toby91_ca

$500k would have been "IDEAL" though

How did you come up with $57,548,333? For the 13 forwards, 9 defensemen and 2 goalies, I have $57,915,000, meaning they would have to shave off $1.215 million. Maybe I'm off due to rounding, but $400k is a bit much.

If Mac didn't play in the Finals, the Wings could have petitioned to get his name on, but it would have been denied (very likely anyway as there would really be no basis for a petition to be accepted in his case)

I'm sorry, but just because someone writes a memo and puts something like that in there, it doesn't mean that is the actual requirement. Journalists make mistakes all the time and in this case, the writer is wrong. The actual requirement is 41 games.....period. If some odd reason anyone disputes that, call the NHL offices, they will confirm it for you.

I don't think Campbell should be given consideration (based on history), but to be fair, he had 333 pts in Norris voting last year (good for 5th and not much difference between 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th) and those 333 pts compared to the 25 points Ralfaski had (one of your picks)

Unless by "defer" you mean "accept less" until a later contract, it won't work.

Datsyuk scores more points than Zetterberg, yet you only list Zetterberg as scoring more than 100pts? Too late for me to put much thought into this now, but I'll give my opinion on a couple. - If healthy, Crosby finishes with more points than Ovechkin - Datsyuk finishes with more pionts than Zetterberg, as does Hossa, but mostly due to health. I think Zetterberg will miss a few games here and there, but he and Datsyuk will have a similar ppg stat

There are likely other examples, probably abberations, but the Pens won 2 cups in a row, with pretty much strictly offense (they were close to the bottom of the league in defense both years). I'd throw the 80's Oilers out there as well, although they were closer to the middle of the pack in terms of defense, not as bad as the Pens, but there is no question whether it was defense or offense that won them the cups.

I think you need to do a little more analysis to conclude that the reason the Wings had a bad stretch in February was because of the games Lidstrom was out. Lidstrom missed 7 games (I'm including the game he got hurt since he only played 3 minutes that game). Their record during his absence was 3-3-1 (not terrible) and in those 4 games they lost (including the SO loss), they scored a grand total of 1 even strength goal. I don't think they lost those games due to their inability to defend. There is no doubt that some of the missing offense was due to not having Lidstrom in the lineup, but not that much. Consider also, that they lost 6 games in a row (with Lidstrom in the lineup) just before the injury. I think they simply went through a slump, which started with Lidstrom in the lineup and they actually started coming out of it while Lidstrom was injured. There is not doubt that they would be in rough shape if he was out for an extended period, but to point to last February's record when he was out of the lineup is absolutely missleading.

There is an absolutely huge difference here. Ovechkin takes the vast majority of his shots from the left faceoff dot. A lot of Sammy's shots come from the point, which is why I compare his stat to Lidstrom for example.

That, or maybe they are just assuming he is the best and they are noting all the other guys after him Seriously though, Yanik is the best and it isn't even close, not debateable. He's probably led the league (in most years by a healthy margin) for the past 10 straight years (not sure, but I have stats that show he has been for at least the last 7 straight years).

Yeah, I noticed that as I was reading the highlighted part in your quote. My finger must have slipped to the left when I tried to hit the 3. My point was though, that Crosby, for example, will have played far more games in the NHL by the time he's Zetterberg's age or Datsyuk's age than those two have played so far. Yes, they missed a year due to the lockout, but even considering that, he'll still have far more games anyway. Lecavalier is another guy I can see people thinking is a little older, although, he's really only come through as a star in most people's eyes the last few years. He's younger than Datsyuk and only a few months older than Zetterberg and he's already played 710 games.

He was 3rd on the team in hits and played on 2 fewer games than the leader and 5 more games than 2nd place.

Imagine if they played against Canada.

Ovechkin missed the net more than any other player in the league last year and did so by a very, very wide margin. I don't think anyone would suggest he can't shoot.

I hear what you are saying, but I think the stat is somewhat misleading due to his time manning the point on the powerplay. For comparison, his shooting percentage is not all that lower than Lidstrom's, Stuart's, etc. Not much worse than Kopecky's either.

Hossa is only 3 years older, it just seems like he is 6 or 7 years older because he's been around the league since he was 19 and Kopecky just completed his first year at the age of 25. Hossa is 1 year younger than Datsyuk, but has played 701 games vs. Datsyuk's 445 and compared to Zetterberg's 255 (he's only 1 year older than Zetterberg). Game experience makes you seem older. Take Crosby for example (not that he seems older yet, but...) he's already played in 213 games (he also missed 29 games last year) and he is 7 years younger than Zetterberg. For something really funny to think about, when Gretzky was Kopecky's (who's just getting started) age, he had already played 632 games and racked up 543 goals and 1,520 points.

I think that is debatable, especially in today's NHL (very little scoring). To be a goal scorer, you really need the skill, you either have it or you don't. Practice will help, but you need that god given ability. You can't teach someone to be the best defender in the world, but you can definately learn defense a lot easier than learning how to score goals.

I think I tuned out after you said you'd justify it.

The one thing I can say about this list is Fedorov's placement is nothing short of an absolue joke.

In terms of what wins, offense vs. defense, I think you really need to be well balanced between the two and be pretty high on both. The only way a purely offensive team is going to win is if they really blow the rest of the league out of the water (see 1980s Oilers). It is also pretty rare for a strong defensive team to win it all unless they have a strong offense as well. I did a little bit of research and came up with these numbers. Since expansion in 1967 (40 cups), here is the breakdown of cup winners and their standings in term of offense: 1 - 10 times 2 - 12 times 3 - 4 times 4 - 2 times 5 - 3 times 6 - 4 times 9 - 1 time 10+ - 4 times (NJ*2 in same era and NYI*2 in same era) I think if you did the same for defense, you might get similar results, not sure, but I think what this at least shows is, more often than not, the team winning the cup is one of the best offensive teams in the league (22 out of 40 years = top 2)

It's also interesting that Staal only received 1, 4th place vote. If you speak to a Pens fans, they would probably tell you he should be a Selke contender. He is great defensively, but the voters probably just figure he's young, needs more experience, etc.

I think Eva misstyped, he didn't get "several" selke votes, he got 1, 5th place vote, good for 1 pt (which compares to Datsyuk's 537 pts). Rick Nash also got a vote.

*double post

Are you saying Osgood would be on your top 50 list? I'm not an Osgood basher, but he wouldn't be on my top 50 and I also don't think you can definitively say he was the best goalie in the playoffs, I think there would be a healthy argument between him and Fleury. I might lean towards Fleury, who had the slight edge in save percentage, the other stats are more team oriented (sv % is to an extent, but not as much as the others). Also, I'm not sure I'd say Osgood was a Vezina contender, he only received 1 third place vote, leaving 10 other goalies ahead of him.