Mils

KoZed was ap79 at one point I think.

I agree, that was a good idea that, for reasons that are beyond me, was outright rejected by "hockey people" everywhere. It was a creative, if not brilliant, move by Fox. "People can't see the puck..... okay, let's make it easier to see the puck." Groupthink at its worst killed that. We forget so quickly that the hockey market will only expand, thus growing the sport, if we appeal to NON-hockey people. Traditionalists limit the expansion of the game.

Yes. He's been solid, but keeping him in that contract year might be wise.

I'm being perfectly consistent. My basic assertion is this: Although it's a team game, there are occasions where individual performances decide games. Furthermore, the shootout is not inherently bad because it isn't 5 guys taking the shot. This is true in other sports: In basketball, a game can be determined by a free throw. In football, the game can be determined by a field goal. In almost any sports, there are elements where the individual might decide the outcome where the team has failed. Go shootout. Before you go on with this notion that I'm going out of my way to disagree with you, save the time and stop. This isn't a one-man conspiracy. I think I do a pretty good job of developing my own opinion regardless of who is on what side. We had a similar discussion about the shootout back in Dayton when they started it. This isn't something I've developed just to instigate an argument... I do that at school. haha.

This argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense. You're arbitrarily applying your team/individual reasoning because you don't like the implementation of the shootout. You're saying that the shootout is bad because it "places individuals over teams." By that theory, then we should not assign goals or assists to specific players, and penalties should be served by the entire team instead of one guy. We should pay everyone the same, and not put names or numbers on the jerseys. Then, we would eliminate any trace of an individual, and it would be all teams all the time. Although it is, at its a core, a team sport, nobody is devaluing the team by deciding a game in a shootout. If the teams can't decide the game in 65 minutes, then it shouldn't be a problem to allow members of each team to try and do it on their own. Shootouts and penalty shots have nothing to do with each other. They're the same format, but going to shootouts to decide games has no practical effect on a penalty shot in the middle of a game. Bertuzzi sucks. Have a nice day.

He played against Colorado last night too.

It'll be a good game. Forsberg prediction: 16:22, 0 G, 1 A, +1, 0 PIM (whether he plays for the first time against Vancouver tonight or Anaheim on thursday.)

The Pepsi centre "The Can" will be rowdy. I was at the L.A. game, and the reception for Foote was huge. It'll be exponentially bigger for Forsberg. Forsberg's departure was one of the reasons people stopped coming to games (that and the team sucking of course.) According to Adrian Dater of the Denver Post, in reference to Foppa, "I think he’ll play tomorrow night for sure, against the Canucks. He’s getting really antsy to play, and there’s no reason to think he can’t go out there and play 10-15 minutes, especially against a soft team like Vancouver. (Send me your emails now, Canuck-heads)." -Adrian Dater's blog, March 3, 2008. The problem we encounter in losing Smyth and Svatos is we lose two of the guys we would be relying on to put a puck past Luongo. If those two were in the line-up (damn Jack Johnson and that turnbuckle), then our top 6 would be Sakic, Stastny, Smyth, Forsberg, Svatos, Hejduk. That group can just flat score goals. Now that they're out, the top 6 will be Sakic, Stastny, Forsberg, Hejduk, Brunette, Wolski. Not nearly as commanding, but totally unpredictable because Forsberg is a total unknown right now. We've also got Hlinka and Hensick who can score in theory, but haven't done a whole ton in actual games. Once again, the question for my beloved Avalanche becomes, can their defense keep as many goals out as the offense puts in. I think Salei and Foote are an improvement, but we still don't have anything nearly equivalent to Pronger and Niedermayer or Lidstrom and Chelios. Vancouver has a better chance with those two out, because the scoring punch decreases. This game could very well boil down to momentum and goaltenders. I think it will be a good one. I hope it will at least. These teams have too much to lose to not give it 100%. If one team disappoints in this situation, then they probably don't really deserve the playoffs. centre is spelled c-e-n-t-e-r. Another awesome bit from Dater's blog: "The Canucks are a fraud, and Dave Nonis was outfoxed by everyone at the deadline, only getting a stiff named Matt Pettinger. They can’t score goals, and Luongo is good, but not invincible. Nonis made a great trade getting Luongo for the gutless, wimpy, fraudulent, awful player named Todd Bertuzzi (Hey Bert, have fun signing your entire life savings over to Steve Moore in a couple years. Oh yes, trust me, it’s coming, “dude”)." -Dater's blog. I love that writer. (No, I don't want to re-open the Steve Moore debate. The quote made me laugh, so I shared it. That's all.) This post is horribly scattered. Sorry for the incoherence.

Oh, that would be sweeter than seeing Joe Louis Arena sink into Lake St. Clair.

Him being lights out would be awesome, he's had such terrible luck with his health. If he could develop some of the Regher chemistry with Foote or Finger or Salei or Hannan, that would be a huge step forward. Maybe with more healthy time, it will develop.

Jets: Although I still disagree entirely, you make some good points on Forsberg's positioning, the Tanguay trade, Brunette's skating, and Fotte's absence post-lockout. However, if they go the way you suggest, then we won't make the playoffs again before 2012, barring some excellent acquisitions. Letting Liles, Brunette and Forsberg go and relying on Wolski and Hensick as regular second-line guys would be tough to get through. You are WAY overvaluing our young guys. Stewart might be ready now, but Stoa suffered a serious knee injury with the Gophers this year, Shattenkirk is ANOTHER slightly undersized puck-moving defenseman, Boychuk has shown that he's habitually unprepared to play at the NHL level, Hensick will struggle becuase of his size, and Wolski is getting close to bust stuatus. I'm willing to agree to disagree on those points, because we obviously don't agree at all. You make some very solid points, and $13 mil to play with in the off-season would allow for excellent acquisitions. I hope that FG would have big plans for another Foote/Salei/Hannan type defenseman who's 6'2" or larger (not Sauer). Salei looks to be a great pick-up. Two or three more shrewd moves like that would be very exciting. It boils down to the idea that we didn't need to miss the playoffs last year to get where we are now, the team's financial issues this off-season will be terrible, and the guy who produces more in the last 16 games of the season will be Forsberg. Jets, what is our biggest need this off-season? If we can retain Foote and Finger, then we would have Clark, Salei, Hannan, Leopold, Foote, Finger, and Cumiskey. The only hole I see there is none of them are over 6'2". Sauer is large, but doesn't play like it consistenlty enough. So, IMO, a big defenseman would be nice. No more undersized puck-movers. We've got Leopold and Cumiskey, and Shattenkirk is on the way. At forward, a replacement for Brunette would be nice. Next season we for sure have Smyth, Stastny, Sakic (assuming he re-signs a 1 yr. deal), Hejduk, Wolski (RFA), and Svatos (RFA). I think a pure playmaker would be good, somebody with speed and passing skills to get on a line with Hejduk and Sakic and get the puck to those guys. First line of ???? - Sakic - Hejduk would work well. On the second line, Smyth - Stastny - Svatos? With Smyth and Statny, a strong shooter would be good, because Smyth and Stats are always around the net. I find Wolski to be an optional piece. Hlinka is gone. So, the wish list from my perspective is 1.) Starting goaltender 2.) Playmaker 3.) Big Defenseman 4.) Sniper. Agree?

Roy had probably a better defense in front of him 2001 (Ray Bourque comes to mind), but didn't have the same statistics (2.21 and .913). Foote and Blake were great defensemen, but DeVries and Kasparaitis? Hardly legendary defensemen. (They did have the best defense in the league, to your credit. But Roy was a big part of that.) I'm no mathematician, but 19 games for Aebischer isn't 1/3 of 82. And the only reason Roy didn't win those awards is because he didn't want to be Gretzky's puppet and compete for a starting job on team Canada. Gretzky went political and made sure Theo won both awards. We could go around in circles all day on this, Fanpuck and I have had this argument more than once. They both had amazing seasons, and neither acheived the ultimate goal of winning a stanley cup. Go ahead and get the last word, I've made my case for Roy. There isn't any way to win this argument one way or the other.

I didn't say we were getting the same Forsberg back, in fact I've acknowleged in other posts that he won't be near the super star he was when he left. However, he was on a point per game click with Philly (40 in 40), and barely under with Nashville (15 pts, 17 GP). The question isn't performance, it's whether or not he plays at all. As far as who is likely to produce more in the last 16 games of this regular season, it's Forsberg. Say he plays in 16 games for the Avalanche, he's likely to get between 14-16 points, mostly assists. On a line with Sakic and Hejduk/Brunette, he'll do the playmaking, and the other will do the scoring. Sakic has put up a similar points per game, but has been slow to return from injury. Forsberg at 50% is a better playmaker than Smyth, Wolski, or any of our other left wingers. (I know Forsberg is a natural centre, but he probably won't push Stastny or Sakic to the wing on a regular line.) Now that I think about it, Brunette stands to benefit the most because Wolski/Hlinka won't likely play on a line with Forsberg very often. Forsberg has continued to consistently produce, even in the face of missing significant time since the lockout. Mismanagement in recent history (and yes, 2005 is recent history. That's 2.5 years back out of 12.5 years of Avalanche hockey): 2005: Letting both Foote and Forsberg go. Should've devoted all 6 mil to one guy, probably Forsberg. 2006: Trading Tanguay for Leopold. (Injuries aren't Leopold's fault, but we didn't need another smallish, puck-moving defenseman. We already had Liles and Cumiskey, and that's enough for one team as is.) 2007: Acquiring Foote and Forsberg (good players, but no way to keep them under the cap without losing somebody else, and giving up a 1st rd. pick was questionable for Foote. I repeat: Good players, fit our needs. I just think it may have been a short-sighted attempt to get attendance back up. This off-season will be rough.) Jury is still out on Liles IMO. He hasn't developed as expected. He should be head and shoulders above Clark and Finger. He's not. Trading him at the deadline would've been the best option. I can't speculate as to why that didn't happen, all I know is it didn't happen. The team hasn't shown that it can shrewdly deal with the salary cap limitations. I hope I'm wrong. It would be really impressive to see some rhyme to the reason, and I'll be the first to step up and point out their success, but I just don't think we've made the best decisions ever. Still struggling to adjust to post-lockout economics. Look for yourself, tell me how we can keep Forsberg and Foote. Remember, Sakic hasn't taken hometown discounts in the past, and we have no evidence to make us believe that Footer or Foppa would either. Avalanche Salary Overview

Forsberg. He will have a hand in almost any point that Sakic puts up from here on out, now that Smyth is probably done for the year, and he'll have more points on the PP. It would be even easier to call if Svatos wasn't also hurt, because he's a goal scoring machine when somebody gets him the puck. In my estimation, Forsberg will single-handedly be responsible for getting one of our UFAs to be (Hlinka, Brunette, or Wolski (RFA)) more money in free agency because of increased production late in the year. On this note: Let me be the first to predict that the Avalanche will have serious salary cap issues, and will struggle to bring back Forsberg (UFA) AND Foote (UFA) AND Sakic (UFA) AND Liles (UFA) AND a starting goaltender (Theo UFA). (See: 2005 off-season.) Based on recent history, the Avalanche will mis-manage it horribly and end up back in the middle of the pack in the western conference.

That may not have been the best goaltending performance that season, let alone all time.

Consultant, and former president for the ECHL Phoenix Roadrunners.

Linköpings HC in the Czech Extraliga.

Around here, we sometimes take "bandwagon" and "scapegoat" to new levels. See: Jose Theodore. (2002: Greatest goaltender of all time. 2006: Biggest bust since Alexandre Daigle)

The NHL and those TV networks that carry it should hope that the standings finish up looking something like this (although most involved would like even more to have Toronto involved). The rivalries are there (COL-DET, CAL-MIN, MTL-PHI), there are good regional match-ups (ANA-SJ, NYR-NJ), 4 original 6 teams (Boston, NYR, DET, Montreal), 4 Canadian teams (CAL, VAN, Montreal, OTT). Not to mention, Detroit, Dallas, and New Jersey are struggling while COL, NYR, and the Bruins are 5-8 seeds that are in the middle of winning streaks. A lot of storylines and a lot of teams and matchups with rich histories would provide for an excellent playoff season. Getting Toronto in there instead of Philadelphia would be a ton better even still. A first round playoff matchup between Toronto and Montreal would be AMAZING. Having MTL-TOR, and DET-COL would draw a great deal of interest from people both in Canada and in the States. Toronto's addition would add a lot of fans, a lot of history, and that series would be so much fun to watch. A throwback in NHL history like nothing we've seen (since the Colorado Detroit rivalry is in its infancy compared to the MTL-TOR rivalry). VERY exciting.

Quenneville deserves some consideration, helping keep the Avalanche in the playoffs without Stastny, Smyth, or Sakic for a good chunk of the year. (And now it looks like Svatos and Smyth might be done for a while.)

Jim Carey?

Most stupidest... iiiiiironyyyyyy. I'm just kidding stealth! But seriously, the worst argument ever undertaken on these boards was just a couple weeks ago, when somebody (I forget who) was trying to convince Jets and Me, among others, that the playoff system is somehow biased against Canadian teams succeeding... that was ridiculous.

Will that be available to those of us in the States? My official prediction: The avalanche are quiet trade-wise tomorrow. Nothing more than maybe 1 or 2 tiny deals like Scott Parker and Michael Wall last year. The Habs land Hossa.

If he'd gone to Ottawa, your "hunch" wouldn't have gone that way, I'm sure.

We need a defenseman, but what we specifically need, as usual, is a guy who is big, plays physical, and makes the front of our net unwelcome territory. Stuart or Jackman would be fine, I don't think Foote would add much, and I'm admittedly totally unfamiliar with Brian Campbell. Three guys who could go the other way in a trade for a defenseman would be Skrastins, Hlinka, or Liles. Liles especially might have some trade value to a team that really needs a puck-moving defenseman, and I'm not sure where Hlinka or Skratch fit in anymore. Hlinka doesn't fit on the top two lines or on the third line, and Clark and Finger are better than Skratch now. I don't think Brunette is as optional as he may seem. He's a Steve Konowalchuk lunch-pail type second line player. Lines: Forsberg - Sakic - Hejduk Smyth - Stastny - Brunette Wolski - Arnason - Svatos McLeod - Laperriere - Guite Extras: Hlinka, McCormick Hannan - Liles Finger - Leopold Sauer - Cumiskey Skrastins Extra: Clark (hurt) Theodore Bedaj