Datsyuk a Selke Finalist

[norrisnick 1]

Que Eva with his "Datsyuk isn't even the best defensive forward on the Wings" comments.

Somewhere Eva is paying homage to a bronze statue of Zetterberg and trying to remember where he put his Datsyuk voodoo doll.

The Selke finalist sure did a dandy job against Nash last round, didn't he?

There's a reason Zetterberg gets the tough assignments. And it's not because Datsyuk is the better defensive forward.

[Lovin Jiri Fischer 147]

Congratz, he's gonna be playing golf in about a week and a half.

Yes he is. With Pronger's head.

[dicksmack 33]

The Selke finalist sure did a dandy job against Nash last round, didn't he?

There's a reason Zetterberg gets the tough assignments. And it's not because Datsyuk is the better defensive forward.

I don't think that Hank's ascribed role necessarily proves his defensive superiority. They are both very gifted two-way players but somebody has to play second fiddle offensively and assume the greater defensive role. Pav is an elite scorer and you'd have to be nuts not to put him where he will score. However, Datsyuk is utilizable in so many ways; opposite another team's star centre is no problem. I think people realize that Pavel could just as easily take Hank's role and do it as good or better than he does. Pav hits harder, stickchecks better, wins more faceoffs, wins more puck battles, stickhandles out of the defensive zone better. Are you telling me Hank out hustles Pav on the backcheck? Please. You don't want Pav shadowing somebody but out doing his own thing at all parts of the rink.

Perhaps Zetterberg was seen as a leader of a sub-standard pk, and generally as a team that was uncharacteristically regarded as having poor defensive chops. If that perception was prevalent among the writers then Pav's freelance two-way game may have been seen as unique in the Red Wings defensive mix. It also may hurt is chances of repeating.

I've already discussed the idea of basic two types of Selke nominees: the shutdown centre and the high scoring two-way player. Datsyuk is of the latter group a al Gilmour and Fedorov. Is one type better than the other? I don't know. I think the two ways (not implying anything) tend to win when there's no dominant shutdown forward in the mix. However, while Richards is more like the shutdown type, perhaps he's kind of a blend between them. I could be wrong but I think Richards' chances are 60/40 to win it.

[norrisnick 1]

I don't think that Hank's ascribed role necessarily proves his defensive superiority. They are both very gifted two-way players but somebody has to play second fiddle offensively and assume the greater defensive role. Pav is an elite scorer and you'd have to be nuts not to put him where he will score. However, Datsyuk is utilizable in so many ways; opposite another team's star centre is no problem. I think people realize that Pavel could just as easily take Hank's role and do it as good or better than he does. Pav hits harder, stickchecks better, wins more faceoffs, wins more puck battles, stickhandles out of the defensive zone better. Are you telling me Hank out hustles Pav on the backcheck? Please. You don't want Pav shadowing somebody but out doing his own thing at all parts of the rink.

Then give the tough jobs to Pavel and unleash Z. It's not as if Z can't take the bull by the horns and lead offensively as well. The point remains that Z is given the match-up duty. If Pavel were better, he'd get them. Babcock isn't the type of coach that makes the decision based on their offensive merits. His top stopper gets the assignment. Not the guy left over after picking a scorer.

Perhaps Zetterberg was seen as a leader of a sub-standard pk, and generally as a team that was uncharacteristically regarded as having poor defensive chops. If that perception was prevalent among the writers then Pav's freelance two-way game may have been seen as unique in the Red Wings defensive mix. It also may hurt is chances of repeating.

They voted for the guy they (wrongly) voted for the year before as Z was option #1 in '07-'08 and he most certainly wasn't leading a sub-standard PK or defensive team then.

I've already discussed the idea of basic two types of Selke nominees: the shutdown centre and the high scoring two-way player. Datsyuk is of the latter group a al Gilmour and Fedorov. Is one type better than the other? I don't know. I think the two ways (not implying anything) tend to win when there's no dominant shutdown forward in the mix. However, while Richards is more like the shutdown type, perhaps he's kind of a blend between them. I could be wrong but I think Richards' chances are 60/40 to win it.

It has nothing to do with types and everything to do with voting our #2 as the league's #1. Would Raf be a good choice for the Norris? Absolutely not. He's not our #1.

[titanium2 867]

The Selke finalist sure did a dandy job against Nash last round, didn't he?

There's a reason Zetterberg gets the tough assignments. And it's not because Datsyuk is the better defensive forward.

I actually agree. I'm starting to think that Pav's defensive game is starting to become a little overrated. He admitted that one of the main reasons as to why he loves Z as his linemate is because Z is quicker to backcheck for him than anybody he's ever played with.

I'm not so sure he's the right choice for the award. You could say that he has the most points among the other candidates, but if you advocate for that reasoning, then don't get mad when Lidstrom loses the Norris to Mike Green.

I think I'd rather look at it as "Among the three, who sets the best example for their team in regards to how hard you have to work on the defensive end?"