toby91_ca

I remember back in the summer of 2005 more than a few people on here saying was going to be the better player between him and Crosby. Crosby was already the much better player even then (2 years younger). I guess the discussion of him now is remindnig me. Funny thing about Perry though, he is quite a big guy, yet as many people have said, not really the toughest.

There are rules regarding size of upper gear on goalies as well as sweater size and these amounts are checked by the league on a regular basis. His equipment is legal, live with it.

The fact that the shots were all hitting him in the chest had more to do with his strong positional play than it had to do with poor shot selection. Already done.

Less than 2%.

I'd be surprised if it wasn't every goalie in the league that could protect the full bottom portion of the net by doing that, however, it is still much more difficult to get down and close the 5 whole with longer pads, the tops of the pads will get in the way of each other the taller they are from the knee. All you would really need to cover the entire bottom portion is 36" pads and this ignores your skates.

There definately is a limit to the length, refer to Section 3, 11.2 of the official rulebook, which states many restrictions on the size of leg guards, including restricting length to a max of 38". Also, the longer the leg guards are, the more difficult it would be to cover the 5 hole, so I am not sure what you are getting at there.

His .914 save percentage then would suggest he was pretty good. Giggy has been very good, for a very long time. He has improved over the years, but not becuase his equipment has been getting bigger, but because he has gained experience. I have yet to see anyone actually demonstrate that his equipment is any bigger than most goalies in the NHL. What are the actual measurments on his pads, blocker, trapper, shoulder pads compared to the rest?

We are or we're.

You're right in that some are a little overconfident, some taking offense of experts picking Anahiem in the series, etc. I just brush it off as many simply being exited because the Wings haven't been in the conference finals since 2002.

Luongo and Giguere are big guys without pads, that's part of the reason why they look bigger. There are restrictions on size of equipment for all goalies, some goalies may use smaller chest protectors because they feel they can move easier without the bulky pads, but I really do not think that Giguere, for example, is wearing pads that are any bigger than the norm.

Never coached - Getzlaf, Penner, Perry Only coached Kunitz for 21 games. He has coached the others a little more. That said, I'm not sure any familiarity with any of the players is a real advantage, maybe a little.

Huh? Somehow I am the leader of the Datsyuk sucks in the playoffs clan? I don't even remember talking about it too much. I probably stated on the past that he has been unable to get anything done in the playoffs, but that has been a fact, simple as that, nothing more, nothing less. However, I am still not sure I like the fact that he was given close to $7 million a year.

I'm as frustrated with the calls as anyone else, but how can you really argue them? Markov had his stick wrapped around a guy, I wish they would call that 100% of the time and then maybe guys would stop doing it.

No kidding. Both Lidstrom and the Shark player (Erhoff?) had their arms out on each other, but Erhoff had the position on him, so I really can't figure out the call.

Yes, I know how +/- is calculated and I should have been more clear. I used points, but my assumption was that neither player was on the ice for any goals scored that they didn't get points on. I know it is not realistic, but neither is the entire scenario, it was simply to make a point.

Let me ask everyone this (those saying it was the right call), if the Wings were down 2-1 and Zetterberg is in the position of Briere and the same thing happens, does your opinion change? Unfortunately, I wasn't home last night to watch the game and haven't seen any of the video, but by the way it has been described, how could it not conclusively be a goal? I have heard that it looks to be going over the line, but you don't see it going over the line because you lose sight of it. Is the only possible place it could have been out of sight being over the line? I heard Pierre McGuire talking about it on the radio this morning and he suggested it looked like a goal at first and then after looking at video it was inconclusive, but then looking at it again later with blown up video, it looked like a goal. Maybe because of the cloudiness, it isn't conclusive, therefore no goal is the right call. I'd like to see some replays though.

Yeah, but his job is to make the first save, anything after that is up to the D to take care of. Had to do it.

In my opinion, +/- should almost be a non-factor in determining the best defensive forward. Here is my nonsense hypothetical example: Player A - job is to shut down the other teams' best offensive players, that's all the player does all year...defensive specialist. At the end of the year, he is held pointless, but he did his job and did not allow a single goal to be scored while he was on the ice, his year ending +/- is 0. Player B - go to offensive guy, doesn't really concern himself with playing in his own end (hovers around the red line most of the time when the puck is in his team's end). This player has an outstanding offensive year and finishes with 145pts (all even strength...quite remarkable ) At the same time, because of his lack of defensive play, he was on the ice for 85 goals against, resulting is a year ending +/- stat of +60. So, Player B has the vastly superior +/- stat, but I think it is obvious who the better defensive player is.

They voted in favour of Lecavalier over Brodeur for most outstanding player, not MVP....and yes, I think there is a difference, though, I'm not sure if that difference is always taken into account.

Ask anybody that knows hockey, they will tell you that goalies need to control rebounds better. Some goalies in the NHL are simply roasted because the bad rebounds they serve up. This is simply a response to your general comment because it sounds like you are saying as long as the goalie makes the first save, he can do no wrong, everything after that is up to the defense. On this particular goal, I am not saying it was Hasek's fault, in fact, I think it was more the D's fault, but at the same time, I am still baffled by the way Dom played it.

Why is Datsyuk's salary the same if not more than Joe's next year? The only solice I can take is that I believe Joe's contract is a couple years old.

So, just looking at stats, there were 2 games last night that produced a total of 5 goals (1 of which was an empty netter). Is it just me, or is that simply not enough? Think about this for a minute, if you are not a fan of any of the teams playing last night, are you going to be watching those games? I didn't see any of the Ottawa game, so I am not sure how pleasing the product was, but I did watch the Detroit game and I thought it was pretty good from an entertainment point of view, but I am probably biased because I have a vested interest in whether Detroit wins or loses. If you have no vested interest, how exciting were these games? Of course, you can't always look at stats to make decisions, case in point, the NYR vs. Buffalo game on Sunday. I am not a fan of either team and even though it was a 2-1 game, it was probably one of the most exciting games of the playoffs so far. I really do not like these GAA stats: MARTY TURCO - 1.30 J GIGUERE - 1.30 ROBERTO LUONGO - 1.70 DOMINIK HASEK - 1.71 HENRIK LUNDQVIST - 1.85 RYAN MILLER - 1.98 I'm okay if there is one wonder goalie who is just playing out of his mind in the playoffs (on a hot streak), but to have this many guys sub 2.00 GAA just doesn't sit right with me. There are also a few other guys that are just over 2.00, I'm talking 2.01, 2.04...

This is exactly why I have always been against bigger nets just to produce more goals. They need to fix the way the game is played, not simply produce more goals from the same boring style.

When Cheechoo scored that goal, I was thinking to myself "what in the hell was Hasek thinking??". I still think that, what he did makes no sense to me, he could have just stood there and poked the puck away, but he chose to to lie on his back (not even look where the puck is) spread his arms and hope for the best. He does it all the time and it drives me nuts. BUT, and this is a big BUT, he played great last night and while the goal was a pretty bad effort on his part, without him, the score would have been worse.

Are you serious?