|
|
| Sport List >Home | NFL | MLB | NCAA Football | Golf | MMA/Boxing | NLL | DRAFT |
| NBA | NHL | NCAA Basketball | Soccer | 1 on 1 | Racing | Other |
|
Contact the Mailbag if you have
any Sports Questions
|
The Puckhead Mailbag Welcome to the third edition of the Puckhead mailbag! For those of you who are new readers to this series, please make sure to read the two previous editions of the mailbag: Before I launch into your
questions, I have to give my congratulations to a special team. Team Now, onto the mailbag, where for
the very first time, I don't start with a question from The Captain. Today, my
leader comes from another regular contributor... In your last mailbag, I
saw a record like 33-11-3. I thought they eliminated ties. What is the extra
column for? And how are points awarded? I'm sorry for being unclear on
this in my last mailbag. The last column counts for overtime losses. Some people
also have another column in the standings for shootout losses, but here I have
them grouped with the regular overtime losses. The points system for the NHL is
not too complex. If a team wins a game, whether in regulation or overtime,
it counts for two points. A team that loses in regulation gets no points, but a
team that loses in overtime or in a shootout gets one "consolation"
point. You are correct, though, that ties do not exist anymore in the NHL. Onto my next question... G'day! I always like
reading the mailbag in case I learn something new. Before the season, I had four
bets for the Cup winner: I'd say your chances are pretty
good. I'm about 95% positive that either The last time I wrote about the
Stanley Cup and who I thought would win, I said that I still believe in my
Red Wings and that the Sharks will likely flame out in the playoffs. My stance
on Big Joe Thornton may not be the
most sterling playoff performer, but his supporting cast has definitely shown
that they will be able to step up. Devin Setoguchi could become the next great
playoffs star, and the Sharks have a very solid defense and a stud goalie in
Evgeni Nabokov, both key ingredients to a playoff contender. If the Red Wings
falter in their quest, then the Sharks should be more than good enough to take
the Cup. I wouldn't call them 1 and 1A, but they're definitely the top two. The next question comes from yet
another return contributor, with very likely my favourite question of the year. Could you give us a bit
of insight into one of the most under-appreciated lines in NHL history, the
Grind Line? The Grind Line is one of my
favourite lines in NHL history. It originally consisted of Detroit Red Wings
checkers Kris Draper, Kirk Maltby, and Joey Kocur, but the third member switched
to Darren McCarty after Kocur's retirement in 1997, giving it the familiar form
that people hear about. This line was an incredibly
vital part of the Red Wings through their two consecutive Stanley Cups wins in
1997 and 1998. They were a defensive line that shut down opponents, kicked
serious behind, and never ever quit. They were almost always matched up against
their opponents' top line, and wore them down thanks to relentless effort. They
never hesitated to mix it up with opponents. Draper was an incredible
face-off man, and was more than sterling defensively, winning a Selke Trophy in
2004. Maltby was the solid checker who often had a knack for frustrating
opponents into cheap penalties. McCarty was a classic enforcer, often seen with
blood on him, with a knack for scoring big goals. They all helped protect Here's a question from a regular
reader, yet a first-time contributor to the series. Can you explain no-touch
icing and give us your views on the subject? In the NHL, icing is when a
player shoots the puck from his own side behind the centre red line into
the other end of the ice behind the opponent's goal line, and it is touched by
the opponent. The diagram of the average ice surface is shown below:
However, in every single amateur
league around the world, icing is called without the opponent touching the puck,
making it... no-touch icing. Touch icing has gotten its
fair share of criticism, mainly due to injuries suffered by defensemen when
going back to get the puck for icing while being chased by a fore-checked. One
of the most recent examples of this is Minnesota Wild defenseman Kurtis Foster.
Last season, when going back for icing, he was pushed into the board by San Jose
Sharks forward Torrey Mitchell, resulting in a broken femur that he still hasn't
recovered from. However, I don't think that the
NHL should go to no-touch icing. One of the main qualms against touch icing is
that players are put into dangerous situations, yet in the NHL people should be
able to avoid those dangerous positions. If there is going to be an icing call,
it should also be because the team deliberately got rid of the puck to delay the
game. Keeping touch icing ensures that it is only for real cases. Do you think the current
system of playoff seeding is fair; i.e., the winners of the divisions being
seeded 1, 2 and 3 despite the fact that a non-division winner may have a higher
point total? This is a very difficult issue
to tackle. On one hand, there's the belief that there should be a reward for
winning your division, which is home-ice advantage. One the other hand, there's
the fact that a lot of poor teams who lucked into an awful division end up
hosting a superior team, which could be seen as unjust. Personally, I like the idea of
there being a reward for winning your division, which is a home playoff series.
Each team plays 24 games within their division, and coming out on team means
that you were able to take care of business among your immediate contemporaries. However, what I think would work
better is a system similar to what the NBA has right now. In the NBA, each
conference's top four teams (three division winners and top non-division winner)
are seeded according to their record. It means that not only division winners
get their reward, but teams that are vastly better are seeded accordingly. It's
a win-win in my books. What’s the difference between a hat
trick and a natural hat trick? Also, how many players can get an assist on one
play? As many of you know, a hat trick is when
a player scores three goals in a single game. However, a natural hat trick is
when a player scores three consecutive goals without another player on either
team interrupting his string. It is by far the more difficult to accomplish. One player to get a natural hat trick this season is Pittsburgh Penguins centre Jordan Staal. In a game against the Red Wings in November, he scored three times in the third period to send the game to overtime, where the Penguins wound up winning. One of the most famous natural hat tricks in NHL history was recorded by little-used Red Wings enforcer Darren McCarty, in Game One of the 2002 Western Conference Finals. McCarty popped them past Colorado Avalanche netminder and Hall of Famer Patrick Roy, to lead the Wings to a 5-3 victory. As for the helpers, there are a maximum of two assists handed out on each goal. They are the last two player on your team to touch the puck before you score. However, if fewer than two touched the puck after the opposition had control, then there are fewer assists. My next question comes from across the
pond, from the What is your take the on wearing of
face shields and neck guards? Do you think either of these should be compulsory? -Your Friendly Neighbourhood British Hockey Fan The issues of face shields and neck guards are difficult ones to tackle. Both are mandatory all the way through youth hockey. When you reach Jr. A, neck guards are not regulated, but face shields are. In the pros, though, neither are mandatory. These are two very separate issues. I personally like the idea of face shields being mandatory. Pucks very often rise up towards the face, and people are very often at risk of receiving a high stick. Almost all young players heading into the NHL are wearing face shields, because that’s all they’ve known. It would be a perfect time to grandfather them in. However, neck guards are things that I feel very differently on. Most of the push to have neck guards has been spurred on by the accidental slicing of Richard Zednik’s carotid artery last year by a skate blade. The reasons why forcing players to wear neck guards might not be as great an idea are quite simple. One, very few players wear neck guards today. Two, several players feel uncomfortable wearing neck guards, saying that it restricts their breathing. Three, I don’t believe that neck guards provide nearly as much protection as their proponents say. All they really consist of is a padded piece of cloth. That’s not going to slow down a puck shot directly there. You’re still going to feel pain and suffer an injury. I don’t believe it’s worth forcing players out of their comfort zone as a knee-jerk reaction to a freak accident. Bottom line, that’s what Zednik’s injury was: a freak accident. It’s was a one-in-a-billion shot that isn’t worth changing the league and inconveniencing the players for. Here’s a history question… Is Wayne
Gretzky the clear cut best hockey player of all time?
-The Animal, Most people
see the Great One as the greatest hockey player of all time, casual and hardcore
hockey fans alike. I would have to say that I personally believe he is. However,
he is definitely not the clear cut best of all time. Why? Because you can quite
easily make cases for other stars past and present. There is a
significant faction that clamours for the great Bruins defenseman Bobby Orr to
be the greatest. A defender who was supremely skilled offensively and
defensively, Orr won the Norris Trophy for eight consecutive years in the heart
of his career. He was also the only defenseman to ever lead the NHL in scoring,
and won three consecutive Hart Trophies for league MVP. His career may have been
unfortunately shortened at 31 due to knee problems, but his absurd dominance
lets him have a say in the debate. Among the
forwards, you can also make a case for the NHL’s resident Iron Man, Gordie
Howe. Howe played an astonishing 26 seasons in the NHL, playing in the 40’s,
50’s, 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s… and every one of those years was a
showcase for his excellence. He was an All-Star in every one of those decades,
and won six Hart Trophies and Art Ross Trophies. Not only was he an offensive
star, but his toughness and physical play is unparallelled among the NHL’s top
players. He was always willing to muck it up, and often was seen delivering a
bone-crushing check or laying out a pesky player with a flying elbow. Gretzky
was never a physical players. I believe that
Gretz is the best, but he’s far from clear-cut. After talking
about the best, it’s time to look at the worst… Who is the
worst team to have ever won the
-The Rookie, There have
been tons of teams who have all won the Stanley Cup. Finding the best one is
easy, but finding the worst is not even close to as easy. After careful
consideration, though, I have come to the conclusion that the worst Stanley Cup
winner in hockey history is the 1907 Kenora Thistles. Who? The
Thistles were an amateur team that decided to challenge the ECAHA Champion
Montreal Wanderers for the Cup, in a two game, total goals series. They won the
first game 4-2, and the second 8-2. They are also known as having the shortest
tenure as Stanley Cup champions, with the Wanderers winning the cup back in two
months. They were named in a city-wide contest by a local carpenter, Bill
Dunsmore. But why is
this team below the rest? Two simple reasons. One, the main reason that they won
the play was because of Art Ross. Ross was a very successful rushing
defenseman… and he didn’t even play on the Thistles. He was loaned to the
team by the Brandon Kings just for the series. The other
reason was because of the series played months later against the same team,
without Ross. There, What do you think about the NHL's 82 game season? Is 82 games enough to determine playoff seeding? Or would you rather see a more extensive playoff at the sacrifice of some regular season games?
-Johnny Appleseed, To be perfectly honest, I love the current schedule, and I don’t want to see it changed in the slightest. One of the great facets of the 82 game schedule is the ability for every team to play every other team in the league at one point in the season. It eliminates silly scenarios where Canadian teams can’t play each other, or where teams can’t welcome some of the biggest draws into their building. The schedule also allows divisional rivalries to prosper. Six games are more than enough times for us to see the Leafs and Sens drop the gloves, or for the Flyers and Penguins to spill blood. It’s always great to see rivals throw down, but not to the point of overkill. As for the playoffs, I think they’re more than extensive enough. The beauty of a seven game series is that the best team normally wins. In seven games, you don’t have pretenders stealing games and making runs at the championships; it’s a war, not a battle. The playoffs are beautiful times for fans, largely because you see the most intense, exciting hockey you ever will. If you stretch it too long, then the shine wears off; it almost becomes a second regular season.
Crossbar:
the top bar of a goalie net Obstruction: a penalty that occurs when a player stops another from freely moving Screening: a classic hockey technique that consists of a player shielding the opposing goaltender’s vision Thank you very much for reading this week's mailbag! Please E-Mail me any questions you have, or any terms you want to be defined. Hope you enjoyed!
Submitted 1/22/09 Comment on this article to Comments@informativesports.com
|
