next 3-4 seasons? Because I don't. Just for reference, centers whose cap hit was between 4.5m and 5.5m this past season are listed below: Mats Sundin Olli Jokinen Peter Forsberg Marc Savard Michael Nylander Patrice Bergeron Saku Koivu Jason Spezza Jason Arnott Now tell me, honestly...do you see Staal's AVERAGE season over the next few years fitting in properly with that group? From the third line? Defensive specialists don't get paid the big money if they don't ALSO score. If Staal doesn't score, he doesn't get paid anywhere near that. If he stays on the third line as a defensive specialist, he probably is closer to 12 goals than 29 next year. If he moves to a scoring line, he's not helping the team as much unless it's as the second line center with Malkin converted to play the wing. You're right. Contracts are about the future...which is why I valued Staal at nearly double what Samuelsson makes despite the fact that right now they are comparable level of players. Because Staal is likely to improve, while Sammy is not. Look at it this way; if Samuelsson were 19, and Staal were 32...how much would they be worth? And finally... Samuelsson would have been on the first PK unit and would have been used primarily for his defense had he played for the Pens this season. He wasn't in Detroit because Detroit has a team full (literally) of defensively capable forwards. Sammy is probably one of the 120 best defensive forwards in the NHL, yet he plays very little PK time because his team is so deep with top penalty killers.

Hart- Ovechkin. In a landslide. Norris- Lidstrom. Also, in a landslide. Selke- Zetterberg. Should be a close race, though; Z should win, however. Vezina- Brodeur. Nabokov has been a surprisingly common pick...despite the fact that he played on a much better team that Brodeur and posted significantly worse stats. People talk about how many games nabokov played; Brodeur played just as many and does it EVERY YEAR. Byng- Datsyuk. Because ya just gotta... Calder- Kane. Dominant rookie with no prior professional experience. Toews might have taken it had he not been injured....but he was. Adams- Boudreau. I want to pick Babcock, but the fact that Boudreau turned around a team that most had marked as 'out of playoff contention' and got them to a finish with a diviion crown will give him the Adams.

You clearly missed the bulk of what I was saying. I said that right now, they are comparable players. I didn't say Sammy will have a better FUTURE than Staal. The fact that Staal was matched up with top opposing forwards has more to do with the fact that he plays on a team that has a lot of one-dimensional forwards who don't play defense well than it does with any advantage over Samuelsson's defense. But right now, both are solid defensive players who throw some hits and have decent size, to go with an ability to score 20 goals that hasn't been consistently displayed. Saying "Staal is only 19, he'll be a beast in a few years" does NOTHING to change that fact. If anything, this consensus that Staal is worth 3-4m for a 3 year deal only reinforces that anyone on this board who bashes Samuelsson is an ignorant fool who is talking out of their ass; because Sammy makes barely more than a million and he's producing at the same level as Staal is.

NFM... Here's a suggestion for a scoring method: You pick a series score. You start with 5 points per series, and receive a -1 for each game you are off for each team. Picking the exact series score will also yield 2 bonus points, for a total maximum of 7 points per series and 105 points per season. For example, say I pick Detroit to sweep 4-0, and instead Detroit is swept. I get zero points. But, say I pick Detroit to win 4-3, and they lose 4-3. I get 3 points. Under the original system, picking a close seven game series and getting the winner wrong would result in zero points, while picking a team to sweep and have them win in seven would be 1 point. The wrong team pick is actually closer (correct number of games, only off by the winner of the final game) but the 'sweep' pick gets rewarded more. Under my suggestion, the wrong team pick is worth 3 points, while the sweep pick is worth 2 points. Picking the right team to win 4-2, and having them win 4-3, would yield 4 points. That's 3 below the maximum, but this provides a value to being exactly right without rewarding 'safe' picks such as always picking a winner in 5 or 6 games, as those are the series lengths with the least to lose as you can only be 2 games off at most if you picked the winner, instead of seeing a potential loss of 3 points. Also, going based off of negatives for both sides means someone who picked a tight seven game series and was right on that, but wrong on the winner, gets something while a predictor of a sweep by the losing team would still get nothing.

In terms of right now ability? You bet. Both are capable of 20 goals, but not sure bets. Both are reliable defensive players who are not Selke contenders, but are well above average. The difference is that Samuelsson's value might be at its peak right now, while Staal's is growing rapidly. If I were comparing Staal to Sammy in terms of overall ability AND potential, I wouldn't have said Staal was worth about $2m per year for a three year deal.

*headdesk*

He won it nine times as a coach, and including this year has won it two other times in the front office although I am unsure of how this year's Cup counts, as his role is 'special consultant' and that's kind of unusual.

His brother was playing in a primarily scoring role at 20. Jordan won't be. And even if he does explode? That just means that they can trade Malkin for a couple of talented wingers so they aren't the Pittsburgh helicopters. And I didn't say I questioned his consistency; I was more saying that a 17 goal drop brings up the consistency issue from a negotiation standpoint. Which hurts his value. If he scores 30 next year, then it might go away. If he scores less than 20, though, his value goes down because he's then two years removed from his one 20-goal season, and has consistently scored third line-type numbers for two seasons. I expect Ray Shero to wait until early next season to see how Jordan is performing, and if he is not scoring, to offer him a deal that would take him to the cusp of UFA status for less than $3m a year. If Jordan is scoring at a 30+ goal rate, I wouldn't be surprised to see an offer above $3m for the same length. Shero seems like a fairly good hockey head, and that's the kind of thing I would expect from such.

There are four UFA names I would REALLY like explored in the offseason as depth acquisitions: F Jason King G Brent Krahn F Josef Vasicek G Alex Auld All three guys have plenty of skill but for whatever reason haven't been able to put it together. Sort of like a Dan Cleary type of signing. Signing a guy because he's got decent raw skills but hasn't been able to put everything together consistently, but when he has he's been a very good player. King reminds me a great deal of Cleary. Versatile winger with scoring talent who needs to be grabbed and molded by a coach like babcock. We all think of Cleary as a hard working, defensive stalwart. When he came to Detroit on a tryout, he was neither and had to become that to justify his presence on the roster. Vasicek is a big kid who has plenty of talent; his mental situation is the only question. He was a beast in the 2002 playoffs, for example. Not giving him a look would be irresponsible. Krahn was supposed to be the next superstar goalie coming out of juniors; worst case scenario is that he doesn't play well enough to justify his presence above Howard, and he's sent to Grand Rapids and serves as an experienced partner in a tandem with Larsson or he is waived and another team takes him on what ifs. Best case scenario is that he gets his head on straight and lives up to even a fraction of his potential, allowing us to save Howard one more year and then have a 'good problem' when we have two skilled young netminders who are NHL ready and we trade one of them for picks or prospects. Auld is a similar story to Krahn, except he played well enough for the Bruins they may want to keep him as backup to Thomas, while they try and dump off Manny Fernandez. Maybe even buy him out.

Primeau and Holik were massively overpaid. Staal might be too. I am not saying he won't get a decent paycheck...I am simply saying he won't deserve what he gets. And honestly, I don't see the Pens signing Staal for more than 3-4 years on his next deal; that would allow them to commit to a lower number, while still retaining him as an RFA when it's over. I just checked the numbers, and Staal made 2.2 average over his contract because of his huge first season...but then he scored 12 this year. Had it been 12 his first year and 29 this year, I would be shocked to see him get less than $3m for a 3-4 year deal. But instead, it makes you question his consistency and why he would have a production drop of almost 60% when he was in the same role. Anson Carter was a 25-30 goal scorer, or a 5-10 goal scorer. He was never worth anywhere close to $5m, and that was even when people thought he would consistently score he never earned better than $3m. Plus...Staal is a third line center right now. Primeau and Holik both got paid, yes, but both were FIRST line centers for much of their large deals. Staal is unlikely to be in that position in the next few years...he certainly won't be there as a Penguin. And FTR...Filppula at $2m+ is overpayment, unless it's for 5+ seasons. Finally...Staal being 19 increases his trade value, but not his contract value. If an identical player were 23, would he make less money? The only time you sign a guy for different money is for his age, and that's because chances are, he'll get worse. With youth, though, getting better is hit or miss. Staal's second season was significantly worse than his first, so that will reduce or even nullify any thought to give him more in the short term because of his potential. Staal could just as easily have had his best season in his first season, and be a 15 goal, 35 point checking center for the rest of his career. At this point, he doesn't command a contract worth that much, nor will he get the kind of length that might justify the increase. He'll likely see a MAXIMUM of $3m, for 3-4 years. $5m if he proves himself deserving in the next 2 1/2 seasons.

No. Why? Certainly not because it diminishes our chances of winning the Cup...because we all saw how necessary Downey was to our Cup run. Or did you forget that already? Maybe you were crying too much about him not being in the lineup and how it meant we wouldn't be able to win the Cup?

Fleury is one of the league's five best goaltenders right now, and he's young. If they can lock him up for 6-7 years at $5m, that's a great deal. Hossa at $6.5m is a bargain. If the Pens get that offer from him, and decline...that's a dumb move. I can see this happening, but it's overpayment. Malkin has to prove himself more before he can justify that kind of coin. His season as runner-up for the Hart was not as impressive as Crosby's Hart-winning season, and Malkin isn't the golden boy; so he gets less leeway in demanding money. Not saying he won't ask for $10m, just that he isn't worth $9m. Crosby's cap hit is $8.7m...I would expect to see Malkin closer to $8m or $8.5m, unless he's traded. Staal is a guy who has scored 20 goals once, and is a decent checking center. He has done nothing else to this point; in other words, he's a center version of Mikael Samuelsson in terms of accomplishments and defensive ability. Samuelsson makes $1.2m...so being generous we'll say Staal gets $2m. Orpik is a #3 stay at home defenseman. Why does he get paid like an All-Star? He's average at best...worth no more than $2.25m. He sure as hell isn't better than Brad Stuart, who most on this forum are saying isn't worth $4m. Malone has similar numbers to Dan Cleary offensively. Cleary is far, far better defensively. Both can play all three forward positions. Cleary got $2.8m per year, and was supposedly worth between $3m and $3.5m on the open market. Malone gets $2.5m or he's overpaid.

I say that because the Wings have four open spots for skaters, and Holland wants to keep McCarty, Lilja, Stuart, and Chelios. Downey's chance of receiving a contract hinge greatly on which, if any, the Wings retain out of those four. The only chance Downey has of making the roster is if one of them, most likely Stuart or Lilja, does not return, and even then, Downey would be the 13th forward, and probably actually 14th behind Meech, who would be serving as a swingman. And that's assuming Wings brass wouldn't give that spot to Helm (assuming, of course, that McCarty is back) instead. If McCarty doesn't return, Downey is probably in that spot instead, serving as the 13th forward with Meech in for a regular role up front or a deal made that solves the defensive logjam. And btw... Hudler was one of the Wings' best players all playoff. So now the haters are like 'a few good playoff games won't make me forget a terrible regular season' when all season the haters were saying 'yeah, but he won't help us in the playoffs.' Hudler is a good player. He was one of the team's top forwards all playoffs despite getting very limited time. Downey, OTOH, is a dime a dozen type with no hockey skills who is probably not coming back if McCarty does. Accept this.