eva unit zero

Lidstrom is injured? I heard nothing of this.

Yep, because I point out that some of the videos show legit penalties, I should go watch soccer. Have you ever taken a slapshot off of the top of your foot? How about your wrist? Or better yet, have you ever had the joy of being boarded the way Campbell was by Stamkos? Maybe you should experience some of these things before you act like a complete f***wad.

Declining since 08? In 08, Zetterberg finished in a three-way tie for 6th in scoring with 92 points. He's currently in a two-way tie for seventh with 69. His scoring pace has considerably slowed down the past couple of weeks, but he is still at a point per game and above his career average. If he's declining, then this summer tell Holland to not bother offering a contract to any player older than 31. Because clearly those old f***ers are screwing us over.

With Z hanging out in the top ten in scoring and being a Selke contender, it's not unreasonable to consider him a contender to actually be named for First or Second team in the postseason; the catch being that he has been playing both LW and C all year. The interesting thing, though, is that it is possible for Zetterberg to get voted in on the all-star teams at both positions. The key to that trick would be receiving a significant portion of first place votes, and the remaining votes split up fairly evenly among other contenders, with at least three competing well for the second place votes. Add in Sharp, Kopitar, Crosby, Loui Eriksson, Rick Nash, and you have a group of guys which under the right circumstances over these last ten-twelve games could put Z in that unique spot.

Just looking at the first few, your list of "bad calls" is not exactly full of bad calls. Edler's hit was nothing but head, as was Foligno's. Stamkos' hit on Campbell was probably the most dangerous of all; knocking a guy into the boards like that is the kind of stuff that ends careers. Ohlund went in elbows first on his hit, Powe's hit can arguably be called elbowing on instant-replay; and given the fact that refs don't have video review instantly that's a good call. Your NHL chances are improving, then?

You are such a ******* sheep. The instigator does not cause cheap shots, allow more opportunity for cheap shots, or anything of the sort. Having a reduced number of enforcers in the league has reduced teams' ability to respond to cheap hits, but those cheap hits have for the same reason reduced in frequency. The instigator being eliminated doesn't prevent cheap shots because players who are going to do that will do so regardless of the consequences. See: Ulf Samuelsson, Bryan Marchment.

ALERT!! LEBDA LOVER LOVES LEBDA!

Chara's hit was much worse than Kubina's. Kubina's was an oblique approach where he only just caught him with the elbow, he didn't hit him with a full on check like Chara. Chara's was also into the boards, which is more dangerous for head shots like those, regardless of benches and stanchions. Kubina should have gotten no more than 1, Chara at least 3.

Eric Lindros: Forced to retire by concussions. Sidney Crosby: Receives major concussion. Crosby family: "Sidney, retire dammit, before you're like that brainless Lindros kid!"

Because the Mule was playing like ass. And then Modano was back, so why put it back together right?

Things that were wrong with Lessard's hit: It was charging in that he took multiple strides gearing up for the hit. It was elbowing, as he led with his elbow and that was the initial contact point. It was a head-shot in that he hit the player in the head as the principal point of contact. Lessard should be happy if that game is the only one.

Known working player/player combos in the top nine: Zetterberg: Datsyuk, Franzen, Cleary, Holmstrom, Bertuzzi, Filppula Datsyuk: Zetterberg, Holmstrom, Hudler, Cleary, Franzen, Bertuzzi Franzen: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Filppula, Hudler, Bertuzzi, Cleary Filppula: Franzen, Hudler, Bertuzzi, Holmstrom Hudler: Datsyuk, Franzen, Filppula, Cleary, Bertuzzi Cleary: Everyone Bertuzzi: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen, Hudler, Cleary Holmstrom: Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Cleary, Filppula Modano: Cleary Note: Modano is only included because he will be on the top three lines due to his inability to play on a checking line; I don't consider him among the team's top nine forwards. We have two basic line setups. Z/Dats together and Z/Dats apart. So what is needed is to assemble the ideal combination involving each setup. With Z/Dats together, we have to use Filppula as the second line center. The other options are Franzen and Hudler. Neither come close to Flip in skating, and Flip is the best of the three on faceoffs. Following the sniper/playmaker/net presence model, we can define Z and Dats in the first two roles for their line, and Flip as the playmaker for his line. Bertuzzi and Holmstrom fall into the 'net presence' category as that is by far their most useful role, so we'll work on assembling lines based on that. Franzen and Cleary can fill both net presence and sniper roles, and Modano and Hudler can fill both playmaker and sniper roles. Franzen and Modano serve the team best as snipers, leaving Cleary and Hudler in the net presence and playmaker roles respectively. Based on the "model" and ideal chemistry, this would work out to the exact top-three lines Babcock started the season with, which are as follows: Z/D/H Franzen/Filppula/Bertuzzi Hudler/Modano/Cleary I personally don't like these lines, even though they follow the "model" because while the first two have had success, the third one displayed a clear lack of chemistry between Hudler and Modano, not only due to coinciding slumps but also due to playing styles. Using Hudler or Modano as the "playmaker" had little success because the two have such drastically different playing styles it harms the overall line. Switching Hudler for Bertuzzi puts Cleary in the sniper role and Franzen in the net presence role, but the second line of Franzen/Filppula/Hudler, as it has been used in the past, has worked more as a "two shooter" line than the DZH line works, and it also provides two highly skilled playmakers in Flip and Huds. With Dats and Z split, it means you have to either put Flip on the wing, the third line, or even both. Recently we saw an extremely effective line in Huds/Dats/Cleary which followed the model. Based on that line, we can jump to this setup: Franzen/Z/Holmstrom Hudler/Dats/Cleary Bertuzzi/Filppula/Modano Why is left-handed Hudler on the left side yet left-handed Modano is on the right side? Because Hudler, despite being intended as the sniper, has served as a VERY effective playmaker for that line. Modano, on the other hand, would be the shooter, receiving passes from left-handed Filppula. A left-handed shooter on the right-side taking passes from a left-handed center can be very dangerous and could give Modano a huge kick-start. So I would most likely roll the split lines I just mentioned, because I feel that would provide the most dangerous and well-rounded Wings team. Oh, and for the D? Lidstrom/Kindl Kronwall/Stuart Ericsson/Rafalski Salei can play in Rafalski's spot until he gets back. But seriously; Nick is the best partner for Kindl in terms of style, and I'm not talking "Kindl sucks" either. Kindl is a good skater and skilled with the puck. He can bring it offensively, he just needs to learn some defense and to bring his game together a little bit. He's been improving every day and if he's given the opportunity to play with someone he actually fits well with, he'll get moving up at a much more rapid rate.

You are stupid. I don't call posters names like this often, but you earned it. Chara and Pacioretty both raced both the puck and took swats with their sticks. Pacioretty knocked it up-ice, with Chara trying to knock it back into the zone. Pacioretty then raced past Chara along the boards, and Chara moved up next to him and slammed him into the boards, and with Pacioretty skating at full speed, put him into the boards and also the stanchion. Definitely suspension-worthy. It was obvious Pacioretty did not have the puck and Chara would not be able to gain the puck by hitting Pacioretty. It was a dangerous hit and could even qualify under the head-shot rule because Chara pushed him in such a way so that Pacioretty's head would be the direct point of contact with the stanchion.

The argument is not that McCrimmon is responsible for turnovers; however bad schemes do cause some. The argument is that he does not run the defense properly, and therefore the defense, with skilled defensive players, does not function as it should. With the Salei/Ericsson pairing, you should be able to swap in Kindl without having to completely rewrite how the game will be handled. It seems like McCrimmon is handling each pairing and each game as separate situations, rather than having a defensive scheme which applies to the entire defense and is implemented and evolved as the season progresses. McCrimmon was an excellent shut-down defender. One of the best in the league. But he is simply not cutting it as a coach.

That's making the argument that Lidstrom's current season is one of the greatest defensive performances of all-time. Perhaps you don't realize how rare a 150+ point season has been in NHL history. It has been done nine times by Gretzky, four by Lemieux, once by Yzerman, once by Esposito, and once by Nicholls. That's it. Lidstrom certainly has not been putting on one of the sixteen best defensive performances of all-time this season.

If you had understood my post, you would have picked up on this. Plus minus is not an accurate display of a player's capability and should not be used as such. Certainly being worse defensively is going to negatively impact your plus-minus, but if you had to compare two players' defensive ability, there are so many factors outside of the player himself that affect the player's plus-minus. The other ten players on the ice for example, especially the goaltenders. If the Canucks maintain two minutes of sustained offensive pressure, and then a random clear down the ice slips past Luongo... should the Canucks players get minuses? Basing a player's defensive performance on a stat that is based on goaltender performance is a ridiculous concept. That was before voters acknowledged Europeans as top players.

Plus minus measures the goals for and against in even strength, power play, and shorthanded situations. A player receives a minus if he is on the ice for a goal against at even strength or while his team has a power play, and he receives a plus if he is on the ice when his team scores a goal at even strength or while shorthanded. A lot of goals are scored which result in players receiving a "plus" or "minus" without having had any effect on the play. The Drew Miller goal that started the scoring against Phoenix on Saturday happened at the start of a badly timed line change by the Wings. The Wings forwards changed, Phoenix began to push, Helm knocked the puck free in the neutral zone and Miller carried in and scored. Bertuzzi was getting on the bench and Abdelkader off as Miller entered the zone. Yet Abs and the D get pluses.

+/- is about as useful as GWG or SO. It means nothing. A player could score his team's third goal of the game at the ten minute mark of the first period, and the opposition could score two in the final five to make the final score 3-2. Does that make the third goal more important than the first or second? And two goalies with identical stats except for their shutout numbers? Say one has 10 shutouts and another has none, both in 40 starts. Both have 2.10 GAA and .916 sv%, and 23-12-5 records. Who's the better goalie? The 10-shutout goalie is going to get more Vezina votes, but his non-shutout GAA is 2.8, his non-shutout sv% (assuming average shots against remains equal) is .888, and his non-shutout record is 13-12-5. There are stats that are and aren't useful. Shooting percentage isn't even a great indicator of a player's scoring skill. Zetterberg and Ovechkin are great indicators. Firing the puck on net with the intent of creating a rebound will hurt your shooting percentage, but will increase the chance of a goal being scored. And plus-minus may just be the most useless of them all. It's supposed to show the effectiveness of all players, but it doesn't show the difference between who players play against, it only counts certain situations, and defensive players are more likely to end up with a low score simply from playing against the opposing team's high scoring players.

Ericsson was just as much or more to blame; he didn't try and force Marleau away from the puck when it became clear MacDonald was going to play the puck.

Fighting is not part of hockey. It's something that happens sometimes during a hockey game. If you can explain to me otherwise, please do.

I love how Murphy is sitting there saying "Well Salei didn't have the time to get over and cover him" when Filppula is RIGHT FREAKING THERE.

It sounds more like he's saying he's a starter-caliber NHL goalie. With the whole "If the forwards and defense play like they should, it won't come down to Howard's play" he was saying the Wings have the skaters to win the Cup, and Howard is as good as most NHL starters, so the Wings should be in a good position to win the Cup.

You do realize that when Grigs came to Wings camp, and played a few games for the Griffins, that was only four years removed from having his femur and tibia both snapper, and having a fat embolism in his lung which nearly killed him. Before that crash, Grigs was a great skater.

This.

The capability to trade money was taken away because it would provide a huge advantage to large-market clubs. New York could trade Redden and enough cash to cover his salary to, say, Phoenix for a 2nd round draft pick. The Rangers now have an extra draft pick and are paying out no less in cash, and Phoenix has a decent defenseman at no cost. There are processes in place for contract buyouts. Eaves is still on Boston's cap from being bought out. The problem is that GMs like Sather have been spending like it's 2002 and they can have a $40m blueline. A lot of GMs simply haven't learned the cap mentality the way they should. You have to be much more frugal with your spending. The Wings, spending to the cap, would be about $35m-$40m below the salary of 2002's team based on the average salary in 2002. Yet they still dominate, because Holland and Wings upper management understand how the cap world works.