eva unit zero

Datsyuk was a top flight center in the NHL and received the salary of such. Kronwall was an elite prospect who was on the verge of breaking out and had just had his first full season with any real ice time, and played very well. Datsyuk's salary was fair for his play level at the time and he has since exceeded it. Kronwall was arguably overpaid, but over the length of his deal has more than lived up to the total value. Datsyuk was two years older than Ericsson is now. Kronwall was a year younger. Ericsson is paid like a top four defenseman, and plays like a #6. He needs to play like a top four soon to prove he's worth his deal, and defensemen generally reach their peak around his age or a couple years later. Justin Abdelkader played his first two NHL games in the Stanley Cup Finals and scored a goal in each game. Does that mean he'll be deserving of a $3m-$4m cap hit on his next deal? That's basically what you're saying here. As far as the actual point of the thread (this is NOT a Jonathan Ericsson thread, please return that argument to that thread, ok?) I think the article is somewhere in the middle. Detroit fans do go a bit overboard at times. One example, which I bring up because of the photo attached, is Joey Harrington. He was a very good quarterback and posted very good numbers, but the team simply didn't win. So he was crucified for it. Wayne Fontes was the best coach the Lions have had since the 1960s. Loved by players, successful with an organization that was terrible for decades before and has been less successful in terms of division titles and playoff appearances and wins in the nearly 20 years since he was fired than the handful of seasons he was here. Yet because of how vilified he was by fans, he often gets called "the worst coach ever" simply because he couldn't take a mediocre team to the Super Bowl. He couldn't use the few good players he had and win a championship. Chris Osgood played goal for the Wings and was one of the league's best goalies for most of his career. He was nominated for the Vezina in 1996. He won the Cup in 1998, playing stellar in net. He doesn't get proper credit because the team repeated, but had traded Mike Vernon, who started for the 1997 Cup. Vernon, however, played behind Vladimir Konstantinov, the best defenseman in the world at the time, as well as Nicklas Lidstrom, one of the two best defensemen of All-Time. Osgood did not have Konstantinov, a huge blow to the team. Brandon Inge has been one of baseball's elite defensive players, and a good power hitter. Yet because of his low batting average, and possibly because he switched positions (suggesting he wasn't good enough at any single position) many fans despised him and wanted him replaced by, well, anybody. And of course, the obligatory mention of Jiri Hudler, who gets unreasonable amounts of hate despite being one of the better forwards on the Wings. Starting last season on a slump didn't help, but his finish to the year seemed to be completely ignored by those who dislike him. The fact that he is not particularly liked by his coach due to his size and speed also lead to problems for him as far as fan hate. That is the point of the article, and why it does have SOME merit.

*GRAND ENTRANCE* *applause* Thank you all, and yes, now the real fun begins. I was actually the 42nd person to vote for Hudler. It put them into a tie at 42 each. Irrelevant to the question. Filppula is clearly more valuable than either. Draper won't even play regularly if you bring him back and waive Hudler. Filppula is better than Draper defensively, he's more important to the penalty kill, and he's better offensively. And while both Hudler and Filppula would be regulars, Filppula is more important for the reasons I listed above, plus his advantage in that he is a more capable NHL center, and better on faceoffs. Hudler is better offensively, but not so much that a powerful team like the Wings couldn't make the sacrifice of Hudler to get a more solid two-way player like Filppula. As for Huds vs Draper... Are you guys on crack??? Draper's skills are that he's good on faceoffs, he's a pretty decent penalty killer, and he's fast. Let's compare that to the rest of the roster. Faceoffs: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Filppula, Helm, Franzen, and Abdelkader all are capable faceoff men. Draper is not really a significant upgrade, if at all, over any of them. PK: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Cleary, Filppula, Abdelkader, Miller, Helm, and Eaves are all better penalty killers. So ultimately, Draper brings speed. So does Chris Conner. Better speed than Draper, and he's younger. And signed. And there's Helm and Mursak also. Eaves and Cleary also have excellent speed. So why is Draper necessary, regardless of Hudler? Let's look at what Hudler brings. Hudler has a very good shot, is an excellent playmaker, and has incredible offensive awareness. Shot: Zetterberg, Franzen, Datsyuk have better shots. Cleary, Bertuzzi, and Eaves also have good shots. Playmaking: Datsyuk and maybe Zetterberg are better. Filppula is good also. Offensive awareness: Datsyuk and again, maybe Zetterberg are better. So as you can see, Hudler brings more to the team that Draper. By a fairly wide margin. If both were to have the same statistical performances they did last year, Hudler would be the more valuable player. Draper would be the #14 forward. Hudler would be one of the team's more productive scorers. If Hudler performs more along the lines of his second half last year and his 2008-09 season, he would be finishing third on the team in scoring. Second if Dats or Z misses a lot of games again this year. So... A solid scorer who could be one of the team leaders in goals and points if he plays like he has in the recent past, or a spare part? And half have voted spare part. I suppose this makes sense from people who were upset that a ridiculously overpaid McCarty was cut loose after the lockout.

Howard faced 40+ shots five times in 09-10 and four times in 10-11. He made 40+ saves four times in 09-10 and twice in 10-11. He faced 50+, and made 50+ saves, once in 09-10 and not at all in 10-11. He faced almost exactly 30 shots per game, on average, each of the past two seasons. 1997 and 2002 we received good goaltending performances from Vernon and Hasek. But neither stacked up to Osgood in 2008 or 2009. And the way you slice up the years makes it seem awfully anti-Osgood. Howard is a good tender. He has mixed reviews in his two playoff performances so far, but what is encouraging is that while the first was bad, the second was stellar. He may never be a clutch goalie, especially given his age. But he is a good goaltender and more than worth his price. If you take all goaltenders who are currently in the league Howard is one of the better ones, but I don't know that he will ever be an "elite" goalie given his age and skill level. Osgood at his age was a Vezina contender and Cup winner. Hasek was a Vezina winner at his age. Belfour, Joseph, Roy, Brodeur were all elite goalies. Kirk McLean, John Vanbiesbrouck, Mike Richter, and Tom Barrasso as well. Even Tim Cheveldae and Bob Essensa were All-Stars and Vezina contenders by that point. Howard has done well so far, but he has by no means placed himself in the upper echeleon, nor shown that he will be a truly elite goalie. Granted, Tim Thomas followed the career path of Joey MacDonald for most of his career, and then suddenly won two Vezinas in three years. But most top goalies put themselves there when given the opportunity to do so, and prove that they belong there. Every single goaltender, except for Cheveldae, I mentioned was either a Vezina nominee, a Cup winner, or both during his first five seasons of play in the NHL. Many also won the Vezina during that time. Cheveldae was mentioned because he only missed being nominated by a small margin, and set multiple Red Wing records while doing so. Admittedly, Howard played fewer than five games in each of his first three seasons, so counting those would be questionable. But he is unlikely to be nominated in the next couple of seasons. Will the Red Wings win the Cup in the next three seasons? Howard is certainly good enough that a solid team in front of him can bring that home. And he has one of the best teams in the league. So there's a pretty good chance of that happening. I don't see Howard as an elite goalie, but he still has plenty of time to change that perception. Unfortunately, most people don't change their perceptions of a player after the first two or three seasons (Osgood letting in bad goals, Selanne being poor defensively, Kariya as a floater) so even if he does manage to reach that level later on, he'll have to do it in dramatic "Timmy Tom" fashion to get noticed. Or to go from simply good at something to being the best (such as Yzerman's defensive game) so that people may not think he's the best, but they won't be able to say he's not among the best.

Jonathan Ericsson is not even a top-four defenseman on the team, and with the addition of Commodore and Kindl having more experience, he is in real danger of losing a regular spot on the roster. Datsyuk was a first liner and established star when he signed his contract, Kronwall was the #3 defenseman on a team that would win the Stanley Cup the following season. Datsyuk was 29, Kronwall was 26. Ericsson is 27. Datsyuk improved a bit over where he was before signing. Kronwall moved into his prime and had more significant improvement. Ericsson is between the two in age range. Ericsson is not likely to improve considerably; small improvements in his game are what we should hope for and expect. He will hopefully develop over the next three years into a defenseman similar to what Lilja was for the Wings, but with better skating and puck skills. I think this is also part of the logic behind the Commodore signing; he will help Ericsson develop in that direction while Salei could not.

Nah, it's Ericsson's fault. Ever since Holland wasted that pick on him he's torn this organization apart from the inside.

The reason for the Wings' success is clear.

Mike Ilitch's kids are involved with the team and invested in its success. Sorry to disappoint you.

In 1999 the Wings were forced to go with a nearly retired Bill Ranford for most of the second round because a hot Osgood was injured. Otherwise the Wings would have easily passed that round. In 2001 the Wings were hugely reliant on their power play to score goals against LA (9 of 17 total goals scored), and yet still lost Game 3 (4-3 LA, 0-for-7) and Game 5 (3-2 LA, 0-for-2) by a single goal because of a failure to score on the PP. In 2006 the Wings had a very good regular season goaltender who has since proven he was and is not capable of playing his best under heavy pressure. The Wings have had the occasional bad playoff run. But I would hardly say that they are destined for a fall soon.

Decent streak? 31 points in 43 games is a decent streak? That's more than half the season. Hardly a "streak" of any kind. More like a recovery. Of course, while we're on the subject of streaky play... what about Johan Franzen? Down the stretch he was virtually invisible and in the playoffs he was invisible after being injured; before his injury he looked ok offensively but made some major defensive mistakes that cost the Wings.

Flip isn't the playmaker Hudler is either. Jiri has a definite advantage in both of those areas. Hudler also goes to the net more readily. That said, Flip is the third best forward on the team, so it's not like he's a bad player. He's a different player; he's a good defensive center with an ok shot and good playmaking skills, who is a good fit on the second line and could potentially fill a first line role at some point in his career. Hudler outscored Datsyuk during the time they played together. Does that mean that Datsyuk was riding Hudler?

If the Brule trade goes through, the Oilers still have Fraser and may or may not figure out that he actually has a broken foot. As I said, it wasn't "I'm going to dump my injured players on this guy." Especially given that Lombardi is out in the press bitching about "having" to trade Smyth and then not being able to replace him. Sounds more like Lombardi is the ******* and Tambellini was taking $7m in cap space off his hands, and then when Lombardi didn't get Brad Richards he threw a hissy fit.

Cujo had 454 wins. Osgood had 401 wins, and 2 Cups as starter and was a game away from a 3rd. Both were strong in the postseason. During the past 25 years, the top 6 goalies in the league have been Roy, Hasek, Brodeur, Belfour, Osgood, and Joseph. Two are in the Hall. Two more are active and considered locks. So what is your argument against the remaining two?

No. My position is that the Oilers doctors missed the scaphoid fracture (which often doesn't show up on x-rays and is mis-diagnosed as a sprain) and believed that Fraser would be ready to play. Lombardi was given access to the Oilers' medical reports on Fraser. It's not like they were like "we know he's injured, hehe, let's trade him" and hid that information from Lombardi. Unless that proves to be the case, in which case Tambellini's reputation as a GM is not what he should be worrying about, Lombardi is alone responsible for this. As it is, the Oilers and Kings are attempting to work out some sort of "fix" for the deal.

Something I don't quite understand. Everyone talks about the "horrible season" Jiri Hudler had. I agree, he had a pretty bad stretch. But his season, as a whole, as not horrible. Let me illustrate. In his first 30 games, the games that people are really mad about, he scored 6 points. He then proceeded to score 31 points in 43 games. What happens if Hudler had been half as productive in the first 30 as in the last 43? He scores 42 points. Not a huge difference, but it puts him ahead of Filppula in team scoring. If he had been just as productive? He finishes with 53 points. That would rank behind only Z, Dats, and Franzen. Yes, I know his production would have been 15 points had he scored at the same rate the entire season as he did over the first 30. And I realize that these are hypothetical situations, but his ACTUAL production was 37 points. Statistically, that is a second-line scoring forward. Even with his struggles last season. So whether you consider him second-line or not, saying he had a horrible season simply isn't true. So please, whether you like him or not... enough with the "horrible season" stuff, because it simply isn't true.

Lombardi intended to buy out Fraser. The Oilers told him that he would be healthy soon enough for that. Instead of having his docs check him out before accepting, Lombardi took the deal and went after Brad Richards. Then he failed. He signed Simon Gagne instead. He made a big trade for Mike Richards. Then his doctors told him Fraser would be out longer than initially expected. He had already used Smyth's cap space. Because of the 10% rule, he could have still asked the NHL to void the deal, and then traded Smyth to the Oilers for a healthy player, yet he didn't. Sounds to me as if this is all in Lombardi's court.

Hmm. Although I'm no fan of Ericsson, Holland is correct in his assessment that Ericsson probably would have gotten more on the open market. Commodore is a significant upgrade over Salei, while White is only a small downgrade from Rafalski. Hudler and Flip were only going to leave this team in a trade which improved the team. No such trade was available without another team placing a better offer. If Emmerton is the "Ritola" situation you are referring to, Holland told Draper he would have to play for a spot on the team. Draper won't be coming to camp without a contract. Conner is unlikely to gain a roster spot as we already have speedy checking line players with better size and skill. And we don't need a *new* second line center. Datsyuk and Zetterberg are more than capable of centering the top two lines. If they are boh on the top line, Filppula or Franzen can center the second line. We need to replace Holmstrom and Bertuzzi with Dan Cleary clones. It's not that you post unpopular viewpoints. It's that you try to get people mad. You intentionally start arguments just for the sake of arguing. It's like going on a political website and posting radically opposing views and statements, even if they aren't yours. I wouldn't be surprised if you actually do that, also.

Unlikely. At minimum, it will go to the "unofficial" status where #2, #6, #16, and #91 currently reside.

Given the Hall's tendency to vote "Forward-Forward-Defenseman-Goaltender" over the past few years, so long as there are deserving players, Osgood should make it in on the first ballot. Only two retired goaltenders even come close to Osgood's accomplishments; Tom Barrasso and Curtis Joseph. Joseph's lack of any significant playoff achievements, and Osgood's advantage over Barrasso in career performance gives Osgood an edge, assuming those two aren't voted in before Osgood becomes eligible. With 454 wins, Joseph has a pretty strong case there. Barrasso has a Vezina, Calder, and two Cups plus a good number of wins himself. So both could be in the Hall before 2014.

Is that pulled from a foreign site through a translator or something? The sentence structure is completely jacked up. And when did Brian Boucher take Guy Boucher's coaching job? I thought Brian signed with Carolina to play goal.

Lombardi was upset at the initial deal because Edmonton didn't file papers stating Brule was fit to play, so he could then be bought out. Maybe Brule wasn't fit to play? Should Tambellini have falsely claimed Brule was healthy to make the trade go through instead of "here, you can have this skilled young player, but he's had a concussion recently so he might not be able to play right away." With Fraser the Oilers medical staff gave an estimated time of when he should be able to play. The Kings medical staff then disagreed with this assessment, after the trade had been made, after Lombardi had used the cap space Smyth occupied. So what ultimately happened is that Lombardi got one player he couldn't buy out because he was injured and was upset. And then he made the second deal for a player who was supposed to be healthy by a certain time. Basically, he's now upset that his staff thinks Fraser won't be healthy in time to be bought out. So he's just going to end up waiving him anyway.

No, I am just sick of the "Messier was one of the elite all-time players at everything" stuff that goes around when he was in my opinion a second-tier center with the likes of Oates, Francis, LaFontaine, and Turgeon. As for Yzerman being the third best center of his era... the two guys ahead of him are considered by virtually all hockey experts to be the top two centers of all-time. So any other "best of his era" center would be third-best. Hardly a good comparison. It's like saying Joe is the fifth-best left winger, and Rob is the seventh-best center, so clearly Joe is better. Is makes sense, except that there is so much depth at center that such a statement is silly. They waived the requirement for Mario Lemieux, but not for Ray Bourque. Bourque was the undisputed #1 defenseman of his era when he retired. Lemieux was generally considered second to Gretzky, and that he possibly could have been greater if he had been able to stay healthy. So we're talking the best defenseman of the era, or the second best center. Finally, I don't know that I necessarily agree with the "Lidstrom is so far above Yzerman" sentiment. As stated before, Yzerman had to contend with Gretzky and Lemieux. Yzerman was also underrated early in his career due to his team's lack of playoff success, despite the weak roster. It's the "Brad Park" argument. Brad Park was consistently the best defenseman in the league not named Bobby Orr (finished second to Orr four times in five years for the Norris) and then Denis Potvin, who Park finished second to twice. If Orr had not been in the league, it is entirely possible that Park wins the Norris in all six of those seasons, and goes from being "really good" to being "possibly the best ever" simply from the absence of someone who was better. If Gretzky and Lemieux are not in the league, Yzerman probably wins a couple of Hart trophies and at least one scoring title. Probably named first-team center a few times.

Say I'm in charge in LA, and I get word from my docs that Fraser is injured. I don't go ahead with the trade, regardless of whether the Oilers' docs are saying "he can play" or not. Because ultimately it's not up to the doctors, or Edmonton's GM, whether LA takes the deal. Everyone knew he was injured last season; there were no secrets. If I offered to sell you a house that didn't have any insulation, and I told you that it was originally built without insulation, but don't specify that there is still none there, do you buy it? Of course not. But Lombardi did.

Second leading scorer because of how long he played, not how great he was. As for being the only person to captain two teams to a Cup; Leetch lead the Rangers to that 94 Cup. Messier may have been the Captain, but Leetch was the LEADER. Captain is a title. Ron Francis is the only player to ever captain two different franchises twice. Big deal. Messier has won 6 Stanley Cups. Do you know who has won 4? Kris Draper. Darren McCarty. Tomas Holmstrom. Who has won two Cups and been to three finals in the past four seasons? Tomas Kopecky. Let's look at this: Messier goals-per-game: 0.395 Messier assists-per-game: 0.679 Messier points-per-game: 1.075 Now let's compare it to someone he was traded for. Bernie Nicholls. Nicholls goals-per-game: 0.421 Nicholls assists-per-game: 0.651 Nicholls points-per-game: 1.073 Seems like a fair deal, right? Nicholls scored 475 goals and 1209 points, so the "small sample size" argument can't really be used here. Messier's career numbers basically match Nicholls. They're the same age, they have the same per-game stats. Messier was a bit more physical and more durable due to a bigger frame. But think about it. Your "second all-time" argument could be for Bernie Nicholls, if he had remained healthy. He certainly had a higher offensive peak than Messier.

Mark Messier was only important to the NHL because he was around forever.

Mark Messier is overrated. He has two Hart trophies to his name, neither of which should have gone to him. People act like his leadership is generational because he said his team would win, and then he came out and scored a couple of goals. People act like the 1994 Cup doesn't happen without "The Guarantee" and that Messier was the most important player, when in reality he was at best the third-most important player. His ego destroyed a locker room in Vancouver, yet most people don't bother bringing that up when talking about him. Harvey was a great defenseman. One of the best ever. But still not as good as Nick.