seeinred

You're lucky the minus feature is gone, because I think this had a good chance of becoming the most negged post in the history of LGW.

What do Finns have to do with a Swedish game? And I can kinda understand the suspension I guess. He definitely jumped and it looked like he was going for the head. I'd be pissed if someone got suspended for it here, but in a less physical league I can understand it.

I, too, was on the "what the hell is Lang doing out there right now" bandwagon during that game. That was exciting as all hell though. Is it almost the playoffs yet?

Now she'll never win it

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. There's no provision in the CBA (that I can find, anyway), about those draft picks going anywhere else.

There were none actually with the article for me either, but if you go to multimedia->photo galleries, it's there.

I can't stop listening to this: *NSFW language, obviously*

Fibonacci was a terrible leader, never backchecked, and always disappeared in the playoffs.

I was going to make points to debate Stevie's jersey retirement (facetiously, obviously), but I just can't bring myself to actually type it out.

Smith kinda seems like a #2 to me.

Same here. I can't imagine what that's like, and it's interesting how it's stirred up some memories.

Doughty is far and away my #1 choice to "replace" Nick. I'm hoping they can seduce him with the thoughts of carrying on the legacy or something. I, too, believe Doughty's gonna go down as an all-time great.

It definitely was. Salei's been to the finals, but he's never won a Cup.

Good times...

I think that's pretty much it. I think it's basically a race to the face-off dot, and the linesman decides who would've gotten there first and either blows it dead or lets it go.

We could do that with a 1-way contract too. A 2-way contract only means that a player gets paid different salaries in the NHL and AHL. Maltby will have to clear waivers to be assigned to GR, and if they recall him during the season, he'll be subject to re-entry waivers as well.

It would really depend on how they did it I guess (and your perspective), since the blue line is considered part of whichever zone the puck is in and the entire puck has to completely cross it to enter/exit a zone. If they keep the blue line starting at the same point in the neutral zone and made it wider only toward the net (if that makes sense), then the offensive zone would be smaller when you're outside of it, but it would be the same size it is right now when you're in it. If the keep the blue lines starting at the same point closest to the nets and expanded it only toward center ice, the offensive zone would be bigger while you're in it. And if they keep the middle of the blue lines in the same place and add a little bit more each way, then each zone is bigger when you're in it and smaller from an outside perspective.

Long as in the teams will be attacking the same directions they did in the 2nd period.

He can have kind of a mean streak. He is by no means a fighter, though. If he stays healthy, he's probably good for 15-20 points or so I'm guessing. He's broken 30 a couple times. I don't think he'll be any worse than Lilja. I'm pretty sure he'll be better offensively than the Pain Train.

This painted a crystal-clear scene in my head, which in turn made me LOL IRL. +1 for you, sir.

* Hybrid icing rule; Not a fan, though I would MUCH rather have the hybrid icing rule instead of no-touch. * No line change for team committing an offside; This would be fine if it was only for intentional offsides. Otherwise it seems a bit harsh * Crease reset rule; Is that like the old "Touch the paint and I blow the whistle" rule? If so, pass. * Face-off variation (face-off controlled by whistle in place of traditional puck drop); I'm not even going to dignify this one with a response. * Overtime: three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on- 2 followed by shootout (5 players per team). I still hate the shootout. I would much rather see 2 on 2 instead (but not both), at least that's still hockey (sort of). * Bigger crease; Yay, more disallowed goals! Seriously, the goalies are fine. * Verification goal line (additional line situated behind the goal line); If this is a line exactly a puck's diameter behind the goal line (and I don't know what else it could be), it's retarded. It would only work if the puck is completely level. * Wider blue lines; OK, sure, add a couple inches to the offensive zone. No big deal * Line changes zone in front of each bench; There's basically an imaginary one right now. I don't have a huge problem with this rule, but it seems fine the way it is. * Face-off variations (infringement results in the offending player moving back further, three face-off dots down the middle of the ice); Three dots down the middle is just stupid. I do like the idea of penalizing a player for an infraction instead of just throwing him out, though the way guys drift in as the puck's dropped would make this rule pointless. * No icing the puck while shorthanded; As much as I like to consider myself a traditionalist, I would love to see them at least give this rule a shot. At this point it's trite to say "Why should a team be rewarded for taking a penalty," but I kind of agree, at least enough to be curious enough to want to see this implemented for a few pre-season games or something * OT – three minutes of 4-on-4; three minutes of 3-on-3; three minutes of 2-on-2 with long line changes; followed by three shooters per team shootout (if tied after three shots then players who have shot previously can shoot again). Same as before, either 2-on-2 or the shootout, not both. I have no problem with repeat shooters though. I actually kind of like the possibility, nay probability, that Pavs can embarrass a goalie multiple times in the span of a couple minutes. * No touch icing; I get the safety aspect of it, but hockey's a dangerous sport. I truly enjoy a balls-out footrace to touch up or negate an icing. * Team that commits an offside infraction cannot make a line change and face-off is in offending team zone; Again, make it intentional offside only. It happens way too many times in a game * Face-off variation: after a face-off violation, opposition center may choose his face-off opponent; A hilarious idea in principle, making defensemen line up for the draw, but how embarrassing will it be when you giddily select your opponent only to have him beat you clean? * Second referee located off the playing surface; OK, cool, whatever. What's he gonna do though? * Delayed penalty rule Ummm, isn't that the way it works right now? * No icing the puck while shorthanded; I feel like we've covered this already. * OT – 4-on-4 (with long line change) followed by a shootout with five players. Whatever. Did I mention I hate shootouts? * Variations of special teams play; Make the PK unit play with their sticks upside down! * OT – 4-on-4 (with long line change) Again?. Agree? Disagree?

Did you just get a new girlfriend or something?

I'm curious as to the evidence each side produced, or what factors were considered. Because, at least from my perspective, it seems like it should've been something along the lines of: Devils lolHossa lolZetterberg lolLuongo NHL But we don't like it! Arbitrator Go screw, NHL.

Are you thinking of Tom Wilson?

I really like this signing. I even like the fact that he's been suspended. It's nice to know that you have a defenseman that's capable of playing a little dirty. I'm really, really optimistic about this. Plus the fact that this is his 2nd tour with Babcock leads me to believe Babs had some influence on this decision. It's even easier to like this signing knowing that the coach wanted this guy again.