eva unit zero

I haven't been saying Dom is bad. Simply that to argue that his numbers are basically equal to Ozzie's, or that Hasek's performance against playoff teams is considerably better, is a flawed argument. To argue that it's a no-brainer to say he should start the majority of the remaining games because that will give the team the best chance to win is biased conjecture at best.

An interesting thing I think might affect this debate. Pronger has been good offensively, but his defense has been severely lacking considerably. Niedermayer has been his usual reliable defensive self, but his offense has been far from what people are accustomed to seeing from him. And Beauchemin has been..well...horrendous. Schneider is the only Ducks defenseman who's been playing to his ability at both ends. By contrast, Lidstrom is having one of his better seasons, Rafalski and Kronwall are having career years, and Stuart is a solid #4 at both ends. And as far as the average performance over the past couple seasons, the two defenses are about even. So the Wings have the better defense THIS SEASON.

Plus minus is an offensive statistic. The best players for plus-minus are invariably the top offensive players on good teams. ALWAYS. Defensively-minded players on bad teams will come out with mediocre plus-minus scores even if they are top defensive players. Offense-only players on good defensive teams will generally come out with a strong plus-minus because their team doesn't allow many goals, and as such there is not much opportunity to receive a minus. Dany Heatley this season is a prime example; he is at best only above average defensively but has a better plus-minus rating per game than Datsyuk. Is Heatley more Selke material than Datsyuk? Or is he simply playing on a line that generates more offense? I didn't say Dats wasn't good defensively. Just that anyone putting him as a Selke nominee is overrating his D.

It can range mathematically anywhere from 36 to 146 in a conference, and 36 to 141 in the league. It is almost always ACTUALLY between 85-95. Just so everyone understands where those numbers came from.... In the current system, if the 8 playoff teams are divided as evenly as possible across divisions (3-3-2) then a team from a division sending three teams would play 36 games against playoff teams in its conference, and 46 against all others. If all playoff teams in one conference won all of their games against non-playoff teams or teams in the other conference, and half of their games against playoff teams in their conference, with all losses coming in OT, you would see a top 8 that looked like this: 1) 66-0-16, 152 points 2) 64-0-18, 146 points 3) 64-0-18, 146 points 4) 66-0-16, 152 points 5) 64-0-18, 146 points 6) 64-0-18, 146 points 7) 64-0-18, 146 points 8) 64-0-18, 146 points If playoff teams in the other conference only lost games to the previously listed teams, and all in OT, then the other conference could potentially look something like: 1) 60-0-22, 142 points 2) 59-0-23, 141 points 3) 59-0-23, 141 points 4) 60-0-22, 142 points 5) 59-0-23, 141 points 6) 59-0-23, 141 points 7) 59-0-23, 141 points 8) 59-0-23, 141 points The non-playoff teams would have an average of about 14 wins each in this scenario... As for the minimum... We'll look at the games if the only points posted by the bottom eight teams in the conference were against each other. There would be a minimum total of 140 games among the group, for 280 points, which could be shared equally at 34 points per team for the bottom four and 36 points for the top four, including the final playoff team.

How about if I show proof that the Wings use individual lettering. That's not a nameplate.

Ok, you tell me... Who has been better this season, Roberto Luongo, or Evgeni Nabokov? Why would you pick that guy over the other?

No it's not. It's his name. "Kronvall" when referring to the Detroit defenseman IS a misprint. And as far as American media goes, NHL.com is the only site that hasn't corrected it.

No. I'm saying Pavel has a slim chance of winning it because there are several better defensive forwards in the NHL who are probably more deserving of a trophy given to the best defensive forward. In the post you quoted, I was saying that Pavel's plus-minus was far from an indicator he was deserving of the Selke.

They have virtually identical numbers in most categories. They have both allowed 70 goals and have 4 shutouts in about the same minutes. But Osgood has faced CONSIDERABLY more shots than Hasek has. 114 shots, or almost four per game, all saves. To break it down on a per game basis; Osgood allows 2.07 goals on 24.8 shots per 60 minutes. Hasek allows 2.09 goals on 21.7 shots per 60 minutes. In simple terms; Osgood has allowed fewer goals per game despite seeing more shots. Is that not a textbook example of one goalie outplaying the other? And since you postulated it, here's what the numbers would look like had it been Dom stopping 19 of 20 against the Hawks: Ozzie 23-8-3, 2.10 GAA, .916%, 4 SO Hasek 23-8-3, 2.06 GAA, .905%, 4 SO Those numbers are not significantly different from what they currently have. And they still show Osgood as having outplayed Dom by a considerable margin.

To win the Selke, you don't have to be a defensive specialist. But if you think Dats having the best plus minus of any forward makes him the frontrunner for the Selke, you have failed to understand that plus-minus is an OFFENSIVE statistic. Only the very rare, truly elite defensive players post a high plus-minus based primarily on their defensive play. Plus-minus is best used as a gauge of how well a player's line is performing. It has very little value as an individual statistic until it gets to the extremes, and even then it has only marginal value. Case in point, the 1992-93 season. Here's some statistics of some of the top players in +/- that year. M.Lemieux, 69-91-160, +55 P.Bure, 60-50-110, +35 Yzerman, 58-79-137, +33 S.Fedorov, 34-53-87, +33 D.Gilmour 32-95-127, +32 If +/- is taken to be a representation of pure defensive ability, then Lemieux should have won the Selke right? And if it's taken as the best combination of a high plus minus without a lot of points, then Fedorov should have won it. Bure and Yzerman are both in the middle of those two depending on those categories. Yet Doug Gilmour, the guy with the worst plus-minus of that group, was the Selke winner. Furthermore, the NHL has never seen a year where the Selke award winner also led the league in plus-minus. A forward has led the league in plus minus over 20 times, including Wayne Gretzky with four times on top of the plus-minus charts, and yet no forward who has led the league in plus-minus has won the Selke. Not even in a different year. Plus-minus has much more bearing on which defensemen will be in the running for the Norris; if you look at the defensemen who have led the league in plus-minus, they are usually in the running for the Norris that season.

Fixed.

Hasek has played fewer than 50% all season. He has been outplayed by his partner. Why again should he get more games now?

Kronwall is the correct spelling. Kronvall is the correct pronounciation. Take a look at his JERSEY for the correct spelling. It's "Kronwall" on both his Detroit jersey and his Sweden jersey.

Bowman is credited with too much influence for Yzerman's defensive game. People act as if Yzerman was a purely one-dimensional player, like a Craig Janney or Pierre Turgeon, and then Bowman said 'Hey guy, play some defense.' The truth follows more along the lines of: Yzerman was a very good offensive player who was also quite capable in his own zone. Bowman asked Yzerman to shift his focus from offense to defense. This took Yzerman, already one of the league's better defensive forwards and one of only a handful of guys with high end ability at both ends, and turned him into one of the five best defensive forwards in the league from 94-2002, but sacrificing the top end offensive output Detroit fans were accustomed to seeing from him before that period. However, Bowman's asking Yzerman to refocus definitely impacted the team's success. It's like I always say in Yzerman discussions...had he remained an offense-first player, he probably would have finished his career with something close to 800 goals and 2000 points in the same number of games...but he probably wouldn't have been as truly great a player and likely the Wings wouldn't have won as many Cups.

Why would the Wings trade Cleary at the next deadline? That makes little or no sense. Unless Cleary vastly underperforms next season...which would mean he wouldn't be the primary piece in a Hossa deal. With the NTC, I'd have rather seen a deal close to 2m...but I'll take it. Holland wasn't trading him anyway, or he'd already be gone.

I think the question the OP is asking is simply this... Why in other countries, when fans riot, is little or nothing done about it? No, the answer is not 'more violent cultures' because people generally say the US is barbaric in relation to the UK, which has its own problem with soccer riots. The OP is simply wondering why rioting is relatively tolerated at soccer matches as compared to other sports.

The only math we need...based on average occurence of each type of win or loss, the Wings have slightly over a 70% chance of officiallly clinching the division on Thursday.

You have your facts incorrect. Theoren Fleury's jersey was bloodied, and he was kicked off the ice to have his jersey cleaned. A fan threw down his jersey, but the jersey was covered in autographs and ruled unusable and Fleury was not allowed back onto the ice until his jersey had been cleaned.

For the middle 23 games of the 69 he has played, Hudler scored 19 points. This is also coincidental with Zetterberg and Holmstrom being out of the lineup for many of those games, putting Hudler on the top two lines. In the first 23 games and last 23 games, Hudler has been on either the third line or fourth line almost exclusively with only spotty power play time. In other words...if Hudler is played in the top six, he will score nearly a point per game. If not, he'll still score better than most third or fourth liners.

If we assume the only difference in his plus minus is offensive performance, that means there has been a decline of about 33 goals per year while he is on the ice. He's on pace for the same kind of points and +/- this year as the past two years, and that's 22 points down of his 03-04 season. So basically, between a decline in his defense and his linemates' offense, as well as his massive drop in offensive output, is where the difference lies.

What's funny, is that people act as if McCarty is some great offensive player in the postseason, but Hudler has no chance of being an effective playoff scorer, despite that fact that Hudler has a better career playoff points-per-game at every level the two have both played.

I understand you are trying to justify Dats for the Selke. But the reality is, as good as he is defensively, he's not even the top defensive forward on his team...so his chances of winning the Selke are pretty slim.

Damn Leafs fans...

That is incorrect. Yzerman wore #18 for the 1992 All-Star Game. Larry Robinson, then of the Kings, had first dibs on #19.

Race does have genetic reality. Things such as lactose tolerance in adulthood, or other types of resistances or vulnerabilities are often genetically present or absent depending on a person's heritage.