toby91_ca

I understand that PIT and CHI had some luck as well in their drafting or timing thereof....but my point wasn't really that it is surprising that they are not at the same level as thoose teams, my point was they still suck pretty bad and battle for worst team in the league, year after year.

I don't know, I see them as completely different players, right from day 1.

The last report I saw, it was pretty much Pittsburgh and Detroit leading the way with man games lost (Pittsburgh was pretty far ahead, followed by Detroit and then the 3rd most was quite a bit back). On losing impact players, it's been tough here, but Pittsburgh has been without Malkin, Neal, Letang, Martin and Dupius (not the most talented, but does have chemistry with the top line) for lengthy periods of time. Actually, I think all of those guys are out for the rest of the regular season (except Neal). I totally agree with your sentiment though and while not thinking too deeply about it, after this weekend, I was thinking that it would be very difficult thinking they don't get in at this point. I didn't want to jinx it though. Very hard believing either Washington or Toronto could catch them. Speaking of Toronto (where I've lived the past 15 years) how crazy has their decline been? They are up to 8 losses in a row....all in regulation I think.

Interesting read? Hard to tell, I had such a hard time getting through it. That's one poorly written article.

I think they'll make the playoffs. I haven't checked, so I could be wrong, but I think they'd have the tie breaker against the other 3 teams sitting at 80pts (currently). I think they have more ROW than the others. They also have more games left than most.

Hartnell has biten a few I think

Looks like Neal's cross check was to the shoulder and the follow through with his fist caught the head. Dirty, yes, suspension worthy, no. Even if the stick came up and caught him in the head, I don't think you'd see a suspension. For a suspension, it would have to be a direct cross check to the head (I'm assuming). Someone asked about the linesman standing right there. I'm not 100% sure of the rules here, but I had always thought that a linesman can only make a call when they see a highstick that draws blood.

I don't know, getting rid of the loser point might push more games to OT and SO as opposed to having the opposite impact. With the loser point, teams at least push harder for the win, knowing they have the safety net of the single point. If you take that away, they might be more cautious and take there chances with the SO.

It makes sense though with where they currently sit in the standings. They could move within 1 point of the last wild card after tonight, with games in hand I believe....so 50/50 would make sense. If they lose in regulation tonight and the Rangers win...they'd be 5 points out and chances would start looking very slim.

One thing for sure is that the NHL really dislikes the number of games going to a shootout and they would love to decrease that significantly. The only problem is figuring out how (they don't want to go to 3 on 3, which I agree with....and they don't want to extend OT beyond 5 minutes). That leaves them pretty stuck. The thought is switching ends to have long changes in OT, but I'm not sure how much of a substantive impact that will have. The NHL is really stuck with living with ties or living with shootouts. The other potential solution woudl be to award more points for an OT win than for a shootout win, but no less points for losing in OT vs. shootout. With that, teams will gun for a win in OT for sure. Of course, the big problem with that is the points system....whole other discussion.

I think the argument that people have against staged fights is that the only reason they happen is for the fighting itself. A lot of people want fighting out of the game, a lot of people like it the way it is and a lot of people don't mind fighting in the game if is the result of tempers flaring, heat of battle, etc. Those people would respond to your comment by say "of course it doesn't make the fight more fun, but that's the point, we didn't come to watch the fight". If a fight happens because of something that's happend in the game, fine, but if it's a fight just to have a fight....that's different. Not 100% sure where I sit on the fence yet to be honest, but there are certainly folks that have their opinions on this. No point in arguing about it, one person's opinion against another, simple as that.

So, I was just looking at the current scoring leaders and, projecting everyone to the end of the year based on current ppg pace, Crosby wins the scoring title by 20pts. That part isn't that surprising has he has been producing a much higher ppg than everyone else for the last several years, the surprising part is how many points #2 will have. Crosby is projected to get 111 points and Getzlaf is projected at 91 points. Everyone else is sub 90pts. What if Crosby was hurt again this year? Getzlaf is gauranteed to break 90....could we have seen the first sub 90 point Art Ross winner since the original 6 era when they played 70 games or less? I had a look at the scoring leaders from 1968-69 (year in which number of games increased to 78) to present. In those 44 years (not including this year), there have only be 5 times in which the leading scoring has had sub 100 points....2 of those years were lockout years, so they would be greater than 100 in a regular year. So, out of 44 years, only 3 sub 100 (96pts in 2000, 96pts in 2002 and 94pts in 2004). Those are the years that the NHL was looking hard at figuring out how to fix the lack of scoring. Now, fast forward to the current year....without Crosby, there could potentially be someone winning the scoring title with less than 90pts. I haven't heard much about lack of scoring lately, but is it a concern? Does anybody care? Personally, I like scoring, but I don't mind a 2-1 game either...just depends on how you get to the 2-1 final score. If there are lots of scoring chances and great goaltending, that's fine, but if it is because of smothering defense....I'm not a fan.

Anahiem has 17 games remaining and Toronto has 15 games remaining. Kessel has also played in 6 mores games than Getzlaf. While Kessel has 2 more points currently, my simple projections have him at 89pts and Getzlaf at 91pts. I kept the projection simple and didn't assume Getzlaf would miss x% of the remaining games since he's currently missed x% of the first 65 games. Don't get me wrong....I totally agree, but the smaller the projection period, the closer you can get to something that makes sense. We're looking at about 15 games to go for everyone (give or take), with more than 80% of the season already in the books. So, I don't mind doing a bit of a projection. While I don't see any possibility of Crosby not winning, unless he gets injured, someone could get hot and push 95+ points contrary to current projection. Generally not a fan of projecting though....which is why I haven't spent much time looking at it until now (standings included).

All hypothetical of course, but I doubt D or Z would get traded, not at this stage of their careers with this organization. That said, I think you'd have to be sentimental thoughts aside and think realistically about it and I would be in favour of such a move. I don't think it woudl be enough though. Datsyuk will be 36 at the end of the season and while Zetterberg will only be 34 entering next season, he'll be an exteremely old 34...his body is breaking down pretty rapidly it seems. We'll see how he recovers for next year though. Other players in other organizations in a similar situation do get traded as rentals, etc. (see Iginla, Bourque, several others.....just don't see is as a realistic scenario here...just doesn't seem to happen in Detroit).

Pretty sure he's getting top 10 money

What about him reminds you have Stevie? I see them as having quite a different skill set and style of play.

I know you are joking, but as others have pointed out, you really can't or shouldn't compare junior stats. If you want to compare his stats to Crosby's stats, the best you can do is as follows: - Crosby, at 17, scored 66 goals (168pts) in 62 games in the Q - Mantha, at 17, scored 22 goals (51pts) in 63 games in the Q Even then, you really shouldn't make that comparison since guys develop at different times (so really hard when you are talking about guys in their teens). Also, when Mantha was 17, overall league scoring was higher as well (teams scored an average of 3.58 gpg compared to 3.18 when Crosby was 17. Scouts are decent at picking out guys though...this is why you see very high scoring players not necessarily get picked very high and guys that don't score much that do.

I ton of NHLers did, not sure the context of the question though? Is it in reference to Lefebvre being amoung the all-time point leaders? There are a couple issues there: 1 - Back in the 80s and 90s (similar to NHL), scoring was significantly higher in the Q (astronomical actually). 2 - The all-time leading scorers in juniors are not likely to be amoung the better players in the game as the best players don't last in the league very long (e.g. Crosby played his last game in juniors at the age of 17). You see guys putting up huge numbers at the age of 19 and 20, but that is a huge difference when you try to compare to guys at 16, 17 and 18.

Only 3 games in the NHL though. Absolutely crazy stat: He scored 165 points in 36 games in the BHL in 92/93 - 4.58 ppg. The crazy part of the stat though, is that he didn't lead his team in scoring (or "ppg" if you were thinking he missed a ton of time....leading scorer also played 36 games)

This actually doesn't look good on Pat, seeing as he left very similarly from the NYI.

Absolutely massive difference between an 18 year old (Drouin last year) and a 19.5 year old (Mantha this year) when it comes to junior. Drouin hasn't really seemed to turn it up much year, but that's normally the exception. If you look at a lot of player's stats, those that play in the 3rd and 4th years in junior really pile up the points. The real stars don't last that long in junior. I think he'll end up being a decent player in the NHL, but I'm not taking anything he is doing in the Q this year as meaning too much beyond him gaining confidence.

I saw him on the ice at least once in the 3rd period of the semi-final. I remember thinking to myself that I didn't see him out there at all until that point.

http://www.tsn.ca/olympics/story/?id=444517

I have a hard time believing this. If true, he's a complete ****** basically. I don't know the guy, so that's not the reason I have a hard time believing it. If he truly asked for a trade after not being named to the team, is he the guy (with that type of character), that you would pick to be an injury replacement? There is some sense to it as well though....Yzerman just stepped down as Executive Director, could this be one the reasons? There's probably enough stress that goes along with the role anyway.....time to step away and go out on top, let another guy come in and deal with the stress (although, if NHLers aren't going next time....no stress to deal with). On MSL being terrible all tournament, he barely played in any of the games, he was scratched for a few, played maybe a couple shifts in the semi-final and in the gold medal game, he played more than he played in any other game and was decent.

The article suggests Ilitch would pay for housing as long as necessary, but what happend to cause this? "In 2002 Parks received an eviction notice from her $1800 per month apartment due to non-payment of rent. Parks was incapable of managing her own financial affairs by this time due to age-related physical and mental decline. Her rent was paid from a collection taken by Hartford Memorial Baptist Church in Detroit. When her rent became delinquent and her impending eviction was highly publicized in 2004, executives of the ownership company announced they had forgiven the back rent and would allow Parks, by then 91 and in extremely poor health, to live rent free in the building for the remainder of her life.[43] Her heirs and various interest organizations alleged at the time that her financial affairs had been mismanaged."