@Ati if you can read finnish you'll see that in here: http://www.yourmove.fi/service.cntum?pageId=148190 it says that floorball is actually second (my mistake) in the number of players. ''Kokonaisharrastajamäärän arvioidaan olevan yli 350 000, mikä tekee siitä Suomen toiseksi harrastetuimman lajin jalkapallon jälkeen.'' But it is second to football. It does not mention hockey but it is quite clear.

The rink size arguments also work only for defencemen because for an attacker it just offers an advantage. You have more room to pull your tricks. Ovetchkin and kovaltsuk definately didn't have a disadvantage when they had more room to go pass the defencemen. In larger rink it's about skill and in smaller you need more strength. That's the difference. If you looked at Skinner he was on fire few times. He had absolutely no trouble and I can't see how the larger rink was a disadvantage to anyone else than defenders.

I still don't get you point about the +/- because the points in +/- vary from player to player quite a bit. If you were watching the statistics of say 10-20 games it might not show anything but in longer run it shows whether you are good on both sides of the ice or not. If you're on the ice when opponent scores statistically 1/5 times it is your fault. If you as a defender can keep you enemy from scoring and others can't your +/- does look quite a bit better unless you're totally hopeless with your offensive skills.

I wouldn't blame Rask for Boston's failure though. He didn't play that bad in all of the last 4 games. And as for superstar goalies Kiprusoff for exaple is definately a superstar. He plays the most games of all goalies in the league and is the sole reason Calgary has a chance to win games. Thomas was a huge flop last season so I wouldn't name him a superstar unless he can prove that he can keep up the good work.
Mikko Koivu is a huge superstar in Minnesota and their captain for a reason. Malkin on the other hand hasn't proved himself to be a superstar in my opinion. He's in the shadow of Crosby too much.

Just wait a few years and we'll have a new suprerstar called Granlund.

Quote from EliteAti :

E: Reijans is Shadow? Yeah thats the argument where i flamed Shadow to oblivion, we had some argument about a year ago about him trolling.

You are wrong dude, I know both Shadowww and E.Reiljans and they are 2 different people.

Quote from Juzaa :

@Ati if you can read finnish you'll see that in here: http://www.yourmove.fi/service.cntum?pageId=148190 it says that floorball is actually second (my mistake) in the number of players. ''Kokonaisharrastajamäärän arvioidaan olevan yli 350 000, mikä tekee siitä Suomen toiseksi harrastetuimman lajin jalkapallon jälkeen.'' But it is second to football. It does not mention hockey but it is quite clear.

The rink size arguments also work only for defencemen because for an attacker it just offers an advantage. You have more room to pull your tricks. Ovetchkin and kovaltsuk definately didn't have a disadvantage when they had more room to go pass the defencemen. In larger rink it's about skill and in smaller you need more strength. That's the difference. If you looked at Skinner he was on fire few times. He had absolutely no trouble and I can't see how the larger rink was a disadvantage to anyone else than defenders.

I still don't get you point about the +/- because the points in +/- vary from player to player quite a bit. If you were watching the statistics of say 10-20 games it might not show anything but in longer run it shows whether you are good on both sides of the ice or not. If you're on the ice when opponent scores statistically 1/5 times it is your fault. If you as a defender can keep you enemy from scoring and others can't your +/- does look quite a bit better unless you're totally hopeless with your offensive skills.

I wouldn't blame Rask for Boston's failure though. He didn't play that bad in all of the last 4 games. And as for superstar goalies Kiprusoff for exaple is definately a superstar. He plays the most games of all goalies in the league and is the sole reason Calgary has a chance to win games. Thomas was a huge flop last season so I wouldn't name him a superstar unless he can prove that he can keep up the good work.
Mikko Koivu is a huge superstar in Minnesota and their captain for a reason. Malkin on the other hand hasn't proved himself to be a superstar in my opinion. He's in the shadow of Crosby too much.

Just wait a few years and we'll have a new suprerstar called Granlund.

Continuing on topic, please do ignore the nolifers.

Those numbers do not cover professionals, though. Where to get the numbers from that? I have no idea. I get the point though you're right.

The Rink size has small effects on many other things like pace, amount of passes, amount of dekes, positioning. It all changes which makes things complicated overall even though your point is valid.

The +/- Stat isnt so important because your opponent varies alot, youre not going to play against the same team for the whole year. You might get a huge blowout win 8-0 and be on ice on even strenght on all of them and then lose some games with -1 on your stats. This happens against very weak teams in the NHL.

Rask let some very easy ones in last 3 games, he wasnt ready for the pressure, even though he had a very great season. Almost Vezina worthy. Kiprusoff was a superstar, his numbers have been on decline since lockout, slowly but steadily. He is a streaky goalie, bit like Luongo and Brodeur, sometimes he is unbeatable and sometimes everything goes in. In the recent years he has has more of latter ones. Thomas on the other hand is getting his 2nd Vezina in 3 seasons. And in the recent one he set the new National Hockey League sv% record (done by Hasek) which some thought was unbeatable.

Koivu is a great player, great one. Lets put it this way. Crosby vs Koivu, both are very good. But one of them is a superstar and the other is not, even though Crosby can be said to be a generational talent. Koivu is a great leader, but he needs some individual awards and more team-success to get into that special group.

Malkins Conn Smythe trophy and PPG pace speaks for itself, During Penguins 2009 Cup run Malkin was the man carrying the team, not Crosby. And Malkin has been suffering from some very big injuries this season, bit like Parise.

Gawd wasnt expecting a shitstorm without any swedes

This has style. Nurminen, the coach, totally drunk... I would be drunk 24/7 as well as him following 2 weeks if I was him... Can't blame it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvCGLoBHqg0&feature=share

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

Wasn't this one funny decades ago?

Yet again, you have nothing original to say, seems like you can't think of anything yourself. How about you **** off?

I agree on most that you say, but still differ about the +/- because in a long run you get good games and bad games so much they balance each others out and in the end it's just about how well you played. You can't say that player is good just because of his +/- value but if his value stays at the top long you can see that he's playing for the team and does not make many mistakes that lead to opponent scoring goals.
As a goalie (in floorball though, not hockey haven't played hockey very much lately) I value the players who almost never do mistakes as much as the goal scorers because you know that without them you'd have much more work to do because of so many bad passes or bad calls on which opponent to guard or where to move to block passes or shots.

I also have some trouble understanding the definition of your superstar because awards are mostly given by canadians and you need the whole team to be good in order to get them. Say that Crosby had ended up in Edmonton or Florida. He couldn't have lifted them up to battle for Stanley Cup no matter how well he played. Thus he would not be a superstar by your standards.

I look it a bit differently. I feel that superstar status means that if a team loses it's superstar they lose much more games than they did when that one player was on the ice making the difference. If your team can survive without you you're not a superstar. If they can't survive long without you you're a superstar. That makes Mikko Koivu a clear superstar in my standards because he's the sole leader of his team and had he not been injured in the season I dare say that Minnesota would've made it to playoffs. Kiprusoff has had a rough season this year alright but he's still the player who either wins or loses the game. With average goalie Calgary would not only lose more games than now but could not even dream of real success. With Kiprusoff there's always a chance to win. Rask...well let's say he's not quite ready for the superstar mantle but he'll get there in a few years. He has played well this season when he's been given the chance and once he gains more experience he'll grow to be much better than Thomas ever was. He's still young for a goalie just give him some time.

Quote from Juzaa :

I agree on most that you say, but still differ about the +/- because in a long run you get good games and bad games so much they balance each others out and in the end it's just about how well you played. You can't say that player is good just because of his +/- value but if his value stays at the top long you can see that he's playing for the team and does not make many mistakes that lead to opponent scoring goals.
As a goalie (in floorball though, not hockey haven't played hockey very much lately) I value the players who almost never do mistakes as much as the goal scorers because you know that without them you'd have much more work to do because of so many bad passes or bad calls on which opponent to guard or where to move to block passes or shots.

I also have some trouble understanding the definition of your superstar because awards are mostly given by canadians and you need the whole team to be good in order to get them. Say that Crosby had ended up in Edmonton or Florida. He couldn't have lifted them up to battle for Stanley Cup no matter how well he played. Thus he would not be a superstar by your standards.

I look it a bit differently. I feel that superstar status means that if a team loses it's superstar they lose much more games than they did when that one player was on the ice making the difference. If your team can survive without you you're not a superstar. If they can't survive long without you you're a superstar. That makes Mikko Koivu a clear superstar in my standards because he's the sole leader of his team and had he not been injured in the season I dare say that Minnesota would've made it to playoffs. Kiprusoff has had a rough season this year alright but he's still the player who either wins or loses the game. With average goalie Calgary would not only lose more games than now but could not even dream of real success. With Kiprusoff there's always a chance to win. Rask...well let's say he's not quite ready for the superstar mantle but he'll get there in a few years. He has played well this season when he's been given the chance and once he gains more experience he'll grow to be much better than Thomas ever was. He's still young for a goalie just give him some time.

Pittsburgh was in absolutely same kind of situation the lowest teams are right now (Edmonton, Florida, Colorado) and he pretty much singlehandedly (debatable) got them from a 2nd rate promotion to a team fighting for a playoff spot. Anyway, he was the core for their current success.

+/- might be true, but it will never balance out completely. You will still have that +5/-5% (roughly) of random events. However, Lydman played 78 games during this season and got only 25 points. That could mean hes just the guy who happens to be on the ice when the goal is scored on opponent and on the bench when Ducks get scored on. He might set up some plays, but since he doesnt even have high amount of assists, he might have had some luck with timing aswell.

This year was very weak for Kipper. 90.6sv% is way below league average which has been highest than ever. 91.5%-92.5%. It is a big margin. However, he has had his whole career going up and down. One season he might be Vezina-worthy, and the next one he is playing worse than a backup. It also can be of his huge workload, over 70 games / season is a big amount to any goalie. However, his age starts to deflect to his performances aswell. Same thing happened with Nabokov and Brodeur, all after the Olympics, not a coincidence.

Mikko Koivu can be looked as a superstar yes, but he isnt one in leagues eyes until he gets some individual recognition. He doesnt have PPG pace. And he has only 1 gold on team level (the one which came yesterday). He just hit his prime and maybe he can get his game on another level. But at this point, Koivu isnt a superstar in anyones but Finns and Minnesota fans. I hope he will because Saku was a great captain and Koivu has all the possibilities to follow his footsteps. However, he has shown signs of being clutch player, and thats what matters in big games.

Quote from DeKo :

Yet again, you have nothing original to say, seems like you can't think of anything yourself. How about you **** off?

Wakka wakka.

Just saying, if you wanna trash a couple-year-old joke for being passe, you probably shouldn't proceed to trot out a dust-covered clunker like that one.

Or maybe just stop being so uptight. It's an internet forum, dude.

btw, well done Finland

Quote from DeadWolfBones :

Wakka wakka.

Just saying, if you wanna trash a couple-year-old joke for being passe, you probably shouldn't proceed to trot out a dust-covered clunker like that one.

Or maybe just stop being so uptight. It's an internet forum, dude.

He just doesn't understand the elegance of Hockey.

You want to see a brutal sport, go watch a Professional Box Lacrosse game. You'll wonder how some of the shit that happens is legal. Reffing it is doubly fun, because you just let everything go.

I haven't been interested in hockey since 1995. We won then and everybody in Finland made such a big deal about it that I got fed up.

Finns are what you call a bad winner.

:spider:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGGZAx5NnHA

We come home in style

Quote from manneF1 :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGGZAx5NnHA

We come home in style

How classy

Funny thing here is that no SWE people have commented in this thread
Btw, beating SWE is not a challenge at all, so congratulation FIN, you can have your glory. It's like winning against a tree, well done, truelly well done