eva unit zero

They still can't afford Peca though, so this rumor is pretty silly. Dropping Kaspar to the minors and putting Callahan on the roster gives them 12 forwards, 7 defensemen, and 2 goalies for with only about 730k in cap space. Which means that Ansimov (850k) doesn't fit, and they currently have nobody else under contract. So they need to sign one more forward, but it will be a fourth liner and not Peca. EDIT: It is possible Peca is willing to sign for less than 700k. However, it seems unlikely given his recent history and the fact that talks between Peca and the Rangers have been less than smooth.

It seems unlikely with them already over the cap, although they do need at least one more forward. They do need to drop some salary though...if you assume Callahan and Ansimov round out the forwards, that gives them 23 players at about $53.4m, or more than 3m over the cap. If I were NYR, I would look to dump of Kasparaitis' 2.989m (priority one) and Mara's 3m (priority two), as those two are the two highest paid defensemen on the team, yet the two best performers are Rosival and Malik. That would leave them about 2m under the cap assuming they brought back no roster players and added Marc Staal. If we drop Ansimov, that means they would have almost 3m to spend on Peca or another forward. Peca shouldn't cost more than 2m or 2.5.

Brind'Amour is NOT a shut-down guy. Peca had some solid offensive years, he wasn't on the second line for his defense. Draper has spent most of his career on the fourth line. Carbonneau was a fixture on the third line because he wasn't just a defensive specialist, he was THE defensive specialist. Lehtinen is a guy capable of putting up decent scoring numbers, and is one of the most offensively capable wingers on his team. Generally around the league, when you look at fourth liners, their purpose is primarily defensive or physical, or both. That's why including PP/shootout as the second option makes zero sense, because you never put that kind of player in that role. No, that's not what this discussion is about. I would have picked enforcer too, I feel a skill guy who can't be a defensive shut down guy or a physical player is a poor decision if used as a fourth liner. Hudler is a primary example of this. The Wings would have been better off with Hudler on a higher line and a guy like Cleary, Franzen, or someone else on the fourth line.

The UHL is now the IHL.

Osgood seeing 20 wins per season means an average of 30-35 starts per season. That's a totally reasonable amount to average over that time. He'll likely see around 30 until Hasek is gone (next summer or at very latest the year after), and if the club decides to go with Ozzie/Howard after that, he'll likely see more than that. Averaging 20 wins with that amount of PT is hardly an unreasonable suggestion, given that the Wings are one of the best teams in the league, and Ozzie has never had a losing season even on bad teams. As far as Ozzie breaking the 400 win mark, that's 64 wins away, meaning an average of 13 wins per season over five years. Even with the 20-25 starts per year you say he'll get, he can do that.

Jagr's points per game pace fluctuated widly from season to season. Yes, Jagr consistently put up more points than Fedorov. No, Jagr was not a more consistent player. The two things are not the same, that's what you failed to grasp with your initial statement of 'Jagr is more consistent than Fedorov.' As far as the Russians, my all-time best hockey players list usually includes Tretiak and Fetisov near the top, so I have to assume they would be in there. Lidstrom would probably at least be in the discussion, Larionov, Makarov, Kharlamov would all be involved as well.

Osgood may play five more years. If he plays all those years with Detroit, and averages just 20 wins per season, he's the All-time wins leader for the franchise. If he averages 23, he passes Sawchuk's career mark.

If healthy, Z could crack 100.

I still think the data is wortless because it's not a realistic situation. As I said before, it would have been worthwhile had the options been an enforcer and a defensive specialist, because that is a situation you might actually see. No coach will put PP players on the 4th line; or more accurately, no coach will put 4th liners on his PP. If they're good enough to be on the PP, they're not 4th liners.

The thing about Forsberg is that he's a great player who's had a couple of great seasons, but due to injury issues could never stay healthyy. This thread is more about who was the best player rather than who had the best career, making health far less of an issue because it's about how well you performed in the time you were on the ice, so Forsberg is a valid pick.

"And does Mr. Harry Potter have his key?"

Do you understand what the word 'consistent' means? What it does NOT mean: Better, higher point totals. What it DOES mean: Similar quality over a period of time. Fedorov's offensive output did not go as high as Jagr's in the late 90s. But Fedorov was CONSISTENTLY in the 65-75 point range. If you take his points per game rate from the 96-97 season through the 06-07 season, Fedorov is extremely close to that for almost every individual season during that period. The exceptions being the 02-03 season, when he was noticeably above, and the past two seasons, when Fedorov has, for the first time in his career, been battling injuries, and has also played significant minutes on the blueline.

I would totally disagree that Jagr has been more consistent. Fedorov has consistently posted numbers between .75 and 1 PPG almost every season for the past decade. Before that his numbers were higher, but part of that was the fact that scoring was up about 40% around the league as compared to the 90s. And when Fedorov's numbers were higher is actually when Jagr's numbers were lower...proving that Fedorov has had more of a consistent offensive output level. Jagr had a very high peak in the late 90s, but for the first part of this decade was considered washed up as his point totals were drastically down from what he was putting up.

Jagr was a top three offensive player from 95-01, as well as in 06. Most of those years were spent with an established elite-level linemate. Not true. He won in 2001 with Lemieux, and he won in 98 with Ron Francis. People do it to Fedorov all the time. It's fair to do it to Jagr if it's fair to be done to Fedorov, especially given Jagr has had far more attitude problems than Fedorov.

Leipold's situation is unusual though; he sold a team valued at 125m for around 190m. He paid an $80m expansion fee, and lost $70m during his time with the team. That means had he sold the team as valued, he'd have had a net loss of $25m, instead of an overall profit of around $40m like he has.

There is unlikely to be a cheap backup available who is better than Osgood. If you are thinking Jimmy Howard, if he passes Ozzie on the depth chart within two years he'll be given the chance to start. If Howard isn't starting in two years, and it's not because Osgood is playing particularly well (i.e. Howard is playing well enough to start, but Ozzie is playing like he did ten years ago), Howard will be traded.

Given that Fedorov was a better player than Sakic at the time, and his deal was based on Sakic's but was longer for less per year? Beyond that, there's the fact that even had the offer sheet been for 10m, it wouldn't have been a slap in the face. Well, not from Fedorov. And I remind you...The Wings won two Cups on that six-year contract for which Fedorov was one of the three best players each time. The Wings likely win neither of those Cups if they lose Fedorov, and Fedorov would have improved the Hurricanes enough that the picks coming back would not have yielded anyone who would have made an immediate enough impact to change that.

Tough guys in Detroit get marginal love if they can't play. Graves and McKay never really got a shot in a Wings uniform, but they are exactly the kind of guy who IS popular in Detroit--a tough player who has skills.

Just....wow.

Ozzie has 252 wins right now in a Wings uni, and 336 overall. Five more seasons at 20 wins apiece average would give him 436 overall (eleven behind Sawchuk's 447) and 352 as a Wing if he stayed the five years. That would put Ozzie 7th All-time in Wings (assuming Hasek retired within the next 74 wins, so probably two seasons max) and would tie him with Sawchuk for first in a Wings uniform. Who knows what could happen at that point.

Filppula won't be the second line center. They've already said that Datsyuk will be centering the second line, and that they will at the very least be trying Grigorenko on his wing. Draper has been the third line center maybe four full seasons and a couple more partial seasons in his Red Wing career. As far as the actual question, I didn't disagree with the outcome...I said the question is inherently flawed because one of the answers is a kind of player typically used only on the top two or sometimes three lines, thus making it almost an invalid choice. Had they worded it 'A skilled player who can play special teams' you can bet that it would have been a notably different result.

Think about it this way. There is a very good chance that the third line center for the Wings will be either Hudler or Filppula. There is a decent chance that whoever it is will be on the PP. Some third line centers around the league this past season: Derek Roy, Jeffrey Hamilton, Tyler Arnason, Mike Ribeiro, Jarrett Stoll, Stephen Weiss, PM Bouchard, Sergei Brylin, Petr Cajanek, Eric Perrin, Niko Kapanen, Bryan Smolinski. That's about half the guys in the league being primarily offensive guys who play the power play on the third line...and I would bet another quarter of third line centers are guys who 'could' play the power play, because this is hardly a definitive listing of the best and brightest third line centers in the NHL, leaving off names of defensively capable guys like Radek Bonk and Jordan Staal.

That is a hugely incorrect interpretation of RFA. The only differences between RFA and UFA are as follows: With RFA, the team holding the rights has a right to match any offer made that the player agrees to. Should the team choose not to match, they receive compensation for the player based on the contract amount. The player still has every right to shop his service the way a UFA does. The difference is that if you sign an RFA for cheap, his team will match, and if you overpay, you give up a large number of picks. That is why you don't see RFAs moving teams but once in a blue moon. Who is the last guy before Penner? I think it was Shanahan, going from New Jersey to the Blues. Ultimately, it's usually easier to find a guy for the same price who won't cost you a boatload of picks. Lowe obviously had issues getting players to Edmonton this summer, including the whole Nylander fiasco, and he was in a situation where he would have just kept Smyth had he known the cap was going to look like this. So he went out and picked up a young guy he felt could be another Ryan Smyth, a big, gritty winger who can score, and did it for less than Smyth wanted and gave up less than he got for Smyth. If it works out, Lowe looks like a genius.

Yeah, it was a real slap in the face to sign a long term deal for below market value. Yep, huge slap in the face. Fedorov should have done it up like Sakic and gone for 3 years, so he could have made 9 million in 2001. Feds was the best player in the league at the time he signed that offer shet, and even with all the bonuses kicking in his average salary over the deal was below 7 million. Given that the top paid players at the time the deal was signed was Joe Sakic, who had just signed a similar three year deal worth 21m, the yearly number is not out of whack for that season, and that season alone, as Fedorov quickly dropped--three players made 8.5m the next year; Jagr and Kariya broke through the 10m barrier the year after. By the time Fedorov's deal ended, he wasn't even in the top 25 highest paid players based on the average value of the deal. He was outside the top 15 by the fourth year. He was also fourth among Red Wings players at that point, his 6.333 sitting just behind Brendan Shanahan's 6.5m. Shanahan was NEVER more important than Fedorov to the Wings until after Fedorov left.

And Lou takes the bait. That question is totally f***ed up, and is DESIGNED to get the result of 'ENFORCERS ROXXORZ!! SHOOTOUTS SUCK!!' Of COURSE you would take an enforcer over a skill player who could play the PP and participate in the shootout for the FOURTH LINE. WHY? Because teams generally only have two PP units, meaning that if a forward is on the PP, he is PROBABLY on one of the top two lines, or MAYBE in cases of depth at one forward position or remarkable chemistry he is on the third line. The chances that a skill guy who is only good enough to be on the fourth line would be picked very often for the shootout are also exceedingly slim. It would have been better had the question offered a third answer, 'defensive/faceoff specialist' which would have garnered, oh I dunno...70-80% of the vote?