egroen

You're really missing a lot. Arguments can be made that Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Morenz, Mikita, Esposito, Clarke, Messier, Trottier, Lalonde, Schmidt and Sakic were all better "all-time" than Yzerman. There are arguments Orr, Shore, Harvey, Bourque, Potvin and Kelly are all ahead of Lidstrom. By the way - I am not saying I agree with all those arguments I think there is a good case to be made that Yzerman would have seen higher point totals in the 80s with a better team, but not nearly to such an extent as your example. Plop '89 Yzerman onto the mid-90s Wings and he might actually score less points. In '89 almost all of Detroit's offense went through Yzerman and he was double-shifted almost every game and received an obscene amount of ice time and power play time. With so many other offensive options in the mid-90s a coach simply would not play Yzerman as much (much like Datsyuk today), and would utilize his other scoring threats much more. For instance, I have a feeling Datsyuk on that '89 team would score more points than he does now (or if you put Datsyuk on a lesser team), even taking the different scoring eras into account.

As the CBA is right now, there is next to no definition of what "circumventing the cap" actually is, and just a broad-based allowance that the NHL can stop it and punish those that do it... whatever "it" is. In this case, it may not really be the length of the contract called into question (or they would not have approved of it in the first place), it is allegations (from whom?) that "retirement" before the contract transpired was brought into the contract talks... or also possibly the "structure" of it. It could also be the NHL responding to bitching from the other teams (read: Burke) to put a stop to it -- and they are sending out a message. That message would pretty cleary be: 40 - ok. 42 - not ok. They'll make it as difficult as possible for any team signing long-term contracts on players out to 42 - that's the message. If they did not do this, what is there to stop teams from signing players until 46 (chelios is still playing) or even 50 (Gordie Howe was still playing)? Hell, with 10 extra years tacked onto Zetterberg's contract we could have had him at a cap hit of $3.5m! I am sure this is an area that will be addressed and further clarified in the next CBA. Until then, this is their only means of combatting that.

Hmmmm.... i find myself agreeing with Eva more than I disagree with him. I also always appreciate anyone who actually takes the time to use stats to back up their opinion.

Zetterberg and Franzen will be 39 at the start of the final season on their contracts so I used that as my initial cutoff (should have clarified). Hockey-reference.com is my first stop for stats typically -- their "power play" feature is invaluable. http://www.hockey-reference.com/pp/psl_fin...c=&offset=0 107 seasons played at 39 or greater. 57 at 40 or greater. 34 players. http://www.hockey-reference.com/pp/psl_fin...;order_by=goals 29 seasons played at 41 or greater. 14 at 42 or greater. 8 players. Over 4 times as many players have played at 40 or greater than 42 or greater. Did you want to eliminate defenseman as well? That should further help your case! I guess i assumed it would not take a rocket scientist to determine a star player at 50% of his prime at the age of 40 is much better than a standard player at 50% of his prime at 40 -- the star player has a greater chance of still being good enough to play in the league. Nothing scientific about it, and just common sense. For every "Ledyard" there are 5 Yzermans, Hulls, Howes, Messiers, Oates, etc. The point, I think, was that a long-term contract out to 40 for someone like Hossa is a lot more realistic than a long term contract out to 40 for someone like Kyle Calder (both 30). I agree with that. Either way, plenty more players play to 40 than 42. Looks like '4 times' is about right. 400% - seems significant to me. You're not going to buy that significantly more players play at 40 than 42? The cap difference is also significant. Detroit saves $1m in cap space on Zetterberg and Franzen by tacking on two cheap years while Chicago saves $2m in cap space by tacking on 4 extra cheap years to Hossa's contract -- I think this is the biggest beef from most GMs pointing fingers at Chicago. So where would you draw the line? 973 players played in the NHL last year. 108 were 34 or greater: 11% 54 were 36 or greater: 3.5% 26 were 38 or greater: 2.7% 7 were 40 or greater: .7% 3 were 42 or greater: .3% (The most ever in the history of the NHL) 1 was 44 or greater: .1% 35 seems the most realistic. But I would argue it is advantageous for both the players, franchises and fans if GMs and players could agree to long-term contracts beyond that age. 38 would be a good idea - but either way you slice it, 42 is worse than 40.

I want a goon as soon as Maltby is retired -- one useless player (offensively) is about all I can stand.

As most are saying - Lidstrom is the better player but Yzerman trumps him for importance to the franchise.

Just like the majority of civilized human beings, I do not feel insults necessitate or in any way deserve physical violence. But you would still feel obligated to fight Franzen, Lidstrom, Maltby, Chelios, Homstrom, Datsyuk, etc. etc. etc. if they showed up at your door step over insults you have thrown their way, right? People keep their mouths shut on the internet? Especially as an adult, entering into a fight carries a very high risk of ending up in the hospital, jail or worse. I am a s*** talker to the bone and will rib anyone I am competing with, whether over playing sports, watching sports or playing cards or Taboo. Good lord, it can be fun in friendly competition, and it happens constantly in non-friendly competition. I frankly think you are a ***** and a poor competitor if you can't handle it. And this isn't the Wild West - if you want to assualt me for insulting you, I'll just laugh and call the cops. I feel absolutely no obligation to physically fight someone I insult.

Well, you've said some awfully disparaging things to plenty of others on this site, so I hope you are prepared to end up in the hospital and on disability for an extended period because you are willing to physically take on the countless people (as well as NHL players) you have ridiculed here. Somehow I have a feeling that is not true and simply another regurgitated turd spewed from your mouth. If it makes me less of a "man" because I feel a responsibility to be there for my family and not in the hospital, jail or worse... well, I guess I'll learn to live with it, as well as the chance some mongoloid can't handle an insult. I'm sure I would have an easy time getting off assualt charges with... "But he called me a girl!".

So because I have ridiculed you here a few times I should be willing to meet you at the flag pole?

Any approved SPC can be challenged, investigated and de-registered and the investigation by the NHL is not time limited.

Still really confusing... Looks like they essentially agreed to an amount and gave it to the arbiter: http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2009/08/ji...h_the.html#more

Interestingly enough, a player is also 5 times as likely to be in the NHL at 44 than at 42.

Good point about the "star" players tending to last longer in the NHL - that is true (you're going to recognize most of the names listed here). Anyways, here we go: Players in the NHL at 40 (over the past 30 years): Albelin Andreychuk Belfour Blake (this year) Bourque Brewer Burke Carbonneau Chelios Coffey Dineen Dowd Esposito Fedorov (this year) Fetisov Francis Gilmour Harper Hasek G. Howe M. Howe Hull Joseph Keon Lafleur Larionov Ledyard M. Lemieux C. Lemieux MacInnis Mellanby Messier Mikita Mullen Murphy Nieuwendyk Oates Patrick Ratelle Recchi Roberts Robinson Robitaille Roenick Sakic Samuelsson Samuelsson Schneider (this year) Shanahan Stevens Thomas Weinrich Wesley Yzerman Roloson Players in the NHL at 42: Andreychuk Chelios Hasek G. Howe Larionov C. Lemieux Messier Recchi (this year) Roberts Joseph (this year) Is one more likely than the other, by a significant margin? Are we really arguing over this? One is over 5 times more likely than the other. EDIT: Oh, and I hate you too

But again - it is not the contract length that is really being disputed (though the NHL does want to apparently send a message).... Hossa's contract was approved. New info has come forth since then implying there was collusion over an agreed upon retirement date. Now, yes... contracts to 42 are exponentially worse than contracts to 40, no matter how you shake it. Holland can argue the Wings have a history of playing star players until that age, and he can show numerous examples of doing so. Chicago can not show a single instance of playing a player until the age of 42 - not a single one, I believe. You want to argue it is "the same thing", and it's simply not. One has an exponntially higher chance of happening. 40 "artificially" brings the cap hit by about $1m and 42 artificially brings the cap hit down by about $2m. Big difference. Make no mistake, the NHL and owners like these kinds of contracts - where players potentially stay on the same team for the majority of their careers. The fans love it and it brings down the price. There probably should be a cut-off date, and I have a feeling there will be one in the next CBA -- 38 is probably "right", but I don't think the NHLPA or the NHL has a problem with 40 - as both sides get what they want with the "loophole" in place.

And by the way - for you maroons who "wouldn't sign Hudler to anything over $2m" -- Zherdev, whom had a virtually identical point total to Hudler (23 goals, 58 points), was just awarded $3.9m in arbitration. Hudler just gave Holland an awfully nice show of faith and showed some gratitutude to the Wings.

So Hudler signs a hometown discount with Holland right before the arbitration meeting, but is still going to Russia for two years - when he gets back he only wants to play in Detroit. That's a pretty sweet deal, actually. Most likely, Hudler will be worth a heck of a lot more than that in two years.

Holland has mentioned in interviews they were going after Sundin for a one-year deal, and ended up using that money to sign Hossa.

Yup.

Filppula is very valuable - and there is definitely a good chance he continues to improve, but it seems many just have unrealistic expactations of him. We see "sparks of brilliance" from him, sure - just like we would see sparks of brilliance from anyone who makes it to the NHL, but we were seeing "sparks of brilliance" out of Zetterberg and Datsyuk every single shift at that age. Brett Hull announced to the media that Datsyuk would one day be the best player in the league Datsyuk's rookie year. Lidstrom called Zetterberg the "next Yzerman" before he ever arrived to the NHL.

Many seem to feel Flip will just be handed PP time and his numbers will automatically start matching Hudler's production (or more) "if he only gets the PP time" -- which is completely ignoring that he has gotten plenty of power play time over the past 3 years -- he just has not done much with it! Why would that all of a sudden change? Even 3 years ago, Filppula was getting 47 seconds a game on the PP where he managed to score all of 0 points all season long. Just looking back at both players for the past two years, it is easy to see that one is obviously better suited for it than the other: 2008: Filppula 1:49 per game and 8 PPP -- Hudler 2:41 per game and 15 PPP 2009: Filppula :47 per game and 6 PPP -- Hudler 3:01 per game and 28 PPP To summarize: Hudler scores a point for every 10:50 minutes of PP time he sees Filppula scores a point for every 14:45 minutes of PP time he sees I have a feeling Flip will not see his PP time go up that much, as he just is not that good at it, and that Leino, Cleary or a free agent will be the beneficiary of the increased power play minutes available next year (and Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen and Holmstrom will also see more time).

Sundin turned down $7m from the Wings last year - I doubt he would come here now for $2.5m

As I pointed out in another thread, Filppula has received more than a fair shake on the power play and done very little with it. Even without bringing in another free agent, I would not be surprised if Leino and Cleary end up ahead of Filppula for power play minutes. My doubts with Filppula come from watching him, not from any sort of a grudge - I like him a lot. But he is not a goal scorer - and rarely puts the puck where he wants it when carrying it at speed. And he is not much of a playmaker - just take a look at the playoffs where he led the team in assists: Most of those assists were secondary, passing to Hudler or a defenseman who then set up the goal scorer; or from simply give-and-gos to Franzen and Hossa who then did their thing. So I have doubts that Filppula will ever amount to what many of you think he can, offensively - but I am certainly rooting for him to prove me wrong.

Filppula and Franzen are in no way an upgrade from St. Louis and Lecavalier, who Prospal played on a line with in Tampa -- so I don't see him going nuts. Though Detroit's transitional game from its D is light years beyond Tampa's, and that will help his output.

He's my ideal candicate (plus a grinder). He has size, and had 126 hits last year which is more than any Red Wing other than Brad Stuart whom had 157. He can also play center (53% FOW) and had 46 takeaways vs. 22 giveaways. Low on speed and defense - but he is an ideal Hudler replacement (with more size and possibly less $$$).

The Red Wings have access to $3.2m+ pretty easily. Abdelkader to GR; Lebda traded... Also a decent chance Lilja is on LTIR I have to think Holland will go after two players, and a grinder after he finds his offensive player.