toby91_ca

Technicalities are important.

Yes, he did. Gartner actually sent him a text or something like that, congratulating him on breaking his record. Gartner was the first guy to quickly point out that Larkin didn't really break his record.

Ummm....top 100 NHL players, celebrating 100 years of NHL history. Anyone's career outside the NHL is completely irrelevant, this isn't the HOF where consideration is given to activities outside the NHL. It's not meant be 100 greatest hockey players of all time, it's top 100 NHL players.

It's embarrassing if you don't break 90mph though.

What do you mean by doing everything to keep the good guys out of the game? I also like the accuracy shooting and fastest skater....although perhaps I'm biased by loving watching that when i was younger.

The only problem, again, is that it wasn't comparable. McDavid started at the red line, like they used to, while Larkin started at the blue line, so really was at top speed when the clock started.

Players in the history of the league with 2 Art Ross trophies and at least 1 Conn Smythe: Wayne GretzkyMario LemieuxBobby OrrGuy LafleurSidney Crosby + the guy that's not quite as good as either Kane, Toews or Keith.

- 691gp, 317g, 814pts, Calder, Art Ross x 2, Hart, Lindsay, Conn Smythe - 709gp, 266g, 712pts, Calder, Art Ross x 1, Hart, Lindsay, Conn Smythe - 687gp, 260g, 592pts, Conn Smythe, Selke So, 2 out of 3 of these guys are in the top 100. I wouldn't have problem having all 3 in, however, only 2 are and I fail to see any argument at all as to why the first in this list is the one that isn't.

Example # whatever of Toews being overrated.....saw a clip on TSN regarding top 100 players of all time (note: remaining 67 yet to be announced at the time of me writing this). They suggested that we know there are 6 current players on the list and we assume 4 are obvious (Crosby, Ovechkin, Jagr and Toews)....who might the other 2 be? Really? I don't have a big issue with talking about him being one of the 6 current players, but not talking about him because he's so obvious one of them? Really?

To put that into perspective, their (team) pace of 31 goals is less than what a single player, Tim Kerr, scored in 85/86 - 34 and what Dave Andreychuk scored in 92/93 - 32.

I think the philosophy really depends on what everyone thinks about the current players and prospects. I everyone thinks the team has all the right pieces (not me) and just need more experience, I think squeaking into the playoffs and losing early can still be better than missing the playoffs (certainly if missing it by finishing 9th or 10th). The experience the young guys would get by being there in the playoffs is more valuable than many think. Think about PIT and WSH, they had much of their personnel lined up before they were good enough to compete...needed to get in an learn how to lose before you learn how to win. WSH hasn't been able to progress too much beyond that, but so be it. The other way to look at it is that the team has too many holes and still needs to bring in good young players (I'm probably more in this camp). In this scenario, squeaking into the playoffs doesn't really help the cause in the same. That said, I don't think the draft class is that strong this year either.

So, it's the same old story, Crosby is the only guy scoring a greater than 100pt pace. Having missed 6 games so far, he's still on a pace to get there, but if he misses more games, it might not happen (but ppg would likely still be there). After that, next closest is Malkin at 93pt pace, then McDavid at 91. What's even worse, for me anyway, is that there are only 7 guys in the league scoring at 1ppg (ignoring those that have only played a handful of games). Scoring continues to be down, no doubt, but in terms of individual stats, maybe it's just me, but I like to see domination, I like to see guys put up big numbers. Am I in the minority and no one else cares? I hate seeing guys win scoring titles with less than 100pts. It's more likely than not that Crosby gets there and this year may be a bit different because he's at a pretty good pace (111pt pace...but not a crazy pace). However, it's still only one guy? Are we all okay with this? I don't want to see 30 guys scoring 100pts, it should be difficult to achieve, but I'd like it to be achievable by at least a handful of guys.

You certainly can....how does Uwe Krupp deserve this? He was a all star 2 times in the NHL, although the 2nd time was a bit of a head scratcher. Internationally, he really hasn't had much of an impact. I'm sure I'm missing something here though.

Did I miss something....what was the context of that?

And that was actually my overall point....the game has changed and scoring is down to the point where you may have 1 outlier hitting 100pts, with 90pts a struggle for anybody else. I totally get it, league is different. What I'm saying is that I don't really like it, I like to see 4-5 guys at that level. Overall comparability of players is not really different, but scoring overall continues to slide.

This is exactly what I'm saying, Crosby is an outlier, the rest, lucky to see 90pts.

I was thinking less best of the best talent, not less overall talent because i agree, there is more talent overall. The more I think about it though, the fact that there is more talent throughout, probably means it's harder for the top guys to score, they can't prey on less talent as much anymore. Last year was an outlier for him though, he put up like 15-20 points in his first 20+ games, not sure what was going on...he finished pretty strong, but too much of a hole was dug. At some point, he'll decline though, perhaps next year, he'll be 30, which often seems like a magic number for some. He may still put up big points, but likely will start producing less in the next year or so than McDavid (if he progresses as everyone expects).

What I'm not sure of though, is whether 50 or 60pts still means the same. What I mean is, are there less people scoring at that pace now as well (so scoring down across the board) or is it just that there is less top end elite point production.

Malkin, obviously. Kopitar, maybe Backstrom. McDavid.

Isn't it always around 20,087 or something like that? Unlike some other teams, you never see a greater than 100% capacity number. The problem is that is the tickets sold, actual physical attendence is different, not sure where you'd get that, but they are clearly not getting 20,000 to the games much anymore.

That's actually not at all true. There are currently only 6 out of the 30 teams in the league that pay their first line centers $8M or more, which includes Tampa and I'm not 100% sure whether Stamkos is a center or not...he's played both C and W

So, clearly Ovechkin is a goal scorer, but I think he's close to, if not #2 (Crosby #1) over the past decade or so. So, significant enough to make this an even crazier stat (yes, I know, different era, but...).....At the same age Ovechkin is now, Gretzky had 2,263 points.

Agreed, he was a good player and is still producing at close to his normal pace as well. But he wasn't all star caliber, isn't now and likely never will be. I agree with the sentiment though as the comment about him was a knock against him, so maybe to harsh, but there is truth behind it (good player, not all star).

GPG as in total goals scored in each game by both teams, that's the only measure of scoring when you are talking higher scoring eras. It's simply taking total goals scored for the whole year by all teams divided by games played. I wonder if an argument could be made that assists are easier to come by in today's game with all the technology and ensuring every earned assist is credited, vs back in the 70s. I don't necessarily agree with that though I could just as easily argue assists may be awarded to certain players that really shouldn't have gotten them (which wouldn't happen today) - always an argument on the other side.

I was just mentioning overall scoring for the different eras as someone commented that they weren't sure Orr really played in a high scoring era (he didn't play in the 80s). They were correct, while the 70s had higher scoring, it was that signifcant.