2011-2012 NHL Thread

[CarltonTheBear]

Are we doing playoff / series threads or just one general one or here?

Definitely separate threads. You or anyone else is welcome to start making them whenever. I'll try to do any left-overs before the games start.

 

[BrownRolo]

Can anyone recommend a good online betting site? Maybe where you can place bets on individual playoffs games but also bet on winners of entire series?

 

[ontariojames]

The point about the age was made because if we are just talking about right now, and not building for a few years down the road, it doesn't matter if Stamkos is younger because Malkin is still only 25 and in the middle of his prime.

But his age is still an asset in the here and now. 

As far as Malkin playing on a better offensive team, the difference is smaller than it looks.

Actually, what I said was that Malkin plays on a better team, period. Tampa's a little better offensively and much worse defensively. As a general rule, I think the quality of a team lifts the stats of the players on it.

Also, the biggest factor in offensive support for a player is the linemates they usually play with and Stamkos' usual linemates and Malkin's usual linemates are pretty even. So when you factor that in there's not much difference at all.

That's certainly a factor, maybe the biggest, but you can't discount the impact good defensemen have on a forward line. Leaving alone great offense from defensemen for a second, just having guys who are especially good at clearing the puck are going to move the play into the offensive zone more often, giving the offense a better chance to score. The Tampa defense is a trainwreck.

Along those lines, playing on a bad team means you're more likely to be playing against a team that's protecting a lead. If you're leading the other team is liable to leave themselves open to counterattack as they try to catch up.

Malkin being 1.2 mil more expensive and having one bad year of injury trouble in a career where he's been pretty healthy shouldn't make anyone want to choose Stamkos over Malkin to win right now.

Those shouldn't be anyone's primary reasons but they do factor in Stamkos' favour. Like I've said, the goal scoring and physical play are probably why I'd give the edge to Stamkos.

Also, I think you're being a little unfair with regards to Stamkos in last year's playoffs. He was good. Not great, but good.

If we are talking about who you would rather have right now and not considering who would be better to build with for the future then how is Stamkos being 22 as opposed to 25 an advantage?

Minus Letang, the Pens defense isn't anything special offensively, and in 29 games without Letang Malkin was on pace for 113 points.

Teams also play more defensively when they have the lead, I'm not sure how much of a difference this makes, if it made a big difference I would think Stamkos would've had a better year then he did last year playing on a very good Tampa team. However, we do know Malkin has the potential to be a 113-120 point player.

As far as linemates are concerned, I was generous towards Stamkos in saying they were similar. James Neal was a 50 point player prior to playing with Malkin this year, I don't think it's a coincidence that he all of a sudden turns into a ppg player while playing with Malkin all year while Malkin's having a monster year. Stamkos plays with St Louis, who has been a fantastic player on his own without Stamkos.

Lastly, as far as Stamkos being a better goal scorer goes, Malkin was on pace for 54 had he not missed 7 games, only six less than Stamkos. And Malkin doesn't play with a very good playmaker like St.Louis. And it doesn't appear to be a one year fluke, Malkin had a lot more shots on goal this year than in any of his previous seasons, so he appears to have changed his game to be more of a shooter and goal scorer the same way Crosby did.

So when you consider all of that combined with Malkin's playoff record and the little we have to go on with Stamkos' playoff record (the one playoff he had was mediocre, 6 goals and 13 points in 18 games is disappointing by  his regular season standards) yes I think it's completely illogical to choose Stamkos over Malkin right now.

 

[Kin]

Really? We're still on this? Alright.

If we are talking about who you would rather have right now and not considering who would be better to build with for the future then how is Stamkos being 22 as opposed to 25 an advantage?

Because it's part of what makes him attractive as a player whose contract you have. The world doesn't end tomorrow or in a month so it's not a legitimate way to look at two hockey players in a comparative sense.

Minus Letang, the Pens defense isn't anything special offensively, and in 29 games without Letang Malkin was on pace for 113 points.

It's still better than what Stamkos had to work with and because we're bridging a pretty small gap in terms of point totals it matters quite a bit.

Teams also play more defensively when they have the lead,

Teams do but for a player like Malkin, who's all offense and basically nothing else it's not like when his team goes up a goal he becomes Bob Gainey. A good offensive player has better counter attacking opportunities when his opponent is down a goal because they're pressing.

I'm not sure how much of a difference this makes, if it made a big difference I would think Stamkos would've had a better year then he did last year playing on a very good Tampa team. However, we do know Malkin has the potential to be a 113-120 point player.

Stamkos was 20 last year. He had a pretty astounding season for a 20 year old. He certainly had a better year than Malkin did at the same age.

As far as linemates are concerned, I was generous towards Stamkos in saying they were similar. James Neal was a 50 point player prior to playing with Malkin this year, I don't think it's a coincidence that he all of a sudden turns into a ppg player while playing with Malkin all year while Malkin's having a monster year. Stamkos plays with St Louis, who has been a fantastic player on his own without Stamkos.

Well, someone who's got access to better linemate data than I have can correct me on this if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure St. Louis didn't spend the whole season on Stamkos' wing. I'm pretty sure he played quite a bit with Lecavalier too.

Either way, I don't doubt that James Neal's environment contributed heavily to his point totals. I just think the same is true for Malkin.

Lastly, as far as Stamkos being a better goal scorer goes, Malkin was on pace for 54 had he not missed 7 games, only six less than Stamkos. And Malkin doesn't play with a very good playmaker like St.Louis. And it doesn't appear to be a one year fluke, Malkin had a lot more shots on goal this year than in any of his previous seasons, so he appears to have changed his game to be more of a shooter and goal scorer the same way Crosby did.

I'm glad you mentioned this. Remember earlier about how I said that the quality of Pittsburgh's team, offensively and defensively, played a role in the offensive opportunities that Malkin had? This is a good example.

If Stamkos had shot the puck with the same frequency that Malkin did and, assuming his pretty astonishing shooting percentage had stayed the same, he'd have scored somewhere in the vicinity of 74 goals.

So, yeah, I'm pretty comfortable sticking with Stamkos as the significantly better goal scorer.

(the one playoff he had was mediocre, 6 goals and 13 points in 18 games is disappointing by  his regular season standards)

See, this right here is sort of the perfect microcosm of the difference between us. You're absolutely right if the one thing and one thing only to consider is point totals. If that is the entirety of the discussion I have no leg to stand on. Malkin, using that criteria, was not just better than Stamkos this year, he was 12 better. He was on pace to be 22 better.

Personally, I'm just not inclined to see things that way. I'll personally go with the better goal scorer who can play a physical game. That said, I respect and acknowledge that you see things differently. Different strokes and all that.

Edit: Not that it matters much but the more and more I look into this the more I'm inclined to go with Giroux over either of them.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Boston's Andrew Ference...

http://grist.org/list/pro-hockey-player-loves-organic-food-and-worms/

 

[groundskeeper willie]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

 

[Jalili]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

 

[Corn Flake]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

Probably not.

 

[maplesyrup]

Schenn + 5? Done. Kulemin +5? Done. Maybe anyone Colorado wanted not named Kessel or Gardiner +5. 

 

[groundskeeper willie]

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

Probably not.

I saw the conversation in the other thread after I posted this. Schenn would be a very good start for all the reasons mentioned there, but I'm not sure about your Bozak and Schenn offer. Does Bozak really entice them much with Stastny and O'Reilly already as their top two? I would see them pushing more for a guy like Frattin. Schenn and Frattin might be a tougher deal to make, but I think you'd still have to do it for the chance at a future top line centre.

Maybe they'd be willing to send Giguere back as well.

 

[maplesyrup]

Duchene straight up for Columbus' #2 might work for both teams... It' the type of deal that might keep Nash there.  :-\

 

[Jalili]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

Probably not.

For a 21 year old center with star upside? Yeah ok. Schenn + Bozak it is

 

[Corn Flake]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

Probably not.

For a 21 year old center with star upside? Yeah ok. Schenn + Bozak it is

Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene, only in a more difficult position to find a top-end player in.  But yeah we should just unload him for a centre who had a dismal 3rd year and might not be any better than the guy we had as our 1st line centre this year.

I will just assume for now you are adding Gardiner to all trades. You know, save you some time.

 

[Kin]

Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene, only in a more difficult position to find a top-end player in.  But yeah we should just unload him for a centre who had a dismal 3rd year and might not be any better than the guy we had as our 1st line centre this year.

I gotta say I disagree pretty strongly with both the idea that Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene and that it's significantly harder to find a top-end defenseman than it it is a top-end centre.

I do Gardiner for Duchene in a heart beat.

 

[Jalili]

17. Sports Illustrated's Michael Farber wrote a piece about the Blues that quoted John Davidson as saying they hired Hitchcock to find out if the players they drafted were "capable of carrying a team." Thought a lot about that watching Colorado down the stretch. The team is staying with Joe Sacco and you wonder what that means for Matt Duchene.

18. Duchene was benched March 22 (played only 7:21 vs. Phoenix) then saw almost 15 minutes two nights later. But then his time-on-ice falls off a cliff. Average for the final five games: 11:40. You can sense an uneasy relationship between he and Sacco. The Avalanche dealt Chris Stewart out of nowhere. If they think Sacco is the right coach, what do they think about Duchene?

I would think the Avs would be nuts to move him, but you can't deny he struggled for whatever reason last year. He's not the biggest guy, but he is fairly solid and would fantastic beside Kessel I would think. No idea what the cost would be, but I would think he wouldn't be cheap. By far a better use of resources than Nash though.

Probably would start with Gardiner and the 5th.

Probably not.

For a 21 year old center with star upside? Yeah ok. Schenn + Bozak it is

Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene, only in a more difficult position to find a top-end player in.  But yeah we should just unload him for a centre who had a dismal 3rd year and might not be any better than the guy we had as our 1st line centre this year.

I will just assume for now you are adding Gardiner to all trades. You know, save you some time.

Yeah, right. Duchene the 3rd overall pick who had 67 points as a 19/20 year old might not be any better than Bozak. Good one.

If you think that Toronto (or any team) wouldn`t have to pay up the ass to get Duchene, then I don`t know what else to tell ya.

 

[maplesyrup]

I do Gardiner for Duchene in a heart beat.

+1 

 

[groundskeeper willie]

Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene, only in a more difficult position to find a top-end player in.  But yeah we should just unload him for a centre who had a dismal 3rd year and might not be any better than the guy we had as our 1st line centre this year.

I gotta say I disagree pretty strongly with both the idea that Gardiner has as much upside as Duchene and that it's significantly harder to find a top-end defenseman than it it is a top-end centre.

I do Gardiner for Duchene in a heart beat.

That may be, but the original post said Gardiner and the 5th pick. Gardiner straight up may be what it takes, but adding the 5th is way too much.

 

[maplesyrup]

Gardiner + 5 is a whole other story. No. I don't do that.

 

[Corn Flake]

Yeah, right. Duchene the 3rd overall pick who had 67 points as a 19/20 year old might not be any better than Bozak. Good one.

If you think that Toronto (or any team) wouldn`t have to pay up the ass to get Duchene, then I don`t know what else to tell ya.

You don't need to tell me anything else but you should try listening.

Not better than Bozak isn't what I was implying.. point was if Duchene doesn't bounce back from a HORRIBLE season, he's no better than what we got from Bozak. Actually, he's worse.  sorry if you haven't bothered to watch any Avs games this year or check his stats but it's a reality - he was terrible this year, benched multiple times.

Who gives a rip where he was picked in 2009.  It doesn't matter anymore.  He's a high end talent who took a huge step back this year.  I'm not trading another high end talent who hasn't done anything other than take massive leaps forward for that guy AND my 5th overall pick for what could amount to no better than what we have today.

Sunk in yet?

 

[Kin]

That may be, but the original post said Gardiner and the 5th pick. Gardiner straight up may be what it takes, but adding the 5th is way too much.

I don't think Colorado does Gardiner for Duchene straight up. I think they could get better. The cost, realistically, is higher than that. Would I do Gardiner and the 5th? To give an informed answer I'd have to have a deeper knowledge of the prospects in the draft.

If I wanted to respond to the original post I would have. I was responding just to the specific ideas presented about Gardiner vs. Duchene. A young centre with Duchene's talent is rarely available. Heck, an old centre with Duchene's talent is rarely available. He'll cost a ton if available.