eva unit zero

This is what I expect the roster to look like next year if Bert and Homer both come back. Zetterberg Datsyuk Franzen Hudler Filppula Holmstrom Cleary Bertuzzi Abdelkader Helm Eaves Miller Draper Lidstrom Kronwall Rafalski Kronwall Stuart Lilja? Ericsson Kindl Meech? Bertuzzi will play on one of the first two lines. The wingers on the top-two lines will probably be Bert, Franzen, Homer, and Hudler. Hudler is probably opposite Homer so that there are two offensive players capable of singly opening up offensive space and making plays while Homer does his thing, with the Franzen/???/Bertuzzi line having more of a "big, strongwingers who can shoot and crash the net" feel to it. Or center Hudler between those two and put Z or Dats between Flip and Cleary. One or both of Lilja and Meech return. Lebda does not, and it's unlikely any other defenseman fills that 7th spot. The pairings will probably be shuffled around to avoid the Ericsson/Lebda circus from this past season, so we'll see stuff like Kindl/Stuart and Lidstrom/Ericsson, and depending on the roster we might see stuff like Ericsson/Lilja or Meech/Rafalski. Meech and Rafalski would be a pretty good offensive pair, thinking about it. Maybe try it out on the PP and put Kronner on the first unit.

I said all throughout the season that Howard was being played too much. I was constantly labeled "Osgood slappy" because of the exact reason you just stated; the Wings were "not in a playoff spot and needed to play the hot goalie" but my opinion was more that playing a goalie every game wears him out no matter how hot he is, and this has been proven in the past. Consistently giving Osgood 2 of every 7 games would have been more than enough to keep Howard fresh without shutting down any momentum he might have while still keeping Osgood sharp and ready to step in if necessary. Osgood had significantly better numbers than Howard before Osgood was kept out with the flu, and also much better than what he finished the season with. So let's imagine that instead of starting 9 of 66 games after the November 7th game against the Maple Leafs which Ozzy played while flu-ridden, Osgood were to start 20 of those games. Assuming W/L records projected the same for pre-Nov 7th Ozzie and post-Nov 7th Howard, the two goalies' stat lines would look something like this: Osgood after 11-07-09? 20 starts, 20 GP, 10-5-4 2-0 shootouts 1082:58 Mins 50 GA 512 SA 462 SV 2.77 GAA 28.34 SAPG .902 Sv% 2 SO Howard after 11-07-09? 46 starts, 29-10-7 0-1 shootouts 2806:26 Mins 102 GA 1392 SA 1290 SV 2.18 GAA 29.76 SAPG .927 Sv% 2 SO Osgood was also starting to play better when he went down with the flu. So the assumption that so many here make that playing Osgood any significant amount of games would have cost the Wings a playoff spot is ridiculous. If that's true, than shouldn't Jimmy Howard be a finalist for the Hart trophy? If the Wings were 7th overall with him and would have been no better than 13th overall without him, and out of the playoffs, then shouldn't he be up for the MVP award if it was all because of him?

I've never said Howard was a bad option. I said he played poorly for the most part in the playoffs, most likely due to fatigue from not getting enough rest during the regular season. Especially down the stretch. Howard's play tapered off going into the playoffs, if you recall. As the season came to an end, Howard was playing some of the worst hockey he had played all year. That further backs up my belief that it was not the playoff pressure and him simply being a rookie, because as a 26-year old who's won IIHF gold and been a pro for five years, he is used to playing under pressure. What he's not used to is playing anywhere NEAR as many games as he did this year. Total playoffs and regular season combined, all leagues in one season, here are the amount of games Howard has played since he started at Maine in 2002-03: 2003: 21 (Maine) 2004: 22 (Maine) 2005: 39 (Maine) 2006: 56 (Grand Rapids, Detroit) 2007: 56 (Grand Rapids) 2008: 58 (Grand Rapids, Detroit) 2009: 46 (Grand Rapids, Detroit) 2010: 74 (Detroit) This season he played 16 more games that he had previously played at the pro or college level. Furthering that, he played 63 games IN THE REGULAR SEASON, which in and of itself is 5 more than he had played before in any season TOTAL. Babcock overused Howard and should have played Osgood much more than he did. It would have kept Howard fresher and would have kept Ozzie from getting rusty. If anyone is truly to blame for Howard's poor playoff performance it's Babcock, for mishandling his netminders by not knowing whether Howard could go every night or not. Some goalies play better when they play 75 games as opposed to 50-60. Most don't.

Not to mention the fact that goaltending numbers IN GENERAL are much better nowadays than they were in the 80s or early 90s. Howard's regular season statistics would have placed him as 3rd in GAA (behind Hasek), 2nd in sv% (behind Hasek), tied for 2nd in wins with Belfour 2nd in wins (behind Richter), and tied for 8th in SO with Irbe, Potvin, Brodeur, Vernon, McLean, and Wakaluk (behind Belfour, Roy, Hasek, Richter, Hextall, Puppa, and Casey) while Howard currently places 5th in GAA, 6th in sv%, tied for 8th in wins, and tied for 20th in SO. But let's look at two interesting points. I said Osgood was better in the playoffs than Howard in their rookie years. Osgood made fewer mistakes, and Osgood's GAA dropped from 2.86 to 2.31 while Howard's increased from 2.32 to 2.75...Osgood's save percentage went from .895 to .891, Howard's from .924 to .915. Osgood was also several years younger. Let's take a look at equal age. Howard turned 26 this season. His stat line is as follows: Regular season: 63 GP, 37-15-0-10, 3 SO, 2.26, .924 Playoffs: 12 GP, 5-7, 1 SO, 2.75, .915 By comparison, Osgood's stat line for the season he turned 26: Regular season: 64 GP, 33-20-11-0, 6 SO, 2.21, .913 Playoffs: 22 GP, 16-6, 2 SO, 2.12, .918 Howard lost two games in shootouts, so his record under the old system would be 37-23-8 Give him time, he'll serve well in the playoffs. But don't diss Ozzy just because you don't like him; He was great, has had a HOF career and is still good.

Many times goals were either soft goals (45 feet out, medium-speed wrister, no screen?) or quite often goals which were results of Howard's misplays or poor decisions. Such as tossing the puck into Nik Kronwall's skates with his glove when there is a forechecker right on Kronwall, instead of just freezing the puck. Bad rebounds (redirecting a short from the corner to the slot rather than the endboards) or coming out of his crease to challenge the shooter and failing to return to the crease as the shooter advanced, despite the attacking player on the other side of the ice. Overcommitting on multiple 2-on-1 rushes, some of which his defensemen saved his ass on. No, he wasn't the only Wing making errors. But he made some pretty huge ones, and he is given the "but he's a rookie" free pass that guys like Osgood and other 90s rookies never got, despite the fact he has much more pro experience than any of them did and many of them were better in their rookie year than Howard was this year.

Howard is a good goalie. He was faitgued in the playoffs and made some errors. But one bad game? He had several bad games. I'm not saying they were his fault with regard to his ability, but they were his fault in terms of the fact that most goalies would normally have been able to stop the goals he had given up, and they were given up at bad moments that killed momentum. As far as saying I am 'bashing Howard' I have supported Howard since he was drafted, even when most LGW members felt Howard was the worst of the signed prospects and should have been traded while he still had value, I felt he should be given the shot as the backup because he was still a high-end prospect and should be given the opportunity at the NHL level. At the same time, he can't play every game and still isn't perfect.

So like a US vs Canada Olympic style match, so as to make 40-45% of the NHL players ineligible? Doesn't work. Or a US teams vs Canadian teams game, meaning players from 24 teams vs players from 6 teams? Even worse. If you want a single All-Star game but don't like the current format, how about this: Name two All-Star coaches. The #2 coach gets first pick in a snake draft; each team is a standard 12 forwards and 6 defensemen, with 3 goalies (one for each period, as normal) picked from all 30 teams. Top 42 players in the league play in the game, split evenly, coached by the top two coaches. As fair as possible every year.

Ok, let's look at this then, going from two different directions. 1) Sign a UFA goaltender who would sign for $1.5m or less. You've now almost certainly signed a goalie worse than Chris Osgood. 2) Sign the best goalie you can who is willing to backup Howard, regardless of price. You're probably spending around $3m. 3) Sign the best goalie on the market, and make Howard backup if necessary. Now you're putting out something like $6-7m.

Right now Greiss is the only goaltender they have under contract. Based on the supposed $57.7m cap for next season, they have 6 forwards, 5 defensemen, and 1 goalie with about $21.5m left in cap space. They should be able to fill out their forwards and defense, including keeping Marleau, Pavelski, and Setoguchi, for about $16-17m. That doesn't leave them enough to sign a guy like Nabokov who would want way more than he deserves. But they can go out and sign a goaltender like Theodore or Biron for $2m-$2.5m and not really suffer much if any of a drop in performance. Nabokov is a very good goaltender, but San Jose would be better off using the $6-7m he will likely cost on making sure their skaters are as good or better than they are now and signing a solid goaltender like Theodore, Biron, Turco for less than $2.5m or even perhaps trying to trade for a young guy like Price or Schneider who makes more than $1m as a backup. Better forwards and defense than the current Sharks in front of Price, Theodore, or Biron is probably a better shot at the Cup than this year's Sharks.

All I have to say regarding the "replace the All-Star game" talk is: Division All-Star teams. 8 forwards, 5 defensemen, 2 goalies. Teams seeded 1-6 by combined out-of-division record, using points-per-game percentage. Three round tournament, two 15-minute periods, single elimination. Top two teams get byes, 3v6, 4v5. Round 1 on Friday night, Skills competition on Saturday afternoon, Round 2 on Saturday evening, Round 3 on Sunday evening. As far as the WC, there are 17 NHL cities with 18 teams that could properly support an outdoor ice rink on New Year's Day. Including the Heritage Classic, four have hosted games already. Pittsburgh has next year lined up. This leaves Calgary, Denver (Colorado), Columbus, Detroit, Minneapolis (Minnesota), Montreal, Newark (New Jersey), New York, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Toronto, and Vancouver. Taking out teams that have already participated in an NHL outdoor game as an away game, that leaves the following cities to host the next few WCs: Calgary, Columbus, Denver, Minneapolis, Newark, New York, Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver. Of further notice, Washington is the only team coming from a city that cannot properly support outdoor hockey on New Year's Day that has already participated or been announced so far. So the 9 cities (10 teams) I listed above should fill out the next five WCs after 2011.

Sorry to break it to you guys, but assuming Lidstrom returns then next season's defense will be one of the three following units: Top four: Lidstrom/Kronwall/Rafalski/Stuart Remaining: Ericsson/Lilja/Kindl Top four: Lidstrom/Kronwall/Rafalski/Stuart Remaining: Ericsson/Lilja/Kindl/Meech Top four: Lidstrom/Kronwall/Rafalski/Stuart Remaining: Ericsson/Kindl/Meech That's simply it. That's how it will go down. Lidstrom is back, then the Wings bring back one or both of Lilja and Meech to play with Ericsson and Kindl in the bottom 3-4. There's a decent chance Lilja retires, and Meech has shown himself a decent defenseman and improved a great deal from start to finish over last season. Perhaps shaking up the pairings to play Kronwall with Rafalski and Ericsson/Kindl/Meech next to Stuart and Lidstrom would help get the kids experience while not having the Ericsson/Lebda type pairing with a rookie who is still fairly new to his position and a defensively incapable partner for said rookie. EDIT: Plus, playing two big guys like Kindl and Ericsson alongside Stuart might help them to develop a more dominant physical game like Stuart's. Meech is a smaller guy, a little smaller than Kronwall, but he definitely has the feistiness to play a more aggressive game even if he doesn't have a hard hitting game (although he did hit more often than Janik last season) so the Wings have three solid young defensemen they have a strong likelihood of bringing back who have good skills and are open to develop solid physical and defensive games to go with what natural offensive skills they have displayed already.

Miller was getting as much time as Helm during the playoffs and considerably more than Eaves. Hard to argue that Eaves and Helm were amazing while Miller didn't do much. Miller was just as key to the PK, and the only one who saw real PP time. Miller, Helm, and Eaves are pretty much equal offensively and defensively. Expecting the Wings to drop Miller just because you like the other two better is silly. Helm will stay, there is a good chance Miller and Eaves will both be re-signed but the Wings may lose one to waivers depending on training camp and final roster decisions.

MOST OVERRATED SAVE OF THE YEAR. The second chance was completely a result of failing to properly control the rebound on the first shot! Yes, the first save looked great, and the second save was a good reaction. But he never has to make that second save if not for his initial rebound failure. If he redirects it properly, the Wings might get to turn that back up ice and get a great scoring chance with Hanzal trapped in the corner like he was.

So your opinion is one of: 1) Howard starts all 82 games. 2) The Wings trade valuable assets for a goaltender who is better than Osgood, possibly including Ozzie in the deal or possibly still paying Ozzie's salary. Likely you'll be looking at a loss of a solid young forward and/or defenseman such as Filppula or Kronwall to acquire the new goalie. Really want to make that deal? 3) The Wings use any of the other goalies they have signed instead of Osgood. Unless, of course, you think Osgood could play 25 games and the overall outcome of those games would be better than the results of any of the three scenarios you implied that I listed, those being scenario 1) Howard's fatigue, scenario2) reduced team capability, or scenario 3) untested young goaltender.

The way you said it implied it could be done. There are no goaltenders who make anywhere near Osgood's salary or less who can match his playing ability who wouldn't cost the Wings significant assets. Very few goalies, such as Rask, even can match the salary and match or beat the playing level, without considering the assets to actually acquire the goaltender. This is why I basically posed the question to you of who you seriously thought would make a better backup for Howard than Osgood. Remember also that the Wings are on the hook anyway for Osgood's salary cap hit if he is forced into retirement. The obvious idea isn't to find a different backup, it's to go with the guy they have and hope he can regain his form. Unless of course you're an Ozzie hater, and think he should be drawn and quartered for only winning the Wings TWO Cups instead of five or six like Hasek would have.

Name a better goaltender than Osgood who is either a UFA willing to sign for less than $2m, or a currently signed goalie who makes less than $2m and is available for less than a minimum of one of Filppula, Franzen, or Kronwall. Not there.

Eliminate "Intent to blow" and play until whistle actually sounds. Instead of two referees and two linesmen, have four referees in a diamond formation; basically one referee down low at each end and two along the boards covering the center ice area. Referees should follow the play as necessary and allow primary discretion of calls to the referee whose 'zone' the play is in. If a referee sees a call away from the pla, he should make it, but he should not make calls such as offsides, hand pass, high stick or frozen puck unless he is the referee in that zone. If a play is under review, all referees should view video if possible, and determine the final call. Eliminate trapezoid. Goaltender penalties; the goaltender is removed from the ice for the duration of his penalty, and another player serves in the box for him. He may not return to the ice until the next stoppage in play.

Ok, here's a legit argument: Howard was playing like s*** on most games. He allowed bad goals at bad times, and was playing worse than Osgood did in the regular season. The argument against playing Osgood in the playoffs was that he was so horrible in the regular season, even though his regular season performance would have been an upgrade on Howard's playoffs. Best case and Osgood turns in a third straight super-goalie performance. However, the likely reason for Howard's considerable inconsistency and obviously slower mental and physical reaction speed in the playoffs was fatigue. So arguing that he should play more than 60 games is ridiculous if you want to win the Cup. That's basically saying you want your goalie to play 90+ games on the season after the playoffs. 80 is a more realistic number for a goalie to play (rookie Howard started 72 this year, btw) because fatigue really affects a goaltenders performance at that level.

It should definitely be Kesler. He's one of their offensive leaders, he's the best defensive player on the team, and he shows up in pressure situations. He's a leader on and off the ice and classy, while Luongo will indirectly complain about the team's performance as an excuse for his own poor showing. Honestly, it could be Brad Norton instead of Luongo, and it would be an improvement simply by removing the captaincy from their highly paid goaltender, the overrated "Itwasn't Myfaulto"

A luxury tax system might be better than the current hard cap. It might not. But let's take a look at one possibility: Luxury tax: Use existing method for determining cap ceiling. Teams pay equal into revenue sharing pool what they exceed cap by. This revenue sharing is divided equally among existing revenue-sharing eligible teams who pay less than the "tax line" (halfway between cap max and floor, or $8m below cap max) while any revenue sharing teams who spend above that line do not receive from this pool. Teams can choose to spend as much or as little as they wish on salaries. A team could have a total payroll of $11.025m by having 21 players making the league minimum (as of next season I believe) of $525k if it chose to do so.

Foretelling the future? Well, depending on your version on flaming, here goes: Hmm. Interesting. Sounds like what a 4 year old says about why they don't eat their broccoli. "I hate it SOOO much, that's why I never eat it!!!" You can't say "Osgood was HORRIBLE this past season so much so that Howard was starting every freaking game!" when Howard started more than 20 games in a row more than once, and Osgood LITERALLY was lucky to play one or two games a month. It's not that Osgood was putting up such a poor performance he didn't play for 20 games; it's that he hadn't played for 20 games so he put up a poor performance. Logic. Look for it at your local grocery store.

Whoever plays the majority should start no more than about 50-55 games, and the backup should start the remainder, give or take a couple. Whoever starts the majority depends on whether Howard has a significant sophomore slump and how close Osgood's play gets back towards his 2007-08 form. Regardless, neither should play an excessive amount and if it comes down to playing almost 50-50, then so be it. I have said before and agree with what has been posted earlier in this thread that Howard's generally poor performance in the postseason was a result of fatigue, as much of the problems came from issues of physical and/or mental reaction speed. Degredation of such is a symptom of fatigue, so it would not be surprising if that were Howard's issue. Osgood should be given more playing time and Howie less in the regular season than last year both because he was showing much better play early last season and it keeps both him and Howard fresh going into the playoffs, as well as in the event of injury.

Detroit goes undefeated, winning every game in OT. 82 points. Chicago wins 41 games in regulation and one in OT, and loses 40. 83 points. Which team is better? Systems where points awarded in each game are not the same from game to game are epic fail because they provide extra points that suddenly appear, or in your case remove points. If you want a simple W/L system, just use a simple W/L system and discard points altogether.

The main problem is the imbalance between the conferences, and the fact that the three-point game exists in its current fashion. Change the point system to: 3 points for a win in regulation or OT 2 points for a win in a SO 1 point for SO loss 0 points for regulation/OT loss Follow this up with: Each division winner is guaranteed a top-8 seed and therefore first-round home-ice in the playoffs. The playoffs are seeded 1-16 by points. For example, the top three teams could all come from one division if that's how the points rolled, as there are two "wild-card" spots which get first-round home ice. Teams are re-seeded each round based on seed (division sinners retain their playoff seed) as the playoffs progress. This would provide for a fairer playoff system as the best teams would be in, regardless of division or conference. Think about it. These would have been the first-round matchups: (1) Washington vs. (16) Calgary (2) San Jose vs. (15) St. Louis (3) Chicago vs. (14) Boston (4) Phoenix vs. (13) Ottawa (5) Vancouver vs. (12) Colorado (6) New Jersey vs. (11) Nashville (7) Detroit vs. (10) Los Angeles (8) Buffalo vs. (9) Pittsburgh Likely leading to: (1) Washington vs. (9) Pittsburgh (OH SNAP!) (2) San Jose vs. (7) Detroit (3) Chicago vs. (6) New Jersey (4) Phoenix vs. (5) Vancouver (1) Washington vs. (5) Vancouver (2) San Jose vs. (3) Chicago (1) Washington vs. (3) Chicago And Chicago wins the Cup. They'll win it this year anyway, just over a different opponent.

Let's take a look at currently signed players who will be making within $250k of Hudler's cap hit for 2010-2011 (between $2.625m and $3.125m) and see what their average production has been the past two seasons in the NHL. Players who are required to hit multiple bonuses to reach that cap hit are not included. Only three players scored more points than Hudler did in 2008-09. Only six players scored more goals than Hudler did in 2008-09. Only three had more assists than Hudler did in 2008-09. Very few are capable to any degree defensively. Hudler is above average defensively compared to the NHL's forwards, and when you take away the defensive specialists who are typically banished to the third and fourth lines, it pushes Hudler even higher above the average. I would say perhaps seven of the forwards listed below are as good or better than Hudler defensively, and only three scored 40+ points, which is 17 fewer than Hudler scored. Hudler at $2.875m is a pretty damn good deal. If he scores 70, then only Parise even beats that mark. Saying that $2.875m could be better used elsewhere is ridiculous. Zach Parise, NJ, 82 GP, 42-47-89 Jamie Langenbrunner, NJ, 81 GP, 24-41-65 Stephen Weiss, FLA, 79 GP, 21-40-61 Milan Hejduk, COL, 65 GP, 25-27-52 Mike Knuble, WSH, 76 GP, 28-22-50 Kris Versteeg, CHI, 79 GP, 21-28-49 Niklas Hagman, CGY, 74 GP, 24-20-44 Radim Vrbata, PHX, 84 GP, 24-19-43 Steve Ott, DAL, 69 P, 21-21-42 Mikhail Grabovski, TOR, 69 GP, 15-27-42 Daniel Cleary, DET, 69 GP, 15-23-38 Valtteri Filppula, DET, 68 GP, 12-26-38 Ales Kotalik, CGY, 78 GP, 16-20-36 Dustin Byfuglien, CHI, 80 GP, 16-17-33 Erik Cole, CAR, 60 GP, 15-15-30 Jonathan Cheechoo, OTW, 64 GP, 9-13-22 Patrick O'Sullivan, EDM, 46 GP, 7-14-21 Rostislav Olesz, FLA, 58 GP, 9-10-19 Samuel Pahlsson, CBJ, 72 GP, 5-12-17 Chris Clark, CBJ, 53 GP, 4-9-13