toby91_ca

That's funny, I thought last year was the first time in 6 years that the Pens made the playoffs. Took Mario 5 years before his team made the playoffs. Wayne wasn't able to bring the mighty Oilers out of the 1st round his first trip. I could go on and on and on. To think someone is disappointing because (at the age of 19), he couldn't take his team past the first round is borderline insane.

You should base it on what he has done: Records Pittsburgh Penguins' franchise record for assists in a season by a rookie (63) Pittsburgh Penguins' franchise record for points in a season by a rookie (102) First rookie to record 100 points and 100 penalty minutes in a season Youngest player in NHL history to record 100 points in a season Youngest player in NHL history to record 200 career points (19 years and 207 days) Youngest player in NHL history to have 2 consecutive 100 point seasons.[1][2] Youngest player to be voted to the NHL All-Star Game[43] Youngest player in NHL history to win the Art Ross Trophy[7] Youngest player in NHL history to win the Lester B. Pearson Award[27] Youngest player in NHL history to be named to the First All-Star Team[29] Opinions are simply opinions and if your opinion is that he is not the best or top 2 or top 3, I don't have a problem with that, but for you to have an opinion that he has been a disappointment is very, very odd if you ask me.

You could also argue that removing the needless all out race for a puck would result in tiring the player out on a play that doesn't matter at all. Now, they can save that energy and apply it to aspects of the game that matter. I think the injury aspect is only one argument, but it is probably important. No matter how rare, the fact that a player could get hurt during a play that doesn't even need to happen, makes no sense. I think you'd have to look at the pros and cons here. Obviously, the risk of injury would be a pro for implementing no touch icing. To be honest, I haven's really seen any pros at all for not implementing. One argument is that you remove the excitement of a race for the puck. I'm sorry, but I don't see that as very exciting. Now, the attacking player make get there first and make something happen....that might be exciting, but the fact is, that rarely, rarely, rarely happens, so what's the point? No need to complete a pro/con list if you can't really get a single pro on one side.

True, but since they'd have to leapfrog 3 other teams, it makes it that much more unlikely.

Seriously, I don't remember talking about this much, but earlier in the season, the talk was that the central division was no longer a cake walk, every team seemed to be fairly competitive. Now, as we approach the end of the season, 3 of the worst 5 teams in the conference are from the Central division and 4 of the 5 teams from the division are out of the playoffs. Nashville is only out by 2 pts, so they could theoretically get in, but still. I guess I just didn't really notice the downward spiral of the other teams in the division until looking at standings recently. Maybe its because I normally do not look at the standings all that often during the year other than to see any battles for division leads, etc., not looking at the standings in totality.

You are arguing that there are only 4 or 5 icings per game and that you may be eliminated 1 race for the puck per game, of which, most are won by the defenseman. So really, we are talking about every 10 games or so, you'll see someone beat the defender to the puck and that will likely result in him losing the puck anyway and it going the other way. What is the real excitement that is being taken away by simplying implementing no touch icing? By the way, the players themselves, support no touch icing.

Probert and Coxe had a couple good ones.

I don't think there is much of an argument for "touch" icing. Think about this: - are races for the puck really exciting? Not for me, but I suppose some may find it so... - in situations where the attacking team would clearly get to the puck with no trouble at all, an icing is likely waived off anyway - how often do you actually see the attacking player get to the puck first in a race for it (negating the whistle)? - in instances where the attacking player gets to the puck first, how often does it result in a play of any consequence? I think it is silly not to change. 9 times out of 10 (no support for this, just making it up), the defender gets there first, so the play is stopped anyway. The 1 time out of 10 the attacking player gets there first, the result is a whole lot of nothing (99 out of 100 times).

So.....still, less goalies have won. You are now adding another variable as to why Lidstrom is not on your list. Previously, you stated that the ONLY reason was that he is a defenseman.

Yet, at the same time, your list of 4 players includes 2 goalies. A goalie has only won the award 7 times in its history.

On your list, Daigle was a disappointment for sure, but I'm not sure I'd classify the others as such. Three of those players were only drafted because of their last names, especially Lindros. I think Daze has been a little disappointing based on what everyone thought he could achieve after his first handful of years in the NHL, but to be honest, I don't remember anyone expecting much of him coming out of junior. Pat Falloon is a name that comes to mind. Also, I remember hearing about Samsonov a couple years before he was eligible to be drafted, he was hyped up pretty good. He had some decent years, but nowhere near what I was expecting.

I think the two "stomping" incidents are clearly different, but that said, Pronger's suspension is still far too short. I think the fact that there is only so many games left in the season had something to do with it. Then again, they didn't suspend him for the rest of the regular season, why leave that 1 game out there? I think Simon's suspension was too short at 30 games, but assuming that is the right number, Pronger should have received about 15 or so.

I find that the general public seems to overrate goal scorers in general. This doesn't mean that I don't think Bure wasn't a great player, because he was. He was a very exciting player to watch, scored many highlight reel goals, but in terms of a comparison to Fedorov, Fedorov takes the comparison easily as far as I am concerned.

I generally don't care, but it does annoy me when he celebrates so much when he scores to put his team up 6-1 late in the game, or he scores when his team is down by 6 goals late in the game. In those situations, it just doesn't sit well with me.

But what was the action, have you seen it?

Pronger has received several small suspensions for acts that were relatively minor. Part of the reason Simon rec'd 30 games is due to his past history of relatively more serious acts, especially the one he had just come back from. Even if the incident was the same as what Simon did, I wouldn't call for 30 games. Apart from that, we already have people in here complaining about it, calling for at least 30 games and they haven't even seen the incident.....how does that work?

I've always been of the belief that the +/- stat is the most missinterpreted stat out there. You really do have to take it with a grain of salt. Someone with a strong +/- stat is not necessarily a strong defensive player. Personally, I think it is more of a team stat than anything else. If you play on a good team, that scores far more goals than it allows and you are a guy that gets top minutes on that team, your +/- stat should be pretty good. I can see where someone might even argue that a strong +/- stat is a better indicator of a strong offensive player rather than defensive. I think it is a bit of both, but maybe I'd lean more to the offensive side. You can have 5 guys out there that are the best defensive players in the world and never allow a goal to be scored when they are on, but if they never generate any offense, they'll be stuck with a +/- of zero. Datsyuk is an offensive player who is responsible defensively + plays on a great team. That is a recipe for an incredible +/- stat which would be unfair to compare to a defensively minded player on a weaker team. Gretzky lead the league in +/- 4 times in his career and I believe has the 3rd highest single season +/- stat (+98) in history. I don't think many would argue that he was a great defensive player.

Tampa Bay almost there as well. 1 more loss by LA or win by Vancouver pretty much eliminates them.

So, it appears to me that they left off some obvious players that should belong on this list. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking: - Datsyuk - Zetterberg - Crosby (although, maybe he's 200lbs+) Ooops, forgot the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/stor...mp;lid=tab3pos2

I give them a pass on Crosby as he is listed at 200lbs, but not Zetterberg or Datsyuk. I agree they focused on the smaller guys, but that's not the criteria they listed, which is annoying as you say. The thing is though, I don't really see Datsyuk or Zetterberg as being much bigger than Parise and Savard.

Didn't Lindros come along and do the same thing Neely did, except better?

The only thing I can think of is that they are thinking about the really small (St. Louis), but if they wanted a list of the best players under 5'11", 190lbs, then that would be the list, not the best under 6'0", 200lbs. I have a hard time believing Datsyuk is 197lbs, he looks pretty damn skinny to me.

I disagree. I would never vote for someone as MVP if their team is out of the playoffs. Well, I would never say never, but they would have to be blowing away the competition in terms of a scoring title (which he isn't) before I'd vote for them. You have to go back 50 years before you'll find someone who won the Hart without making it to the playoffs. Have a look at Iginla is 2002. Ovechkin's year could be quite similar to that. Iginla won the Richard and Art Ross, but was not awarded the Hart (his team missed the playoffs). He had 96 points, next closest was 90 points and then I don't think there was anyone else with more than 80. (at least offense has picked up a little since then). However, I do think that the NHL would love to give him the award. Crosby last year, Ovechkin this year....makes for good marketing. (I know the NHL doesn't decide who wins the awards)

Quote from James Duthie at TSN:

Anyone here anything about this topic this year? There was on and off discussion about illegal curves last year with respect to Kovalchuk, but I haven't heard anything this year. I was watching the Pens vs. Caps game on TSN and they were discussing "Ovechkin's cheating." Now, that sounds bad, but they were not really picking on him, they were simply pointing out that he uses and illegal stick (as do others). They showed a pic of his stick while he was sitting on the bench and I couldn't believe how much of a curve he has (haven't seen anything like that since my street hockey days). They went on to say that Semin's curve is even worse. Before anyone points out that TSN hates Ovechkin, he's not Canadian and that's why they were talking about this, the same guy that lead the discussion was also talking about Ovechkin being the MVP (which I can agree with in some circumstances, but not in others - save that for separate discussion). Here's the real puzzling thing: why hasn't there been any discussions and penalty calls as a result of this? It makes no sense. If a team challenges Ovy's stick, and it is determined to be illegal (no brainer, unless he switches in the 3rd....which he and others have done in the past), Ovy would be penalized and fined $200. If the stick is found to be legal, the coach requesting it to be checked would be fined $100. There was no mention of any penalty against his team for delay of game....I haven't bothered to check. In those circumstances, why wouldn't you be calling for it to be checked? Are coaches saving it for more important times (late in the season? playoffs?). I was thinking the league may be ignoring it as it may result in fewer goals, but when I think about it more, this doesn't really have anything to do with the league, unless there is a larger conspiracy in which the league has asked all teams not to check other teams sticks (which seems pretty far fetched to me).