eva unit zero

Read this: http://www.sihrhockey.org/origins_report.cfm#europe Try googling Hendrick Avercamp. He's a Dutch painter. He painted images of winter sports, including games that are very similar to hockey. He lived from the late 1500s to the mid 1600s. But yeah, he was just psychic and really painting images of colonial Canada.

I have been saying for a long time that the NHL needs to implement the ability for refs to call off a penalty, much like in football. In football, if one ref throws a flag, and they converse and the flag was thrown incorrectly, the penalty is not called. The NHL has needed to implement that kind of procedure for a long time. That way, we avoid situations where one guy sees something and calls it, but the guy with the better view doesn't call it because he saw the fact that it wasn't a penalty.

Hockey was invented in Europe hundreds of years before Canada existed.

I think the spot for top forward is close between all six guys I listed. Z, Dats, and Alfie aren't quite on the level of Crosby, Ovechkin, and Lecavalier but play a much more complete game with top level defense. If players were rated from 1-100, with 80 being a first line forward and 90 being an elite player, with 100 being the best player in the world, all six of those guys would be ranked close to 95.

Bertuzzi and McCabe went for Linden. Chara and a top three pick went for Yashin. You could shave off Bertuzzi and Chara and the deal is slightly in favor of the Isles both times. The fact that Chara and Bertuzzi blossomed after leaving in a manner they didn't seem to be capable of reaching while they were there is what changes the deals from fair to lopsided. And every indication ofr both players on the Isle was that they would be depth players who never developed into elite talents. Another deal with a similar makeup that turned out different? Anders Eriksson and two firsts for Chris Chelios. Eriksson was better as a Wing than Chara was as an Islander, was showing signs of getting better, and was younger when dealt. Chelios was on the decline, while Yashin had just been a Hart finalist. That deal could have just as easily been much worse; Imagine if Chelios had not had his renaissance and had retired by 2001, Eriksson had lived up to his potential, and the Hawks had drafted Martin Havlat and Derek Roy with those picks? That's two first liners and a top defenseman for an aging defenseman who wasn't as effective anymore. More than Ottawa got, and for less.

The problem with the length of the pads is that the elongated portion above the knee just sort of sticks out on guys like Giguere. This often results in additional blocking area that covers areas where goals can be scored on goalies with smaller gear. And if you say someone who is 5'9" can't wear pads smaller than 36", why does Brodeur, who is 6'2". wear 35" pads?

Yeah, goalies who get waived by three different teams in a span of 15 days are generally considered on the verge of being a top starter in the NHL...

I included both Z and Dats in that list without any kind of ranking other than 'Top 12'. Are you trying to say Z is not a top 12 forward in the NHL? Because if you are...you are very wrong.

I would say a slightly illegal curve is less of cheating than lil Manny Legace wearing 38 inch pads. I mean hell, he's only 69 inches tall. Using basic human proporton, legs are typically about half a person's height. Based on this, 6'2" Martin Brodeur should have legs that are approximately 37 inches long. But as a goalie's leg pad is not intended to cover his entire leg up to his waist, Brodeur wears 35" pads. So Manny's legs are about 35 inches long. Using Brodeur as an example, shouldn't he then be wearing 33" pads? Yet Legace wears 38" pads. Tell me that wearing ridiculously oversized equipment is not cheating again?

Avery is on my First All-Star team...of former Wings still in the league that I don't want to see back in Detroit. C: Sean Avery W: Todd Bertuzzi W: Darryl Bootland D: Derian Hatcher D: Brad Norton G: Manny Legace

If you are referring to the Hull goal in 1999, that goal was good. And no, even if it hadn't counted, the Stars would still have won the Cup. It was overtime in game 6 and the Stars had outplayed the Sabres pretty handily all series. The Sabres' chances of coming back and winning were slim.

Yes...my only point was that he was not bought out; he left of his own accord.

Hmm...that's a defense for bertuzzi yet it is not for Fedorov?

The curves on sticks are tightly regulated. Goalie pads are regulated, but very poorly. Giguere and Legace are prime examples of this fact.

Chara was crap for the Isles, as was Bertuzzi. Both players had promise and size, and were regressing and had seemed to plateau as depth players when Milbury traded them. Milbury traded Luongo for Kvasha and Parrish, both of whom would lead the Isles in scoring at some point. Jokinen was horrible for the Isles. While the Isles made some bad trades, part of that is because many otherwise skilled players performed very poorly for them at various points in their careers. Based on the performance, history, and age of the players in the deals Milbury made, the result is not what one would necessarily expect in many cases.

According to this board, the Wings' problem is secondary scoring. Why would you want to see an elite offensive player shipped out for a goalie, when that takes from a weakness and adds to a strength based on this season and the past few playoff performances?

Martin Brodeur is bigger than Giguere, and his pads are much smaller than Giguere's. Explain that one please.

Kronwall's level of play this season is worth well above $3m when compared with his peers. Just so you know. The Wings could probably have taken Luongo on instead of Hasek based on this year's cap; they'd have been looking at an increase of about $2.7m. That would have been doable this year, although it might have meant no moves at the deadline.

Luongo was on crap teams. My point was not that he is not a great goalie...just that he was not better in 97, 98, or 2002 than what we had between the pipes.

Foote turned down a 4 year, $12m offer from the Avs for a 3 year, $13.8m offer from the Blue Jackets. LINK

If Foote or Forsberg were as loyal as you claim, neither would have left town to begin with. They would have taken what the Avs could afford to pay them.

He went 39-6-5 that season and was a Vezina finalist. If he was the backup, he's the only backup in history to have gotten the decision 50 times and also the only one to win 39 games. Luongo wouldn't have helped those teams win a Cup. Luongo didn't enter the league until 1999-2000, where he had a very average season for a subpar Isles team. The next summer, he was traded to the Panthers. By comparison, here are the Vezina ranks of the Wings' Cup goalies: 1997, Mike Vernon: no votes. 1998, Chris Osgood: 7th place. 2002, Dominik Hasek: 6th place. Luongo's first season with Vezina votes was 2003-04. So Vernon, who had been the backup but got the nod in the playoffs, is the only goalie who wasn't a Vezina contender in his Cup year with Detroit. Luongo was 17 at the start of that season. Roberto Luongo would have helped us win no more Cups than we did. Had he been the starter, it's quite possible the Wings don't win any of them.

I understood is as Laperriere saying he didn't get all the hoopla about 'ZOMG DIRTY HIT!!', not that he didn't understand Downey avenging a hit laid on his captain. There is a world of difference between those two interpretations, as one makes him a hypocrite and the other is completely consistent with his later comments.

People slam Bettman for not putting the NHL on ESPN after the lockout. Are you even old enough to remember the NHL in the 80s and early 90s? You know, back in the days when the NHL was NOT ON ESPN, and half the games weren't even televised? Bettman gets slammed because the current state of the NHL's TV deals are not quite as good as the previous ones HE ACQUIRED. It's like slamming a guy with 5 consecutive 50-goal seasons for only scoring 45. The NHL's revenue is WAY up from where it was even three years ago; in 2004, the players received 75% of revenue and the average payroll was 41m. Now, the average payroll is closer to 48m, yet players only receive 55% of revenues. The NHL is FAR better for revenue and television exposure than it was pre-Bettman. So then what is your complaint? You don't like the way rules are called now? Guess what; the only thing they changed at the top as far as penalties was to make sure refs were calling it by the book and the entire length of the game, no whistle-pocketing. The complaint for years was that refs would pocket their whistles at the end of the game, or that things wouldn't be called consistently. It still is like that to a degree, but now there is much more consistency between refs in what is or isn't a penalty. So the only reasonable choice for why people hate Bettman is...expansion? But the league already had a 30-team plan in place before he was even hired. He didn't even make a single decision regarding new expansion teams until 1997, when he was involved in picking which four cities would get teams 27-30. In conclusion, Bettman is hated because people are ignorant and assume that because he's not a 'hockey guy' that he is automatically bad for the league and that the league MUST be doing worse than it was before.

Most of Milbury's bad deals were trading away an expensive player he wasn't allowed to resign for a guy who might becoem as good. He gets slammed for the Palffy trade. But knowing the career performance of Palffy and the guys he was traded for, that was a GOOD deal. Jokinen>>>Palffy easily. Problem is, Jokinen never performed on the Isle, and was considered a bust. Milbury's problem was that he was i na big market, but working with small-market funds. He never got the free pass that Edmonton , Calgary, and other GMs would get for money-motivated bad deals such as Bill Guerin for Anson Carter, Weight for Reasoner, Hasek for Kozlov, Jagr for Beech, and others.