Hinting Their Norris Winner?

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I'll say it. Green should get the Norris. He is the best D-man in the league this year. He is doing what he is supposed to do better than anyone else is doing what they are supposed to do. Washington expects him to score a ton, but obviously not at th eexpense of giving up a ton of goals in return. He's managing that beautifully. He is far-and-away the best offensive Defenseman, while managing to be "good enough" (some would even argue that he's been better than expected) defensively. Personally, I think the guy is underrated at the defensive side of his game. Obviously he's pretty committed to the offensive side of his game - most D-men who play the game he does would get burnt a lot more than he does.

BINGO!

The 2 most important things people tend to forget in this Green bashing mode is that

1. Most dmen cannot play the way he does. Most don't have the ability to involve themselves in the play as much as he does and still be able to recover and not constantly give up 3 on 2's and 2 on 1's. That tells me he has great awareness and obviously, his hockey IQ is exceptional. And people forget how young he is. He's going to get better defensively. He's going to get better positionally.

2. Look at his PP numbers. He ain't gettin' those lofty +/- numbers by scoring on the PP. He's getting them because he's doing his job at even strength as well.

And for Red Wings fans to run their mouths about how he gets to play with Ovechkin and Semin on the power play and blah, blah..

OMFFG. That's right. I said it. A double ******* Oh My God!

As Wings fans, for us to ***** and take credit away from somebody's numbers b/c they play with good players is the height of hypocrisy.

Over 15 years anybody in a Wings sweater has arguably played, season in and season out with some of the best talented, highest hockey IQ players the league has ever seen.

[Guest Shoreline]

BINGO!

The 2 most important things people tend to forget in this Green bashing mode is that

1. Most dmen cannot play the way he does. Most don't have the ability to involve themselves in the play as much as he does and still be able to recover and not constantly give up 3 on 2's and 2 on 1's. That tells me he has great awareness and obviously, his hockey IQ is exceptional. And people forget how young he is. He's going to get better defensively. He's going to get better positionally.

2. Look at his PP numbers. He ain't gettin' those lofty +/- numbers by scoring on the PP. He's getting them because he's doing his job at even strength as well.

And for Red Wings fans to run their mouths about how he gets to play with Ovechkin and Semin on the power play and blah, blah..

OMFFG. That's right. I said it. A double ******* Oh My God!

As Wings fans, for us to ***** and take credit away from somebody's numbers b/c they play with good players is the height of hypocrisy.

Over 15 years anybody in a Wings sweater has arguably played, season in and season out with some of the best talented, highest hockey IQ players the league has ever seen.

Maybe it's a rarity in recent times, but I agree wholeheartedly.

Edited April 2, 2009 by Shoreline

[Coolio Mendez 7]

Green has no right to have his name even mentioned. Sure he can score, but the handful of Caps games I have seen, he is lacking a bit on the defensive side.

The Norris is not a scoring race.

25 years ago there was a guy on the Oilers who was widely considered a defensive liability (Mike Bossy called him a pylon) but he would score at will.............and he could skate like the wind.

Paul Coffey won two consecutive Norris trophies..............simply by threatening Bobby Orr's records (and coming within 2 goals of becoming the first defenceman to score 50). Both years that he won...........he led all NHL defensemen in giveaways. Randy Carlyle won a Norris trophy by leading all NHL D-men in points and giveaways AND was a -16.

Green just scored his 30th goals giving him 30 goals, 70 points and a plus 24 rating in 63 games played this season. I think he wins it.

Edited April 2, 2009 by Coolio Mendez

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

It'd be nice to see Lidstrom win by reputation alone, much like Brodeur did last year with his undeserving Vezina win.

[Doc Holiday 0]

Reading this, Drake, Doc, and all the other people trying to act like complete douchebags when I suggest it's Green's Norris to lose?

Time to see the forest for the trees and stop acting like the Norris winner needs to be some godly defenseman just because our Lidstrom won it.

1. The only one being a douchebag right now is you.

2. I never said the Norris winner has to be some godly defenseman. I even said the guy would be a finalist for f***s sake.

[steveyzerman 0]

Reading this, Drake, Doc, and all the other people trying to act like complete douchebags when I suggest it's Green's Norris to lose?

Time to see the forest for the trees and stop acting like the Norris winner needs to be some godly defenseman just because our Lidstrom won it.

That's actually what the Norris is. Best DEFENSEman. Green is not it. He has a chance, but he shouldn't by any means. & to be fair, I don't think Nick's a LOCK either. I think Nick should be on the ballet & I think Green should not. Who wins it from there is to be seen.

[LeftWinger 5,153]

Green has no right to have his name even mentioned. Sure he can score, but the handful of Caps games I have seen, he is lacking a bit on the defensive side.

The Norris is not a scoring race.

yeah, but he is also +24. I agree, but the writers (NHL actually) will be so happy to be able to award it to someone OTHER than Lidstrom, that he will probably get over 90% of the first place votes!

I tell you what though, after accepting his award the first words out of his mouth should be something like, "Thank you, first I'd like to thank Nick Lidstrom for actaully being "HUMAN" this year!"

[steveyzerman 0]

25 years ago there was a guy on the Oilers who was widely considered a defensive liability (Mike Bossy called him a pylon) but he would score at will.............and he could skate like the wind.

Paul Coffey won two consecutive Norris trophies..............simply by threatening Bobby Orr's records (and coming within 2 goals of becoming the first defenceman to score 50). Both years that he won...........he led all NHL defensemen in giveaways. Randy Carlyle won a Norris trophy by leading all NHL D-men in points and giveaways AND was a -16.

Green just scored his 30th goals giving him 30 goals, 70 points and a plus 24 rating in 63 games played this season. I think he wins it.

Can we limit the periods to < 4615167877787787541?

[LeftWinger 5,153]

25 years ago there was a guy on the Oilers who was widely considered a defensive liability (Mike Bossy called him a pylon) but he would score at will.............and he could skate like the wind.

Paul Coffey won two consecutive Norris trophies..............simply by threatening Bobby Orr's records (and coming within 2 goals of becoming the first defenceman to score 50). Both years that he won...........he led all NHL defensemen in giveaways. Randy Carlyle won a Norris trophy by leading all NHL D-men in points and giveaways AND was a -16.

Green just scored his 30th goals giving him 30 goals, 70 points and a plus 24 rating in 63 games played this season. I think he wins it.

Didnt Cofffey win a Norris with Detroit also? Cant remember...

[LeftWinger 5,153]

That's actually what the Norris is. Best DEFENSEman. Green is not it. He has a chance, but he shouldn't by any means. & to be fair, I don't think Nick's a LOCK either. I think Nick should be on the ballet & I think Green should not. Who wins it from there is to be seen.

it is supposed to be about DEFENSE but it has never been. If it was ALWAYS about defense then Orr wouldn't have never won it, ever and Vladdy would have won it in 1997, instead of Brian Screetch.

[steveyzerman 0]

it is supposed to be about DEFENSE but it has never been. If it was ALWAYS about defense then Orr wouldn't have never won it, ever and Vladdy would have won it in 1997, instead of Brian Screetch.

I'm pretty sure Orr was no slouch on defense. But it's just my opinion, anyway. Whatever happens, happens. I have no influence on the vote. I'm just saying he wouldn't be on my ballot.

Edited April 2, 2009 by steveyzerman

[Guest Shoreline]

1. The only one being a douchebag right now is you.

2. I never said the Norris winner has to be some godly defenseman. I even said the guy would be a finalist for f***s sake.

You and Drake talked down to me like I was a moron for suggesting it, and that it was in some way "extreme" (your part), while this is yet another case for why Green is the front runner for the Norris and it's his to lose. You were wrong. As you can see, I like giving back.

That's actually what the Norris is. Best DEFENSEman. Green is not it. He has a chance, but he shouldn't by any means. & to be fair, I don't think Nick's a LOCK either. I think Nick should be on the ballet & I think Green should not. Who wins it from there is to be seen.

Here's the problem, it doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what they, the voters think, and this is clearly an observation of how people get voted for Norris. The Richard trophy is very clearly definable, no ambiguity, none of that. The Norris, Masterton, Hart, blahblah (you get the idea) are ambiguous and subject to the writers who vote. Observationally, the people who get voted in for these trophies are beneficiaries of the one intangible -- attention. Very clearly, the people who vote are writers, and if you pay attention to who is getting written most about, you will ultimately have a very good idea of who is most likely to be nominated for (or, like in this case, win) certain trophies. Mike Green has been at the center of their attention for most of the season now. Lidstrom is, very obviously, on a pretty defensive team, especially for the defensive expectations the Wings have, and has been seen numerous times making his own mistakes and getting burned, so while he may be nominated (which there's still no guarantee of, which is not something we can say for Green who is absolutely a sure nomination), it's an uphill battle he will be fighting to win.

Personally, I wish Wideman would win. He's been so impressive defensively, has quietly been playing outstanding defense, and of course has been seen with some highlight reel offensive success, but again, none of that matters. Green is the front runner and given the way other people win it's only fair, like it or not.

Edited April 2, 2009 by Shoreline

[steveyzerman 0]

You and Drake talked down to me like I was a moron for suggesting it, and that it was in some way "extreme" (your part), while this is yet another case for why Green is the front runner for the Norris and it's his to lose. You were wrong. As you can see, I like giving back.

Here's the problem, it doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what I think. It matters what they, the voters think, and this is clearly an observation of how people get voted for Norris. The Richard trophy is very clearly definable, no ambiguity, none of that. The Norris, Masterton, Hart, blahblah (you get the idea) are ambiguous and subject to the writers who vote. Observationally, the people who get voted in for these trophies are beneficiaries of the one intangible -- attention. Very clearly, the people who vote are writers, and if you pay attention to who is getting written most about, you will ultimately have a very good idea of who is most likely to be nominated for (or, like in this case, win) certain trophies. Mike Green has been at the center of their attention for most of the season now. Lidstrom is, very obviously, on a pretty defensive team, especially for the defensive expectations the Wings have, and has been seen numerous times making his own mistakes and getting burned, so while he may be nominated (which there's still no guarantee of, which is not something we can say for Green who is absolutely a sure nomination), it's an uphill battle he will be fighting to win.

Personally, I wish Wideman would win. He's been so impressive defensively, has quietly been playing outstanding defense, and of course has been seen with some highlight reel offensive success, but again, none of that matters. Green is the front runner and given the way other people win it's only fair, like it or not.

That's why I put "I think." & I am aware that I have no influence on the vote if you read my last post.

My argument was against you saying that we think the Norris winner ( & I'm going to paraphrase because we don't need the stretch to "godly" in order for Mike Green to be eliminated... From MY ballot. ) should be good defensively because Nick won it. That's not why we think the Norris winner should be good defensively, at least that's not why I think that...

I think that because that's what the trophy should be.

If they want to make a goddamned trophy for best offensive defenseman, by all means, make one. Then you can take everyone with a "D" under the position column, add up the points & there it is. Black & ******* white.

[Guest Shoreline]

That's why I put "I think." & I am aware that I have no influence on the vote if you read my last post.

My argument was against you saying that we think the Norris winner ( & I'm going to paraphrase because we don't need the stretch to "godly" in order for Mike Green to be eliminated... From MY ballot. ) should be good defensively because Nick won it. That's not why we think the Norris winner should be good defensively, at least that's not why I think that...

I think that because that's what the trophy should be.

If they want to make a goddamned trophy for best offensive defenseman, by all means, make one. Then you can take everyone with a "D" under the position column, add up the points & there it is. Black & ******* white.

I dunno, I couldn't say whether or not it should be two trophies. I don't consider it that big a deal. I put it on par with the All-Star game and something of honorable mention, but not some major distinction anywhere on par to the Stanley Cup. The fact that it is the way it is kinda diminishes the value of the Norris to me, but I really can't turn my nose down on it all that much since I couldn't really come up with a better way to judge defensiveness or a defensiveman's talent that doesn't involve watching over 1,000 games per season. Quite honestly, stats are only semi-helpful, but mostly inflated and bumf*cked to a point of ridiculousness.

Edited April 2, 2009 by Shoreline

[steveyzerman 0]

I dunno, I couldn't say whether or not it should be two trophies. I don't consider it that big a deal. I put it on par with the All-Star game and something of honorable mention, but not some major distinction anywhere on par to the Stanley Cup. The fact that it is the way it is kinda diminishes the value of the Norris to me, but I really can't turn my nose down on it all that much since I couldn't really come up with a better way to judge defensiveness or a defensiveman's talent that doesn't involve watching over 1,000 games per season. Quite honestly, stats are only semi-helpful, but mostly inflated and bumf*cked to a point of ridiculousness.

Well, we can agree to disagree if Mike Green should, or should, not be a nominee. From all accounts I've seen, it looks like he'll get it. I just don't feel like he should.

I do think there should be another trophy for defenders that is less opinion based. A Bobby Orr trophy would be just perfect for Green.

But, that's me.

[shadow47 1]

"Best defenseman" means more than just "best defender". It involves everything to do with the position. Just like how MVP means more than just point-scoring. A high-scoring d-man who is pretty good defensively is "better" than a low-scoring d-man who is GREAT defensively. You take away all the fancy positional labels, C, LW, D, and it's just five men on a sheet of ice measured equally. Mike Peca plays defense probably as well as many of the defenseman in the league, much as Mike Green scores more than many forwards. It simply comes down to measuring "hockey playing" by position, and Mike Green has been the best hockey player at the position of D this year, no doubt.

Edited April 2, 2009 by shadow47

[Guest Shoreline]

"Best defenseman" means more than just "best defender". It involves everything to do with the position. Just like how MVP means more than just point-scoring. A high-scoring d-man who is pretty good defensively is "better" than a low-scoring d-man who is GREAT defensively.

Here are the Norris winners:

97-98: Rob Blake (8th in points, 1st in goals, 164th in +/-)

98-99: Al MacInnis (1st in points, 3rd in goals, 2nd in +/-)

99-00: Chris Pronger (2nd in points, 8th in goals, 1st in +/-)

00-01: Nick Lidstrom (2nd in points, 6th in goals, 52nd in +/-)

01-02: Nick Lidstrom (t-1st in points, 23rd in goals, 38th in +/-)

02-03: Nick Lidstrom (3rd in points, t-1st in goals, 1st in +/-)

03-04: Scott Niedermayer (2nd in points, 9th in goals, 11th in +/-)

05-06: Nick Lidstrom (1st in points, 5th in goals, 12th in +/-)

06-07: Nick Lidstrom (5th in points, 16th in goals, 2nd in +/-)

07-08: Nick Lidstrom (1st in points, 20th in goals, 1st in +/-)

Possibility:

08-09: Mike Green (1st in points, 1st in goals, 6th in +/-)

Doesn't look at all different than what one would see from any other Norris winner. The only thing that's consistent is they're in the top 8 in points, which doesn't say too much. So really all that's left is exposure.

[Guest micah]

"Best defenseman" means more than just "best defender". It involves everything to do with the position. Just like how MVP means more than just point-scoring. A high-scoring d-man who is pretty good defensively is "better" than a low-scoring d-man who is GREAT defensively. You take away all the fancy positional labels, C, LW, D, and it's just five men on a sheet of ice measured equally. Mike Peca plays defense probably as well as many of the defenseman in the league, much as Mike Green scores more than many forwards. It simply comes down to measuring "hockey playing" by position, and Mike Green has been the best hockey player at the position of D this year, no doubt.

Exactly. The best Defenseman in the league doesn't have to be the best defender in the league., just as the league's best Center might not have the highest faceoff win %. Defending is a job of the Defenceman, but not his only job. Mike Green is so good at the Defensive game, that he can over-commit offensively and still not get burnt terribly often.

[capsfan25 0]

What he is doing is beyond ridiculous for a defensman. He is a +24 and 38 of his 70 points are on the PP. That means he didn't get a +1 for those. So in other words all parts of his game are on, he isn't just an offensive defensmen.

[Guest Shoreline]

What he is doing is beyond ridiculous for a defensman. He is a +24 and 38 of his 70 points are on the PP. That means he didn't get a +1 for those. So in other words all parts of his game are on, he isn't just an offensive defensmen.

LIES. What would a caps fan know about the caps?