eva unit zero

Yeah, we've been a laughing stock because pretty much every team in the league has outperformed the Wings in the postseason over the past sixteen seasons since the playoff streak started? Wait, what's that you say? The Wings have won three Cups in that time span, matched only by New Jersey? Well, then other teams must have won two Cups and went to the finals several times, correct? Hmm...Pittsburgh and Colorado are the only other multiple winners? And you say neither lost in the finals in that span? So what I'm hearing is that the Wings, who are 3-1 in the Cup finals in the past sixteen playoffs, who have the most Cup wins and Finals appearances, tied with jersey, are laughingstocks? The most successful franchise of the recent past is laughed at, you say? I'd hate to hear what the rest of the league is being called.

When considering a player's pure goal scoring ability, you absolutely have to remove goals he created but did not score from the equation to get an objective picture when using that kind of stat. If two players both score 10 goals, on teams that scored 200, are they equal in their scoring ability? what if one of them had no assists while the other had 50 assists that directly caused a goal? Those goals don't get scored if the players switch places. Meaning the player who posted assists is actually the better goal scorer based on percentage, as he scored 10 goals and his teammates created 140, while his contemporary scored 10 and his teammates created 190. For example...the Central Division's top three goal scorers this season are Zetterberg, Boyes, and Nash. In what order would you rank their scoring ability? Or even better. Radim Vrbata is scoring at a comparable percentage to Zetterberg. Do you think he's an equal goal scorer to Z?

I voted for Rulon Gardner. His defeat of Karelin is by far the greatest upset. Why, you ask? His opponent had not lost a match in 13 years. His opponent had not SURRENDERED A POINT in SIX YEARS. That is an almost unfathomable level of dominance over a sport. Think of Roger Federer, and how he has completely dominated men's tennis for years. Now throw him in the final of Wimbledon, and have him get dismantled by a kid playing in his first professional tournament. Think that's a huge upset? Consider that Federer has not been as dominant as Karelin was. Rulon Gardner's Olympic victory is the greatest upset ever. EDIT: Spelling

None of those numbers compares to Brett Hull for St. Louis. From 89-90 to 91-92 his LOW number was 24.4%, and his high number was 27.7%. The one difference between Bondra and most of the guys you mentioned? All Bondra ever did was shoot. Those other guys put up similar percentages for goals scored while also setting up their teammates for goals. Easy math example: Bondra scores 52 goals with 26 assists on a team that scores 219..Bondra is at 23.7%. Lemieux scores 86 goals with 113 assists on a team that scores 347...Lemieux is at 24.5% Those appear to be similar numbers, until you consider this: If we assume for the sake of argument two things: 1) That 60% of a player's assists will be first assists, as those are more common than second assists. 2) That 60% of first assists can be considered to have created the goal where it would not have otherwise happened, as a majority of goals require setup. Making those two mathematical assumptions with nice round numbers...we come to the following conclusion: In total, based on these numbers, 36% of a player's assist total created a goal directly. Therefore Bondra was responsible for 9 goals, Lemieux for 41. Remove those from the team total and recalculate percentage. Lemieux is now scoring 28.1% of Pittsburgh goals not including those he created directly as a passer. An increase of 3.6% Bondra is down at 24.7%, as he didn't really do much as a playmaker. An increase of 1%. Lemieux was already above Bondra, but that illustrates how Lemieux's playmaking skills skew that particular stat against him. I wouldn't be shocked if Lemieux (and other top centermen) was more directly responsible for teammates' goals than credited by those numbers, while Bondra may actually have been even less directly responsible than credited.

I find this amusing. You have made a list of the best pure goal scorers ever, and left off the top three. That top three being, in no order: Mario Lemieux. .822 goals per game is just RIDICULOUS. And the guy spent his healthy years with NOBODY to play with. Mike Bossy. Called by most as the best pure goal scorer of all-time, Bossy was at what would be most star snipers' peak for HIS ENTIRE CAREER. Phenomenal scorer who would be the all-time leader had his career not ended due to injury. Joe Malone. People (even in this thread) talk about how great Richard is for having scored 50-in-50. Often ignored is one fact; that year Richard broke Malone's single-season NHL and Montreal scoring record of 44 goals, which was set in TWENTY games. He ended up with 51 goals in his first 28 games in the NHL, and 90 in his first 52. In his NHL career, he would score 146 goals in 125 games over five seasons, the last two seasons and 29 games of which would come as a part-time player/coach. In his major professional career, Malone would score 343 goals in 273 games over sixteen seasons. He scored an NHL record 7 goals in a single game. He scored 5 or more goals TEN times. He scored a goal-per-game over an entire season eleven times, clearing the 2 GPG mark for a FULL SEASON three times.

Fedorov spent the entire second half of last season on the blueline, and was called the best defenseman the Jackets have ever had. Those of you pining for Foote might want to take that into consideration.

And yet, he's still a much better player than Darren McCarty ever was, and about 50 times better than Mac looked in Calgary. And people want McCarty back and think he can help the Wings...why then would Sergei not be able to?

McCarty's chances of returning to the Wings are still very slim. And even if he does come back, he won't be bumping Kopecky. It will be Downey or Drake. I don't understand why people think McCarty would be such a clear upgrade on Drake or Kopecky given that his last stint in the NHL ended with him as a healthy scratch on a team with far less depth than Detroit has. I also don't get why people think he was ever a top-six forward...seeing as he never scored 20 goals in his career, it's kind of an odd thing that many Wings fans consider Mac to have been a top-sixer, but Samuelsson, who has scored 20 goals once and would have done it a second time, and is probably better defensively, is not considered a top-sixer.

How many times has Lydman been outmuscled? Tallinder? 'Physical presence' is not about the number of hits you throw. It's about being able to physically impose your will on the game. Case in point: Kris Draper vs Eric Godard. Draper has many more hits, but Godard brings more physical presence. Tallinder's biggest advantage over Lydman is the fact that Tallinder is one of the top shut-down type defensemen in the NHL...while Lydman is second-tier in that respect.

Compare the position of Kovalchuk's knee in the last frame to the first frame. If you seriously think Ruutu was TRYING to knee-on-knee Kovalchuk, you will probablyu say something like 'he aimed it after Kovy moved' which is NOT the case. Ruutu's knee is exactly centered on where Kovalchuk WAS, which is a result of the fact he was lining him up for a bodycheck. Had it been an intentional knee-on-knee, Ruutu would have lined up with Kovalchuk's KNEE.

Not to diminsh Hasek's recent performance...but I think it bears mentioning that if Hasek had seen the number of shots per game Osgood has seen over the season and stopped them at the same rate he has so far, his GAA would be close to 2.4. Reversing that, if Osgood had the same save percentage on Hasek's shots, his GAA would be close to 1.60. That said, there's over two months left to play and plenty of time for either guy to really grab the playoff starter spot.

To solve this problem, with existing teams: Three conferences of ten teams each. The existing NW and Pacific divisions remain the same. The 'Central' conference would see the entire Central division, plus Atlanta, Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa, and Pittsburgh. Remaining teams in the 'Eastern' conference. To solve this problem, with expansion adding two teams to Western conference cities: We'll use KC and Vegas for this exercise since they appear to be the frontrunners for any expansion. Move Detroit east, and divide each conference into four divisions. WEST: Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose, Las Vegas Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Colorado Dallas, St.Louis, Phoenix, KC Minnesota, Chicago, Columbus, and Nashville EAST: Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Florida, Carolina New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington Montreal, Boston, NY Islanders, NY Rangers Ottawa, Detroit, Buffalo, Toronto The most feasible solution seems to be an Eastern team moving West in addition to two expansion teams. This would imbalance the conferences to 18-14, meaning two teams (Detroit and Columbus) would have to shift to the East. Florida to Houston/Portland/Indianapolis seems to be the logical candidate for a move added onto the scenario above, with Colorado, St.Louis, and Columbus as teams potentially switching divisions in the West, and a huge reorganization of the East necessary, possibly as outlined below: EAST: Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Carolina, Washington New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia Boston, Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa Columbus, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Buffalo

Niedermayer is overrated. He was not a Norris contender for the first eleven years of his career. Name me another All-Time great defenseman who played the first eleven years of his career as a second tier (or lower) defenseman. For reference, Nick Lidstrom was top ten in Norris votes as a rookie and had won the Norris three times and been a First-team All-Star SIX times in his first eleven seasons. Ray Bourque was a First or Second Team All-Star in each of his first seventeen seasons. Chris Chelios had won the Norris twice in his first eleven seasons and had been named a First-Team or Second-Team All-Star several times. Niedermayer was not considered an elite defenseman until he won the Norris in 2004. I can think of several guys whose careers started at around the same time who were considered elite earlier and longer.

LALIME and Rhodes never had success in Ottawa, but they never had success on other teams either. Both Hasek and Osgood have played very well in the postseason both for Detroit and other teams.

Would this be coupled with the Pierre Turgeon award for softest French-Canadian and the Craig Janney award for softest player?

Carson was not a bag of pucks. He is the only player I am personally aware of in NHL history to score 30 goals playing as a third line center.

Not even the worst Tkachuk trade. St.Louis trading Nagy, Handzus, Taffe, and the pick that became Ben Eager for Tkachuk is one of my all-time worst trades. Especially when coupled that offseason with Craig Conroy for Cory Stillman and you have a pretty horrible offseason for the Blues that saw two Selke contenders who brought decent offense shipped off for defensively irresponsible players who weren't that much better offensively...but that was to be expected with Larry Pleau in charge.

Some of the worst deals in recent memory that haven't been mentioned: Detroit trades Tim Cheveldae and Dallas Drake to Winnipegfor Bob Essensa and Sergei Bautin. Montreal trades John LeClair, Eric Desjardins, and Gilbert Dionne to Philadelphia for Mark Recchi. Also, The Hasek trade in 1992 went like this: Winnipeg trades G Stephane Beauregard to Buffalo for C Christian Ruuttu and future considerations. Chicago trades G Dominik Hasek to Buffalo for G Stephane Beauregard and future considerations. Chicago trades G Stephane Beauregard to Winnipeg for C Christian Ruuttu. It was drawn out over the course of two months but ultimately might be the only three way deal in history where one team ended up with what they started with. And it can't really be called a bad deal, and here's why: Chicago had Ed Belfour, who won the Vezina in 1991 and would win it again the next season. They traded their backup goaltender, who didn't really play well in Chicago, for a much needed defensive center. Interesting factoid about Beauregard...he might be the only player in NHL history effectively traded for himself twice; Later in 1992 he was traded to Philadelphia for future considerations, and a year later was sent back to Winnipeg to complete the deal. Traded for himself twice, and within a year's time!

I'd rather Tallinder if we're getting a Buffalo D-man. Both are primarily defensive guys, but I think Tallinder is the better shutdown defenseman and brings more of a physical presence.

Yanic Perreault is the best face off man in the league, and has been since the retirement of Ron Francis. And as every faceoff is important, here's how to measure who wins them. You do have to go to the second page to get past all the one-off guys who have taken a handful of faceoffs and won more than 65%. NHL Faceoff leaders by percentage

Both goalies have historically stepped their game up in the postseason, even if their team didn't follow suit. The question is not 'who gave us a better chance last year' but 'who gives us a better chance THIS YEAR' and there's still two months of hockey before we'll know the answer.

Assuming the moment highlighted shortly before the incident was the penalty, I can understand Antropov's frustration. That was a pretty ******* weak call.

Zetterberg has a better chance at leading the league in scoring than Dats does. Dats is on pace for 96 points over 82 games. Zetterberg is on pace for 103 in 75 if he plays out the season, or 98 in 71 if he misses the same percentage of the final 30 as he has of the first 52. Alfredsson, the league leader, is on pace for about 110 and he just had a huge game which skews his average slightly upwards of where it normally would be. Alfie is the only player in the top ten with a better PPG than Zata. Crosby, who is out for an extended period, is right behind Z's PPG number, as is Jason Spezza. It'll be great to see them both among the leaders at the end.

Why on earth would Suter think he's anywhere near Phaneuf's level? Suter shouldn't even be expecting KRONWALL money let alone Phaneuf money. Suter is less offensively capable than Kronner at this point and unlike Kronwall he isn't as good in his own end as he is in the opposing end. Suter for 2m-2.5m sounds about right.

It you look again, you see that Ruutu's knee buckles on contact; which suggests that he was NOT expecting to hit knee-on-knee; if you are trying to hit someone with your knee by, say, kneeing them...your knee doesn't buckle like that because you are EXPECTING contact and PREPARED for it. Kovalchuk dodged at the last second and couldn't get fully out of the way; Ruutu's elbow grazed Kovalchuk's back (it was NEVER head high) at the same time their knees collided so it's not like Ruutu came in and stuck his knee way out.