eva unit zero

Diving.

Eaves having been a hot hand may feel like that because he had the hatty...but he's been on the 20-goal pace all season.

Osgood is getting a reduction, though. And afterwards, he'll have to wear two leg pads like everyone else does, instead of just one like he does now.

I would guess that it's one of two things; either Elias gets his 'C' back, or Arnott is made captain.

But I didn't give David Steckel lessons...

What if the puck splits, and the larger portion goes into the net across the goal line, and the smaller portion simply goes behind the net? That would follow the rule, technically.

Or scoring ability; Maltby's best season was 14 goals in 65 games, and he scored 14 goals two other times. Eaves has scored 20 goals once, has scored 14 goals another time, scored 12 in 65 last season, and has scored 11 in 32 so far this season. Eaves has scored 58 goals and 126 points in 339 games to Maltby's 128 goals and 260 points in 1072 games. That's a ridiculous difference in GPG and PPG.

Osgood was a top ten netminder in the NHL for most of his career. Only one goaltender in his age range has been better consistently, and that's Marty Brodeur. When I think of the best goalies of all-time, Osgood is among the group. He's a clutch goaltender who has been a longtime starter who plays very well and wins most of his starts. Also, food for thought: Osgood is 8th all-time in playoff wins, and 4th all-time in playoff shutouts. His overall playoff stats are very similar to Brodeur's, except that Osgood's w/l record is far better. Osgood's playoff record is actually very similar to Roy's when you adjust for the number of games played.

2.12 GAA, .918 sv%. 2 shutouts. He faced 26 shots per game. Vernon only faced 24 in 1997. I am amused that you argue that one of the team's best players in that run, with those kind of numbers, had a poor performance. Hasek's defense in Buffalo was underrated. Yes, his team allowed a lot of shots through; but they were a high percentage perimeter shots. He was a great goalie, and came up huge often, but his numbers through the 90s were slightly exaggerated due to the fact that his defense was good at clearing screens and keeping the puck on the outside. Yzerman won the Pearson in 1989. He was named First Team at center in 2000. That's two separate years. As far as the Hull analogy you are complaining about? Hull was a decent goal scorer who suddenly became an elite player when paired with Oates, a very skilled playmaker. When Oates left, Hull's goal scoring dropped considerably, putting up OK numbers with Craig Janney, who is a decent playmaker but no Oates. Oates kept on scoring at a high level without Hull. An average goalie compared to the league would play a few seasons in the league and compete for a starting position. He would not win one in his rookie season and hold a starting job on the most successful team in the league for almost a decade before being traded, and starting for a few seasons and then coming back and having to win back his starting job. Osgood is, or at very least was, a great goaltender.

Roloson is three years older, and yet Osgood had won a Stanley Cup before Roloson had 75 NHL starts under his belt. Osgood has had six 30-win seasons. Roloson has had none. Only once in Osgood's professional career has he posted a losing record, that being last season's 7-9-4 record. Roloson has done so seven times in the NHL and once in the AHL. Osgood was consistently considered a top goaltender throughout the 90s, has been named to play in the all-star game multiple times as well as having been named a member of the postseason all-star team. Roloson has made one appearance in the all-star game, selected because he and Fernandez were the only realistic options for the Wild at that point.

I have to figure that the "couldn't stop a beach ball" part comes more from the fact that his starting job was stolen by a rookie, as his save percentage over his career did not vary by much. I said one guy stops 13 great chances, and the other guy only faces 13 shots. Unless you think every shot is a quality chance, which completely changes the hypothetical situation around. Osgood sat for 20+ games last season without interruption. Howard went 37-15-10; that's twelve more wins than losses. Certainly Howard wasn't playing every game due to winning the previous game. But you seriously don't think there were points in there where Osgood could have reasonably been inserted for a game here and there, do you? Not my style, thanks.

Regardless of whether you think Osgood lets in weak goals or not, the stats don't lie. Osgood is superior to Howard in every way over the past month. If one goalie has a tendency to let in weak goals, but only averages 2 total goals against and wins more than he loses, that's better than a goalie who doesn't let in weak goals but who averages 3 goals against with a losing record. Hate who you want, but at least recognize statistical fact.

Osgood over that span: 2-1-1, 2.71 gaa, .917 sv%

Howard has been badly outplayed by Osgood for a month and a half. This what you don't understand. Howard automatically gets the next start after a bad game to 'sort it out' if you will. The problem is that he has been having a ton of bad games. Osgood, on the other hand, has been playing great and after each great game he gets exiled to the end of the bench for another week or two. Howard has done nothing to earn his starts this season; Osgood has done plenty. Osgood should be starting half or more of the games from here on out until Howard proves otherwise.

You didn't catch the part where I said I would trade Franzen for Getzlaf, did you?

You mean former All-Star goaltender Tim Cheveldae? Basing it on winning alone is silly; if one goalie faces 15 great chances and stops 13 but loses, while the other goalie only faces 13 shots and wins, how do you determine who deserves the starts based on that? A deal for a goalie would happen before the deadline. As far as last year; it was a rookie and a vet who wasn't playing at all. Use up the box of tissues yet?

I would trade Franzen for Getzlaf straight up. I think Franzen and Flip might be more than he's worth though; but the basic deal is a good concept. How about one of these: 1) Filppula and Franzen for Getzlaf and Koivu 2) Filppula and Franzen for Getzlaf and Sutton 3) Filppula, Franzen, and Salei for Getzlaf, Koivu, and Lilja

So we send a division rival a young, top-6 skilled forward who is just picking up his game back to where it belongs, a highly rated young defenseman, and a 3rd round pick all for just a 32 year old backup goalie? Stuff like this is why you are a joke mindfly.

Given that he was playing no better than Boucher during the playoffs, and only came in due to Boucher's injury (and started the season as about the 5th string tender, moving up due to injury to guys like Emery) it's not hard to believe that last year's playoff was the height of Leighton's career, rather than a glimpse of what's to come like so many seemed to think.

As far as Eaves is concerned, I've been supporting the idea of him getting more ES time for a long time. I took many a shot for suggesting Eaves could play wing on a scoring line (Homer/Dats/Eaves was specifically what I suggested) back in the late summer when most posters around here were debating lines that included Mattias Ritola.

Modano's playing style and Hudler's being put together is the worst possible fit of two players on this team. The beginning of this season is a perfect example. Combined with the fact that Modano was new to the team, and Hudler had been gone a year and so was basically new, you have two players who have no developed chemistry with each other or the surrounding roster trying to shoehorn together two completely incompatible styles of play into one line. Your lines would be much more effective with Hudler and Cleary swapped, and no this is not a "go-Hudler" comment. Hudler has always played well with both Flip and Franzen, and when put together this season Franzen/Flip/Huds immediately clicked. Cleary/Modano/Bertuzzi was also an effective line, if you recall. So if we assemble DZH based on the fact that line has had great chemistry in the past, why not use other lines that have worked well together? Also... you would seriously play Draper over Miller? Drapes has looked better this year than last, but he's simply not as good as Miller. The top line definitely wouldn't be better defensively than it is now. Hossa is very good in his own end, but he's not Z in that respect. Compared to your other posted lines, the second line drops Z in Flip's spot, which is an improvement at both ends, the third line has Eaves instead of Hudler, and the fourth line has Miller instead of Eaves.

Filppula isn't performing up to the second-line center par level Steve Yzerman set in 1993-94. Of course, there are only a handful of forwards in the league capable of playing at that level, so it's not really fair. And that really is the essence of the Filppula debate, isn't it?

If basketball is Canadian, then hockey is British. In fact, if we're going based on place of origin, hockey would still be British.

I would have expected Smith going the other way, given contract size/length and the fact Ellis was signed this offseason, plus the fact that now Stevie will get pretty much nothing for whoever is dealt. I would dump Ellis for the best offer, because he and Smith have looked basically the same, but Smith is younger and has had better peak play.