toby91_ca

I'd argue against that. You'd have to watch more Buffalo games to understand how important Myers is to that team. Not that it matters though, I don't think importance to your team should have any bearing on the rookie of the year award, it's not an MVP award. Did you leave out Mason's 10 shutouts on purpose? That makes a HUGE difference in the comparison. Also, Mason didn't have a guy like Myers to go up against either. Mason was also only 21 I think. Probably shouldn't matter, but I wonder if the voters would be swayed by the fact that Howard is 26 and Myers is only 20? I bet some might. Not sure, but Sawchuk had 44 and Belfour had 43.

Pretty nasty. Looks like he gets a quick shot in there and then bounces back down and hides pretty quickly. Then he tries to tell the ref that he did nothing wrong.

I didn't hear the call, but based on what was written here, it wasn't call the "best ever" it was suggest to be "one of" the sickest. That said.....still a stretch, not even sure it's his best, but it certainly was a pretty slick deke. Also, to those that suggest all that should have been done is a poke check, well, easy to say now and easier said than done. How many times have you seen a goalie go for a poke check and get burned? Happened to Fleury twice in that shootout. Gotta give Crosby credit for improving on this, he wasn't great early in his career, but this year, he's probably the best. He's tied for the most goals with 7 and of those players with 7, he has the highest percentage at 78%. The only players in the league with higher percentages are those guys that are at 100% but most of those are guys that only scored 1 or 2 goals on 1 or 2 attempts. There is one guy that's 5 for 5. Datsyuk is 6 for 12 this year for a 50% success rate, still pretty good.

I caught a bit of the Pens vs. Caps game last night and for what it's worth (which probably isn't much), one of the colour guys showed a grafic of his top 3 guys regarding the Selke and he had Staal, Backstrom and Kesler. I think, regardless of how much it should matter (which isn't much if you ask me), Datsyuk's +/- and takeaway stats in the past 2 years pushed him to the award. With his +/- very low this year and his scoring down (shoudln't matter, but likely will in the voters eyes), I don't see him winning this year and he may not even be amongst the top 3 vote getters.

Whether they are the 5th seed or the 8th seed or anywhere in between doesn't make much difference to me. If you aren't in the top 4, I don't think it matters as much. If your goal is to get to the finals, then you are going to have to face the best teams (theoretically) at some point. Regardless, no matter who you get in round 1 (1-4), it's going to be a good team. It's highly unlikely that they're going to get in the top 4, so I think the only goal would be to get in, to me, getting higher than 8th doesn't really help that much, I know, every little bit counts and could give you home ice in later rounds, but barring upsets (which often do happen though), that's not going to happen.

I heard that the players would like to expand it beyond just lateral or coming from behind type plays, they want to avoid even the head shots that come head on (no pun intended). I may have heard wrong as I just got the end of a radio discussion yesterday.

He's been terrible on the draw tonight, one of the worst in the game (40%)

I mostly agree, but at the same time, you don't really want it to be "let's give it to him because he's really old."

Wasn't Hasek 37 when the Wings won in 2002? Regardless, I think players are playing longer than they used to, but that said, you certainly due decline with age and we've seen Lidstrom's minutes start to come down, for example. With a goalie winning in the playoffs, I guess the thought might be, sure you can still play in the NHL into your late 30s, but are you going to still have enough to actually lead your team to a cup? I think that's a good question.

I think it would be different, still suspendable, but different if Seabrook was actually making a play with the puck....I think that's what may have pushed it over the edge....to 8 games.

I think Wisniewski is, in part, a victim of timing. Had Gonchar's hit happened this week, I'm sure he would have been suspended, with all the media hype going around these days. That said, Gonchar's hit was nowhere near as severe as Wisniewski's and the player did not get hurt. Without all the hype going around, you probably would have just called Gonchar's hit an elbowing penatly and be done with it. Wisniewski's is suspendable no matter how you cut it and he likely got more games because of the hype. I heard some (even on this board) calling for 10 games. Regarding Richards and Cooke....and there are others, fact of the matter is, those hits were not illegal, can't suspend. The fact that those hits were not illegal is a problem, but they have apparently made an attempt to fix that....not sure why the fix can't be immediate though. I made the comment yesterday on Seabrook's hit on Perry and I'll say it again (no that it makes any difference in the Wisniewski suspension), he barely touched Perry, he let up big time when Perry turned his back and simply touched him lightly with his gloves....Perry took a dive, was not hurt in anyway...no more than me sitting on my couch watching the game. Have a look at the reply again.

I can't remember if this was posted or not, but the incident happened shortly after Canada beat Russia in the quarterfinals. A young girl, Ovechkin fan, had a camera out and Ovechkin decided to try and take it away and ended up dusting her up a little bit I guess. In any event, the real reason I'm posting this is a comment made at the bottom of the article, which appears to have predicted the future. (I came across this while looking up some things on the net that has absolutely nothing to do with hockey). http://deadspin.com/5480457/alexander-ovechkin-loves-shoves-all-his-fans

The girl wasn't in his way, he was walking in a different direction when he decided to turn and go right for the camera, so that's a pretty weak argument. Not saying the guy is a complete ass or anything, but he certainly was a pretty poor loser during the olympics and also refused to talk to the media for most of the tournament as well (don't blame him for that, you want to focus on the tournament, but several other players fulfilled that responsibility).

No, clearly it was a joke, the person was joking about what kind of call should have been made on the shove he gave the girl, I just thought it was funny that the person suggested he would end up getting nailed for boarding and then a couple weeks later he ends up getting suspended for boarding. Clearly coincidence.

The only thing I can think of is that it was in the playoffs, but I still don't see why that would be so different than regular season in terms of finalizing a new rule that I think everyone agrees with.

That was my initial thought as well, actually, my initial thought was that it looked like a horrible dive, but then looking at it again, it looks like he is about to jump and then gets pushed from behind, when he has absolutely no footing or balance, so I don't really think it was a dive. I know he and the Hawks were furious on that play thinking there should be a penalty, especially because they scored, but I disagree with that, it wasn't a cross check, it was a push. He thought it should have been interference, but he was jumping to play the puck, I don't have a problem with someone trying to push him out of the way.

My opinion, the hit was intent to injure, he was definately going after him for the hit on Perry. He starts his line for the hit at least from the top of the circle (quite a distance), he jumped into the hit, the puck was nowhere near Seabrook (he hadn't even touched it for quite some time) and his elbows were up, regardless where the initial contact was (chest, or it looks like it could even be chin anyway). There was nothing clean about the hit, he will be suspended I'm sure (well, you never know with the NHL, you can never be so sure). I could be wrong here, but I thought Perry took a huge dive on that play. If you look at it, to me, it looks like Seabrook was going for a hit, but when Perry started to turn, he let up big time and didn't really hit him at all, he just looks to give him a weak little push with his hands and Perry tries to sell it. After Perry realizes there would be no call, he's back up instantly. I want to say I'm completely unbiased here as I have no interest in Chicago or Seabrook one way or another, but I do have a pretty good dislike for Perry.

He's not even under contract.

If you take MVP literally, not sure how it's Ovechkin, his team has a better record (7-2) without him in the line up than with him. In those 7 wins, they scored 40 goals (5.7 goals per game).

So, I read that Downie was fined $1,000 which makes absolutely zero sense to me. If you review the play and reach the conclusion that the way that got wrapped up, etc. was an accident, that's fine, shouldn't result in anything other than the 2 min penalty he got for interference or whatever. I'm perfectly fine with that conclusion as it's almost impossible to judge intent, even though he looks to do this on purpose, you really can't tell. However, if you reach the conclusion that he intended to do what he did, I see that as one of the dirtier plays out there....actually grabbing a guys leg and trying to injure him? You either conclude that there was incidental contact and no punishment or you conclude that everything was intentional and give the guy a hefty suspension. What the hell is a $100 fine supposed to mean? We don't really like that you are trying to break guys' legs, but we don't really see it as that big of a deal. Just to be clear, I would have said no punishment at all, but if the league thinks he did it on purpose, the $100 fine is mind boggling.

Not sure about the buyout option, they'd still be stuck with a relatively hefty cap hit for a number of years and be without a player and without a lot of cash.

I think it will be a long shot to get to both 200 goals and 600 points by the end of the year. 200 goals is likely more probable, but still a long shot. If he gets hot in the goal scoring department, he should get there. In any event, reaching these milestones is still a lot more realistic than getting to 97 points. Having a look at the top 10 scorers in Wing's history, assuming he stays healthy and stays with the organization into his late 30s, he has a good chance at finishing 4th (passing Fedorov and Lidstrom), but he won't get any further than that. This assumes Lidstrom doesn't accumulate significantly more points than he already has.

Not sure what this has to do with the Selke, but I'm not sure how you get 84pts. If he continues to put up "these numbers", what numbers are you referring to? 2pts in his last 2 games? That would have him finish with 71pts. 4pts in his last 5 games? That woudl have him finish with 68pts. 9pts in his last 8 games? That would have him finish with 73pts. I have no idea where you are getting 84pts.

Let's be realistic here. Finishing with 70-75 pts would likely be excellent for him, but even that level is not a sure thing. He has 9pts in the 8 games played since the olympics, which everyone believes he has picked up his pace. That's great, but even if he continues that, he won't hit 80pts, let alone 90 or 97pts. He won't finish anywhere close to 90pts in my opinion.

The problem I have is the PK time. If Datsyu is the best defensive forward in the league, why is there 7 forwards on his team that have more PK time then him? Kesler is Vancouver's first choice on the PK. Also, Kesler's 66 blocked shots blows Datsyuk's 25 out of the water.