Yzerman191

It'll be interesting to see the final result. Ovechkin could still lose out on both the Art Ross and the Richard, depending on Crosby and Sedin's performance in the last few games. It's very possible Ovechkin and Crosby end up in a tie for the Richard. Washington and Vancouver have one game left and Pittsburgh has two. It'll be interesting to see what things look like when it's all said and done. Also, this is off topic but just a rant: why is Carmen allowed to troll in every thread under the cover of defending one of his or her favorite players? Taken from the site rules: "DON'T incite flame wars by purposely baiting ("trolling") other members into an online flame war. Members caught doing so will be disciplined appropriately." To me, what Carmen is doing is quite obviously against the rules and makes a mockery of potentially interesting and thought provoking discussions. I can't tell you how many threads I enter into to see Carmen derail it right off the get-go. It would be one thing if, whenever Carmen needed to satisfy his or her need for discussion about Crosby he made a separate thread about it, but to derail largely unrelated threads (and not necessarily this one) is just annoying.

People keep mentioning that Rask has better stats than Howard, but the workload has a lot to do with that. One of your jobs as a starting goaltender is to be ready to start any given game, whether they're back-to-back games (as Howard has done all season) or stretches of 20+ games in a row. Having played 60+ games in a season should warrant extra consideration, because as a goalie, battling the fatigue is one of your most difficult tasks. For example, had the last two games Howard played in not happened he would still be sitting around a .928 save percentage. I also don't think age should play a factor. In Andrew Raycroft's Calder season, he was 23 years old, had 29 wins, a 2.05 GAA, .926 save percentage, and 3 shutouts in 57 games played. In Evgeni Nabokov's Calder season, he was 25 years old, had 32 wins, a 2.19 GAA, .915 save percentage, and 6 shutouts in 66 games played. Ed Belfour was also 25 years old when he won it. Howard differs from the three above goalies in no significant ways. His age, games played, GAA, save percentage, wins, and shutouts will be pretty similar to many recent goaltenders who have won it before him. I'm not necessarily advocating Howard for the Calder because I think that Myers is equally deserving. I just think that it's ridiculous to discredit Howard based on his age or goaltenders with fewer games played but slightly better statistics.

My vote is for Chicago. The travel would be as minimal as we can hope for all playoffs, and they play a style of hockey that seems to work to our benefit. Rather than a hard-hitting style, which I think takes its toll on a team that has played more hockey than anyone else in the last three years, they play a fast-paced puck possession style similar to our own, but I think we're better at it. They've got questions in net and on the powerplay, as well as a coach that we generally get the best of. I also think it'd be a fun series to watch, win or lose, and would add a spark to an already blooming rivalry. People keep picking Phoenix and I don't understand why. They're probably the last of the four teams I'd want to play right now. They've got a rock-solid goaltender and literally the best team defense in the west (lowest in goals against). They're the underdog in any given series and have absolutely nothing to lose no matter who they're up against. There's no pressure to succeed; even if they're swept in four games they've still greatly exceeded expectations for this season. A team like that terrifies me. Realistically, looking at the standings, I think we're least likely to face Phoenix anyways. We'll likely end up with the Sharks or Vancouver, but probably Vancouver.

I can't see the Capitals making it to the Stanley Cup Finals, let alone winning. They have questionable goaltending, lackluster defense, and a balls-to-the-wall style offense that just doesn't seem to work very well in the playoffs. I think New Jersey or Pittsburgh has a great shot at beating them in a best-of-seven series.

I hope Osgood gets another start this season. He's obviously rusty, and I think with a little more experience (just like in the game today) his game will improve. Leaving him completely rusty essentially puts all your eggs in one basket, completely relying on Howard not to falter (which is entirely possible). I'm not sure it really matters where we end up in the standings anyways; there doesn't seem to be a clear-cut best team to play IMO.

Looking at the upcoming schedule today, I noticed something I had previously missed: though a lot of our matches are against teams that are out of playoff contention, many of them could have an unsettled grudge with the 'Wings. St. Louis, Minnesota, Nashville, Edmonton, and Columbus are all teams we've been beating up on year after year in recent history, so I guess my question is this: will that be on their mind when they're playing us? Will they be thinking about how they may be able to knock us out of the 8th seed and get a little revenge? Just thought it was a funny topic.

I wonder if Colin Campbell's presence had anything to do with the lack of retaliation. People tend to behave themselves when in the presence of their boss.

Those videos are pretty funny! As for the Heatley incident, I would argue that Heatley committed depraved-heart murder, a legal term to describe extreme recklessness and disregard for human life that results in the death of another human. Heatley may not have had any intention of crashing, but it really doesn't matter; he ended someone else's life as a result of his recklessness.

Not only that, but he'll be offered that kind of money in his native country, near all of his friends and family. I won't lose a bit of respect for him if he decides to take an offer for big money in the KHL.

On paper, I agree that Canada is the better team. However, as a unit, Russia is playing better than Canada. Canada is having some unexpected problems with some key players (Getzlaf, Perry, Niedermayer, Pronger, Seabrook, Brodeur) who were expected to come up big for them, as well as some expected problems (Thornton, Marleau) with underachievers in clutch situations. There is also a lot of talk that Canada doesn't have enough role players, guys that aren't afraid to roll up their sleeves and do whatever it takes to win; the same cannot be said for Russia. Overall, I want Russia to win but my head tells me Canada will take it. Russia's problem will be in their own zone, and even with an explosive line like Semin-Malkin-Ovechkin, Canada has the forwards capable of exploiting their lack of defensive talent. And not only do they have the capability of exploiting the first line's defensive shortcomings, but they have the depth that allows them to roll four lines capable of scoring after any screw up by any of the Russian lines. I also think that Canada has the advantage in net, whether they went with Luongo or Brodeur. With that said, I also thought that Canada would beat the USA, so maybe I'm wrong. I hope so.

Heatley celebrated prematurely twice in the same play.

There are certain guys you just can't leave off the team, and in my opinion, Pronger, Niedermayer, and Thornton are three of them. Pronger and Niedermayer both need to step up, but they still deserve to be on that team, and there was no chance in hell Yzerman could leave them off. In retrospect, it's easy to say that the two of them are the odd men out on account of how well the young guys (Doughty, Keith, Seabrook, Weber) are playing, but there's no way Yzerman can make that decision before the tournament. And in my opinion, Bouwmeester is the only one I'd consider inserting into the lineup - certainly not Phaneuf or Green. The powerplay is struggling, and many think Yzerman should've chosen Stamkos for that 13th forward. I keep hearing people say, "Ugh, if only we had Stamkos!" after each failed powerplay. Well guess what? They've already got about 20 guys that regularly play on the powerplay in the NHL and are struggling, so talent and scoring touch is not the problem. Canada is going to be perfectly fine. They'll almost certainly get through Germany, and they've got the talent and the depth to beat Russia. I see the game tomorrow as a sort of workshop - Babcock will probably try to get his guys to take a solid lead, then maybe shuffle the lines around to see what works. Also, there's no way Babcock could've put Luongo in net from the onset and not heard crap about it. It was Brodeur's job to lose and he lost it.

Sure, you could say that a few of their top players are underachievers when it comes to the big games - guys like Thornton, Marleau, Luongo, Nash (though I think that is TBD), but I wouldn't say that about Crosby. He's way above a point per game in the NHL playoffs. He's played terrific in these games so far, and I think you'd have a hard time disputing that. He's dangerous almost every time he's in the offensive zone. I really dislike Crosby too, but he is definitely not part of Canada's problem. Whether you like it or not, the guy can step up when it matters.

I sure hope Semin-Malkin-Ovechkin play with the top D-pairing... all three of them need a map to find their own defensive zone. I thought that was the whole point of having Datsyuk play with Ovechkin and Semin?

Some people would call Jagr the best European-born NHL player of all time (not any 'Wings fans, of course). A finalist for the Hart trophy six times (won one), three Pearsons, five Art Ross trophies, two Cups, the second-most game winning goals of all time, ninth all-time in points, and twelfth all-time in goals. With that said, you've got to take a look at what he's done lately, and his NHL totals certainly deteriorated by the time he left, though his playoff stats have always been good (and remained impressive, even in his last NHL season). Since leaving, he's continued to be a point per game player, though in a weaker league. I'd be willing to take a chance on him for $4M/1 year contract. Who else are we going to sign to make up some offense, and what do we really have to lose on a one-year contract?

I'm an American rooting for Russia and Canada. I want Russia to win because I like a lot of the Russian players (Datsyuk, Fedorov, Ovechkin, Malkin), and I want Canada to win for the sake of Yzerman and Babcock. Also, I think as much as people dislike Brian Burke the man could probably use an Olympic medal; he's going through a pretty rough patch...

Well, the injuries seem to be piling on again. Datsyuk has a sore ankle, Kronwall's knee isn't fully healed, Filppula's groin is acting up, Holmstrom's knee is bothering him, Eaves has a sprained ankle, and Maltby may be having shoulder injury (if any of this is news to you, check mlive). The worst part is, four of the six are participating in the Olympic games, where they will face some of the most competitive hockey of their lives. I just can't quit thinking about Lidstrom's tendinitis, Datsyuk's ankle, Kronwall's knee, etc. whenever I hear about these guys going off to the Olympic games. So here's my question: is this Olympic break really going to help us all that much? Literally all of our best players (Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Lidstrom, Franzen, etc.) will get little rest as they fly to Vancouver shortly after tonight's game to compete with the best hockey players in the world. Guys like Datsyuk and Kronwall, players we desparately need for a legitimate championship run, already have their health dwindling in the balance, and certainly could use the two weeks off.

You misunderstood me; I was referring to another poster. I don't deny that Crosby vs. AO is a good debate, and a fair one at that; it's just that a perfectly legitimate topic, such as this one, shouldn't be ruined by a poster who, whether being sarcastic or not, insists on bringing up Crosby in every thread imaginable and starting a firefight.

This thread is going to turn into an Ovechkin vs. Crosby thread in no time flat, all because one poster can't seem to help themselves. I think Ovechkin will probably take his third straight. At his point per game ratio right now, he'd be on pace for 138 points if he'd have played all 82 games. He's undoubtedly the best goal scorer in the game, he seems to inspire his team on the ice, and he's had a hand in over one-third of all of the goals scored by his team. Also, like another poster said, their winning streak started right about the time Ovechkin was made Captain, which certainly can't hurt his case. No other forward or defenseman has blown me away this year, but there are a few noteworthy goaltenders. Vokoun and Miller are both having strong seasons with extremely high save percentages and a handful of shutouts each.

The loyalty of the fans in this organization just amazes me. Draper, Maltby, Holmstrom, and Osgood have all been treated well by upper management for a good reason - they were all solid parts of several championship teams. Loyalty to players who deserve it is not killing this team. I would argue, rather, that by being loyalty to our players, we attract interest from free agents all around who see and hear how well the Red Wings treat their players. We also see that players within the organization often don't want to leave, and sometimes resign for contracts lower than their market value. I think the extra loyalty all pays off in the long run. The players I keep seeing listed - Holmstrom, Draper, Maltby, and Osgood - have not been the problem for the most part. They have all played their roles very well this season. Osgood is dying to get in there, work the rust off, and lead us to another SCF; he just hasn't been given the opportunity. Draper is an integral part of one of the best lines we've seen this season. Holmstrom is one behind Datsyuk and Zetterberg (the team leaders) in goals scored. And unlike Abdelkader, Bertuzzi, Helm, Cleary, Filppula, and Williams, Maltby actually has a neutral plus-and-minus rating. Besides, who do we have to replace the four of them? We don't have some stud backup goaltender waiting in the AHL; we've got a couple guys who could stand to benefit from a couple more years of maturation down there. We don't have a whole core of talented forwards to replace Maltby, Draper, and Holmstrom; rather, we've got a bunch of scrubs who aren't AHL ready. You guys need to get real; these depth guys aren't the problem, and our loyalty to our players isn't what is hindering our chances this year. Our problem is injuries mixed with underachieving by the players we need most.

Very subtle advertisements.

Not a chance. At his current goals per game ratio, if one is to assume he won't decline (which he undoubtedly will, given his reckless style), he would have to play 1285 games, which amounts to about 15-and-two-thirds of a season. Pretty hard to imagine, unless you don't think he has peaked yet (Gretzky hit his peak at 22; Lemieux at 23). And just for fun, in order to pass Gretzky in points, assuming Ovechkin doesn't decline, he would need to play 2,117 games (about 26 seasons) at his current PPG ratio.

And for the record, I'm not really rooting for Mike Green to get the Norris. I'm just a realist and I realize that the judges will often overlook the defensive lapses in favor of offensive dominance.

Ovechkin is on pace for 124 points after missing 8 games, which would make that the highest PPG since Mario Lemieux in 1995-1996. He's also got a +41 rating. Mike Green is on pace for 77 points in 77 games this year. Hopefully he doesn't get hot and beat Lidstrom's 80. Anyone think they'll finally give him a Norris this year?

Yeah, I hope they make the playoffs.