egroen

Or that dude from Parliamant saying the government will soon have to step in to regulate the NHL. I also had fun picturing Mounties on the ice, in addition to the officials.

I predict angry Montreal fans will soon burn the city to the ground. Could you imagine if Steve Moore played for the Canadiens?

Bert and Franzen are definitely cold, but Filppula has been playing more of a perimeter game since he has returned, which is frustrating.

This is going to sound heartless, but I completely agree with no suspension in this case. It was an every shift hockey play that unfortunately had terrible results. Pacioretty sounds to me like he is being advised by his lawyers and building up a case - which I frankly have little sympathy for. It's hockey... You're a warrior - act like it.

He's been invisible inside of the blue line.

I do find it laughable the fans demand a $7m season out of our $1.5m goalie.

Not sure what has happened with Filpulla, but he is not the same player we saw at the beginning of the season.

I'll agree with the sentiment the lines were not working that well together.

Don't pick on Draper, he actually had a great game.

Though I still remember when the 2002 Wings had like 12 straight losses in March. Always disappointing to see them lose though. Ah well, I'm ready to give up on the President's Trophy.

The officials better write a 4 page, single-spaced apology letter to Lidstrom for that one.

We'll soon be cheering on the Las Vegas Wings.

He's an extremely unique case - pretty much his entire career (winning a Conn Smythe the year before winning the Calder).

Agreed.

I figured things would normalize down the stretch, but it is nice to finally see him get there. Funny how his +/- improves once Stuart and his 'offensive experiment' is gone. I have a hard time seeing anyone give Lidstrom a legitimate challenge for the Norris at this point, especially now that the paper tigers have cooled off offensively. A possible 7th Norris ties him with Harvey and one behind Orr. He is already the oldest Norris winner at the age of 38. Here's hoping he keeps it up!

You are being nit-picky We'll say a 110 pt season this year, down from 150 pts only a couple seasons ago. I do consider Lidstrom amongst the greatest ever 'defensively' - amongst the likes of Harvey, Savard and Langway.

Ken Dryden retired at the age of 31 after winning his 6th Stanley Cup in 8 years and a Vezina that year to become a lawyer.

Rob Blake won over Lidstrom in '98 despite having less points and a negative +/-. That was before the voters acknowledged defense could be played without crushing hits, however.

Lidstrom's current defense is like a 150 pt season from Gretzky - not his best, but still one of the best in the game

I find it hard to believe too, also because McCrimmon played a very smart defensive game as a player and is often credited by Lidstrom as a great mentor when he first broke into the league. But the Wings literally went from years of great defensive hockey to years of lackluster defensive hockey almost over night between the 08 and 09 seasons... Coinciding perfectly with McCrimmon's hire. Hard to ignore that.

Since 2000 his +/- has been the following: +19 +9 +13 +40 +19 +21 +40 +40 +31 +22 That's a ton of variance during a time when Lidstrom's defense was very consistently great. Between 03 and 04 he dipped 21 and between 02 and 03 he went up 27. Was 03 Lidstrom far away superior defensively to 02 and 04 Lidstrom? Those who watched those years know he was the same elite defensive player each year, and if given enough time we could write out a couple of pages attempting to explain why his +/- has taken a full 20 point swing in some years - his linemates, goalies, good/bad luck, etc. It's easier to just look at the stats and think Lidstrom was bad defensively in years like 01 and 02 and he was great defensively in 03, 07 and 08 - but that is not accurate at all. But to explain the variance is only going to come out like muddled, subjective "excuse making". The fact is, Lidstrom is not what he was defensively, but he is still one of the best in the NHL in that department and by far the #1 defenseman on the Wings you want out there to defend a lead or on an important penalty kill. Lidstrom could just as easily be a +20 this year - it's just too variable of a stat to look at on face value on a year to year basis. Unfortunately, the voters do look at +/- and it could be the #1 reason he does not win a Norris this year. Which would be too bad, as the other top producing defenseman are simply not at his level defensively, no matter what their +/- states.

I remember at the beginning of the season someone shared a link of someone who was meticulously watching Wings games and assessing plusses and minuses based on actual individual game play. Anyone remember the link?

It's different from what I had thought - I simply though it only awarded negatives to those individuals sharing responsibility to goals against. They have added a whole lot of extremely subjective variable - but interesting to look at nonetheless. It does seem to pass the 'eyeball test' of matching up well with those players whose official stats do not necessarily reflect how they are actually performing on the ice.

You seem to overlook the fact this is not an amateur sport we are talking about, in which case you would be right - fighting is not necessary for participants to enjoy the sport and get something positive out of it; and that is actually the case - college hockey and age group hockey (even beer leagues) have much less tolerance for fighting than the NHL. But the NHL is a professional sporting league, and as such their source of income is 'entertaining' fans. Fans pay good money to be entertained by the best athletes in hockey, but also for the excitement of a decent toss every once in a while. Fighting has been a part of professional hockey for almost a 100 years - it has been ingrained in the culture of the fans as well as the players (over 90% whom regularly vote in players polls that fighting should remain a part of the game), and arguably even helps keep players honest and reduces cheap shots (which I would prefer not to argue about at this point) - fighting is one of the aspects which makes hockey unique and draws fans which might not otherwise clamor to watch lacrosse players on ice. As professional entertainers, players are paid huge sums of money to risk bodily harm on a nightly basis - it's not exactly 'the children' we are trying to protect - or else we would all be striving to outlaw boxing and the MMA, to impose speed limits on race car drivers and eliminate tackling from football. Selling professional hockey in North America, without fighting, is a losing proposition - to the players, fans and owners.

Thanks!