Deraldin Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 Hah! I seem to recall telling you guys that the Detroit Edmonton series wasn't going to be as easy for Detroit as everyone thought. My picks: Ottawa:Buffalo 4:2 NJ:Carolina 4:1 (I'd love to say 4:0, cause I hate those canes so much, but I just don't see it happening.) Oilers:Sharks 4:2 (It'll go to six games one way or another. Ducks:Avalanche 4:3
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 http://www.nhl.com/news/2006/05/271296.html How in bejeebers does someone get nominated Goalie of the Year (Vezina) and NOT Rookie of the Year (Calder)? Is the NHL on crack or what? DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Deraldin Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 http://www.nhl.com/news/2006/05/271296.html How in bejeebers does someone get nominated Goalie of the Year (Vezina) and NOT Rookie of the Year (Calder)? Is the NHL on crack or what? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Because there are that many awesome rookies this year? <_<
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 "Because there are that many awesome rookies this year?" But, not goalies? Right... DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 http://www.nhl.com/news/2006/05/271296.html How in bejeebers does someone get nominated Goalie of the Year (Vezina) and NOT Rookie of the Year (Calder)? Is the NHL on crack or what? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Because they figured that the three other players listed were more impressive in their rookie campaigns? You'd have a case if you were talking about Hart nominees.
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 More proof that the NHl is just plain old fashion stupid. I find it hard to believe that one cna be cosnidered one of the top 3 goalies in the NHl this year; but not be one of the top 3 rookies. It's absolutely ludicrous! DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 Of course! Especially considering the two aren't really related. There's nothing saying that the best goalie in the league is necessarily one of the better players in the league. The only trophy nomination you could complain about that to would be the Hart. For instance, Kiprusoff is a Hart candidate. If he was not on the Vezina list, then that would be stupid. Crosby, Ovechkin, and Phaneuf have been in the top 3 for most of the year by many analysts. Lundqvist would occassionally move into #3, but Phaneuf would usually retake it shortly afterwards. I considered it a tossup between Phaneuf and Lundqvist, so I'm not all that surprised.
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 Please. Ovechkin and Crosby were sooo good their teams were amongst the worst in the entire league, and in Crosby's case his team was supposedly 'stacked'. And, Calgary was gonna do good no matter what this year. Bottom line is a rookie is one of the top 3 goalies; he shou;d be automatically one of the top 3 rookies... unless of course goalies this year all had GAA of 5.oo, and S% of .750... which they din't so it's moot. Espicially, since their high point totals ( fot the forwrads) are artififically higher due to rule chnages to make scoring easily making it harder for a goalie.. espically a cookie goalie.. to do good... This is an asanine way to do things... Anyways, this list should prove that post season isn't taken into account for regular season awards. If it was, Brodeur would be in, and Lundqvist would be out. And, 2 of the moronic rookies wouldn't even be nominated since they suck so bad they couldn't even make the play offs. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!! DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 The Post-season isn't supposed to be taken into account, so I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. I think this is just proof that your a bitter person
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 "The Post-season isn't supposed to be taken into account, so I'm not sure what you are trying to prove." Um.. Did you miss the whole debate earlier in this thread (or the other NHL thread). There was a whole disucssion of whether or not the post season mattered in the awards ceremony (other than the ConnSmythe obvious). I stated that only the regualr season counted. Others stated that they take into account the play-offs. And, others stated that the first round would matter. Obviously, I was proven right here. Factually. The awards are based on Regular season performance (barring Conn Smythe). Period. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Deraldin Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 If it was, Brodeur would be in, and Lundqvist would be out. And, 2 of the moronic rookies wouldn't even be nominated since they suck so bad they couldn't even make the play offs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Brodeur would be in for what? Not sure what that part was about.
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 (edited) Hmm.. I'm a fool. LOL He snuck in there somehow for the Vezina... Kinda ruins my theory. CONSPIRACY!!! LOL I don't think Broduer was a top 3 goalie... Well.. it still stands that if play-offs counted, Lundqvist surley wouldn't be a top 3 goalie.. Edited May 4, 2006 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 Playoffs are just a part of the entire season. In any case, count yourself lucky that he's considered then.
Volourn Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 "Playoffs are just a part of the entire season." No. They're seperate. Why do you think there's a seperate MVP for both? Why aren't play off points counted in the scoring race? Why are first and second team awards awarded for each seperated? Why are stats for eahc kept seperately. Sorry, you lose. The regualr season is for regular season awards. The play offs are for play off awards. Game over, and case closed. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 4, 2006 Posted May 4, 2006 The 2005-2006 hockey season isn't over yet. That ends when someone wins the Stanley Cup. Besides, as I was saying, Henrik Lundqvist played more than just the playoffs, so IF the playoffs did influence the voters, they wouldn't just look at Lundqvists polls. Besides, these are the nominees. When people talk about the "post season influence" they talk about the actual winner. Given that no one has placed their votes yet, it is impossible to completely ignore accomplishments made in the playoffs. For instance, the Vezina trophy is voted on by the GMs. After the playoff round between New Jersey and New York, I wouldn't be surprised if the performance of the goalies in that series influenced the votes of some GMs. It shouldn't happen, but to believe that it won't happen is to assume that the GMs in fact are not human.
Hurlshort Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 It's true that all the awards are based solely on the regular season. That is because they are individual awards, and it's not fair to knock an individual just because the rest of his team sucks. I'm not making this up, the voting is supposed to only look at regular season. They do have another award for the playoff MVP which only looks at the playoffs. Ovechkin deserves the rookie of the year award because he scored 50 goals. That is simply not easy to do, even in the new NHL. It's a gigantic feat. Scoring 100 points is pretty special too, so Crosby deserves recognition, and a defenseman (Phaneuf) getting 20 goals is also very uncommon. All three of these guys did more than just have good seasons, they set a new league standard. Lundqvist is a top goalie, but he's not doing anything other goalies haven't done before.
Volourn Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 (edited) "Lundqvist is a top goalie, but he's not doing anything other goalies haven't done before." Neither is what they did. Then again, a rookie goalie having 30 wins, being in the top 5 for both GAA/S%, stealing the starting goalie position from a veteran, and helping your team return to the payoffs after missing 7 seasons in a row (with lots of help from Jagr hehe) isn't something that's common either. Bottom line is Lundqvist got robbed because goalies are almost always treated like 2nd class citizens to skaters which is lame consideirng how important goalies are to a team's success. "it's not fair to knock an individual just because the rest of his team sucks." Yes, it is when that player is getting all the ice team. Edited May 5, 2006 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
alanschu Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 "it's not fair to knock an individual just because the rest of his team sucks." Yes, it is when that player is getting all the ice team. What??? Bottom line is Lundqvist got robbed because goalies are almost always treated like 2nd class citizens to skaters which is lame consideirng how important goalies are to a team's success. Definitely. Which is why the media and analysts feel that Mikka Kiprusoff should be a Hart Trophy candidate, while the actual players felt Ovechkin should be. The Hart Trophy and the Lester B. Pearson trophy are both MVP awards (one by the media, one by the players) have the same candidates, except the Hart has Kipper, and the Lester B. Pearson has Ovechkin. Sorry, but if the NHL Players think that Ovechkin is among the top 3 players in the league and not Kiprusoff, I don't think goalies are getting as short end of the stick as you think. Sorry, you lose. Game Over.
Deraldin Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 "Lundqvist is a top goalie, but he's not doing anything other goalies haven't done before." Neither is what they did. Then again, a rookie goalie having 30 wins, being in the top 5 for both GAA/S%, stealing the starting goalie position from a veteran, and helping your team return to the payoffs after missing 7 seasons in a row (with lots of help from Jagr hehe) isn't something that's common either. Bottom line is Lundqvist got robbed because goalies are almost always treated like 2nd class citizens to skaters which is lame consideirng how important goalies are to a team's success. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Crosby and Ovechkin were both going to get the nod for scoring over 100 points in this season. Not an easy thing to do in your rookie year. Ovechkin was only the fourth rookie in history to score 50 goals. Crosby was the youngest player to ever score 100 points and led all rookies in assists and was second in both goals and points. Phaneuf likely got the nod beacuse he's only the third rookie defenceman in history to score 20 goals in a season. Lundqvist was good, but he was only in the top five for goalies, and frankly that just wasn't good enough this year. And your comment about how he stole the starting role from Weekes, but he had a good deal of help due to Weekes sucking so badly. "
Volourn Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 (edited) "but he had a good deal of help due to Weekes sucking so badly." LOL :D Edited May 5, 2006 by Volourn DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
Deraldin Posted May 5, 2006 Posted May 5, 2006 In other goalie news, did you know that Rick DiPietro led all goalies with 28 penealty minutes this year? :D
Hurlshort Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Oh my, do they even use goalies in the Ottawa/Buffalo series? The Sabres won 7-6 in OT! The Sens are going to start missing Hasek at this point.
Kor Qel Droma Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 It wasn't just the goalies tonight. Although it seems like they didn't really help. And what's Ottawa going to do, start Mike Morrison? Jaguars4ever is still alive. No word of a lie.
alanschu Posted May 6, 2006 Posted May 6, 2006 Pfft, given the way Miller played, it sounds like they might as well just stick with Emery. MiMo might get a start....as it can't be much worse.
Recommended Posts