toby91_ca

It's Alex, they played on the same team in Russia (Dynamo) during the lockout year.

Everyone currently knows the game is a joke and to give the game more meaning and change people's perception that the game is just a joke would be to actually make it mean something, like the winning side getting home ice in the playoffs. I understand the thought process, but I do not understand why someone would have those thoughts going through their head. Maybe you couldn't disagree anymore, but I think I can probably disagree with it more than you.

The backup goalie isn't technically considered part of the game roster unless he replaces the starter. A team can't have 2 goalies playing at the same time, so since one has to play net during the shootout, the other can't be shooting.

You can't be serious...please, tell me you are not serious.

Management was willing to admit they were not basketball guys so they hired a guy and gave him full control. That's what Bowman wanted with the Leafs, but current ownership/management thinks they know hockey and don't need to give full control over to someone.

While I agree with most of this, to play devil's advocate, you could also look at it this way: If my employer guaranteed me a lot of money over the next 15 years no matter what, I wonder if that may have an impact on the level of effort I put out there. Depends on the environment I suppose. While is may be silly to say that Ovechkin will slack off now because of the big contract, it may be just as silly to completely dismiss that potential and say he is going to play his heart out for the rest of his career.

Some of the worst grammar/spelling I have ever seen

I agree that Legace doesn't deserve to be there, but I got a kick out of your "just yet" comment. Legace will be 35 years old in a couple weeks. If he isn't worthy just yet, he likely never will be.

Having Hossa there over Malkin is BS and I suspect it is because he plays for Atlanta, which is complete lunacy.

Just to be a smartass, the two correct answers currently are: No and not yet. Is Osgood a HOFer? Well technically no and technically not yet. He hasn't been elected to the HOF.

So, I was flipping back and forth last night, couldn't pass up the Vinny vs. Sid matchup (oddly enough, both were pointless). In any event, there was a penalty called in the 3rd period against the Pens and goes something like this: St. Louis high sticks his own player and the Pens player gets called for the penalty for being close by I guess (actually, the ref obviously just saw a stick hit a face and assumed). I figure this type of thing happens every now and then, but what made it worse was that the Tampa player was cut and the Pens ended up being down for 4 minutes in the 3rd with a 1 goal lead. In the end it didn't matter, the Pens killed it off and won, but it would have been pretty interesting if the Lightning scored 2 goals on that and went on to the win.

I can understand the arguments for an against. If you simply look at his career stats, you can make a pretty good case for it, but I just can't see him as a HOFer. I don't have a great reason as to why I think that way, but Osgood just doesn't say "HOFer" to me.

Hasn't been announced yet. Hudler should be there before Filppula, but Hudler isn't eligible, he's on his second contract. Filppula is still on his entry level deal and is eligible. He probably has a shot at it, but I haven't bothered checking who else might be eligible.

5th in scoring amongst defensemen while playing for a team that is 18th in goals for and plays more than any other player in the league. Not only is he an all star, I would bet he will be a Norris finalist as well.

Why are there so many people hung up on whether Osgood will start or not??? He's going to play 1 period like the other 2 goalies. What difference does it make whether it's the 1st, 2nd or 3rd period? It's absolutely meaningless.

I haven't seen him play, but his stats are not terribly impressive. He has 11pts in 36 games and the points are fairly spread out across those 36 games. I think he has 3 in his last 5 games, but nothing significant.

The only game he played in was 1996. He was selected for the 1997 game but didn't play due to injury. He neither played or was selected in 1998.

Old news and he won't be playing for the Ducks http://www.letsgowings.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=47299

Huh?

It's still a joke, in terms of competition. I remember all the talk about the international teams improving around the 2002 Olympics (6 years ago now) and I know this is the under 18's, but there doesn't appear to have been any improvement. http://www.tsn.ca/canadian_hockey/news_sto...12&hubname= Canada is 3-0 with the following results: 11-2 10-1 17-0

Consider this: Staal is mid-way through his 2nd year in the NHL. When Draper was Staal's age, he was about 4 years away from full-time NHL duty. That fact alone makes comparing the two pointless. When you are drafting 2nd overall, you are not looking for a guy that is going to fit in nicely on your 3rd or 4th line (i.e. similar role to that of Draper). He may be there now as a 19 year old, but I guarantee you the organization has much higher hopes for him than that. For interests sake (I know this is not gospel by any stretch of the imagination), Staal's scouting report list his potential as 1st line forward, Draper is listed as checking line center.

Hey, you asked, I had to be honest

Actually, it probably makes a little more sense for baseball. If the results of the game could impact your team in the future, you'd probalby want representation from your team there. In terms of the NHL, if you need someone from your team in the game to give you motivation to watch, are you really a fan of the game?

Yes

Oh and I know. I guess I am simply of the view that it does not make sense to pick one over the other. They should both be there or not.