Brush with Greatness

Call me crazy, but if I were a Leaf fan, Tellqvist wouldn't exactly be instilling confidence in me with tonights game.

For the record, the Devils fired Ftorek with about 8 games left in the 1999-2000 season and went on to win the Cup with Robinson behind the bench. As for Andy Murray, I think you are somewhat delussional about how good they actually are. If you look at their forwards, apart from Demitra, Frolov (who have both missed time) and Conroy, they have nothing up front. Armstrong, Belanger, Avery, Robitaille, Roenick, Brown, etc. are not a solid group of forwards. Their defence isn't much better. Visnovsky is good, Norstrom isn't bad, and Corvo, Gleason, Dempsey and Miller are all functionable. Mathieu Garon has been okay but hasn't exactly set the world on fire. In fact, I would say that Edmonton, Vancouver, San Jose and Minnesota are all more talented teams than the Kings yet Murray has them right up there with them. On paper, the Kings shouldn't be any better than a .500 team.

I'm going to disagree with that statement. It would have taken Roy 76 games to reach thirty wins that season with the pace that he was on. His personal best was a 68 game season. Is there a possibility that it could have happened? Sure. But it's not like he was at 25 wins or something, he was 17-20-6 in 43 games on a non-playoff team. Who knows though. With the team struggling as it was, maybe he would have pulled his pouty act that year and got himself dealt anyways.

No, it was AS I MENTIONED as they offered him an opportunity to coach through the 97-98 season. I'm not really sure how you dispute that fact. Was Nolan pushing for a longer/bigger contract at the time? He sure was and Regier was probably fairly confident that Nolan would not return under his offer. But on the same token, if Nolan decided to take the offer, Buffalo wasn't going to turn around and yank it. If I was a GM coming into a position where the word around the league was that the current coach had pulled a powerplay to get the previous GM canned, I would probably be fairly conscious about handing out a long term contract to this guy until I was confident I could work with him. Particularly considering the fact that the coach displayed nothing in his track record to indicate that he deserved a big long term deal. If he had decided to stay on for 97-98 whose to say what would have happened. Would he have been gone then anyways? There is that possibility, amongst many others. The fact is that Nolan had the opporunity to continue coaching at the time and refused the offer out there, thinking that we was deservant of more. This doesn't even broach on the Crisp job in Tampa Bay.

Nolan's playoff record in his two seasons (while one, considering they missed the playoffs his first season) with the Sabres was an outstanding 5-8, whereas the two seasons after Ruff took over, they apparently nosedived posting a 24-12 record in the playoffs, including a trip to the Cup finals and a loss in the conference finals. Furthermore, Nolan posted a 73-72-19 record in his two seasons with the Sabres whereas Ruff posted a 73-57-34 record with them the first two seasons after taking over. By the way, Ruff only had Hasek for three healthy seasons, and, I don't know about you, but I don't consider 3 out of 10 many. Another funny fact, before Nolan took over, the team had made the playoffs for eight straight seasons. His first season there, they miss them. But you're right, fuck all of that, because Ted Nolan won a regular season division championship (with a solid 92 points, while Ruff's team four years later had a 98 point season, just ignore that though)! Yeah, he was offered the opportunity to coach the one season AS I MENTIONED. His one series playoff win in two years isn't exactly enough to dictate his contract demands with new management. Often times, understandably so, new management likes to take a wait and see approach and Regeir wanted to do likewise here. Nothing wrong with that.

Kot909, any definite word on how long Frolov is out for?

Revisionist history has been FAR too kind to Ted Nolan. First off, in regards to Muckler, I think the way that Nolan treated him was very shady. This was a guy who gave Nolan his first opportunity in the NHL and after differing views on player selection, Nolan goes behind his back and over his head and badmouths the guy. It's certainly a two-way street and Muckler is anything but innocent in their negative relationship (and I believe management at the time intentionally pitted one against the other). However, why is Muckler always portrayed as the villain here? In regards to his coaching abilities, Nolan was one game over .500 in his two seasons in Buffalo. True, he did win the Jack Adams in 96-97 and I hope he handed the trophy over to Dominik Hasek. The Sabres averaged over 33 shots against per game. Furthermore, their record that season was 40-30-12, yet only 3-10-2 when Hasek didn't play. I'll give Nolan credit that he is extremely good at getting the most out of his players and getting them to outwork the opposition. However, this isn't the only requirement of good coaches. I once read an article which cited an NHL head coach whose staff looked at film in 96-97 and struggled to figure out what system the Sabres used, until it hit them that there was no real "system". The team pretty much played hard and outworked teams and Hasek took care of everything else. Finally, Nolan always questions why he can't get a job in the NHL (and often unfairly insinuates the race card) when the fact is that he had two opportunities. When Regier took over, he offered Nolan the opportunity to coach through the 97-98 season (and look at a raise/contract extension in the future), which Nolan refused, at which point he was dismissed. Shortly thereafter, Esposito offered him the head job with the Lightning (I believe when Crisp was fired) and Nolan again refused. Personally, I think Nolan is an excellent coach at the Junior level and really admire his work with young aboriginals. Nolan is probably good enough to coach in the NHL again as well, but he needs to drop the attitude.

I hate to say I told you so but... It was obvious when this team was picked but that we would struggle to produce offense. I mean, we left off 7 of the top 10 Canadian scorers at the time when we picked the team. Even looking at the top 13 Canadian scorers in the NHL at the current moment, we have FOUR of them. Now, I realize that you simply don't take the 13 top scorers and call it a team (although in reality I think that group of forwards would have fared much better than the current crop). But we do need to take our best players, and simply put, we did not. I challenge anyone to contend that Eric Staal is not one of Canada's best 13 forwards. If so, then why is he not on the team? We need to stop justifying picks with the age/experience argument. I mean, how is a player supposed to gain international experience if he's not given the opportunity to compete internationally? People seem to forget that our forwards are competing against the best defensemen and goaltenders in the world and goals are not going to come as easy for many of these guys as they do in the NHL. We need to get off this "we need checkers" mentality. Honestly, these guys drag the team down. No offence but this is an ass-backwards quote. Salt Lake City did not have any players that could only check. Was Mike Peca there? Sure was, and he was in the middle of a 25 goal, 60 point season (at a time when numbers like those were actually impressive). If he had 4 goals and 12 assists, he would not have been there. It was actually Nagano where we tried to fill the "ghost" roster by plugging players into certain holes and such. Rob Zamuner? Trevor Linden? Like I mentioned, Doan, Draper, Smyth, and Bertuzzi didn't directly hurt the team (well, Bertuzzi may have) but on another token, I wouldn't say they helped the team (awaiting the mis-guided penalty killing arguments). In fact, I agree with the arguments that Draper, Doan and Smyth may have been among the better players. But they did hurt the team by taking away spots of potentially better players and by not complimenting the skill of the players around them. Unfortunately, playing with Draper hurts a guy like Heatley and undermines his value. Heatley's a very solid player, but not one that can carry others. He needs to ride shotgun with someone and compliment them. And am I the only person that realizes that he plays his best hockey on the left wing with a right handed centre (Spezza, Briere)? I mean, it's only natural when you think about it. So yeah, you can write that line off (Draper, Heatley, Richards). And then there is the Smyth, Lecalvier, St. Louis line. Although they did have their spots, unfortunately this line is just not talented enough to make that impact at the international level. So two lines down. With the other two struggling (especially Thornton, Bertuzzi, Doan and the oft-benched Rick Nash), we just didn't have the offence. My team probably would have looked like this: Gagne-Sakic-Tanguay Heatley-Spezza-Iginla Nash-Thornton-Staal Kariya-Lecalvier-Richards Smyth (who is the only one I wouldn't have had originally) Is there a checking line? No, but like I mentioned, at an international tournament, we don't have the explosive guys such as Hossa, Kovalchuk, Gaborik, etc. to be writing guys off. Canada's offence is almost always by committee, but by designating checking lines and taking away spots from more deserving players to fill the team, we limit our offense significantly. Great players will adapt to roles as tournament's progress. Onto the defense, which, despite our low GAA was also very dissapointing. In our last three games, we averaged over 30 shots against per game (while generating just over 20). It's apparent that we have a real issue with developing capable international defensemen. Our D struggled in moving the puck and joining the rush. None of those guys looked like they could skate at that level (albeit Bouwemeester probably can, and possibly Redden). We really miss Niedermayer, and unfortunately, there is no one similar on the rise. The NHL style tends to filter out the smaller quicker D. Regardless of all of this though, Phaneuf should have been there. Regehr isn't even the best Canadian defensemen on the Flames yet he's on the team? How does that work? The really upsetting part with the team is that not one player named to the team was not at the summer orientation camp. That tells me that no matter what type of performance any player had (ie. Staal's borderline Hart candidacy season) they weren't making the team. It was obvious that this team was picked based on the 2003-2004 season, which means we basically had the best team from two years ago, rather than the best team now. Honestly, and I said this prior to Ron MacLean or whoever else mentioned it today, the lockout may have cost us a medal in this respect. I think if this tournament was played on an NHL rink, we probably could have won it all (especially with a potentially dominant Thornton-Nash-Bertuzzi line). However, the international game is much different. The international game is more of a puck possesion game and less tailored to the dump and chase style. And ultimately, our terrible speed dragged us down. If you noticed, all the European teams penetrated our zone through the middle before they would dish off to the side which allowed them to maintain possesion. They were able to do this because of their speed, coupled with our slow team. The defensemen had to collapse both deep and towards the middle of the ice to respect this, pretty much giving the opposition the zone in the process. On the flip side, this was something that we weren't skilled enough to do. As a result, we were forced to penetrate outside, which with our slow forwards was easy to contain and force turnovers/dumps. It was very ugly to witness if you knew what to watch for (and probably the reason why we looked like we were getting dominated at times, which we were). Anyways, I think we should turn it around for 2010. Hopefully this serves as a wake up call and Gretzky's Old Boys club ceases to exist. I really hope he decides to step down and opts not to stay on (or god forbid coach the team). In regards to the coach, my heart says Darryl Sutter. But (and I probably rarely do this) I have to agree wholeheartedly with Kingofthe909 on almost all his points here. It would be difficult getting everyone to buy in on such short notice. The strength of the Sutter's is partially in the fear that one has of them, particularly because of their absolute power over personnel and such, which I don't believe Darryl would be given. Hitchcock probably wouldn't be a bad choice, but we need to to change everyone over. Crawford and Babcock would be the two other logical choices and both are currently well liked in the Hockey Canada circles. Ultimately, I think Babcock would be the best choice. Again, he is similar to a degree with Sutter in his hard nosed approach but I just think he could get the guys to buy in a bit quicker. In regards to the Executive Director spot, Burke wouldn't be a bad choice nor would Detroit's Ken Holland (although potentially too heavy a Red Wing influence, however that shouldn't matter at that time), but ultimately I would like to see Scotty Bowman oversee the team selection. I really think we need someone not currently associated (his Detroit advisor status doesn't count) with an NHL team, yet still an insider. The exact person could change in four years time, but regardless I would like to see someone with no attachments, so to speak. It just gives them more time to commit to scouting/team selection as well as eliminating some of the favouritism.

Top 12 Canadian Goal Scorers in the NHL this season Simon Gagne - 37 Eric Staal - 36 Dany Heatley - 34 Jonathon Cheechoo - 34 Sidney Crosby - 28 Ryan Smyth - 27 Brendan Shanahan - 26 Steve Sullivan - 26 Patrick Marleau -25 Jarome Iginla - 25 Marc Savard - 24 Alex Tanguay - 24 It does put into perspective our difficulties with scoring goals. Do all of those guys deserve to be there? Of course not, but a few more (*cough Eric Staal) probably wouldn't have hurt the team. But hey, we've got Kris Draper and Shane Doan and they're playing hard, so it's all good. Sure, Eric Staal only has 32 more goals than Draper this year, but Draper works hard! Are guys like Draper and Doan directly hurting the team? No, but to go back to my December post when the team was selected, we need more guys that are capable of putting the puck in the net just in case some players go cold (I mean, was I the only one that saw these struggles coming back in December?). And they are taking spots of talented guys that could be helping the team (ie. Staal, Spezza, etc).

I suppose you mean apart from that Conn Smythe trophy on his mantle, right?

Just a reminder, the final four episodes for this season (and possibly ever) are on tomorrow night.

There's nothing to be constructive about when their last win was against Atlanta and the one before that was in Boston a month ago. Also, they were 2nd in the West after beating Dallas on New Year's eve, now headed out of the playoff picture. I love my team, not their coach. Win in regulation that is. When they're playing teams in the conference every night, they can't be giving them points in overtime. Um, you do realize the Kings are actually a pretty shitty team on paper (and have been for the past few seasons) and constantly overachieve, right? And that you typically fire a coach of an underachieving team, not an overachieving one? And I know, yada yada yada, you watch a 1000 games a year and every Kings game and that only you really know how good they are, blah, blah, blah.

I think the Spezza, Heatley, Alfredson line, when healthy this year has been head and shoulders above any other line in the league. I know this isn't the clearest indication, but they have combined for 201 points in 139 games played between them. For comparison sake, Forsberg, Knuble, Gagne have combined for 169 points in 144 games. I don't really know how you can compare the two. With S-H-A, if you are left with any 2 of the 3, you still have a good line. Take out Forsberg and that line sucks. Mike Knuble is nowhere on the same level as Spezza, Heatley, Alfreddson, Forsberg or Gagne, and as a result, I'm not sure how you can call them the best line in the league.

I'm going to guess that the Mike guy that hates Crosby has some theory along the lines of Crosby not playing because he knew the Pens would lose to Ottawa and he's a whiner and such. Just a hunch.

Along with (AHL) playoff-calibre goaltending. It's tough to say for certain, but this honestly looks like the move of a team who is going to deal another defenseman (ie. Marc-Andre Bergeron) in hopes of acquiring a #1 goalie. It would be smart to keep all six (Pronger, Bergeron, Staois, Smith, Tarnstrom, Spacek) just to offset the physical wear that Pronger is taking right now which, coupled with the Olympics, would leave him dead for the stretch drive. Either way, this move helps them. They lose a bit of potential in Jani Rita, who may have just needed a different environment. Tarnstrom doesn't bring a lot, but they could throw him back in as a PP quarterback. This would give Pronger a bit less playing time. Despite lacklustre numbers this year for Tarnstrom, he can still bring it on the PP, and the numbers have as much to do with Gonchar's presence as anything else. They also have the depth to keep him at the #5 or #6 spot so he shouldn't hurt them too much defensively.

Triple Post. Something was fucked.

Double Post

Okay, I'm pretty sure you inadvertently contradicted your original statements by listing their wins, but just to prove my point. Against the Sens, who they are tied atop the overall standings with at the moment, in 4 games they are 2-2. Not 1-3 and not 0-4 but 2-2. Against the Flyers, who have to be considered one of the top three in the East, they have taken 5 out of a possible 6 points in their three games. And against the Red Wings and Predators, who are currently 1st and 2nd in the West, they are 2-0. So those are the 4 top teams apart from Carolina standings wise at the current moment, and Carolina is 6-2-1 against them. Now to me, that looks like a pretty good winning percentage and based on that, it's very unfair to say that they would be worse if their schedule was tougher. For comparison sake, the Flyers are 3-2-2 against those same teams (including Carolina). Ottawa is 2-4, having not played the Wings or Preds. Furthermore, using your quality wins, Philly only has 2 against Ottawa, 2 against Atlanta, 1 against Carolina, 1 against the Rangers, and 1 against the Flames. The rest were against the teams you mentioned as scrubs. Ottawa would have 3 against the Sabres, all before they got hot, 2 against the Canes, 1 against the Kings, 1 against the Rangers, and I'll even give you the Avs game, despite you not couting the Tampa wins and the fact that the Avs were in a stretch were they were playing their worst hockey, sandwiching losses to the Penguins and Islanders around the Sens game. However, I won't give you the Oilers one because I think the three headed monster on Conklin/Markannen/Morrison is worse than Grahame. So 12 quality wins for the 'Canes and only 8 for Philly and Ottawa. Yet you contend that the Flyers and Senators are more deserving amongst their spot in the standings than the 'Canes? I think it's probably about time that you just admit that you were wrong with your original statement that Carolina's schedule plays a factor in regards to their current standing amongst the top of the NHL. That's not to say that I don't think the 'Canes aren't playing over their heads, and I think they will be in tough to maintain a top 2 spot in the East or to make any significant noise in the playoffs, but at the moment they are one of the best teams in the NHL, a fact which has nothing to do with their schedule.

Umm, do you actually research this or do you just spew this stuff out without any real thought behind it? The Flyers are 5-0-1 against the Caps and Panthers this year and Carolina is 5-1 against said teams. Overall, the 'Canes are 8-5-1 in the Southeast. Meanwhile they are 10-2-1 against Atlantic teams, 7-2-1 against Northeast teams, and 7-2-1 against the Western Conference. So basically, their worst record, winning percentage wise is against teams in their own division. But you're right, the reason they are high up in the standings is because they play Florida and Washington alot (6 times so far, pretty much the same amount as every other team in the Eastern Conference).

This thread on their forum implies that they would release a 2007 version. http://community.sigames.com/groupee/forum...25/m/5882024361 I hope they do. Well yeah, of course they are going to release a new one. That one isn't do out until September of 2006, so if you don't mind waiting 9 months, then do that. I would highly recommend buying the current one.

Thanks. I actually found it a few days ago after doing some more searches. I downloaded the try and buy version and am about 3 months in controlling the Blackhawks. The game is very detailed. I will probably buy it once the trial runs out though on the forums they are talking about releasing another version so I might just wait until then and try playing the minors and whatnot. They are not releasing another version, just a new patch. There are some issues with home ice advantage, so that patch should be updated and out probably sometime wihtin the next week or two.

In regards to EHM:NHL 2006 the place to get it is www.sigames.com. SI Games originally created a little soccer sim called Championship Manager. I just bought the Digital Download version, so if you don't have an issue with that, it is the way to go. By far the best hockey game ever. I haven't even attempted the NHL yet (which has full salary cap implementation), I'm so involved with my franchise in the Western Hockey League. Junior hockey is so fun because there is such a quick turnaround on players that you're not waiting forever for picks to develop and such. Difficult to capture Memorial Cups though.

Yeah, I heard that the game gets to the point where there is also too much to manage. Too much micromanagement with all of your stars, entourages, staff, etc. I have heard that making the movies though is great fun.

WHAT?! WHAT!!!? Do you even watch hockey? Gagne put up 24 goals and 45 points in 80 games last NHL season and his numbers were on a similar pace in an injury riddled season before that. This year he's already got 27 goals and 44 points in 32 games riding shotgun with Forsberg. Even with the scoring increase, I would say that's quite a bit of an improvement. Mike Knuble? Please, I know you love the Bruins, but the guy's put up less than 1/2 point per game throughout his career. He's a glorified third liner that, when paired with an outstanding playmaker, can generate some decent offense. And Forsberg is benefitting because he gets to play with Knuble? Just take a look at the year Milan Hedjuk is having in Colorado without Forsberg. Despite almost every player in the NHL having improved numbers thanks to all of the powerplays, Hedjuk's numbers are actually down this year. When healthy, Forsberg is arguably the best all around player in the world yet you would have us believe that it is him that benefits from playing alongside Gagne and Knuble rather than vice versa? This might be a stupid question, but living in Florida, did you never have the opportunity to see Forsberg play before he moved to the east coast this season? And then you go on to tout the big three from Ottawa, who have all clearly benefitted playing alongside each other much more than Forsberg has benefitted playing alongside either Gagne or Knuble. I would say one name who's been missed in all of this discussion regarding the Hart Trophy winner would be Eric Staal. Let's face it, he doesn't have much for scoring support in Carolina (no, Cory Stillman doesn't count) and it's not like Gerber has been anything above average for the 'Canes this year, but despite these two facts, Carolina is one of the top 5 teams in the NHL right now. The original post on awards also missed any Jack Adams discussion. I think right now, Lindy Ruff would be your winner, edging out Andy Murray, Laviolette, Renney and possibly Barry Trotz.

Cracked Rib. At least at week. Those can be incredibly painful (I know). However, he shouldn't be out that long.