imisssergei

I said see above, not below. Crosby and and Vinny have nothing to do with each other in this case. Here is the post I was referring to: "With Crosby, he was hyped as the best player ever. He has produced, but I think Ovechkin has been more impressive. Crosby has had a very solid supporting cast, yet can't get his team out of the first round of the playoffs. To me, what Ovechkin has done with the cast he has been given, is much more impressive. Take Ovechkin away from the Caps, and you have a team that is in the lottery for Stamkos. Take Crosby away from the Pens, and they don't really miss a step." I don't care what type of production people expect out of a player. I know that productions is directly effected by the surrounding cast you have. What is disappointing about Crosby to me is that he has failed to make any real impact in the playoffs. Again, without Crosby the Pens are still in the playoffs. So technically speaking, the only real gain that the Pens get from having Crosby is financial. He was hyped as the best player since Gretzky. Yes, he is young, but he hasn't really done anything all that impressive. He has a good enough supporting cast to make noise in the playoffs. And he hasn't done that. That is why I am disappointed in Crosby. I'm not saying he needs to win a Cup. But I am saying he needs to at least get the Pens out of the first round.

I almost put him on my list. I agree until last season, he was a disappointment.

See above.

But of those 7 times, 6 different goalies have won. Only 7 dmen have won it. And IMO, Bobby and Marty are more important to their teams success than Lidstrom is to the Wings.

The reason I threw Kozlov in there is that he was drafted pretty high, and has never really filled out to much more than a third liner. With Crosby, he was hyped as the best player ever. He has produced, but I think Ovechkin has been more impressive. Crosby has had a very solid supporting cast, yet can't get his team out of the first round of the playoffs. To me, what Ovechkin has done with the cast he has been given, is much more impressive. Take Ovechkin away from the Caps, and you have a team that is in the lottery for Stamkos. Take Crosby away from the Pens, and they don't really miss a step. That is why I think he isn't a real MVP candidate. IMO, a true MVP must be vital to his teams success. Crosby's injury has proven that the Pens success isn't hinged on Crosby being in the lineup. And you are right, we wouldn't be talking about Malin if Crosby hadn't gone down. But Crosby did go down.

The only reason I don't think Lidstrom will get any serious consideration for the Hart, is that he plays defense. Since the trophy's inception in 23-24, only 12 times has a defensmen have won the trophy, 7 of which were won by Shore and Orr.

So you are saying that this is the first year that this type of play hasn't been called a penalty? I agree 110% with the statement that just because it isn't called doesn't mean it isn't a penalty. However in this scenario, it is a not only a solid hockey play, but it's never been called a penalty.

I think if anything, the injury to Crosby shows that he isn't a true MVP candidate. And I would agree, with the amount of hype Crosby had gotten, he is a disappointment.

Grigs Cleary Stefan Chistov Blackburn Bonk Gratton Viktor Kozlov Falloon And basically anyone Toronto has drafted in the last 20 years.

How does it not slow the game down? Even if only 1 icing per game is negated, that's 1 more stoppage that you would have with no touch, which is also one more opportunity for a commercial break. With no touch as soon as the ref yells 'ICE!!' everyone stops skating. You lose a lot of flow. Let's say that there is an average of 20 icings a game. With touch icings, the defending team must skate 200 feet and touch the puck. At a normal rate of skating, this usually takes about 3 seconds. Now with no touch icings, you take away those 3 seconds each time, and the game is now 1 minute longer. It doesn't sound like much, it's a ton of extra time on the clock. I compare no touch icing to no tag offsides. They both kill the flow of a game with those instant whistles.

I seem to remember something my coach used to always yell as we were doing bear crawls, mountains, suicides, ect... "YOU GO HARD BETWEEN WHISTLES! NEVER STOP UNTIL YOU HEAR A WHISTLE!"

I would buy the argument that just because it isn't called doesn't mean it's not a penalty, if it were called at least say 1 out of every 8 times. But it isn't. It's part of the game. Hah, 10 hour day with a break? Either you are in or you are out Eva. Break out the smelling salts if you aren't awake!

Wrong. The play would be blow dead as soon as either team touches the puck. In event that the defending team doesn't touch to puck in effort to run time off the clock, the ref has the option of blowing the play dead.

If it isn't a legal check, then why isn't there a penalty called every time? Or even a majority of the time. There isn't a penalty called because it is a legal play. It's called paying the price. As far as icing technicalities are concerned, you are wrong, the puck does not need to cross the red line to avoid icing. Per the rulebook "For the purpose of this rule, the point of last contact with the puck by the team in possession shall be used to determine whether icing has occurred or not. As such, the team in possession must “gain the line” in order for the icing to be nullified. “Gaining the line” shall mean that the puck (not the player’s skate) must make contact with the center red line in order to nullify a potential icing." Technically, the puck must touch the leading edge of the red line to nullify the icing. But as we all know, the refs give a few feet of leeway on this.

No, it is a perfectly legal play. The check is thrown simultaneously as the player gains possession of the puck as the whistle is blown. There is a lot of gray area in how this rule is called. Just like on the opposite end, a player is supposed to actually come in physical contact with the red line in order to avoid an icing call, yet most linesmen will allow a few feet of leeway.

A few things to consider. Players on teams that don't make the playoffs, almost never win the Hart. Defensemen almost never win the Hart. I've read some pretty ridiculous things in this thread, and some pretty interesting things. Someone said that AO's +/- was effected by his PP time. A + or a - is only awarded when a goal is scored even strength. So I'm not too sure what that poster was trying to say. Anyone? Malkin has had an incredible season. If people want to eliminate him from Hart consideration because of his supporting cast, than no one on the Wings should be in consideration either. Crosby isn't the best player on his team, this year. Nabokov hasn't played so many games because he is that good, it's because the backup is that bad. Lidstrom has had a Norris caliber season, but the Hart might be a stretch. Datsyuk has been playing out of his mind. AO should get serious consideration for the Hart regardless if the Caps are in the playoffs or not. The argument was made that AO needs to take the Caps to the next level to get consideration for the Hart. Well, he has done just that. There is no one single player in the NHL good enough to take a team to the playoffs. We all know how good Bobby Luongo is, but even he wasn't good enough to take the Panthers to the playoffs. Look what AO has done, and look where the Caps would be without him. I'm not sure he takes the Hart home if the Caps don't make the playoffs, and I'm not sure he deserves if it they don't. I'd say any of these 4 could win it: Alex Ovechkin Marty Brodeur Bobby Luongo Evgeni Malkin

That's ridiculous. It all comes down to who wants the puck more. It's part of the game. To give a double minor for a perfectly legal check is ludacris. You give a huge advantage to the defenseman in that situation. All he has to do is gain position, and he knows he won't get hit. You can't make a knee jerk decision. Keep touch icing. It makes the game more exciting.

In 88-89 Mario Lemieux was in on 57% of the Pens goals.

I haven't found anyone else, but really looking would be to painstaking from my attention span. Anyone have more patience?

In 2000-01 Pavel scored 29.5% for the Panthers with 59 of 200.

Who's this OA you speak of?

So tell me, exactly what do you think would happen to the Caps if Ovie went down? And what would happen when he returned?

Just a quick lesson, Eva correct me if I'm wrong. In order to have a 'winning record' a team must have a winning percentage greater than .500%. Example. (stats per TSN) Detroit 75 GP 49W 20L 6T 49/75= .653 Philly 74 GP 36W 28L 10T 36/74= .486 Detroit is well above the .500 mark, while Philly is just below. To put it bluntly, unless a team wins 42+ games, it cannot finish a season with a winning record. Currently 7 teams are mathmatically eliminated from have a winning season.

EDIT: double post

If memory serves me, Center Ice just offers select first round games, if any. You should be fine.