Kukla's Korner

Abel to Yzerman

GDT - Game #23:  Red Wings host Lightning (7:30)

The Red Wings (14-7-1) are riding a five-game winning streak and have won 9 of 11; as they host the Lightning (11-10-2) tonight at JLA.  DET lead the Western Conference based on winning percentage (.659 - 2 overall), yet find themselves in 5th overall; two points out of the conference lead.  Only 3 points separate the 1-8 playoff positions in the Western Conference, and 5 points separates 1-11; insane.

With the exception of DET’s 22nd ranked PK and 13th ranked FO%, DET are in the top ten in every major statistical category; the apathy of late October seems a thing forgotten.

At eleventh place in the EC (but only 2 points from 8th), TBL find themselves mired in inconsistency.  5-5 in their last ten games, and in the bottom half of every major statistical category - the Lightning have been struggling.  Mathieu Garon hopes to have found his game as Roloson has been awful this season.

Admiral Ackbar could not have said it any more clearly - It’s a trap game tonight, for sure.

Central Division Standings:

GP W L OTL PTS GOAL DIFF  
1 CHI 25 14 8 3 31
2 STL 24 14 8 2 30
3 DET 22 14 7 1 29
4 NSH 24 11 9 4 26
5 CBJ 24 6 15 3 15

Team Records:

DET:  22 GP,  14-7-1, 29 pts, (5 in Conf, 3 in Central), 65 GF, 49 GA, Last 10 8-2-0, WON 5

TBL:  23 GP,  11-10-2,  24 pts, (11 in Conf, 3 in Southeast), 63 GF, 72 GA, Last 10 5-5-0,  LOST 1

Home/Away Record:

DET at home:  9-2-1 (1)
TBL on road:  4-7-2 (22)

Stats (rank):

DET:  .659 point% (2), 2.91 G/G (9), 2.23 GA/G (6), 1.45 5-5 F/A (3), 19.4 PP% (7), 80.5 PK% (22), 34.9 S/G (1), 27.1 SA/G (2),  50.6 FO% (13).

TBL:  .522 point% (22), 2.70 G/G (16), 3.04 GA/G (22),  0.94 5-5 F/A (23), 15.7 PP% (23), 83.3 PK% (16), 29.2 S/G (19), 30.2 SA/G (17), 49.2 FO% (20).

Goal Differential/Game:

DET = +0.68
TBL =  -0.34

Player Stats:
DET Skaters:
GP,  G, A, PTS,  +/-,  ATOI
C Johan Franzen 22 10 12 22 10 17:17
C Pavel Datsyuk 22 6 13 19 1 19:28
C Valtteri Filppula 22 7 12 19 8 16:54
D Nicklas Lidstrom 22 6 10 16 8 23:51
L Henrik Zetterberg 22 5 8 13 1 19:20
C Jiri Hudler 21 2 10 12 4 13:25
D Ian White 18 4 7 11 11 22:35
D Niklas Kronwall 22 6 4 10 0 23:09
L Tomas Holmstrom 20 3 6 9 0 12:35
R Danny Cleary 22 4 3 7 -3 16:47
L Drew Miller 20 2 4 6 7 10:31
R Todd Bertuzzi 16 1 4 5 4 14:11
L Justin Abdelkader 22 2 3 5 1 13:29
D Brad Stuart 22 3 1 4 4 20:27
D Jakub Kindl 20 0 4 4 2 13:37
C Darren Helm 22 2 2 4 1 14:40
D Jonathan Ericsson 22 0 2 2 2 16:40
C Cory Emmerton 18 1 1 2 4 8:41
D Brendan Smith 3 0 2 2 -1 14:54
R Patrick Eaves 10 0 1 1 0 11:02
L Fabian Brunnstrom 4 0 1 1 -2 9:21
D Mike Commodore 3 0 0 0 0 10:14
C Gustav Nyquist 1 0 0 0 0 11:07

DET Goalies:
Player GPI W L OT GAA PCT
Ty Conklin 4, 1-2-0,  3.30,  0.880
Jimmy Howard 19,  13-5-1, 1.87,  0.930 #1 in wins, #2 in shutouts, #3 in GAA

TBL Skaters:
GP,  G, A, PTS,  +/-,  ATOI
C Steven Stamkos 23 15 10 25 7 20:13
R Martin St Louis 23 6 13 19 4 21:29
D Marc-Andre Bergeron 23 3 16 19 4 19:28
C Vincent Lecavalier 23 10 7 17 2 18:50
R Teddy Purcell 22 5 8 13 3 13:35
L Ryan Malone 19 5 7 12 0 15:24
R Brett Connolly 23 4 4 8 1 13:11
D Eric Brewer 23 0 6 6 -7 23:00
C Dominic Moore 23 1 5 6 -4 14:52
D Brett Clark 23 2 3 5 -4 17:34
R Ryan Shannon 17 1 4 5 -7 13:01
R Steve Downie 20 2 3 5 -12 13:44
D Matt Gilroy 21 0 5 5 6 18:02
D Pavel Kubina 23 1 3 4 2 17:33
C Nate Thompson 23 2 2 4 -4 14:32
R Adam Hall 23 1 1 2 -3 11:34
D Bruno Gervais 6 1 1 2 -2 14:48
C Tom Pyatt 18 1 1 2 -2 12:03
D Victor Hedman 20 2 0 2 -5 22:55
C Blair Jones 10 0 1 1 -3 7:15
C Dana Tyrell 3 0 1 1 0 8:48
C Mattias Ritola 5 0 0 0 -2 10:50

TBL Goalies:
Mathieu Garon 14,  5-4-1,  2.43,  0.916
Dwayne Roloson 14,  6-6-1,  3.46,  0.887

TSN- HOT and NOT: 

DET: Hot:
Ian White (D) 4 pts in last 3 GP
Valtteri Filppula (C/W) 4 pts in last 2 GP
Pavel Datsyuk (C/LW) 8 pts in last 5 GP
Henrik Zetterberg (C/LW) 6 pts in last 4 GP
Johan Franzen (LW/RW) 15 pts in last 11 GP
Jiri Hudler (LW/RW) 4 pts in last 3 GP
Todd Bertuzzi (RW/LW) 2 pts in last 2 GP
Jimmy Howard (G) 2-0-0, 1.44, .952 in last 2 GPI

DET: Not Hot:
Ty Conklin (G) 0-2-0, 4.78, .825 in last 3 GPI

TBL: Hot:
Steven Stamkos (C/W) 4 pts in last 2 GP
Martin St. Louis (RW/LW) 3 pts in last 3 GP
Mathieu Garon (G) 2-1-0, 1.33, .944 in last 3 GPI

TBL: Not Hot:
Victor Hedman (D) 0 pts in last 7 GP
Pavel Kubina (D) 0 pts in last 4 GP
Teddy Purcell (RW/LW) 1 pts in last 9 GP
Dwayne Roloson (G) 0-2-0, 5.88, .778 in last 2 GPI

Injury Report:

DET:
Jan Mursak (RW/LW) Fractured ankle (Injured reserve)
Patrick Eaves (R) Broken face

TBL:
Mattias Ohlund (D) Right knee inflammation (Injured reserve)
Steve Downie (RW) Upper body injury (Day to day)

Jeff Sagarin NHL Ratings, USAToday

NHL 2010-2011 through games of 2011 NOVEMBER 28 FRIDAY

HOME ADVANTAGE=  0.25   RATING   W   L SCHEDL(RANK) VS top 10 | VS top 16  

1 Detroit Red Wings     =  4.67   14   8   3.94(  20)  4   5 |  6   5
23 Tampa Bay Lightning   =  3.79   11 12   3.96(  18)  2   3 |  5   4
———————————————————————————————————————————
Mule took a maintenance day off yesterday - but will play tonight, the practice lines:

Emmerton-Datsyuk-Bertuzzi
Filppula-Zetterberg-Hudler
Cleary-Helm-Brunnstrom
Miller-Abdelkader-Holmstrom

Lidstrom-White
Kronwall-Ericsson
Kindl-Stuart
Commodore

Howard (starting)

Filed in: | Abel to Yzerman | Permalink
 

Comments

AndrewFromAnnArbor's avatar

Broken face

Gawd, I can’t believe it’s the second time in as many months that we’ve had to drag out Black Francis & Co.

DET: Not Hot:
Ty Conklin (G) 0-2-0, 4.78, .825 in last 3 GPI

Should the guy really be on this list if he hasn’t started a game in over a month?

Excellent work as always, Okie.  Much as it pains me to say it, I’d like to see OT or a skills comp tonight, so that the Yzerbolts can head home with a consolation point.

Posted by AndrewFromAnnArbor from Fortress Europe on 11/30/11 at 01:02 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

I’m assming Emmerton is in Mule’s spot.. but that can’t be right because that gives us the smallest line in the league next to a Gionta Cammallerri line.  Liking Brunnstrom getting some minutes and Helm and Charlie looked good last game together, Brunnstrom on that line could be dangerous if those two can open up some time and space.  Liking these lines a lot

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 11/30/11 at 01:08 PM ET

stonehands-78's avatar

Thanks, Okie.

Jimmy Howard 19,  13-5-1, 1.87,  0.930 #1 in wins, #2 in shutouts, #3 in GAA

... just wish we had an “all star” goalie ... //sigh//

L.G.R.W.

Posted by stonehands-78 from the beginning ... a WingsFan, on 11/30/11 at 01:09 PM ET

TKShreve's avatar

Thanks for the GDT!

Only 3 points separate the 1-8 playoff positions in the Western Conference, and 5 points separates 1-11; insane.

On this subject: Is this not pretty normal for the past few years? It’s not really that wild to have 5 points separating 4-12 with 20 games left if I remember last years playoff racedown.

Critics cite the shootout and overtime point structure for this logjam in the standings. I have also heard them say that it is a Bettman wet dream come true to have this scenario unfold every season.

Thoughts?

Posted by TKShreve from East Uptown on 11/30/11 at 01:31 PM ET

Avatar

It’s a trap game tonight, for sure.

You know, this is like the fifth game in a row that someone’s brought this up.  It’s kind of starting to lose its meaning now…

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 01:36 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

TKShreve, it IS the loser point that’s awarded in the shootout that really skews the records in the standings. It has been like this since the lockout. I know that one year there was a team that didn’t make the playoffs who normally would have if the team that finished ahead of them didn’t have so many loser points. That’s a shame and is my real beef with the shootout, other than it being a b.s. way to determine a game’s outcome.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 11/30/11 at 01:43 PM ET

stonehands-78's avatar

” ... That’s a shame and is my real beef with the shootout, other than it being a b.s. way to determine a game’s outcome.”

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from COLUMBIA, TENNESSEE on 11/30/11 at 10:43 AM ET

that’s 2 beefs ... and I agree; they both stink.

Posted by stonehands-78 from the beginning ... a WingsFan, on 11/30/11 at 01:53 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

You’re right, stonehands. I should have said my MAIN beef with the shootout. I just hate everything about it.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 11/30/11 at 01:57 PM ET

Bent's avatar

You know, this is like the fifth game in a row that someone’s brought this up.  It’s kind of starting to lose its meaning now…

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 10:36 AM ET

I was thinking that too, except here I think Okie was meaning more the 1-3-1.

But yeah, not every game can be a trap game for the wings.

Posted by Bent from The U.P. on 11/30/11 at 01:58 PM ET

11B4PF7 in MN's avatar

Since I am out-of-market I have only been able to watch ten Wings games this year.  I may take some heat for saying this, but what a difference a healthy Todd Bertuzzi makes to this line up.  That being said, after watching the Bruins/Wings game; I think the Wings still need a top six forward to be considered elite.  They also need to get swap out Error52 for a legit fifth defensemen, but hey, that has already been discussed to death, hahah!

Back to the main point, according to many articles, Bobby Ryan is available.  I read a number of proposals from many fans on this website and I think that

Posted by Nathan from the scoresheet! on 11/29/11 at 01:50 PM ET

is accurate with his assessment:

I think this is a classic example of a fan overvaluing their team’s prospects.

The bottom line is that Kenny should go all in to get this guy—whinny bitch that Ryan is or not.  The guy is an elite talent that is big and young.  There is clearly one untouchable in the Wings prospect pool and that is McCollum-err, ah, I mean Smith.  Personally I would like to see Detroit hold onto Sheahan simply because he is a big pivot that may have just started to develop, but if that is what it takes to get something, include him in the deal.

Oh yeah, seriously though, what is wrong with Cleary?

Posted by 11B4PF7 in MN on 11/30/11 at 02:05 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by TKShreve on 11/30/11 at 10:31 AM ET

It’s been pretty persuasively suggested that the “loser point” does not make the standings any closer. There’d probably be around 5 points separating 11 teams whether the shootout existed or not, whether the all games were three points or not, etc. The actual cause of league parity is the salary cap.

That said, the shootout does unfairly influence which teams get in and which teams don’t. Teams that win a lot of shootouts and teams that lose a lot in OT get an unfair advantage.

And that sucks.

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 02:07 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

I realize the gameday thread really isn’t the place for this, but I just did a little bit of research as it relates to THShreve’s earlier post. I took the current league standings and adjusted them to account for wins and losses only under a 2/0 win/loss system. Of course, everyone’s point totals change but there’s a couple of interesting things about the Western Conference standings under this scenario.

First, LA (currently in 8th under the current set up) is actually out of the playoffs with a 12-12 record while San Jose (currently in 9th) is actually the 8th place team at 13-8. I know that LA has played 3 more games than San Jose, but those 3 extra games are all SO losses (3 extra points).

Second, of the teams in the top 8 in the current set up, 6 of them would all have 28 points if it were just 2 points for a win and no points for a loss. Again, San Jose would be 8th, not LA.

My point of all of this is to illustrate the fact that teams can and have made the playoffs or improved their playoff seeding by way of actually losing games. This is not right and really needs to stop. If the league is intent to keep the shootout to decide games (and they are), they need to stop awarding the loser point.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 11/30/11 at 02:08 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

Damn, I meant TKShreve. My bad, sir.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 11/30/11 at 02:10 PM ET

mrfluffy's avatar

Oh yeah, seriously though, what is wrong with Cleary?

Nothing now that he’s on the third line. In the game against Nashville Cleary looked much better.

Posted by mrfluffy from A wide spot on I-90 in Montana on 11/30/11 at 02:11 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

7 points in 22 games.. on pace for a solid 28… in a top 6 role?  he belongs on the 3rd line by now.  He was at his best on our 3rd line in our Cup Year, he does great against 3rd line matchups but can be a good defensive forward out there against top guys, just don’t expect him to score on them very often.. he caught then off gaurd one year, wont happen again.

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 11/30/11 at 03:12 PM ET

MarkK's avatar

... just wish we had an “all star” goalie ... //sigh//

... or at least one of those “elite” ones, like the ones in Vancouver or NJ who are in danger of losing their jobs to their respective backups.

Posted by MarkK from Maryland on 11/30/11 at 03:26 PM ET

Avatar

I was thinking that too, except here I think Okie was meaning more the 1-3-1.

Ah, fair enough.  I hadn’t even thought of that.

The actual cause of league parity is the salary cap.

No doubt that is a contributing factor, but the fact that they were both implemented at the same times means you can’t really claim one is more of an influence over the other, because all stat comparisons include both.  If there was no salary cap could you really say that there would be fewer shootouts and thus fewer loser points?

he belongs on the 3rd line by now.

Absolutely.  The main problem with Cleary is that Detroit doesn’t have six bonafide top six forwards and thus a guy like Cleary, who is a third liner through and through, is being asked to play and produce in the top six, where he doesn’t belong.  It can’t be a coincidence that he’s visibly played better after being put on the third line than he was on the second.

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 04:10 PM ET

Jeff  OKWingnut's avatar

Khan(!) has tonight’s lineup - and telling Bruno it is time to earn a spot:

Franzen-Datsyuk-Bertuzzi
Filppula-Zetterberg-Hudler
Cleary-Helm-Brunnstrom
Miller-Abdelkader-Holmstrom

Lidstrom-White
Kronwall-Ericsson
Kindl-Stuart

Howard (making his 16th consecutive start)

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 11/30/11 at 04:15 PM ET

Avatar

No doubt that is a contributing factor, but the fact that they were both implemented at the same times means you can’t really claim one is more of an influence over the other, because all stat comparisons include both.  If there was no salary cap could you really say that there would be fewer shootouts and thus fewer loser points?

You’re right that we don’t have the luxury of pointing to an actual season played out using one without the other.

What we can do is take the game results of today and recalculate the standings based on whatever scoring system we prefer. I do this, sort of as a hobby, just about every year.

For example, if we want to see what the standings would “look like” if we awarded 3 points for a win, 2 points for an OT/SO win and 1 point for an OT/SO loss, it’s a relatively simple conversion to make.

Similarly, we can get at least a rough idea of what the standings might look like if we went back to wins, losses and ties. Take every game that went to a shootout (regardless of outcome) and count it as a “tie” for both teams. Take every game that ended up with a loser in the 5-minute overtime, and assign that loser a “loss” with no points awarded.

Every time I make these adjustments (and I have been doing so for years), I find that the standings never get significantly tighter or wider. In fact, they more often tighten slightly than loosen. So you can actually make an argument that the “extra point” games decrease statistical parity on average, rather than increase it.

In my opinion, the teams that typically gain the most from three-point games are not overtime losers (since under the old system, many of those games would have ended in ties anyway), but shootout winners. Those games should end with the teams earning one point apiece, but the shootout allows teams to “win” unfair coin flips and get extra points.

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 04:24 PM ET

MsRedWinger's avatar

Thanks, Okie, great as always.

I’m interested that Emmerton sits again while Bruno plays.  I thought everybody was pretty happy with Emmerton’s play, or is it maybe: 1) his knee did take a beating from that hit a couple of games ago or 2) Babcock is looking for another forward (Bruno?) who can start scoring some goals on a regular basis.

I agree that Charlie Buckets is most effective on a third line.

I do wish we could somehow get that “top six forward” that Babcock said he wanted when last season ended.  I think we’re OK defense wise, even with BigE not playing as well as he should consistently.

I watch the Lightning fairly often as they are on local TV here.  I like them - sort of adopted them as my Eastern Conference team - but so far they are not the team they were last season.  They are totally beatable if the Wings show up with another good, determined, 60 minute effort. 

LET’S GO RED WINGS !!!!!

Posted by MsRedWinger from the State where Tigers roam in the Spring on 11/30/11 at 04:36 PM ET

MsRedWinger's avatar

P.S.  I also hate the shoot out.  It wouldn’t bother me one bit to go back to 2 points for a win and 0 for a tie.  A tie is not a win or a loss, so why reward either team points-wise?

Posted by MsRedWinger from the State where Tigers roam in the Spring on 11/30/11 at 04:37 PM ET

Avatar

Here’s a good current example: the 12-9-1 New Jersey Devils.

If it was all about wanting to get rid of the “loser point,” then we’d say that the New Jersey Devils should be 12-10, an above-.500 team. They’d move up to eighth place in the conference, ahead of Ottawa and within about a game and a half of the conference lead.

But consider also that New Jersey is 5-1 in shootouts. Pretend this is 1997 and all those shootout games actually ended at the end of overtime, as ties. Now the Devils’ record looks like this: 7-9-6. Under .500, and tied for the fewest wins in the East with the Islanders.

I believe the second scenario is a more accurate picture of the Devils’ true ability than the first one. Which is why I think complaining about the “loser point” misses the real problem. The Devils only have one “loser point,” but they’re still benefiting unfairly from the system more than most teams with 3 or 4 “loser points.”

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 04:41 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 01:24 PM ET

Yes, but simply changin W-L-OTL-SOL to W-L-T doesn’t factor in the way teams play their game differently.  There used to be teams that played for the tie when going to overtime, simply trying not to lose that single point whereas now there are teams that play for the OT win specifically or the SO win.  If you’ve got a goalie that’s hot in the shootout or scrub players who miraculously know how to convert in the shootout, then you’re going to play your OT differently, trying to make it to the shooutout so you can get the 2 points.  That would count as a tie, but if there was no shootout then that team may very well play the OT period differently.

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 04:43 PM ET

MsRedWinger's avatar

Which is why the only way to get teams to play to win in regulation is to award 2 points for a win and 0 points for not winning (tie or loss).  No overtime (except in playoff games) no shootout (ever). 

I realize this will never happen.

Posted by MsRedWinger from the State where Tigers roam in the Spring on 11/30/11 at 04:49 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 01:43 PM ET

Granted. I realize teams change their strategies based on how points are awarded, which is why I qualified myself by saying we can get “at least a rough idea.”

That said, use common sense. Which do you think has a bigger effect on the “tightness” of the standings:

1) The difference in the number of OT losses and shootout wins that differing teams accumulate over the season, which are impossible to predict on a year-to-year basis with anything resembling statistical significance, don’t usually vary enough between most teams to make much of a difference, and generally cancel out over time;

OR

2) The fact that every team in the NHL now must spend between $48 million and $64 million on player salaries, whereas before there were some teams spending $80 million and others spending $20 million.

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 04:52 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

“I believe the second scenario is a more accurate picture of the Devils’ true ability than the first one. Which is why I think complaining about the “loser point” misses the real problem. The Devils only have one “loser point,” but they’re still benefiting unfairly from the system more than most teams with 3 or 4 “loser points.”

Even with the fact that I’m against the shootout and still believe the “loser point” is a problem, I agree with this statement. The only problem I see is that the NHL is still content with allowing the shootout to be the determining factor in breaking the tie at the end of overtime. It is an inaccurate way of determining the better team both ways, win or lose.  For example, the Wings game against Boston on Friday. I was only able to follow the game in the liveblog but by all accounts, we stole those 2 points. The way the game ended was not indicative of how the game played out. Now I know that this happens on a nightly basis but I would suggest that games like these usually conclude in regulation so the team that stole the 2 points did so while leaving the loser who actually played better with no points at all. My argument is that if the NHL absolutely has to have the shootout to decide games, which means having a winner and a loser, there should be no reward for losing. That’s the bottom line of my argument and my biggest problem with the league, rewarding losing.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 11/30/11 at 04:57 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 01:52 PM ET

The point I’ve been trying to make is that’s it isn’t as simple as an either/or situation, so I don’t understand why would try to present is as a simple either/or question.

Yes, there is a smaller gap between the big spenders and the small spenders, but spending money has never guaranteed success.  The Leafs and Rangers have been perrenial big spenders but that hasn’t guaranteed success, and on the other end there are always teams that have found ways to win without breaking the bank.  That doesn’t change with a salary cap world because spending money doesn’t necessarily mean spending money wisely.

Look at the two worst teams in the league.  Columbus is right up near the cap and the Islanders are at the floor.

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 05:06 PM ET

SYF's avatar

Well done, Jeff.

DET:  22 GP,  14-7-1, 29 pts, (5 in Conf, 3 in Central)

Now that Hitch has turned things around for the B’Lose, suddenly, the Central is one highly competitive division.

Posted by SYF from Ball's Hill on 11/30/11 at 05:06 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from COLUMBIA, TENNESSEE on 11/30/11 at 01:57 PM ET

I can definitely respect that perspective.

Personally, I’d rather see a 3-2-1 system before simply erasing the OT category. I don’t like the idea of ending a shootout (essentially an elaborate, slightly-weighted coin flip) with one team getting 2 and one team getting 0. To me, the bigger philosophical problem is that some games are worth 2 points and some are worth 3.

Posted by MsRedWinger from Florida, but wishin’ I was back in the Mitten. on 11/30/11 at 01:49 PM ET

Not sure how I feel about your suggestion overall, though I can see it has one awesome advantage—a game between, say, Chicago and Vancouver could actually end with 0 points for everybody. That I like.

Posted by Garth on 11/30/11 at 02:06 PM ET

Fair enough, it doesn’t have to be strictly either/or, though I still maintain that, statistically speaking, the effect of the “extra-point” on the standings is likely more of a “randomizer” than one that persistently makes the standings narrower or wider. Some seasons it may bunch the teams a little closer together, while in other seasons it may shoot the top teams a little farther away from the pack.

What bothers me (and this is not a statement about you personally—you don’t seem to follow this line of thinking) is that people just believe that extra points make the standings tighter, like it’s some kind of iron-clad, unassailable, obvious fact. It’s been assumed and repeated so many times that people treat it like gospel truth, without making any attempt to actually investigate the claim.

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 05:28 PM ET

Avatar

Anyway, sorry for muddying up the GDT.

GO WINGS!

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 05:29 PM ET

stonehands-78's avatar

from Monday’s Winging It In Motown:

“Discussion of the Day: Last season, the Wings went to Tampa Bay to face the Lightning. This year, Yzerman’s team brings their GM home to Detroit. What are your feelings on seeing his team in our building? This is the first time he’s coming into Detroit as an enemy. Are you conflicted? How does that make you feel?”

Posted by stonehands-78 from the beginning ... a WingsFan, on 11/30/11 at 05:30 PM ET

MsRedWinger's avatar

How much do you want to bet that everyone involved in tonight’s game will talk about how it’s going to be “fun” playing Stevie Y’s team?

I don’t see him as the enemy - more like a friendly competitor.  I expect to enjoy the game.  This assumes the Wings win, of course.

cool smile

Posted by MsRedWinger from the State where Tigers roam in the Spring on 11/30/11 at 05:40 PM ET

SYF's avatar

Anyway, sorry for muddying up the GDT.

GO WINGS!

Posted by Sven22 from Grand Rapids on 11/30/11 at 02:29 PM ET

Shut up and keep talking, fool.  wink

Posted by SYF from Ball's Hill on 11/30/11 at 06:55 PM ET

monkey's avatar

I can not imagine a realistic scenario in which Steve Yzerman could ever be considered the enemy.

The extra point in the shootout does muddy up the standings and it does give an unfair and absurd advantage to teams that are better in the shootout than others.

Posted by monkey from Prague on 11/30/11 at 08:22 PM ET

mrfluffy's avatar

I don’t see him as the enemy - more like a friendly competitor.

He’s just getting more experience for when he comes home and takes the reins.

Posted by mrfluffy from A wide spot on I-90 in Montana on 11/30/11 at 08:28 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

Stevie Y is always welcome and his little bastard children The Lightning..  He is legend

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 11/30/11 at 08:37 PM ET

SYF's avatar

I’m always going to cheer for Stevie Y.  Except for when he’s playing/coaching/GMing against the Wings.  Then I’d want the Wings to beat him.  And I don’t believe for once he’d be against that.

Posted by SYF from Ball's Hill on 11/30/11 at 08:51 PM ET

hockeychic's avatar

Thanks you Okie as always for the GDT.  Yzerman coming back to the Joe, even though it is with an opposing team, I still get misty eyed.

Posted by hockeychic from Denver, CO on 11/30/11 at 09:43 PM ET

Jeff  OKWingnut's avatar

Posted by SYF from a north-bound Wings dressing room on 11/30/11 at 05:51 PM ET

Very well put, SYF.

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 11/30/11 at 09:51 PM ET

Jeff  OKWingnut's avatar

OMG - Versus tonight.  No Ken and Mick (the Hall of Famer).

I like Jones - but for the love of god, why Mike Milbury?

Posted by Jeff OKWingnut from Quest for 12 on 11/30/11 at 09:54 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Abel to Yzerman

Welcome to Abel to Yzerman, a Red Wing blog since 1977.  No other site on the internet has better-researched, fact-laden and better prepared discussions than A2Y.  Re-phrase: we do little research, find facts and stats highly overrated and claim little to no preparation.  There are 19 readers of A2Y. No more, no less. All of them, except maybe one, are juvenile in nature.  Reminding them of that in the comment section will only encourage them to prove that. Your suggestions and critiques are welcome: wphoulihan@gmail.com