Stevie Y

A few comments: 1. what does the fact that Lemieux had better seasons before have to do with winning the Hart in that particular year? If anything I would say that this makes a strong case for my point that a players reputation is important for winning the Hart. 2. I never said that Jagr was the MVP. I merely wanted to say that if you have a player that scores 149 points it is hard to argue that another player was soooo much more important. I also wouldnt say that 149 is so much less than 161.

I agree. But "deserving" is really subjective so I guess we can only count what a player actually won and not what he should have won.

I totally agree with you that the fact the we have 3 superstars hurt each players chances of winning the Hart. However, I am not sure that you can say that Lemieux had a clearly better season than jagr in 95-96. Lemieux recorded 161 points and Jagr 149. I know points are not everything. But still its hard to believe that one of them was so much more important to the team than the other that you can call him "the most important player". I personally think that winning the Hart has a lot to do with reputation. Once you are considered to be one of the best players in league you have a good chance of winning it. I guess the media now has a closer eye on Pav and Z so it could very well be that one of them wins the Hart the next time he has an outstanding season.

I know that this is the title of the Hart trophy. However, Sakic won it with Forsberg in the same line up and vice versa (or was one of the injured in that season). Lemieux won it with Jagr in the same line up (who had an incredible season that year). So I would say that it is quite possible for a player to win the Hart even if he is not the only superstar in his team

well if somebody argues that Pav is the best player in the league dont you think that he should be a serious consideration for the Hart?

speaking about the best / most complete player in the league. How many Hart votes did Pav and Z get last year?

Almost everyone has only ONE D-men in their top ten list. Do you guys really think they are less good because they don't appear on the stats sheets as often?

First of all I agree with you. BUT it is possible to not include Z and Dats in the top 10. If you think that all the positions are equally important and therefore include 4 forwards 3 defensemen and 3 goalies it would prolly be tough for Dats and Z to crack the top 10.

I noticed yesterday that Shane Doan wears number 19 for team Canada. I thought Wayne decided to retire that number of Yzerman did not participate in the Olympics... Does anyone know anything about this?

why are there 3 finalists ??? ;-)

Did you guys see that he leads the league in points per game? check out that the stats at www.NHL.com Forsberg 1.56 AO 1.37 Crosby 1.36 I know that he only played 9 games and that he prolly wouldn't have kept up that pace but it's still not too bad...

I don't know how it is in Detroit but I can tell you that we have same thing in Europe with soccer. When teams get stacked with too many stars from abroad the local fans have a harder time to identify themselves with the team. This is especially true if the team isn't playing too wel...

ok thanks. that means that you would have to spread the money more equally then...

The other day I was discussing the whole cap situation with a friend and he came up with an idea / question that I don't have the answer too. I hope someone here can tell me whether this would actually work or if not which rule I forgot about. I will exagerate the idea deliberately to make the point more clear. Suppose you have a player that is 35 and is THE superstar. You and he both know that he will only play for 3 more years and that he demands 8 mil per year for the last three years of his career. Your obvious problem is the limited cap space. Now from what I understood it is the average salary of a contract that counts againts the cap. So let's assume you would offer this guy a 13 years contract that pays 4.6 millions in the first 3 years and 1 million in the last 10 years (it could even pay a bit more up front and the league minimum in the last years). The player would still earn his 24 millions. Your average cap hit would be 1.85 millions for next 13 years. Now you could easily fit this player into your team. After three years (and hopefully at least one cup ) the player would retire. Now you have to free up the roster spot which means that you have to waive that guy. Obviously the money would still count against the cap but the retired player would no longer block a roster spot. Now of course you wouldn't want to be stuck with 1.85 millions for the next 10 years without a player that is actually working for it. But I am interested whether the basic idea would work or if there is some sort of rule against it. Could you give a player a heavily frontloaded contract that runs longer than he wants to play in order to decrease your average cap and fit that player into your current roster?

given his limited ice time he did pretty well, it wouldn't kill us if he leaves but it would still hurt.

That's true, but I guess this is the gamble Kenny took. Also, considering the prices that are paid for top tier players these days his contract does not make him "inmoveable" in case we need room for Zetterberg and Lidstrom.

I also think that 6 mil is a lot. but don't forget in 2 years when we have to re-sign Zetterberg Lidstrom might no be playing anymore...or at least for less money.

ok, thanks. I thought I read something about him considering going back to the flyers after the season.

Does that mean that Forsberg won't be back? or do they have enough room to fit them both?

Too bad. At the right price we could have used him. But how you can you blame him? More money, family and the cup defender...

Understood

The funniest thing is that the guy who started the thread didn't bash Dats in any way. He even stated that he works hard and played well so far. He merely said that Dats and Zetterberg need to produce on the road in order for the wings to move on in the pla offs. Yet he gets called a "hater" and people make it look like he demanded "magical" things from Dats. Why can't the Dats supporter not say something along the lines: "Yes, Dats played really well so far and he is worknig his ass off but YES he will eventually have to score on the road"? I think it's really not about bashing Dats or making his play look bad in comparison to other wings players. Its simply stating the obvious...

thanks!

Thanks a lot Matt. Is there any chance that I can watch the game online somewhere?

Prolly no wings fan will deny the fact that Pavel is a stand out player in the regular season. The problem is that some here think that he wiill show up in this year's play offs while others have their doubts. Since a lot of posts here have the message "pavel has another great season, hopefully we can sign him" it is only logic that those ppl that are concerned about his play off performance will restate their opinion about that. It IS an old story but why should those ppl change their opinion? The play offs haven't started yet therefore Pavel couldn't prove us wrong yet... One more thing: I think everybody hopes that Pavel has an outstanding play off year. If you are a wings fan you want your team to do well, especially your star players.