Jason Chen

The worst part is that Snow and Wang remain convinced that Nabokov will somehow be persuaded by the city, fans, and team to join them. This is all a farce. The Islanders have repeatedly overrated how well their organization is run. They need to take off those rose-coloured glasses and realize that top players don't want to play for a losing team in a decrepit rink. Even if it is in New York, but that's why you have the Rangers.

Just like Rex Ryan's foot fetish video?

Google "Canucks slump" and you're going to get an avalanche of news reports about how the Canucks have had trouble scoring after being shutout twice in three games prior to last night's game vs. Colorado. Isn't it amazing how the media can just pick this team apart? I'm not absolving myself for ripping into this team once in a while, but when I do it's usually for more pragmatic or philosophical reasons. The only time I would rip into this team is if they don't put in the effort I know they can. Teams get shut out, the best ones and the worst ones. It's not a slump and we're not struggling. We're just simply going through the ups and downs of any other regular NHL season. <img src="http://d.yimg.com/a/p/sp/getty/4c/fullj.d2c28721d90cd846aae33df7084b590b/d2c28721d90cd846aae33df7084b590b-getty-102843497am012_vancouver_ca.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">Had the Canucks had trouble scoring against the Avs, or put in another lacklustre effort like at Excel, I would've been (sort of) ready to jump on the slump bandwagon. But in between the two shutout losses I think everyone's sort of forgotten that we beat Washington 4-2. I wasn't able to watch the game, but from what I heard we weren't bad and a much better overall effort than against the Rangers. Although, to the Rangers credit, they played excellent hockey, a defensive, grinding style that John Tortorella's effectively used this year. (If Tortorella wants to be considered for the Jack Adams, losing Brandon Dubinsky for 3-4 weeks with a fractured tibia is the ultimate test. If the Rangers can still stay afloat without Dubinsky give Tortorella all the credit). The Rangers stuck to their game plan and executed it to perfection. Despite the Canucks firing 31 shots at King Henrik, the big chances only came when Vigneault had pulled Schneider. Most of the shots were relatively easy for the Swedish netminder and he had lots of help from his defense. Even Lundqvist said so himself: "...they didn't get that much. We had a couple of big blocks here and there." (And for those of you who read my previous Mid-Season Awards post, I bet you Girardi played a big part in some of those!) It was a one-goal game and it could've gone both ways. Both goaltenders were excellent but the Canucks were simply outplayed. It happens. Nothing unusual here, nothing that would indicate to me that the Canucks are in a slump. Then that awful game at Minnesota. Schneider was once again in net and I thought he was great. Of the four goals two came on breakaways and John Madden scored an easy tap-in from three feet when the Canucks defense completely forgot about him. Schneider's SV%, .840, was not indicative of how well he played. Two of Minnesota's biggest goals were scored on special teams, the opening PPG by Brunette and the third, a SHG by Matt Cullen that gave Minnesota a more comfortable lead and seemed to suck the energy out of the Canucks. We fired 32 shots at Anton Khudobin, who is starting in place of injured netminders Niklas Backstrom and Jose Theodore, and while I thought the Canucks' effort was better than the one at MSG, we still didn't look particularly dangerous. Let's also not forget that Khudobin has been lights out since his call-up: 2-1, .942 SV%, 1.59 GAA. It's no fluke, in Khudobin's two starts last year he was unbeaten with a .979 SV% and 0.87 GAA. Again, despite being shutout, I don't think this qualifies as a slump. Now Colorado. What a game last night. I'm a regular poster at www.canuckscorner.com, although not as frequently as in years past, but I noted that this Avs team should be a team that the Canucks might have a little trouble with if they met in the first round. The Avs skate extremely well and are relentless. The Canucks may be a mobile team and much better at moving the puck but we had trouble keeping up to their footspeed. John-Michael Liles was particularly effective with his speed and Matt Duchene was all over the place. And, oh yeah, we weren't shutout, scoring three times, twice on the powerplay that was the result of fantastic puck movement and quality scoring chances. We lost the game because Luongo was average and Raffi Torres took two dumb penalties, the first an interference on Philippe Dupuis that led to Milan Hejduk's goal, and another holding call early on the third period that gave a well-oiled Avs PP another chance. I would've benched Torres for the rest of the game after that interference call. The Canucks had gained so much momentum from Sergei Shirokov's highlight goal but that needless Torres penalty just completely killed it. Completely. And then instead of redeeming himself he comes back early in the third and takes a hold. What was he thinking? Again, giving that we had some great chances, peppered Craig Anderson with 40+ shots, scored three times, twice on the powerplay, I don't see any signs of a slump. <img src="http://d.yimg.com/a/p/sp/getty/8d/fullj.709db74e2528be4d55a9dd9ea32164fc/709db74e2528be4d55a9dd9ea32164fc-getty-102982596dp008_vancouver_ca.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">There were three things I took away from the Avs game, asides from re-affirming the fact that the Avs' speed could be a problem. First, Shirokov was fantastic. One reason why he's been so good: he's always moving. He opens up new lanes and angles by moving his hands when he's got the puck and moving his feet when he doesn't. He was our most dangerous player all game and it really made me wonder why Vigneault used his so sparingly in the third and on a crucial PP late in the same period on a Paul Stastny interference call why he still went to a struggling Raymond and snake-bit Tambellini on the second unit. Wouldn't it have made much more sense, considering how the game was going and which players were responding, to at least give Shirokov some ice-time there? It was a crucial powerplay and I think Vigneault blew it. Second, Chris Tanev looked tentative, but good. He made a nice play, if a little lucky, in breaking up that 3-on-1 before getting up, losing control of his body's momentum, and then falling on his butt. He's a guy that I can see log regular NHL minutes down the road, but not before another year or two in Manitoba. It's been awhile since Canucks fans have gotten excited about players in the pipeline and there are plenty to keep an eye on. Third, Kevin Bieksa was fantastic. Asides from one boneheaded giveaway I thought he was great defensively, breaking up at least 3 plays, all without any fanfare. He's played himself back onto the top 4 and won't be moved for Salo, if he even comes back. Henrik giving Bieksa that 'A' has done wonders. The Canucks have gone 2-4 in their past six, and only in one of those losses did I feel like we really deserved to lose, and that was against Minnesota on the road, which is always a tough match-up. We could've won that Detroit game had Jimmy Howard not stood on his head, the Rangers' loss came in a lack of effort and a well-executed gameplan by Tortorella, and that Avs game could've easily gone either way. Not exactly what you'd expect from a first place team but not exactly what I'd call a slump, but just a little up-and-down. This is traditionally the toughest stretch of the season, where players start getting injured and hurt. If you want to talk slumps, talk about Edmonton's 0-for-40-something powerplay. ... Actually, that's not a slump, that's... I don't know. I'm lost for words on that one. A slump is when a supposedly good team, like the Kings, go 2-8 in their last 10 and fall out of playoff contention. The Canucks? Still 6-2-2 and first in the conference. Two shutout losses in three games does not mean a slump. Got it?

Hiller has 22 wins in 39 starts, Pavelec has 15 in 30. And I think the Ducks are in a tougher conference with a significantly weaker defense. Anaheim: Visnovsky, Lydman, Fowler, Lilja, Mara, Mikkelson, Sutton, Sbisa, Brookbank. Atlanta: Byfuglien, Bosogian, Enstrom, Oduya, Sopel, Hainsey. The Thrashers have a much better defined top six with two players garnering Norris talks, two dependables in Oduya and Sopel (I thought I'd never say that for Sopel, but he was great with Chicago), a potential franchise player in Bogosian, and an overpaid yet still playable Hainsey. The Ducks have a great PP QB in Visnovsky, two journeymen vets in Lydman and Lilja, a blue chipper in Fowler, and a mish-mash of no. 6 and 7 defenseman. I would take the Thrashers' defense in a heartbeat over Anaheim's. The Vezinas, Harts, Jack Adams, etc. are based on regular season play, which, in a way, makes the case for the Conn Smythe as the most important individual trophy. Some goalies are great during the season but absolutely look lost in the playoffs, like Evgeni Nabokov, a Vezina finalist but not a playoff winner. The reason I would never consider giving a MVP to a losing/non-playoff team is because if he really is THAT good, his team should be in the playoffs. Pretty simple. A player who scores 50 with a decent centre is far superior than a Petr Sykora-type who scores 60 with Crosby, but in that scenario that MVP obviously goes to Crosby, and if you score 50 goals and you can't make the playoffs, then I wonder about what kind of player you may be (an Ovechkin? a Kovalchuk? In other words, not a winner). I think my biggest case in point is Kovalchuk, actually. Without him in the lineup Atlanta is considerably weaker, and he is one of the most talented players in the league, but never in a million years would he get my MVP vote. And more often than not, teams that deserve to be in the finals (Pittsburgh, Detroit, Philadelphia, Chicago the past 2-3 years) don't necessarily rely just on their goaltending. Teams that really don't deserve to be there, the Ducks with Babcock, Edmonton and Carolina in 2006, have done it with amazing goaltending. It should be no surprise then, that in those years the Conn Smythe were given to goalies (although Brind'Amour should've won it over Ward, but that's another argument. Zetterberg, Malkin, Toews were the MVPs all other years. The only exception I would make for goalies is Patrick Roy, because he is the best goalie in NHL history. Green is in a class of his own. Like I said, if you're a defenseman that regularly plays against top opposition and top PK, as Girardi does, and still put up a decent number of points (only 24 totaled over 40 points last year, that's less than 1 per team) you're great in my books. Nobody has had the same offensive output Green has since... well, I think the 80s. He's putting far superior numbers than all of his generational peers. Edler is not an offensive juggernaut, but he is a threat. Much like how Salo doesn't put up 50, 60, or 70 points, his offensive game does change the dynamic of the game and special teams. Robidas is good, but he's up and down a lot. I frankly think he's overrated because Crawford (an offensive wizard, a defensive cement head) can't put anyone else in other situations. He's got Daley, Niskanen, and Grossman down the road but Robidas' his best option. I was a little shocked Robidas got invited to the Canada camp in 2009. I'm glad you brought up Mark Streit. He is FANTASTIC. I couldn't believe it when the Habs let him go and he chose to go to Long Island (obviously not a winning team, but perhaps the pull of living in NY was too much). He's one of the most underrated players in the league. His defensive game isn't polished enough to be Norris material, but he's great offensively and defensively he does his job. (I think his BS stats were inflated in NY because like Robidas in Dallas, the Isles didn't have anyone else. In neither year Streit did crack the top 30 in league blocked shots. This is a little different from Girardi, whose given the opportunity based on his playing style/skill AS WELL AS need (weak depth - brackets within brackets - I've reached a new low) and has excelled. Girardi was 6th in the league last year and will probably finish 1st this year). I was wondering what was going on in Montreal's front office in 2008 when Streit put up 62 points and still let him go. I think what worked against him were 3 things: 1) people think Streit's numbers were a byproduct of Kovalev's play, when really I think it's the opposite, 2) that team also had Komisarek, Markov, and Hamrlik (overrated), three players who garner much more attention than Streit because they're not Swiss and have become big names by then, 3) Montreal's had enough experience with offensive defensemen like MA Bergeron, Brisebois, and perhaps they thought Streit was just another one of those. I'm not sure what happened, but that 2008 squad has no resemblance to their squad today anyway. Only 2 players from the 2008 squad that were top ten in team scoring remain (Plekanec, Kostitsyn). And, most importantly, thanks for reading.

We will never see Girardi win the Norris. Same goes for Edler. If either even get a third place vote I'd be ecstatic. It's rather unfortunate that the award has almost been deteriorated to "defenseman with the most points" award but that's the way she goes. I'm still appalled how many people think Byfuglien deserves consideration, even though it's quite clear he's not even the best defensively on his team. My picks have been unconventional and somewhat controversial (intended... to spark some conversation) but hopefully I've shown enough that the logic seems sound (if you've managed to plow throw all those words). Cheers.

Crosby will win the Hart if he doesn't miss an extended period of time. I already said he's the best player in the league. That concussion, if long-term, hurts his chances. I've already covered the Norris and Byfuglien is an afterthought for that category - he shouldn't be a serious contender. Has his play and production been any different from Mike Green's, who is already unworthy of those two nominations he's garnered in his career? I've already covered Trotz in the comment above. Others to consider: Craig Ramsay, Claude Julien, Mike Babcock, Marc Crawford, Dave Tippett, to varying degrees. Just so I have my bases covered.

That's a great point, that Anaheim's SA/G (34.2) is second worst in the league, although it's negligible because Boston isn't far behind with 33.8 SA/G, which is fourth worst. Both Hiller and Thomas have been fantastic, but I think Hiller has done more with less. He's kept the Ducks competitive and has been forced to play much more than Thomas because McElhinney has been much, much worse than Hiller or Rask. He's logged the second-most minutes and appeared in the most games. The Vezina should be awarded to the goalie most valuable to his team and that's Hiller. Stick Rask in net and the Bruins would still be pretty good. The same can't be said about Anaheim with McElhinney. Byfuglien and Enstrom equal to Anaheim's top pairing (pick your two of Fowler, Visnovsky, Lydman)? I don't think so. Atlanta's pair has combined for 81 points while Fowler and Visnovsky have combined for 60 and -5 combined. I should clarify that "(Byfuglien and Enstrom)" means that Pavelec is helped out by the highest scoring defensive duo in the league this year, something Hiller cannot say. The Thrashers aren't a great defensive team but they have arguably two of the best 'pickpocket' players in the league in Burmistrov and Little. What really hurts Pavelec is his wins (15, 18th) and given that he and Hiller have very similar GAA/SV% numbers, I'm going with Hiller. LA is not playing well, but they are a good team. They've got great pieces and have been in a little bit of a slump. Quick has been good but he's not outplaying Hiller, Thomas, Luongo, Fleury, Lundqvist, or even Ward... There's plenty of better candidates (some I haven't mentioned) to choose from. I love that you brought up Trotz because I've been saying he's one of the best coaches in the league. I've said that repeatedly. Trotz regularly turns chicken sh*t into chicken salad but I think he's had better years in the past. He's got some good, young talent this year (Cal O'Reilly, Cody Franson, Colin Wilson) and the only way he will ever be considered by the media is if they unseat the Red Wings (unlikely). However, I feel that the three guys I've named are more worthy. Boucher has turned TB around and they're no longer a joke. The Flyers made the playoffs last year as an 8th seed in a shootout but Laviolette has them sitting first in the East. AV has distanced the Canucks even further from their competition. They've done outstanding jobs so far. You could also make the case for John Tortorella, who like Trotz has turned into a rather average roster into a pretty good team. When I picked the Selke/Norris winners, team PK was considered, but not the defining factor. If that had been the case it would've been easy to pick Letang for the Norris and Talbot/Adams for the Selke. PK is more a reflection of team play, I totally agree, but that doesn't mean PK should be thrown out the window. It should be, at the very least, taken into consideration. I will never pick a Selke/Norris player on a team with a pitiful PK, just as it's stupid to pick a MVP from a losing/non-playoff team. I knew I was going to take some heat for Girardi but here's my logic explained further. Hopefully it makes sense. First, Big Z. He's a great player. One of the best defenceman in the league. The season Chara won the Norris was 2008-09 and he WAS an offensive juggernaut. His second consecutive 50-point season and 11 powerplay goals, a career high. Has he been as vital to Boston's defence as Girardi has been to his? I don't think so. (More later). Second, Lidstrom. I'm going to ignore the "retirement prize" argument because we're not throwing awards away. Is Lidstrom still good? Yes, in a pick-up game I'd probably pick him over everyone. But he does give away the puck. He has 17 recorded giveaways. He's not flawless, and comparing this season to year's past, he just hasn't been as good. Sometimes I think his reputation, not unwarranted, precedes him, but I think other players have been better this year. Case in point, Datsyuk winning the Selke last year, when I think, quite convincingly, Kesler was the superior two-way player. Third, Bieksa. We're going to have to agree to disagree because I do think Edler's a more well-rounded defenceman. Bieksa's been great but he struggled early in the season while Edler's been his usual, quiet, dependable self. On Girardi... Tortorella's teams thrive on playing the body and blocking shots. It's a big reason why they have such a stingy defence and a good PK. And the best player on their team at doing that is Girardi. The Rangers rely on him and Staal (wasn't considered because I think Girardi's been better, both offensively and defensively) more so than the B's on Chara and the Wings on Lidstrom. The B's have 4 players who average more than 2 minutes per game on the PK: Chara, Ference, Stuart, and Boychuk. The Wings have 2 with more than 3 minutes (Lidstrom, Stuart) and 2 with more than 2 minutes (Kronwall, Salei). The Rangers have 2 with more than 3 minutes (Girardi, Staal) but everyone else plays half that, with Rozsival (traded, so now Sauer) and Eminger rounding out the top 4. Because the Rangers' second unit PK is so weak (Eminger and Sauer... seriously?), Tortorella has had to rely much more heavily on his top pair than Babcock or Julien. Giradi's blocked shots and hits make up a higher % of the Rangers' total output than anyone else for their respective teams (as the chart clearly shows). Overrated by the defence beside him (laughable, other than Staal) and the goalie behind him? The Rangers do have Lundqvist, but Thomas and Howard have been good as well. It's not like Lundqvist is significantly better than either. "Why not choose a defenseman who manages to be great defensively on an defensively challenged team? That would indicate a better talent." Because there's no one worthy of picking from Atlanta, Edmonton, Tampa Bay, Colorado, or the Islanders. A defensively challenged team has nobody that has been great defensively. I would rather much rather pick the defensive MVP on a good defensive team, one that obviously doesn't work by committee, but rather an alpha dog top pair/player. And picking a defenseman who manages to be great defensively on a defensively challenged team may be an indication of TALENT (still very unlikely), but not PRODUCTION.

It is absolutely their choice. There are no league or team sanctioned consequences for not coming out. All I'm saying is that they should because it goes a long way. The most memorable athletes are the ones that connect most with fans, even if it is negative (Ron Artest at Auburn Hills, anyone?). I'm not offended, but certainly perplexed and annoyed.

It's mid-season! We officially past the half-way mark a week ago, but the All-Star weekend is unofficially considered the midway, where players can rest and relax for a weekend before preparing themselves for what eventually becomes a 20-game grind to the death for playoff spots. But it's also the best time of the year, because 1) I get to do lists, like this mid-season awards post, and bloggers love lists, and 2) we're 45 (!!!) days away from the trade deadline... which means I get to do another post about potential trade baits (stay tuned). But let's not get ahead of ourselves... here are 3 nominees for each of the major NHL awards. Hart Memorial Trophy 3. Sidney Crosby. The best player, by a sizable margin, in the league. There's no one else in his class, but his case may be hurt with his concussion. These things are iffy, and considering that he played another game after he was clearly concussed by Dave Steckel at the Winter Classic (I called it... there's no way he wasn't if you watched how slowly he got up... and then missed his shift when the Pens played 5-on-5 with an empty net), so if he misses an extended period of time, it really hurts his case. While the Pens still have Malkin and Staal, Crosby is the key cog in that lineup and given the major lack of depth, this Pens squad just isn't as good without him. That goes without saying. But how much of a difference does it make? Take away the Pens' 12-game win streak where Crosby went on a Gretzky-like tear, and the Pens are a .500 team at best (15-14-4, 4-4-2 in last 10). 2. Daniel and Henrik Sedin. The only wrinkle is that the Hart has never been shared before. Could we make an exception for the Sedins? While they may not be the highest scoring brothers duo in league history (Bobby and Dennis Hull, Maurice and Henri Richard, and of course, Wayne and Brent "4 Points" Gretzky), their chemistry with one another is unmatched. And you gotta feel for Dan, right? First, Henrik makes an ASG before him, then wins the MVP, Art Ross, and is named captain. Henrik's been proven he can play without Dan, and I'm sure Dan can play without Henrik, but together they're practically unstoppable. (To be fair, if the NHL had to pick one Canuck, it should be Kesler. For the sake of Dan's sanity. You think Mrs. Sedin makes more cookies for Dan during Christmas?). <img src="http://media.mmgcommunity.topscms.com/images/d4/a9/8736e28f4c849229df82d794c799.jpeg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed"> 1. Steven Stamkos. He is the runaway MVP. The Lightning currently hold top spot in the traditionally Washington-dominated Southeast Division, and this division is no longer the joke of the league. Florida, the weakest with 42 points, sits 11th in the East. While Marty St. Louis has been a huge, huge part of Stamkos' success, he's been carrying the franchise and sits second in league scoring with 57 points. It's almost amazing that Stamkos is +9 (so much for that he-can't-play-defense theory, which I've tried to debunk since day one), even though the Lightning have allowed the third-most goals in the East with 137, which is also 6 more than they have scored as a team. Take away Stamkos' 31 goals and their GF total (100) sits third-last in the conference. Vezina Trophy 3. Carey Price. After every win at the Bell Centre, Price must be thinking, "how do you like me now, Montreal!?" If you're looking for a feel-good story of the season, Price is one of those. After being unceremoniously booed in last year's playoffs, Price came back better than ever. His record may not be shining, with 21-15-3, but his SV% is .919, and anytime you're finishing the season at the .920 mark you're having a great season. Major points for really bouncing back, and for a franchise that has so much pride and tradition his cocky, I'm-better-than-you attitude has really helped him along in the toughest hockey market in the league. 2. Tim Thomas. He's everyone's obvious choice and for the most part he's been flat out amazing. Of goalies with at least 20 starts, he has the fewest regulation losses with 4. His 1.88 GAA and .943 SV% has been tops in the league all season and has regulated Tuukka Rask, believed by many to be the B's starter this year, to the bench. It's amazing what he can do at his age and his remains one of the best I've ever seen. He saw that puck all the way. It wasn't dumb luck. 1. Jonas Hiller. Only Price has played more minutes but Hiller has better numbers, and Hiller's also played 400 more minutes and appeared in 9 more games (40 in total, tops in the league) than Thomas. That should seal the deal. His numbers are nothing to sneeze at either: his .927 SV% is tied for third in the league and his 2.43 GAA is 12th. Instead of Chara, Seidenberg, Stuart, and Ference, Hiller gets Visnovsky, Lydman, Mara, and Lilja. Which defense would you take? It's a no brainer. That and the Ducks still currently sit 6th in the West. Could you imagine the Ducks without him? It's been a great year for goalies, but the Habs (defensive system), Bruins (defensive system), and Ducks (just no defense) rely on their goalies much more than other deserving nominees, like Luongo (great team), Ondrej Pavelec (Enstrom and Byfuglien), Jimmy Howard (Nick Lidstrom), Jonathan Quick (good team), Fleury (great defense) and a whole slew of others. I don't remember another year in which good goaltending has been so prevalent. It's going to be a fun race to watch if the Tim Thomas bandwagon doesn't blind everyone. Calder Memorial Trophy 3. Corey Crawford. He was once a highly-touted prospect in Chicago's system, (drafted 52nd overall in 2003, the second goalie taken after Fleury was taken first), and forgotten by everyone when Antti Niemi stepped in. Now that both Huet and Niemi are gone and Turco is clearly over the hill, Crawford's single-handedly saved the Blackhawks' season, with the team losing Patrick Kane, Marian Hossa, and Jonathan Toews to injuries at various points throughout the season. Among rookies with at least 25 starts he leads in wins, SV%, and GAA. Not more you can ask for. 2. Jeff Skinner. This kid came out of nowhere. He's undersized as a NHL centre, so he's been forced to move to the wing. His 15 goals are second on the team and he's a plus player on an average team. If he wasn't there, it'd be all Eric Staal, and Staal can't carry a team. He's provided some extra offensive juice and lessened the pressure on Staal. The fact that Skinner plays in Carolina hurts him because he's been a much better player than more heralded players like Hall and Eberle. <img src="http://nimg.sulekha.com/sports/thumbnailfull/logan-couture-2009-11-5-21-13-11.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">1. Logan Couture. I wrote a while back that the Sharks are actually an above average team posing as a Cup contender. They have one good line that's constantly broken up because they can't score on a consistent basis, a defense that has Niclas Wallin, Kent Huskins, and youngster Jason Demers logging regular minutes, which means Todd McLellan has to rely heavily on 34-year old Dan Boyle (27 minutes/game). They're getting disappointing seasons from Joe Pavelski (9 goals, -12) and Devin Setoguchi (7 goals, -13). The lone bright spot is Couture, who wins more than 50% of his face-offs, and leads his team in plus/minus (+9) and goals (19), 5 of which are game-winners. And this is a team with Marleau and Heatley, mind you. James Norris Trophy As usual, this is the hardest category to figure out. This is the part where I disagree with everyone, and everyone disagrees with me. There's too much of an emphasis on offensive output for this award (which explains Mike Green's two nominations) and not enough focus on all-round, actual defensive play (which is what the award is about). You can't look at one singular category, be it points, blocked shots, hits, or ice-time. You have to look at how good he is at BOTH ends of the ice (so no Hal Gills or Willie Mitchells) and how well he plays within his team's system. It's hard to do because the only way you can truly tell which defencemen make a difference in their own zone is by watching them. Having not watched every single team enough times, I can't tell you definitively which player is the best, but I can tell you which ones should be considered. And Mike Green is about 832 spots down the list. 3. Kris Letang. The numbers speak for themselves: 7 goals (11th), 33 assists (1st), +20 (3rd), 84 hits (26th), team PK 87.4% (1st). Letang's putting up fantastic offensive numbers, but what about defensive play? It's been good, but not Norris-material. Even on the PK, it's Brooks Orpik and Zbynek Michalek who get first taps on the shoulder. If there was one offensive defenceman who gets consideration, it should be Letang. 2. Alex Edler. Before flamers start yelling "homer pick!!!" let's (try) and look at this subjectively. Is Edler's game complete? Definitely, probably the most complete out of all Canucks defencemen, who has the league's 4th ranked PK. Does Edler figure in on said PK regularly? He averages 2:08 TOI/G on the PK, and considering that Vigneault has the luxury of spreading that time around, that's not an insignificant amount. Bieksa averages about 30 seconds more and Hamhuis about 50 seconds more. Tangible stats like hits and blocked shots? Check and check - Edler's 71 hits is third on the team and 76 blocked shots is first. And offensively? 27 points, +10, 4 PPG. Let's not mention that along with Ehrhoff, Edler has been key to the Canucks transition game, possessing an excellent first pass and skating ability. Case closed. 1. Dan Girardi. How about that? The Rangers are light on skill but they have plenty of players who play hard, like Callahan, Dubinsky, Staal, Drury, and even Gaborik. But perhaps the most indispensable defenceman under John Tortorella? #5 in blue. The Rangers' PK is ranked 9th in the league and a big reason for that is Girardi. In order to showcase how good he's been this year, let's compare him to all the other candidates, with leaders in bold. <img src="http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h164/jchockey/BLOG.jpg"class="imageFloatCenterFramed"> Sure, Girardi's offensive game isn't as polished, but he's averaging close to half a point per game, and only 24 defencemen last year had more than 40 points. Girardi's SH TOI/G is 12th in the league (leads Rangers with Marc Staal) and 13th in hits and 2nd in blocked shots. But how vital has he been to the Rangers? Expressing his hits and blocked shots as a percentage, Girardi accounts for 25% of all Rangers' blocked shots and 13.7% of all Rangers' hits, who are by a significant margin the most physical in the league. That's astonishing. That means 1 in 4 blocked shots by the Rangers are by Girardi. In comparison: Edler (12.5% of all blocked shots), Letang (8.3%), Lidstrom (10.3%), Byfuglien (5.3%), and Enstrom (13.1%). The popular pick is Dustin Byfuglien, but again, this award is about defence too, so the fact that Byfuglien averages only seven seconds (7!!!!) on the PK per game should automatically disqualify him. Atlanta also allows more than 3 goals per game and has the third-worst PK in the league. Byfuglien for Norris? Please. Giving it to Tobias Enstrom would make a lot more sense, but there are still better candidates. The other hard cut was Nicklas Lidstrom. Believe me, this was so, so, so difficult. Pedigree? Yup. Points? Yup. Team? Ehhh, not so much. The Wings' PK sits 16th in the league (which surprisingly is never at the top of the league - 10th last year, 25th year before), while the Pens, Canucks, and Rangers' PK have been much more effective. That's not mentioning that Lidstrom is an uncharacteristic -1 in plus/minus, and his career low of +9 was ten years ago. <img src="http://nimg.sulekha.com/sports/thumbnailfull/daniel-girardi-2009-10-12-22-41-21.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">Jack Adams Award 3. Guy Boucher. The Lightning have been flailing since their Cup win in 2004 and literally dropped off the map. You didn't hear about them unless it was close to draft time because they held the first overall pick in 2008 (Stamkos) and second overall in 2009 (Hedman). Now they're becoming relevant again. While the Capitals may still have the reputation as the Southeast powerhouse, Tampa Bay now leads the division with a two point differential and Atlanta is close behind. Boucher's system has unleashed the Bolts' offense, an offense that ranked 4th worst in the East last year. He's one of the few coaches that have made a smooth transition to the NHL after coming over from Drummondville (QMJHL) and Hamilton (AHL). 2. Peter Laviolette. Laviolette's blessed because he has so much to work with. What other team can have Danny Briere (24 goals) on their third line? The Flyers have six forwards with more than 30 points and both James van Riemsdyk and Nikolay Zherdev have double-digit goals. You could make the argument that any decent coach could turn this team into a division winner, but what Laviolette has excelled at is playing the goaltending carousel. He made the curious decision to start rookie Sergei Bobrovsky on opening night and rode him until he got cold. Now Brian Boucher's the starter and he's on a tear. Credit Laviolette for having such a great feel for his goalies (2.62 GA/G, 10th), a big reason why his team's done so well. 1. Alain Vigneault. What a change this year's been for Vancouver. One of the most penalized and pugilistic teams in the past, the Canucks went from 15.5 PIM/G (26th) last year to just 11.5 (11th) this year. That means more 5-on-5 ice-time for the Sedins, and surprise, surprise, the Canucks even strength GF/GA ratio of 1.34 sits third in the league, trailing Philadelphia and Boston. The Canucks own the league's most potent powerplay and a top 5 penalty kill. This is the finest job Vigneault has done in Vancouver to date, and he's had some very good seasons here. Frank J. Selke Award <img src="http://blastmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/kesler.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">3. Manny Malhotra. Recently, he's managed to gain a bit of a cult following. The league's best face-off man also leads the the league's fourth-ranked PK in ice-time, with 2:45 per game. He is not the Canucks first-line centre, nor is he the second-line centre, yet he takes the most face-offs out of anyone on the Canucks, taking 30.4% of the team's total. Only Atlanta's Rich Peverley (30.6%) and Toronto's Tyler Bozak (31%) take a bigger percentage of their team's face-offs even though they're not a fixture on their respective teams' top line. His 46 blocked shots is third in the league amongst forwards, trailing only Mike Fisher and Adam Burish, but Malhotra's takeaways (27) is almost equivalent to Burish and Fisher's total (30). If there's any gripe about Malhotra, is that he is a minus player on the road. A Selke winner shouldn't have that wrinkle. 2. Mike Richards. A staple in the Selke category for years to come, Richards is a good shot blocker and never gives up on a play. That he's a +11 despite playing against the opposing team's top line and/or top pairing is quite the accomplishment. By taking away those match-ups, that has allowed Laviolette to play Briere and Jeff Carter against weaker lines and pairings, a big reason why Philadelphia's scoring is so spread out. That's major points for Richards and something that isn't reflected through stats. Only Blair Betts and Darroll Powe average more SH ice-time than Richards per game, but neither have shorthanded markers, of which Richards has 2. The only problem? The Flyers' PK is ranked 17th in the league and Richards is posting his lowest face-off percentage in his career (48.2%). 1. Ryan Kesler. Is there anyone else? Datsyuk's bid for a fourth straight Selke will end this year, meaning that Bob Gainey's record will remain intact. Offensively, Kesler's done it all, on pace for a 40-goal season and just two shy of his career high. His 69 hits ranks third on the team behind Hansen and Glass, his 44 blocked shots is just two behind Malhotra and fourth-best in the league, wins 57.4% of his face-offs, and his takeaway-giveaway ratio of +22 is the best on the team. He should've won the award last year and he should win this year. (For those thinking about a Selke/Hart double whammy for Kesler, only one player has done it in NHL history: Sergei Fedorov in 1994). There are three other players that I considered: Jonathan Toews, Ryan O'Reilly, and to a lesser extent, Nicklas Backstrom. These three players' defensive games are extremely underrated, especially Backstrom's, who has been constantly mislabeled as a one-dimensional playmaker despite being quite polished in his own zone. The arguments against these players is that Chicago and Colorado's PK are fourth-last and second-last in the league, respectively, and Backstrom doesn't play enough on the PK each night (just 1:33 per game) to be really considered, despite top-notch marks in FO%, % of team face-offs, hits, and blocked shots. And there you are, the mid-season awards! Given the Canucks' strong season, and if they continue this pace, I wouldn't be surprised if the Canucks clean up at this year's awards. Thoughts? Comments? Flame away, readers!

I'm not so sure how far back players have come out for a twirl, but I have seen Joe Sakic doing it when he played against Vancouver in the mid to late 90s. At GM Place. Habs players get rousing ovations when they come out for their twirls. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR52egOoFC8&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqHuTn3ECKE In the second clip PK Subban even flips his stick to a kid. You're telling me it doesn't make a difference? I beg to differ. Showing up for charity events is one thing, and the Canucks earn top, top marks for that, but that's away from the game. If you lose a shutout, don't moan and groan and get all moody. Thank the fans a little for cheering you on for 60 minutes.

The 3-star selection, although it has gone through numerous transformations, were first introduced in 1936, on HNIC, no less. It has been around for over 70 years, so yes, I do think it's a tradition. In the grand scheme of things, yes, winning some games trumps this relatively small issue, but it's these little things that bug me. Call me obsessive (I just might be), but I think it's always these little things that tell us a lot about a player.

You've completely missed the point. I'm absolutely happy with the wins and being at the top of the league. My previous post lauded this squad and named it the best ever in franchise history. After a tough loss, believe it or not, there are fans who do care about the three stars. You may not care, but there are those who do. Even if there's only one, the players should at least acknowledge them. It goes a long way. I know from personal experience. It's these small differences that separate the great from the good. I don't think Steve Yzerman has ever not come out. Same goes for Lemieux or Gretzky. Read between the lines - Luongo didn't come out because he was so upset he lost his shutout bid. Maybe management didn't bother telling him to come out but he should've known. Ballard was horrified - he knew the tradition and the consequences. It's not about who wins or who loses, it's about having respect for the game and the fans. Like MacIntyre said, if no one cares, then why bother with the award? Why bother with the damn Molson Cup? Obviously it's not the Vezina or Jennings, but it means SOMETHING, no? The same criticism goes for the Pens during the Winter Classic. No handshake. Sure, it's just another regular season game but it had become tradition by then. The Canucks do great work with the Children's Hospital. People who work for the organization are fantastic - on occasion I've met quite a number of them. Just because they're playing their best doesn't mean I'm going to give them a break. Same rule applies even if they're the NJ Devils. I don't care how well you play, show some appreciation. Is it hard being a professional athlete? Absolutely. Are they worth millions? I think so, it's hard to completely justify them not to. But just because they don't want/like to do something doesn't mean they don't have to. They're professionals. I think they should know better. Hockey players are known as one of the most classy athletes in the world. Right now it just looks like they don't care.

Growing up in a hockey-mad city, I idolized the Canucks. As a kid, you don't pay as much attention to wins or standings or special teams efficiency, and although the adrenaline rush of watching your team win is unmatched, you're always rooting for a single player. But given the economics of the league, players are drafted, signed, traded, waived, or bought out, coaches and GMs are hired, fired, and re-hired. For me, the appreciation of a single player was enough to keep me interested. When I attended Canucks games, which weren't many, considering I'm not a season-ticket holder and single game tickets can be pricey, I was watching one player and one player only: Trevor Linden. I can honestly say that I've never, ever left a game early, and I always made my dad stay until the three-star selections. It was a huge delight for me to see Linden skate in a mini-circle and give a wave to the fans, if only it lasted less than five seconds. You cheered for your favourite player, even in tough losses. So it is particularly disappointing for me to hear that the Canucks have now grown a tendency to not come out during the three-start selections. Back in May, I ripped the Canucks for not saluting their fans after the Blackhawks ended the Canucks' playoff run on home ice. This is what I wrote: "Vancouver fans are no stranger to disappointments. After 40 years of futility we've seen just about everything. But never have I ever seen any Canucks team fail to salute the fans after the end of the season. That perhaps was the most frustrating part of the game. Sure, most fans booed and with the way the Canucks showed up to this game I wouldn't want to stick around the rink any longer than I should, but there are fans who still cheer for them through the tough times and who still genuinely care. Vancouver's a passionate hockey town and for the team to ultimately disrespect their fans like that is discomforting. The majority of the fans left the rink with a sour taste in their mouths but that's no excuse to not acknowledge the support Vancouver fans have given the team all year." (May 12, 2010) <img src="http://mattgunn.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/game4lost_ducks.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">I understand the bitterness after a loss. Everyone's experienced it before. Words are harder to put together. Movements are slower. You're in disbelief, then your shoulders drop and you wonder what you could've done better, then you start getting angry, wondering why you weren't good enough, having been eliminated in a similar fashion the year before. I get it. But what I don't get, is why these professionals can't suck it up and give their fans a little wave of thanks. There are many fans who don't care - a win is a win, and after all, it is a team game. But there are also many who do care. There are a lot of kids today who wait to get an extra glimpse of Henrik, Dan, Kesler, Luongo, or whoever. If 18,859 people walk out of Rogers Arena not caring about the three stars, the players should still come out and give that one person remaining in the stands a salute. It doesn't mean a lot to us because we don't care, but there are still those who do, and given the prices these fans pay to come to games, it's not too much to ask. On January 5, I ripped Luongo on Twitter for not coming out after being named the game's first star in a 3-1 win. It was quite obvious to me that he was upset at losing his shutout with only 10.3 seconds to go in the game. "I'm a competitor and I want to stop them all and I was a little disappointed that one went in at the end," Luongo had said after the game, after declining an on-ice interview when he was named the game's first star after stopping 43 shots. Wait. Was Luongo actually so bitter that he lost a statistic that he refused to come out and acknowledge the fans? Could he be that selfish and petty? I sure hope not. But sure enough, after losing to Detroit in a 2-1 shootout loss, the Canucks once again failed to come out. Luongo and Ballard were named two of the three stars but neither came out. I can understand why players don't come out during road games, like Jimmy Howard, because this isn't their hometown crowd, even if there are plenty of Red Wings fans in the stands. So in both wins and losses, the Canucks just don't come out. It's not like being named a star isn't worth anything - the Canucks' Molson Cup award is annually given to the player who is named one of the three stars most over the course of the season. Luongo won the award three consecutive times, from 2006-2009. I don't get it. Then, Iain MacIntyre reveals to us that the Canucks have "... a loose, long-standing policy against asking their players to return to the ice after losses. Ballard, in fact, didn't even know until [MacIntyre] told him that he'd been named a star and was horrified at the possibility fans might think he had disrespected them." Kudos to Ballard for actually feeling guilty about the whole thing, but what kind of organization does this to their fans? When did the Canucks become such prima donnas? We understand that the Canucks' first goal is to win and quite (unfairly) both the organization and fans think that a Cup title will all of a sudden exonerate all of the past miscues. Not really.

Good catch. I don't know what I was thinking there.

Kesler for me as well. His offensive game is much better than Richards' this season. Like I said, there's no way Richards is anything but a Flyer.

Best? No way. Both Sedins, Kesler, Burrows, Ehrhoff, Tambellini, maybe even Raymond, are better than Samuelsson at handling the puck. Watch Samuelsson closely. He gives away an awful lot of pucks and his passes are never tape to tape, even if his teammate is 5 ft. in front of him.

<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_JkKg_dKJQO0/S7k_bUctgwI/AAAAAAAAAk4/oR2sWN5UJ74/s1600/NHL-President%27s-Trophy.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">Sitting at the top of the league with 55 points in 38 games, the Canucks are in an unfamiliar territory. Always considered a division favourite and top 5 team in the West, having not lost a game in regulation since December 5 vs. St. Louis and going 11-0-2 afterwards, a slim lead over Colorado has expanded to 10 points and 1 game in hand and the Canucks are now the heavy favourites to win the Presidents' Trophy, the first in franchise history. It's unfamiliar territory for a franchise not exactly known for winning, but with a stunning effort in a 4-3 road win over San Jose in a playoff-like atmosphere, even the most cynical fan is asking himself if this is the best Vancouver Canucks team ever assembled. The blue and green are en route to a franchise-record third consecutive 100+ points regular season finish and also a third straight division title, but neither of the previous squads had cracked the 50-win barrier nor advanced past the semifinals. Is this the year that everything changes in Vancouver? Most teams will be over the halfway mark by the end of the week so now's a good time to break down the roster and see what the Canucks have in store for the rest of the year. Had Daniel Sedin been healthy all season last year, 2010 could've been the season the Canucks finished first overall in the West. Chicago had just three more wins and San Jose two more, and could Daniel have made up that difference? Definitely. If Henrik was good for 113 points, then Daniel was good for at least 105 as well. They're ranked 4th and 5th in league scoring, with Henrik having a one-point edge. They've been the most consistent point-producers in the NHL since the lockout, but the big difference this year is that they have been unbelievably good on the road. Henrik has 320 home points vs. 302 on the road in his career, but this year has 28 of his 50 points on the road. Daniel has 303 at home and 293 on the road, but has 31 of his 49 points on the road. It's a little unfortunate that neither player will ever win MVP if both remain healthy, because there's just no way to decide which is more important than the other (perhaps Henrik, but only slightly). Just to don't ask the Sedins to play on Wednesdays - the Sedins' combined career +/- based on the day of the week: Sundays +26, Mondays +34, Tuesdays +69, Wednesdays -2, Thursdays +38, Fridays +32, Saturdays +77. And what does that tell us about them? That they suffer from middle-of-the-week-itis, just like everybody else, except that they're really good at hockey. <img src="http://www.nhlsnipers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/kesler-mm.jpg"class="imageFloatCenterFramed"> While the Sedins have been the engine driving the league's second-ranked offense, clicking at 24.8%, Ryan Kesler has been undoubtedly the team's MVP. He's on pace for 41 goals and plays more than any other forward. He's second on the team in shorthanded ice-time and first in powerplay ice-time (yes, more than the Sedins). In my mind, he's a franchise centre in the Mike Richards mold. If you were to build a team, after taking an elite point-producing centre and locking down your first line, nobody is better than Kesler on that second line. Nobody. Will he reach 40 goals though? I'd wager no, but continue what he's been doing away from the puck - 60 hits, 41 blocked shots, 32 takeaways, 57.3% faceoffs won, discipline - and he's a lock for the Selke. Anything short of winning would be a complete travesty and the whole city should mobilize and march on Gary Bettman's house in protest. We knew that Manny Malhotra was a great in the circle, but did it warrant a three-year deal worth $7.5 million with a limited NTC? I guess since good face-off guys are so hard to come by, especially ones that can play a regular shift, unlike Zenon Konopka or Yanic Perreault, it's certainly worth it. For a team that depends so much on puck movement and puck possession, Malhotra was totally worth it. He wins 63% of his faceoffs, and is just 0.2% of the league from Dave Steckel (a hugely under-appreciated, under-valued player). It's no fluke - he won more than 60% in San Jose last year and 58% the year before in Columbus. He's found a market where he can thrive, not having to shut down the opposition's top line or worry about putting the puck in the net. The Canucks' PK ranks 5th in the NHL and has just allowed one shorthanded goal. The only gripe I have with Manny? While he wins more than 60% of his face-offs both at home and on the road, he has just 4 assists in 20 games and -5 on the road but 13 points in 18 home games and +6. It's nothing new though, Malhotra has always been much, much better at home than on the road, something that is worth keeping an eye come playoff time. Any Stanley Cup contender needs a strong supporting cast. Alex Burrows was sidelined early in the season and struggled with timing early on but has found his groove - he has 6 points in 6 games, and while the argument could be made that any player could play reasonably well with the Sedins, nobody does a better job on this roster than Burrows. Both him and Kesler made concerted efforts to tone down their extracurriculars, but Burrows doesn't have the respect of the league. Dan Boyle was noticeably irked by his high-sticking penalty because Burrows still has a reputation for being a diver. That's not going to help in the playoffs when special teams is a true premium. Like Burrows, Raymond's just coming back from injury but even on the fourth line he hasn't missed a beat, scoring a goal in his first game since breaking his finger. While I pegged Raymond to score 30 goals this year, he's unlikely to hit that total but he will have a chance to turn heads in the playoffs, where a much more physical game has clearly derailed his play. He has just 7 points in 22 career playoff games. <img src="http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/3891358.bin?size=620x400"class="imageFloatCenterFramed"> Jeff Tambellini, Tanner Glass, and Jannik Hansen are three key players in the Canucks bottom six (along with Malhotra) that are keys to the Canucks' success. Tambellini's found a team that caters to his particular talents. The Canucks move the puck well, which allows Tambellini to show off his speed along the boards, and they pass the puck around a lot (almost too much, sometimes) and he's not afraid to shoot the puck. He's a great triggerman for a team that doesn't have a lot of shooters up front. He's also shown a willingness to take the body, with 50 hits in 28 games. He's far from your average one-dimensional offensive player. In Raymond's absence, his offense was more than adequately replaced by Tambellini, who has since been demoted to the fourth line upon Raymond's return. Hopefully Tambellini doesn't get demoted, because he's a good player to have on your roster. Glass is a true blue-collar player. He's the reason why teams don't need any Darcy Hordichuks or Raitis Ivanans anymore, because he can skate, hit, fight, and handles the puck well enough to pin the opposition defense. Hansen is a speedy forward, absolutely vital on our PK with his puck pursuit and he rarely gives up on a play, if ever, but like Raymond he struggles in the playoffs with just 4 career playoff points. How good is Hansen? Take away the offensive side of Kesler's game and the two are quite similar: JH 77 hits to RK's 60, JH's 24 takeaways to RK's 32. It's fun watching these three guys play, even if they're not the most exciting (until Tambellini picks a corner coming down the right wing) or most talented. The two forwards I have the most trouble watching are Mikael Samuelsson and Raffi Torres. For a guy who needs to shoot the puck a lot to be successful, Samuelsson doesn't hit the net much even when he shoots (31 missed shots, 2nd to Dan). At 34 he won't be hitting the 30 goal plateau anymore and while he's currently 4th in team scoring he could finish 7th or 8th by the end of the season. He's better off on the third line because he's an atrocious passer and marginally better stickhandler. Torres is just streaky. He plays with an edge that is there one game but absent in the next. If the Canucks want to go deep these two players have to hit their hot streaks at the right time. The Canucks benefited huge when Samuelsson went on a tear with 8 goals in 12 playoff games. And what can I say of arguably the league's best defense that hasn't been said already? The Canucks are first in the league in goal differential, quite a feat considering that none of our blueliners are elite material. It's certainly an offense by committee, not like in Pittsburgh with Kris Letang or Boston with Zdeno Chara. Ehrhoff and Edler have combined for a +19 rating and 48 points. The two skate very, very well and jump up in the play at the right times. They're so underappreciated (more on that later) that you can't imagine what sort of attention they'd be getting if they played for an East team. Moving forward, given our cap space, you wonder if we can really retain Ehrhoff, who's an UFA at the end of the year. Dan Hamhuis and Keith Ballard have both made Canucks highlight reels with their patented hip checks, with each at least upending an opposition once a game. I've actually been most disappointed with Hamhuis - perhaps it's because my perceptions of him as a more physical defenceman playing alongside Shea Weber and Ryan Suter - but he plays more like Willie Mitchell without the ridiculously long stick and has better mobility. I'm appalled at times with some of his giveaways and his blocked shots total, just 29, is less than one per game. This entire season may be an adjustment season for Ballard, so the best has yet to come, but he's our best shot blocker and the way he jumps up into the play (sometimes ill-advised and too deep), really reminds me of Ed Jovanovski. His 4 points aren't reflective of his offensive capabilities and Vigneault has used him rather reluctantly on the second powerplay unit, instead opting for Hamhuis. Kevin Bieksa was a big name in the rumour mill to begin the season but he's solidified his status as a top four guy in our lineup. No one else on our defense plays with an edge like he does, except Alberts, but Alberts doesn't have the same mobility or offensive weapons. The imminent return of Sami Salo raises some interesting questions because of the Canucks' cap bind, and while Bieksa was rumoured to be on the block to make room for the hard-shooting Salo, he's quickly become an untradeable asset again. If we can somehow get Salo into the lineup without sacrificing Bieksa or a forward, could you imagine what would happen? This team already leads the league and they're going to get even better. The Canucks were noticeably better with Salo in the lineup last year and it gives us a chance to get rid of Rome, who serves little purpose other than to give the other five defenseman a breather or two. As awkward as Alberts looks with the puck, he's one of our most physical defenceman. Honestly, I just can't wait to get rid of Aaron Rome. I don't think he brings anything to this team that we don't already have but you had to admit he's a huge upgrade over Eric Weinrich, Ossi Vaananen, or some other extra defenceman plug we manage to get for a pick at the deadline. The biggest reason for our success? Our away record, which at 7 games above .500 is an extra 14 points for a team that plays average hockey on the road. The reason? Roberto Luongo. Last year's road record: 13-14-1, 3.07 GAA, .894 SV%. This year: 8-5-2, 2.59 GAA, .907 SV%. Luongo's still a far superior at home than on the road, but his stats have improved. It's not where the Canucks would like it to be, since his home record is a staggering 10-3-1, 2.25 GAA, .926 SV%, but you hope that Luongo can at least find a happy medium at home and on the road when all's said and done. <img src="http://www.lphs.ca/image/players/PavelBure-close-up.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">Is this the best Canucks team ever? I certainly think so. In terms of top-end talent nothing beats the Mogilny-Bure duo, but they were never healthy at the same time and the team couldn't win any games. Mogilny's best year as a Canuck, his first, with 55 goals and 107 points, was wasted with Bure appearing in only 15 games and an atrocious Kirk McLean in net. We have a splendid first line, a spectacular second-line centre, a bottom six that can hit, skate, and score, a very capable and mobile defense, and a goalie who still has some good seasons in him. The Canucks are tops in the league in every single relevant category: 25 wins (t-1st), 8 losses (1st), .724 point % (1st), 3.42 g/g (1st), 2.45 ga/g (5th), 24.8% PP (2nd), 85% PK (6th), 56.3% faceoffs (1st). The worst part about all these league leading stats? The Canucks still don't get any respect. As of today, the Canucks' rank in all-star voting by position: forwards Henrik (23rd), Daniel (24th), Kesler (52nd); defencemen Hamhuis (25th), Ehrhoff (36th), Edler (38th); and Luongo (10th) The only wrinkle? Of the 24 times the Presidents' Trophy has been awarded, only 7 have gone on to win titles. It's clearly not a barometer for postseason success but we're looking pretty good right now.

The NHL is experiencing an influx of exceptional once-in-a-generation talent. There's no doubt about that. Looking ahead to 2011, several teams, specifically Calgary and New Jersey, are searching for an identity, looking for a way to sneak into the playoffs, and if not, rebuild their team. Jarome Iginla and Martin Brodeur's best days are over, and with their impending retirements or departures within the next couple of years, the two franchises are looking for players to fill the void. When finding that franchise player, it really depends on how you want to build your team. Some teams like to build from the net out, while others put more emphasis on a forward or defenseman. I've torn a couple hairs from my head trying to compile this list and with the amount of talent to pick from it's difficult after the first three picks. To make my life a little easier, I've split the list up into three sections: goaltenders, defensemen, and forwards. To kick off the new year, let's look at the league's 30 best franchise players, with a major emphasis on age, leadership, and future potential, but keep in mind, this is not the current best 30 under 30, but the future best. Read on to find out which Canuck makes the list. GOALTENDERS 30. Steve Mason, Columbus (age: 22, drafted 3rd round, 69th overall in 2006) Never a highly touted prospect until he won gold with Canada at the World Juniors, Mason was selected in the 11th round by the London Knights in the OHL draft. After compiling a 77-20-2 record over his final two seasons with London and Kitchener, Mason no longer had anything to prove at that level and signed with the Jackets, appearing in 3 games for AHL-affiliate Syracuse, posting an incredible 1.63 GAA and .937 SV%. It was a small sample size, but with starter Pascal Leclaire sidelined with injury (no surprises there) the Jackets called him up and haven't looked back. A fantastic rookie season, 33-20-7, 2.29 GAA, .916 SV%, led to a Vezina nomination and a Calder Trophy. Like most young players Mason has struggled in his second season. Regardless, Mason remains one of Canada's best upcoming netminders. 29. Cam Ward, Carolina (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 22nd overall in 2002) The unassuming Saskatchewan-born goalie improved his win totals from 30 to 37 to 39 in his first three seasons as a starter before being sidelined by injuries last year, posting just 18 wins in 47 games. Like Hiller, Ward's a proven winner: he's the first rookie since Patrick Roy to win the Cup and the first rookie since Ron Hextall to claim Conn Smythe honours. If there's any knock against Ward, is that he's inconsistent and his save percentage - a career save percentage of .905 going into this season - is back-up material at best. However, there's enough past history and talent there to pick him as your franchise goalie. 28. Henrik Lundqvist, NY Rangers (age: 28, drafted 7th round, 205th overall in 2000) That King Henrik was drafted in the 7th round tells you how unheralded he was until he led Sweden to a 4th place finish at the World Juniors in 2001, a tournament that rarely sees Sweden finish high (excluding the last 3 years in which the Swedes captured silver twice and bronze once, the last time the Swedes medaled was in 1996, and since the tournament's inception they've only captured gold once). Playing for Frolunda in the Elitserien, Lundqvist was named the league's MVP with record-setting statistics: a minuscule 1.05 GAA, .962 SV%, 6 shutouts, and a shutout streak of 172 minutes and 29 seconds. He became the first goalie to win 30 games in his first five seasons in the NHL and has single-handedly managed to keep the Rangers in playoff contention every year despite an often anemic offense pre-Marian Gaborik. <img src="http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20090513&Category=OPINION03&ArtNo=905130394&Ref=AR"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">27. Jonas Hiller, Anaheim (age: 28, undrafted) Often overlooked because he plays in California under the shadow of four spectacular forwards (Getzlaf, Perry, Ryan, Selanne) and a defenseman on track for a career season (Visnovsky), Hiller is one of the league's most underrated goalies. He always has a save percentage hovering around .920, an incredible mark to maintain throughout a career. While his goals against has risen since his rookie season, it is more a reflection of Anaheim's porous defense, which makes him arguably their most valuable player. That's not mentioning that Hiller's a competitor and a proven winner, having won the Swiss league championship three times and the Spengler Cup twice. He's an outstanding big game goalie, having ousted the Presidents' Trophy-winning Sharks in the opening round in 2009 and stopped 44 shots in a 3-2 shootout loss to a heavily favoured Canada in the Olympic preliminaries. If age was not a factor, Hiller would be at the top of the list. 26. Carey Price, Montreal (age: 23, drafted 1st round, 5th overall in 2005) The 2005 draft, which produced Sidney Crosby, Bobby Ryan, Anze Kopitar, Jack Johnson, Marc Staal, TJ Oshie, and Tuukka Rask in the first round alone, only three players from that draft have been made All-Stars. Crosby's the obvious choice, and if you guessed Kopitar as the second then pat yourself on the back. The third? None other than Price, the only Canadien whose play can easily sway Montreal into either another Richard Riot or an Eastern European all-night rave. (Granted, that All-Star game also featured Mike Komisarek, but still.) When Price is at his best, which admittedly isn't as often as anyone would like, he can arguably be the best goalie in the league. He's more talented than Mason and Ward and younger than Hiller and Lundqvist. Take him. 25. Jonathan Quick, Los Angeles (age: 24, drafted 3rd round, 72nd overall in 2005) It's a shame that Connecticut native Quick plays out West, potentially killing any chance of a Price-Quick rivalry. Could you imagine? Both 2005 grads, an east coast American in a booming California hockey market and a western Canadian in an unforgiving hockey market. The future netminders of USA and Canada. The implications could be huge. The names themselves couldn't be any easier to make up headlines for. Price dwarfs Quick in terms of trophy case material, but it's tough to say which goalie's cupboard will fill up faster. I will concede that Price is the more talented goalie, but to make up for my homerism I will say that I would bank on Quick to give me more quality starts than Price over a full season. He just seems more level-headed. 24. Marc-Andre Fleury, Pittsburgh (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2003) Before his diving, Championship-winning save on Nicklas Lidstrom in game seven, Fleury was a known choker. It wasn't because he wasn't good, but he had a penchant for losing big games in the worst way possible (think Bryan McCabe style). At the 2004 World Juniors, Fleury led Canada to the gold medal game for the second straight year, this time against USA. There was a lot at stake for both teams. Canada had not captured gold since 1997 and settled for silver after losing to Russia in front of a hometown crowd in Halifax. The Americans had not medaled since 1997 when they lost to Canada, so it was very much a redemption game, and tack on the fact that USA had yet to win gold in the tournament's history, there was a lot for them to prove. With five minutes remaining in a 3-3 tie, a cleared puck was rolling towards Fleury with Patrick O'Sullivan bearing down on him. Even though both Canadian defensemen (Braydon Coburn and Brent Seabrook) had already closed in on O'Sullivan, Fleury went on the offensive. His ill-advised attempt to clear the puck hit Coburn square on the chest and the puck bounced in, giving the Americans a 4-3 victory and their first World Junior gold. The second gut-wrenching came in 2008 Finals. With Henrik Zetterberg flying down the left wing, Fleury stopped the initial shot but lost the puck in his pads, which had snuck behind him and lay still in the blue paint. Fleury immediately leaned back into a snow angel in an attempt to cover the puck, only to end up sitting on it and propelling the puck into his own net. That goal was the eventual game-winner. But all bad memories were cleared after that big Lidstrom stop, and while Fleury may never be a great regular season goalie (his two winningest seasons saw him post sub .900 SV%), at least he's proven that he can get you to the big game and perhaps win one or two... if you can also stand losing one or two. (For those who hate on the World Juniors, you're really missing out. The WJHC has recently gained an unfair reputation as a meaningless tournament and merely a chance for Canada to stroke its own ego on the international stage. That's not true. Before winning five straight golds, Canada was on a seven-year gold-less draught and their 15 total golds is followed closely behind by the Soviet Union/Russia's 12. That's not mentioning that if you want to get a head start on which prospects to watch for in the upcoming drafts and camps, the World Juniors is the tournament to watch. These teams regularly field NHL-calibre talent. Josh Gorges, Kevin Klein, Tim Brent, Dan Paille, Jeff Tambellini, Brent Burns, and Max Talbot are the forgotten players on that 2004 squad with Fleury. Even more fun is discussing which players look like busts, like O'Sullivan. My bust pick from last year's squad? Patrice Cormier. Willie Desjardins absolutely picked the wrong leadership group and it cost him. And any time you're picked by the Devils, unless you've got high end talent or a well-developed defensive game, you're going to see very limited NHL time before your 23rd birthday.) DEFENSEMEN (What!? No Ryan Miller? You must be crazy! That statement depends on who you ask, but Miller is 30. He has one more Olympics left in him and by then he may not even start. By all means his 2009-10 season ranks among the best of all-time in the modern era, but it was the first time he entered 'elite' status, and as quickly as he claimed it he has lost it. I would take all the other guys I've listed over him for future potential.) 23. Dion Phaneuf, Toronto (age: 25, drafted 1st round, 9th overall in 2003) Even though Phaneuf has not played as well as anyone in Leaf Nation would like, he still hasn't the potential to become a franchise blueliner. He's a hotheaded, Type-A personality player, which is great when things are going good and not so great when things are going bad, and those swings are exaggerated and magnified in Toronto. He's everything you'd want in a game-breaking player: a big shot, big hits, and attitude. But he's also everything you don't want in a tight game: a short fuse and a tendency to lose focus, resulting in missed assignments and bad giveaways. You could roll the dice with him, as Brian Burke obviously has by trading for him and naming him captain, but just knock on wood every game. 22. Erik Johnson, St. Louis (age: 22, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2006) Often heralded as the better of the two Johnsons on the American blueline, you can't help but wonder how much better he would've been had he not missed an entire season to injury. Johnson played just one season at Minnesota before making the jump and his transition was seamless, scoring 33 points in 69 games in his rookie season. Already part of the young leadership core moving forward, Johnson follows a line of big impact St. Louis defensemen, which has featured Al MacInnis and Chris Pronger in the past. He has neither MacInnis' big shot nor Pronger's nastiness, but he's a defenseman that does all things very well. But this season, with injuries to the offensive front (TJ Oshie, David Perron, Andy McDonald), EJ's played has seemingly regressed, with just two goals thus far. I felt he was outplayed by Jack Johnson in the Olympics and Alex Pietrangelo this season. <img src="http://kingscast.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/johnsonx.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">21. Jack Johnson, Los Angeles (age: 23, drafted 1st round, 3rd overall in 2005) I wasn't sold on him at first - I saw him as a Phaneuf-like clone, a big kid with immense talent and punishing checks but zero intelligence - but after watching him in the Olympics, he changed my mind. He drew criticism from Terry Murray for his penchant for getting out of position, a tendency Murray felt Johnson had developed because Michigan coach Red Berenson had allowed him to play as a rover. But he's been much better since, no doubt aided by the presence of some savvy veterans (Jarrett Stoll, Rob Scuderi) and humbled by more talented players (Drew Doughty). He was great offensively with Michigan, but it was an underdeveloped part of his game that didn't show until last year when he broke out with 36 points. His best days are still to come. 20. Duncan Keith, Chicago (age: 27, drafted 2nd round, 54th overall in 2002) It took three years for Keith to crack the Hawks roster, even after moving from Michigan State to Kelowna to accelerate his development (he wasn't getting as many minutes as the Hawks would like, as the Spartans had John-Michael Liles ahead on the depth chart). He spent two more years in Norfolk (one due to the lockout), accumulating 51 points over two seasons. By the time Keith broke into the league, he was 22 years old, but he was ready. He averaged over 23 minutes a game in his rookie season, almost unheard of these days. His transition to the NHL has been slow and steady and should serve as a shining example of how to develop players taken after the first round. A player like Keith has at least another 10 years in the tank (his extension was for 13 years) so his age isn't as big of a factor as someone like Phaneuf, who plays a very physical game and has quite a bit of NHL mileage for a 25-year old. 19. Shea Weber, Nashville (age: 25, drafted 2nd round, 49th overall in 2003) If Nashville's jettison of Tomas Vokoun, Scott Hartnell, and Kimmo Timonen sent the franchise back three years, losing Weber alone this summer could send them back five. Of all the defensemen listed here, Weber is the one with the most leadership potential. He's steady, logs big minutes, plays in all situations, shoots the puck from the blueline better than anyone in the West not named Lidstrom, and strong enough to clear anybody from the net. He's a guy I would love to see the Canucks go after, even if that means having to cut a forward, Kevin Bieksa, and Christian Ehrhoff loose. Weber may not be the guy who makes the game-winning play, but he certainly is a guy who can prevent it. 18. Drew Doughty, Los Angeles (age: 21, drafted 1st round, 2nd overall in 2008) There's no question Doughty is the most likely player after Lidstrom to win consecutive Norris Trophies (if not for his defensive play, then certainly his offensive). He's not overly big or particularly intimidating in the defensive zone, but once the puck's on his stick, watch out. Nobody has better offensive instincts for a defenseman than him. There's really no telling what his ceiling is, because whenever he's written off as the spare part he surprises everyone by earning MVP honours. He has the most upside out of any player in this group and while he doesn't have that galvanizing leadership aura, it doesn't matter, because neither did Bobby Orr. FORWARDS 17. Jason Spezza, Ottawa (age: 27, drafted 1st round, 2nd overall in 2001) I struggled putting Spezza on this list because if you named the top 15 centres in the league right now, it's hard to figure Spezza into the conversation without someone telling you how many costly turnovers he makes in a game. But the fact remains: Jason Spezza is one of the best playmakers in this league. Only Joe Thornton has arguably better hands for a player bigger than 6'3". What sold me? 90 points in 68 games in 2006, 87 points in 67 games in 2007, and 92 points in 76 games in 2008. Playoffs? 14 points in 10 games and 22 points in 20 games in playoff runs past the first round. Those are elite numbers. His talent is there, and he's a remarkable goal scorer when he wants to be, and that comes with a good linemate. Losing Heatley hurt him, but in this league it's much easier to find a player who's willing to shoot the puck than a player who can really dish it (ask Rick Nash or Phil Kessel). His play is lackadaisical at times and he'll try the same spin-o-rama backhand pass at the side of the net enough times that you wonder why defensemen haven't picked up on it already, but he's a legitimate number one centre. 16. Rick Nash, Columbus (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2002) Nash is a player with the reputation of a prolific scorer who may never score 50 in a season. As an offensive player, Nash is the prototypical power forward, big, strong on his skates, soft hands, but by that token Nash is quite a one-dimensional offensive player. Charging to the net works for Nash because few defensemen in the league can handle his size, speed, and skill while skating backwards, but ask Nash to be a playmaker or stand-still shooter and his game falls apart. It's hard to see Nash's game develop any further, but he is the league's best power forward and will give you a chance to win games. He's a player that can get you into the playoffs but not necessarily be the Conn Smythe performer. 15. Paul Stastny, Colorado (age: 25, drafted 2nd round, 44th overall in 2005) Statsny may never put up 100 points in a season, but he's a player that doesn't have to score a whole bunch to have an impact on the game. My pick as the next captain of the Avalanche after Adam Foote's retirement, he's a player that, like Mike Richards, has a galvanizing ability. He's very easy to like and follows in the footsteps of Joe Sakic, who was mentored by Paul's father, Peter, back in the Quebec Nordiques days. You couldn't ask for two better mentors. He's remarkably consistent, a factor that must be taken into consideration for a franchise player. 14. Nicklas Backstrom, Washington (age: 23, drafted 1st round, 4th overall in 2006) Because the Caps are so rotten defensively some nights and in the playoffs, I think Backstrom is unfairly grouped with players like Mike Green, Alex Semin, and Alex Ovechkin as guys who can't play defense. Bruce Boudreau has the luxury of sitting Backstrom in key defensive situations because he's got such a wealth of veteran depth players that can do the job (Brooks Laich, Mike Knuble, Jason Chimera, Dave Steckel, Matt Bradley) but that doesn't mean Backstrom's a slouch. He's one of the few Swedish forwards that is unusually fearless when it comes to blocking shots and my number one centre better be able to play both ways. 13. Zach Parise, New Jersey (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 17th overall in 2003) It's a shame that Parise's season is essentially over, because I was really looking forward to how he would respond with Ilya Kovalchuk under the fold for an entire season. He's a player that rarely, if ever, complains, and it would be such a blow to the Devils if they can't re-sign him this summer. Very few wingers are franchise players (currently and in history), in part because of their position, but Parise certainly bucks that trend. We saw Parise score 45 and notch 94 points and that range is probably his ceiling, but it's certainly a very good one and he's entering his prime. <img src="http://assets.nydailynews.com/img/2009/10/30/alg_gaborik.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">12. Marian Gaborik, NY Rangers (age: 28, drafted 1st round, 3rd overall in 2000) With two Rangers making the list, you'd think they'd have an easier time making the playoffs and winning games, but then you remember that Gaborik's made of glass. When you talk about the league's most dangerous goalscorers, Gaborik is frequently left out of the conversation, but when healthy, this guy could take a good run at Ovechkin and the Richard. If you can score 42 in the Wild's system and then 42 with the Rangers with no legitimate playmaker, you're good in my books. And for all his goal-scoring glory, asides from his rookie season, Gaborik has never finished a season with a minus rating. If you can stomach at least one of three seasons in which he plays less than 50 games, he's your franchise player. 11. Alexander Ovechkin, Washington (age: 25, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2004) Yes, a former 65-goal scorer, Art Ross, Pearson, Hart, Calder, and Richard winner doesn't crack the top 10 in my list. Like I said, if this was a list on the 30 best players in the league, you'd have to be a major Pittsburgh homer to not have this guy in your top 5. But despite all the highlight reels and hardware, ask yourself this question: since Ovechkin's rookie season, has he improved, at all? The answer's no. He's just as adept at picking corners and shooting pucks as he was since his rookie season, and given his production this year (a lot of bad luck, really) you might even say his play has regressed. He's not very versatile in that you can't use him on the PK or on the right wing where he struggles because he can't cut across to his forehand. He certainly doesn't make his teammates any better, at least not on a Henrik Sedin/Crosby/Toews level, and that's a major drawback. His individual play is unmatched, but his teams have never fared well in the playoffs and has as many golds ('03 WJC, '08 WC) as 6th place finishes ('04 World Cup, '10 Olympics). He's a very, very marketable player and absolutely electrifying, but you just can't picture him winning the Cup. 10. Eric Staal, Carolina (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 2nd overall in 2003) The second pick in a star-studded draft, Staal's just one of many big power forward centres Canada has to offer. But even with a Cup ring, I was never sold on him. First, he's an incredibly streaky scorer. He has 8 points in December, but 21 in November, including a 5-point effort. Second, he still can't win face-offs to save his life. Brandon Sutter struggles in the circle due to his inexperience and Jeff Skinner is too undersized to play the middle, so the majority of the draws are taken by Staal, and his 753 draws taken ranks 5th in the league, but he wins just 44.5% of them. He's lost 418 face-offs, a league high, and to put that in perspective, Crosby has lost only 4 less but taken 181 more draws. That's a major red flag - that Staal can enter his sixth NHL season but see no improvement at all in the circle. Third, while Staal has put up good numbers in the playoffs, he never would've won that Cup had it not been for Ward's play and Rod Brind'Amour's presence. However, like Nash and Getzlaf, Staal has that rare blend of size and skill that you can build a team around. 9. Ryan Getzlaf, Anaheim (age: 25, drafted 1st round, 19th overall in 2003) Like Eric Staal, Getzlaf still hasn't figured out to win in the circle. I don't know what's with this big 6'4", 220 lbs. forwards but they can be so weak on the draws. They just can't figure it out. Some of the league's better face-off men, Nicklas Backstrom, Paul Stastny, Rich Peverley, and Manny Malhotra, aren't very big. For a big guy with such soft hands it still perplexes me how Getzlaf still doesn't have a single 30-goal season. His career high in the WHL? 29. His NHL high? 25. With a long-term stint on the IR coming up with nasal fractures, he's unlikely to crack those numbers this year. With assist totals like 58 and 66 you'd think he was trying to make a run at the Joe Thornton's title for "big man with softest hands." But Getzlaf's not a perimeter player - he was an absolute wrecking ball for Canada with Perry and Nash, and a willingness to take whatever role's given to him makes a good captain and franchise player. 8. Evgeni Malkin, Pittsburgh (age: 24, drafted 1st round, 2nd overall in 2004) What does Malkin have that Ovechkin doesn't? Face-off ability and a stronger work ethic. If you could really pinpoint the Canucks' success this year, it's their dramatic improvement in the circle and one of the best transition games I've seen in quite awhile. Ovechkin certainly has the better pedigree, but we saw how Malkin carried the team without Crosby. He has a Cup and a Conn Smythe, two things that will always trump whatever individual award Ovechkin gets his hands on. The thing with Malkin is that he's easily distracted and takes some really bad penalties, but that's something that always gets better with more experience and maturity. If there's another reason to pick Malkin ahead of Ovechkin, it's that Ovechkin's stock seems to have stalled while Malkin's at least trending up, albeit slightly. 7. Mike Richards, Philadelphia (age: 25, drafted 1st round, 24th overall in 2003) How fitting that one of the league's most soft-spoken yet hard-working players plays for Philadelphia? Of all the comparisons that these young players have drawn, Crosby-Gretzky, Ovechkin-Bure, Doughty-Orr/Bourque, Richards-Clarke makes the most sense. Once Richards put that orange jersey on, you just can't see him in any other uniform. A two-way forward who doesn't have high-end offensive or defensive skill, but what he lacks in talent he makes up for with a tireless work ethic and a relentless drive to win. He's extremely versatile in that he can score goals or be a shut-down centre depending on the task, and with such a deep Flyers team, no matter what the situation, Peter Laviolette is going to go to Richards every single time. He probably won't lead your team in scoring but when the playoffs start he's a sure-fire bet to be in Conn Smythe talks. <img src="http://www.dobberhockey.com/dobberpics/ryan_kesler.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">6. Ryan Kesler, Vancouver (age: 26, drafted 1st round, 23rd overall in 2003) With the way he's playing right now, you wonder what his ceiling is. 35 goals? 40 goals? Kesler's a player that you constantly have to re-evaluate every year because every year it seems like he makes a marked improvement in one area or another. Originally thought to be a third-line checking centre, then a second-line centre with limited offensive upside, he's now a worthy franchise player. His ranking may be high, but he's outplaying Richards, Getzlaf, and Staal. It's amazing what a little smartening up will do to a player, and Kesler's just that. He works harder than anybody else on the ice, much like another former fan favourite here, and he has a developed a tendency to come through in the clutch with some real blue-collar plays. You can tell he's really enjoying his time here as a Canuck and while Hank may one day hoist Lord Stanley Kesler's the one that will claim Conn Smythe honours. Is his ranking high? Maybe, because no player is as good as he seems on a hot streak and as bad as he seems on a cold streak. But really, is there anything Kesler's doing right now that makes you think he's a fluke? 5. Anze Kopitar, Los Angeles (age: 23, drafted 1st round, 11th overall in 2005) Between him and Doughty, the Kings have at least half a dozen long playoff runs in the future. Mixed with the right veterans and an equally young supporting cast (Dustin Brown, Wayne Simmonds), the Kings may topple the Canucks and Red Wings one day as the West powerhouse. He had a good showing in his first ever playoff appearance with 5 points before bowing out in the first round. Like Staal and Getzlaf he's not particularly strong in the circle, but he's not as weak as the other two. It helps that Stoll wins 60% (!!!!) of his face-offs and puts a little less pressure on Kopitar. Of all the big forwards he may be the most skillful goal scorer and the smoothest skater, two things that really work for him in the new NHL. 4. Matt Duchene, Colorado (age: 19, drafted 1st round, 3rd overall in 2009) Duchene and the Avs were a match made in heaven - a young player who idolized Joe Sakic and the Avs growing up and enough optimism to not get the title of first overall pick get to him. If that 2009 draft was re-done, Hedman, Tavares, and John Moore probably would've been the guys whose stocked have dropped the most. He's fast, speedy, competitive, and a player who has his head screwed on right. He's in a good hockey market with a good coach and a great core of players with Stastny, Ryan O'Reilly, Chris Stewart, Peter Mueller (when he regains his form), JM Liles, and Kevin Shattenkirk. He doesn't need to rejuvenate a jaded fan base on Long Island or spark interest in Tampa Bay. He's a great player in a great position to succeed. It goes a long way when a franchise has a history and tradition of winning the right way. 3. Steven Stamkos, Tampa Bay (age: 20, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2008) In retrospect, perhaps the Lightning's ill-advised hiring of Barry Melrose as coach was good for Stamkos, but it showed that this was a player who wouldn't get beat up physically or mentally. Good for the Lightning to cut him loose soon after realizing their mistake and Stamkos has made some incredible strides in his third year, even after 51 goals and 95 points. His ceiling? Potentially 60 goals, the first to do so since Ovechkin, and 110 points, easily accomplished if his assist totals match his goals. He's smart enough to the play PK in the future and he's already a force on the PP, possibly even more dangerous than Ovechkin because his shot's more accurate. He's a sure-fire captain and eventual Cup winner. 2. Jonathan Toews, Chicago (age: 22, drafted 1st round, 3rd overall in 2006) Again, like the 2009 draft in which the best player went third overall, if the 2006 draft we re-done, Erik Johnson and Jordan Staal wouldn't have gone 1-2 (a cautionary tale - when going with a franchise forward or defenseman, always go with the forward). At age 22 Toews has won just about everything that's there to be won. He won't have another year like 2010 when he captured every single significant trophy because it takes a lot of luck for those opportunities just to present themselves. However, like Pavel Datsyuk, Toews may never be a prolific goal scorer (but he will have the reels to make you think he does) but he plays the strongest two-way game in the league. He's excellent in the circle and is already on the way to becoming one of the greatest captains in NHL history. <img src="http://www.hockeyhermit.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/sidney-crosby.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">1. Sidney Crosby, Pittsburgh (age: 23, drafted 1st round, 1st overall in 2005) What can be said about the greatest player of our generation? He's improved every year, like Kesler, but by an exponentially greater scale. He whined too much in his rookie season and aside from a string of f-bombs on HBO's recent 24/7 episode (great series, by the way) he's now more level-headed. He passed too much and so he scored 51 goals. He wasn't great in the circle but now he's one of the league's best. He had some bad turnovers but now he's one of the hardest players to knock off the puck. There was talk not too long ago where people wondered if Stamkos was in Ovechkin and Crosby's class. That question was poorly phrased. It should be whether or not Ovechkin and Stamkos were in Crosby's class. Before you poo-poo on my list (at the very least, I think these picks are defensible) there were a ton of players that weren't quite franchise material, but certainly very, very good player material. Here's the list of players who couldn't quite make it, for various reasons. Corey Perry, Bobby Ryan, Patrick Kane, Evander Kane, Lucic, Eberle, Taylor Hall, Seguin, Vanek, Tyler Myers, Brandon Sutter, Tavares, Okposo, Seabrook, Chris Stewart, Voracek, Brassard, Loui Eriksson, James Neal, Niklas Kronwall, Jimmy Howard, Sam Gagner, Hemsky, David Booth, Mikko Koivu, Brent Burns, PK Subban, Pekka Rinne, Zajac, Erik Karlsson, Jeff Carter, Claude Giroux, Kyle Turris, Kris Letang, Pavelski, Backes, Hedman, Alex Semin, Varlamov, Neuvirth, Kovalchuk, Rask, Derek Roy, Bogosian, Kessel, Halak, Dustin Brown.

I must admit it's weird not seeing mounds of snow on the streets in December, seeing how as I have spent the majority of the past four winters in Nova Scotia. But either way, it's the season of giving. So, in honour of that, here are your 20 worst trades in the NHL since the lockout! In chronological order! Hooray! August 3, 2005. Edmonton trades Eric Brewer, Jeff Woywitka, and Doug Lynch to St. Louis for Chris Pronger. The advent of the salary cap and a potential new ownership meant the Blues had to shed salary to make themselves more financially attractive. Brewer remains in the Blues organization and is their current captain but isn't expected to last beyond this season. Woywitka shuttled between the AHL and NHL for some time and is currently in the Stars' organization. Lynch, a former second round pick, has played the last three years in Austria. Pronger would sign an expensive five-year extension and was a smashing success with the Oilers in his first season, leading them to the finals. August 26, 2005. Minnesota trades Zbynek Michalek to Phoenix for Erik Westrum and Dustin Wood. The Wild saw Michalek, who was undrafted, in 22 games and decided he wasn't worth their time before sending him to Phoenix. What a decision that turned out to be. Westrum played only 27 games at the NHL level and has been playing in Switzerland for the past couple of seasons while Wood never saw time in the NHL. Michalek spend five productive years in Phoenix, leading the league in blocked shots one year and guiding the Coyotes to their first postseason appearance since 2003. <img src="http://www.bestsportsphotos.com/images/t_20631_07.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">November 30, 2005. Boston trades Joe Thornton to San Jose for Marco Sturm, Brad Stuart, and Wayne Primeau. This trade eventually cost then GM Mike O'Connell his job. O'Connell, to be fair and honest, wasn't a bad GM - Patrice Bergeron and David Krejci were both drafted by him - but he often butted heads with owner Jeremy Jacobs, who refused to open his pockets to retain their prized free agents like Sergei Gonchar and Brian Rolston. The Bruins were struggling at the time, and perhaps misguided by his anger towards ownership, he traded Thornton for three depth players. The trade sent the Bruins back five years. Thornton would go on to notch 92 points in 58 games with the Sharks and win the Art Ross that year. Primeau and Stuart lasted two season each before departing and Sturm was recently sent to Los Angeles for free. Interestingly enough, O'Connell is currently the Kings' Director of Pro Development. December 5, 2005. Philadelphia trades Patrick Sharp and Eric Meloche to Chicago for Matt Ellison and a 3rd round pick in 2006. Ellison played just 7 games for the Flyers over two seasons before moving onto Milwaukee in the AHL and then the KHL for the past two seasons. Meloche did not play a single game for Chicago and is suiting up for his fourth season with Straubing in the DEL. Sharp, however, has become one of the leaders of a young Blackhawks franchise. Unable to find quality playing time on a deep Flyers roster, Bobby Clarke gave him a chance by shipping him to Chicago, where he has become one of the league's most versatile and intelligent players. Sharp's 11 goals in last year's playoffs was tied for the team lead with Byfuglien. Sharp is shooting for his 5th straight 20-goal season. June 23, 2006. Florida trades Roberto Luongo, Lukas Krajicek, and a 6th round pick to Vancouver for Todd Bertuzzi, Bryan Allen, and Alex Auld. For all the hate Dave Nonis has drawn in this city, this should be the deal that negates everything. Luongo, as we all know, is an elite goalie with an Olympic gold medal. Bertuzzi was never quite the same since the Steve Moore incident and lasted just 7 games in Florida before being swapped for Shawn Matthias. Auld was horribly miscast as a starting netminder and the steady but unspectacular Allen remains the only souvenir for Florida in that trade. Oh, and that supposed throwaway 6th rounder? Turns out the Canucks got a pretty decent prospect. You might've heard of him. Sergei Shirokov? <img src="http://miamisportsblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/luongo.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">June 24, 2006. Toronto trades Tuukka Rask to Boston for Andrew Raycroft. Probably angry that Vancouver was making all the headlines around the league, John Ferguson, Jr. and the Leafs panicked and made a goalie move of their own, moving promising netminder Rask for former Calder winner Raycroft. To be fair, the Leafs had another netminder in the system, Justin Pogge, but he turned out to be a bust. Raycroft is now a career journeyman and backup, and while Rask is stapled to the bench due to Tim Thomas' otherworldly play, he is arguably the most promising goalie in this league. February 3, 2007. Boston trades Kris Versteeg to Chicago for Brandon Bochenski and a conditional 5th round pick in 2008. This was a trade that flew completely under the radar, perceived to be a rather insignificant minor league deal. Versteeg has since been moved to Toronto, but he was a key cog in the Blackhawks' makeup and was a vital secondary scorer with Patrick Sharp and Marian Hossa. For a team that doesn't have a lot of high-end offensive skill, the Bruins would probably like a re-do for this one. As for Bochenski? After teasing fans with 13 points in 20 games playing alongside Jason Spezza and Dany Heatley, he had trouble sticking with NHL clubs and despite being a very talented AHL scorer (33 goals in 35 games once), he now plays in the KHL. February 27, 2007. San Jose trades Josh Gorges and a 1st round pick (Max Pacioretty) for Craig Rivet and a 5th round pick in 2008 (Julien Demers). At the time, it was a good trade for San Jose because the Sharks were ready to win now and Rivet gave them one good year, with 35 points and 104 PIM. But it's these kind of deals that have really cost San Jose, who are struggling to keep up with their younger and better stocked Pacific Division opponents. Rivet was traded to Buffalo for two second round picks (Bill Wrenn in 2009 and the other sent to Carolina, who took Mark Alt) and, most likely due to injury, has seen his play nosedive. Meanwhile, Gorges has become one of Jacques Martin's most dependable defenseman and regularly plays against top opposition and logs 20 minutes a night. Pacioretty has yet to find his place in the NHL but he's a player with good offensive potential with 32 points 27 AHL games and 3 points in 3 NHL games this year. <img src="http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/01cFg5M41QfN8/340x.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">June 18, 2007. Nashville trades Kimmo Timonen and Scott Hartnell to Philadelphia for a 1st round pick. You can't entirely blame David Poile for this one. The Preds were going through ownership trouble amidst accusations of financial fraud with minority owner William Del Baggio, and could not retain any of its stars, despite at one point being able to land Peter Forsberg for a playoff push. The Flyers quickly locked up the two players and both have been vital to the franchise since. The two players combined for 28 points in last year's postseason. But the real kicker for me is that the 1st rounder the Preds acquired was their own and had been traded to Philadelphia last year for, you guessed it, Peter Forsberg. Perhaps the only redeeming fact is that the Preds used the pick to select former Giant defenseman Jonathon Blum, and I know better than to question the Preds' scouting department when it comes to blueliners. February 26, 2008. Tampa Bay trades Brad Richards and Johan Holmqvist to Dallas for Mike Smith, Jussi Jokinen, Jeff Halpern, and a 4th round pick in 2009. Unable to foot the bill for their star players' salaries, the Lightning elected to part with Richards, who was in the third year of a 5-year, $39 million contract. Diminishing point totals scared management into action, but you'd think for a former 91-point player they could've gotten a better deal. Smith hasn't posted more than 14 wins a season in his career. Jokinen was later traded for a bag of pucks. Halpern is now in Montreal and that 4th rounder was later sent to Edmonton. Meanwhile, Richards posted yet another 91-point season last year and should the Stars elect to deal him, they'll certainly get a better haul than what Tampa got for him. July 1, 2008. Edmonton trades Joni Pitkanen for Erik Cole. The Oilers should've seen this one coming. Cole scored 30 goals in 60 games the year Carolina won the Cup, but dropped to 29 and then 22 before the Oilers snagged him. His tenure in Edmonton lasted just one disappointing 16-goal year before he was shipped back to Carolina, where a slew of neck injuries has really affected his production. Cole's point production the last five years since 2006: 61, 51, 27, 15, 16. Pitkanen, on the other hand, has emerged as one of the league's best unheralded puck-moving defenseman, having notched 46 points last year and with 18 in 29 this year is poised to hit that 40-point mark again. <img src="http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/77804113.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF878921E86F5CE8BE5D78FB39989BC62F51603617BBE599935116B54EB022E0AB10AD13"class="imageFloatRightFramed">July 4, 2008. Tampa Bay trades Dan Boyle and Brad Lukowich to San Jose for Matt Carle, Ty Wishart, a 1st round pick in 2009, and a 4th round pick 2010 (James Mullin). Boyle had just signed a six-year, $40 million extension in late February, but just four months later ownership decided that his contract was not economically feasible and forced him to wave his no-trade clause. While San Jose's playoff woes have been well-documented, Boyle has been one of the best offensive blueliners in the league, posting two consecutive 50+ point seasons and 18 points in 21 playoff games with the Sharks. Carle suited up for just 12 games in Tampa Bay before moving on to Philadelphia, Wishart is still developing in the AHL, and the 1st rounder was packaged to Ottawa for Andrej Meszaros, who had 33 points and -18 rating over 2 seasons in Tampa, despite totals of 39, 35, and 36 in the three previous seasons with Ottawa. December 14, 2008. Anaheim trades Andy McDonald to St. Louis for Doug Weight, Michal Birner, and a 7th round pick in 2008. For now, Saku Koivu will do, but before that the Ducks had an awful time trying to find secondary scoring. McDonald and Getzlaf formed a fantastic 1-2 punch down the middle when the Ducks won the Cup in 2007, but figured Doug Weight, six years older, was the better option. The Ducks' 2008 campaign didn't last past the first round and Weight left for Long Island. Birner has since returned to Finland and the Blues eventually re-acquired their 7th rounder in a separate deal and drafted Paul Karpowich. McDonald has 154 points in 199 games (0.77 ppg, vs. Koivu's 0.65 ppg) for the Blues. Getzlaf's current point total is nearly double Koivu's and the Ducks continually rely on their big line of Getzlaf, Corey Perry, and Bobby Ryan. February 7, 2009. Carolina trades Wade Brookbank, Josef Melichar, and a 4th round pick in 2009 to Tampa Bay for Jussi Jokinen. Jussi Jokinen wasn't adjusting well to life in Tampa Bay, with just 16 points in 46 games in his first full season with the Lightning. Arguably the league's best shootout player, Jokinen netted 30 goals for Carolina last year playing alongside Eric Staal, and while he's off to a slow start this year he's still third in team scoring. As for Tampa? Neither Brookbank nor Melichar are in the system, and that pick was later traded to Toronto for Richard Petiot (no longer with Tampa), only to be forfeited by the league due to a dispute over Jonas Frogren's contract. So, really, the Canes got a 30-goal scorer and showed off the Leafs' infinite front office wisdom for free. I'd say that's a pretty good deal. <img src="http://www.spox.com/de/sport/ussport/0903/Bilder/christian-ehrhoff-san-jose-sharks-nhl-514.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">August 28, 2009. San Jose trades Christian Ehrhoff and Brad Lukowich to Vancouver for Daniel Rahimi and Patrick White. Nonis will be remembered, quite unfairly, as the GM who went off the board and chose Patrick White in the first round in 2007. After Nonis was fired and Mike Gillis stepped in, it was made apparent to him that White, who had scored only 13 goals in 81 game over two seasons at Minnesota, was not in the Canucks' long-term plans. The Sharks were in a cap bind with the acquisition of Dany Heatley and were forced to jettison Ehrhoff, who had hit the 40-point plateau for the first time in his career. Ehrhoff finished his first campaign with Vancouver with 14 goals and +36 with over 22 minutes per game. Rahimi has since returned to Sweden, unlikely to return, and White has just 1 goal so far in his senior year. September 12, 2009. Ottawa trades Dany Heatley and a 5th round pick (Isaac Macleod) to San Jose for Jonathan Cheechoo, Milan Michalek, and a 2nd round pick. Bryan Murray had his hands tied with this one because Edmonton truly offered a better deal, one that centred around Dustin Penner. Cheechoo was already a shadow of his former self and the 2nd round pick was later flipped to the Islanders for Andy Sutton, now with Anaheim. Michalek, the younger brother of Pittsburgh's Zbynek, is a big, bruising winger, but has just 7 goals in 31 games this year. He's struggling big-time and can't even provide secondary scoring the Sens desperately need. Heatley, on the other hand, was one goal shy of 40 in his first season as a Shark last year. September 18, 2009. Boston trades Phil Kessel to Toronto for a 1st (Tyler Seguin) and 2nd round pick (Jared Knight) in 2010, and another 1st round pick in 2011. In defense of Brian Burke, I don't think anyone predicted the Leafs to finish second last. The jury's still out on this one but with another trying season that 1st rounder in 2011 looks to shape up to be a top 15 pick for an already deep Bruins squad. Seguin, despite being a healthy scratch lately, has wowed with his speed and hands, while Kessel continues to labour and is on pace for just 27 goals. Toronto's 75 GF is only higher than New Jersey and the Islanders. The scales in this trade could still in the Leafs' favour, especially if Seguin or the 2011 1st rounder doesn't pan out, but the chances of that happening are quite slim. January 21, 2010. Calgary trades Dion Phaneuf, Fredrik Sjostrom, and Keith Aulie to Toronto for Matt Stajan, Niklas Hagman, Jamal Mayers, and Ian White. In a trade that features marquee talent, the team getting the most talent always wins, so score this one for Toronto. Stajan and Hagman are the only remaining Flames from that trade and while both have been quietly producing the team scores too few and far between and rank 2nd last in the West. While "Neon Dion" hasn't fared much better in Toronto, he's by far the most talented player out of this group and Keith Aulie, as I've said before, is an absolute keeper. Keep in mind Toronto's one the youngest teams in the league and they're trending up, unlike Calgary. June 24, 2010. Chicago trades Dustin Byfuglien, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager, and Akim Aliu to Atlanta for Marty Reasoner, Joey Crabb, Jeremy Morin, New Jersey's 1st round (Kevin Hayes) and 2nd round picks (Justin Holl) in 2010. July 1, 2010. Chicago trades Andrew Ladd to Atlanta for Ivan Vishnevskiy and a 2nd round pick in 2011. We all know how this happened. As much as Dale Tallon was instrumental in building that Cup-winning squad, he was also terribly inept at handling the cap and didn't file RFA paperwork on time and, as a result, had to overpay to keep his team together. He was fired for his blunder and Stan Bowman was left to clean up his mess, inevitably leading to a mass dump of players to Atlanta, who had just hired Rick Dudley, Tallon/Bowman's assistant in Chicago, as GM. Reasoner was later swapped for Jeff Taffe while Crabb left for Toronto as a UFA when the Hawks still didn't have cap room to keep either. The Thrashers, meanwhile, have a blueliner garnering Norris talks in Byfuglien (33 points in 34 games), named a new captain in Ladd, and have serviceable depth with Sopel and Eager and a decent prospect in Aliu. The Thrashers sit atop the Southeast Division, a place where the Caps had been comfortably sitting for the past 3 years. The Hawks? Currently sitting 8th in the West with 14 losses, third most in the West, and in danger of following in the footsteps of Edmonton and Carolina, both teams who finished in the Finals yet missed the playoffs a year later. <img src="http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0c9f0M9dRg3Je/x350.jpg"class="imageFloatRightFramed">November 30, 2010. Washington trades Tomas Fleischmann to Colorado for Scott Hannan. The Avs were moving in another direction, and as a fast and speedy team the cement feet quota had already been taken up by Adam Foote. The Caps were loaded with talent but still couldn't figure out how to play defense, and with the emergence of centres Marcus Johansson and Mathieu Perreault, Fleischmann was expendable. The trade made sense for both teams but it couldn't turn out any more lopsided. Since moving to Matt Duchene's left wing, "Flash" has re-found his offensive game, putting up 11 points in 9 games and named the NHL's second star of the week. Despite snapping their losing streak against Ottawa, Hannan hasn't provided the defensive presence the Caps were looking for and is a woeful -9 in 9 games. And there you are, the 20 worst trades since the lockout. There have been some big ones, including the Marian Hossa-Dany Heatley, Jay Bouwmeester, and two more Chris Pronger trades, but in those trades I felt at least both teams have been able to walk away with something substantial. Even the Antoine Vermette trade netted the Sens a decent prospect in Robin Lehner. No trade is fair - there's a reason why some teams continue to struggle while others remain consistently good. I was tempted to touch on the Ilya Kovalchuk trade, but it wasn't the trade that killed the Devils, it was that extension over the summer. Tracking the picks that have been moved over the years has been a real pain, but here's an interesting tidbit I found. I was originally going to include the Edmonton-Anaheim deal that sent Pronger to the Ducks but I held back because of this little nugget. In exchange for Pronger, the Oilers received Joffrey Lupul, Ladislav Smid, Anaheim's 2007 1st rounder, 2008 2nd rounder, and another conditional 1st rounder. The 2007 1st rounder was sent to Phoenix, who selected Nick Ross, and the 2008 2nd rounder was sent to the Islanders, who took Travis Hamonic. The conditional 1st rounder would be awarded on the condition that the Ducks reach the finals. (I vaguely remember an article that said Oilers brass were rooting for the Ducks so they could get that extra first rounder.) Anyway, the Ducks did make the finals in 2007 so their 2008 first rounder, 22nd overall, was given to the Oilers. And who did the Oilers end up picking? Jordan Eberle. Hope you enjoyed this post. Happy holidays, folks.

Subban's looked better since but he certainly wasn't very good against Detroit or Toronto. He's going to make mistakes and if Martin benches him again for the same reasons as he did last time then I question the Habs' handling of Subban. That Flyers game, a team he has had a history with, gave him a little more jump.

More swagger for ya: After every Avs win Matt Duchene and Paul Stastny do their "Bang Bang" dance.

Hockey players have always stood out from basketball, football, and to a lesser extent, baseball players because they carry themselves on and off the ice with a certain demeanor. Some call it boring or calculated, while others say they're humble and down-to-earth. Some of the greatest leaders the NHL has ever seen, including Wayne Gretzky, Steve Yzerman, and Bobby Orr, were very soft-spoken players who did more with their stick than their mouths. They were professional and knew their place in the league, respected the veterans, and realized that there was a time and place for everything. Having said that, PK Subban and Linus Omark have all recently attracted a lot of negative attention with their swagger. But, seriously, what's wrong with that? Subban has always been a very confident player. It was the reason why he made a seamless transition from a four-year career with Belleville to Hamilton, where he won the Presidents' Award in his first professional season for his outstanding accomplishments. After logging a team-high 25 minutes against the Oilers on December 1, in which the Habs blew a 3-1 lead and lost 4-3 in overtime, Jacques Martin decided to make Subban his scapegoat and proceeded to make him a healthy scratch for 3 games, all Habs wins. It was Subban's fault that Sam Gagner so easily sidestepped him en route to a shorthanded beauty and a lackadaisical pass to Mike Cammalleri, who also should've been at fault, that led to the Dustin Penner winner. But which rookie doesn't make mistakes? <img src="http://flyersorangecrush.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/0subban_0.jpg"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">Elliotte Friedman used his 'Price Theory' to rationalize Subban's exile, but I think that Price Theory is absolute junk. Price's game fell apart and there were questions about his work ethic. As far as I could tell, the only mistakes Subban made were in that game. Sure, he talks a lot of trash, but so do two very good players on the Canucks. Mike Richards obviously lost a lot of respect for Subban because he ran his mouth too much, but if that's the reason why Subban's sitting then the Habs are doing nothing but hurting Subban's game. What had become a trademark of Subban's game, enormous talent and a mouth to go with it, disappeared when he returned to the ice against Detroit. It was so obvious that Subban was overthinking the game, trying to stay within the boundaries Martin had drawn, that he became ineffective, and it didn't help matters when he was -3 against the Leafs a night later. Let's get one thing straight: Price was benched because he was awful for a long period and to win games the Habs were better off with Jaroslav Halak that year (as a side note, even though he was heavily criticized Price put up better numbers last year than he did the year before, but if you don't win games you get vilified in Montreal). Subban should've been benched and called out for his play in that Oilers game. But to tell this kid that what had made him so successful on the ice is the wrong way to play sends the wrong message. The Habs went 3-0 without Subban in the lineup, but in the process they potentially killed this kid's season and development. Like Subban, Linus Omark is a confident player whose reputation precedes him, especially after made him a YouTube sensation. Omark isn't a very well-rounded player, but he's got great hands and give him room around the net and he'll make sure the puck goes in, and after what he did in Sweden you can't fault Tom Renney to pick the rookie as one of his shooters. Well, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnsngTNeGTg, and all he did was do a spin-o-rama at center ice before faking a shot and slipping it into the net. After the game, Martin St. Louis wasn't too happy about it and accused Omark of disrespect and showboating. A lot of hockey pundits agreed, and to them, I say: "What!? Are you crazy!?" Let me first remind everyone that this is the same guy that pulled off the in a shootout once that caused as much controversy as Omark's goal. Not only is St. Louis being hypocritical, he's also being a sore loser. Omark did what he did best - he put the puck in the net. As gimmicky as that spin-o-rama at centre ice was, he got the job done, didn't he? That move may have been unnecessary, but I also wouldn't be surprised if that put Dan Ellis off guard. The moment Omark pulled off that move he instantly made himself unpredictable. Ellis probably didn't have a very comprehensive scouting report on Omark and was probably reading deke all the way and that spin-o-rama just sold it. The shootout was meant to entertain fans and Omark did just that. If the Lightning weren't happy about Omark's goal maybe they should've won that game in regulation. If Omark didn't score, this would be a complete non-issue. Stop whining, Marty. <img src="http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/85898170.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54885FC7A2A8F6E4AD040BA0C0C7507895D4FECAFC04AA11091E30A760B0D811297"class="imageFloatRightFramed">Breaking into the NHL is difficult and most young players have their ups and downs, but often the most successful players are the ones who are confident in their abilities. We don't have to look too far to find better examples. When Daniel and Henrik broke into the league, they were physically unprepared for the rigors of the NHL play and schedule, and after less than stellar rookie seasons I think they were questioning themselves if they had left MoDo too early (yes, they did). It wasn't until it became quite obvious that the days of the West Coast Express were over that they really stepped up their game. I don't think it was a coincidence at all that when Markus Naslund dipped from 32 goals and 79 points to 24 goals and 60 points in 2006, both the Sedins broke out and hit the 70-point plateau. It was then that they realized they could play and the Canucks were counting on them in the future. Their play wasn't all that different - they could still find each other telepathically and no matter who you put on a line with them, be it Wade Brookbank, Trevor Linden, or Taylor Pyatt, these guys found ways to score. They were confident in their abilities. They weren't the sisters anymore. I must admit, I was quite critical of them, even during the 2005-06 to 2007-08 seasons when they put up three consecutive 70+ point seasons. I thought they were statistically good, but had only led the Canucks to the playoffs once in three years and in their only postseason showing they were average at best. But there was one play in particular, and it wasn't of the highlight reel variety, that told me the Sedins were ready to compete. The Sedins are often victim of extra shots and after whistle scrums and for the most part they don't retaliate. Players with confidence and swagger don't back down. I'm not saying the Sedins are easily intimidated, because they're not, but they've never been in-your-face players. It's a trait that I like in hockey players and it's all about body language. I've never seen Subban shy away from a puck in the corner, a hit, a risky play, or a bigger player. I don't think there's a shootout move that Omark wouldn't attempt. But on December 27, 2009, the year that saw Henrik capture the Art Ross and the Hart Memorial in June, I knew the Sedins had arrived. How? After being totally abused by Dion Phaneuf alongside the boards, Henrik got up, headed towards the net, corralled the rebound and scored. That's resiliency. But the swagger? Immediately after the goal, Henrik went up to Phaneuf and just nearly made him cry. Watch the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gx0MYvc-eiY. So, I ask again. What's so wrong with swagger?

I've been watching Kesler really closely the past two/three games. He definitely is the emotional leader. The guy is a competitor and hates to lose. I like that in a player. I honestly believe that the C is a role that you grow into, not necessarily something that is given based on past merits and accomplishments.

The Canucks finished November with a 8-4-1 record, but there was one game everyone had their eye on: Saturday, November 20, a nationally-televised matchup against the Chicago Blackhawks. While Chicago may have lost several pieces to Atlanta and other teams, they were still the team that had eliminated the Canucks two years in a row from postseason play. The Canucks were overcoming two straight losses, a tough 4-3 OTL in Buffalo, extending their winless streak at HSBC Arena to seven-plus years, and a 3-1 loss to the Penguins, which was supposed to be a preview of two potential Cup finalists. The Hawks were coming off a 7-2 loss to Calgary the night before. It certainly was a 'measuring stick' game, a test of resiliency between two very good teams. The result? A 7-1 drubbing at the hands of Chicago, an absolute shellacking in which Roberto Luongo was chased yet again, though at times through no fault of his own. The performance, if you could call it that, raised questions of whether this Canucks squad was truly ready for the same challenges that await them in the playoffs. To answer these questions, my friend Matt Sze (pronounced 'zee'), a fellow blogger who runs SzeSpeak: The Thinking Man's Blog has kindly joined me for this discussion. JC: The Hawks showed great resiliency by bouncing back from a terrible loss in the second night of a back to back. The Canucks followed up that effort with another loss against a hot Phoenix team. Resiliency is a key component of any good hockey team and in both games the Canucks just didn't seem to have any legs. Attitude reflects leadership, so the age-old question is, was Henrik the right choice as captain? It's no secret that for most North American kids, the ultimate dream is winning the Cup. For many Europeans, it's winning Olympic gold. MS: There was no other choice. Kesler's too young and plays an emotional game, something that can work against him. I'm not so sure Daniel was a good pick to wear the 'A' but Bieksa was a great choice. He has had a long tenure with the Canucks and provides some much-needed fire from the back end. And in regards to that Cup vs. Olympic gold argument, I don't buy it. All athletes are wired the same way - it doesn't matter what the prize is, athletes play to win. As former NFL coach Herm Edwards said, "you play to win the game." Getting to the pinnacle of any sport requires hard work, so to criticize the Sedins or anybody for lacking the desire to win is unfair. JC: I'm going to have to disagree, because I still think it makes a difference... Maybe I'm just a traditionalist and perhaps Lidstrom was just an anomaly... But what about Alexandre Daigle? The guy famously said he played hockey purely for the money. MS: Well, he didn't become a number one overall pick on talent alone, but he made some bad life decisions that eventually led to an unspectacular career. JC: The Canucks have been eliminated two consecutive years by the Hawks. Because Luongo and the Sedins are the best players, they have taken the brunt of the criticism, and a lot of it isn't unfounded. It seemed as though fortunes would be reversed in last year's playoffs, but the Sedins then vanished for stretches. Can our top players elevate their play? <img src="http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/73882764.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54831A838CD875A9477EF75E5B296482BCE804B3618D4BA3975"class="imageFloatLeftFramed">MS: I don't think Luongo has ever demonstrated that he could elevate his game, except in that 2007 series against Dallas, his first ever playoff appearance. He may never elevate his game to that level again, but most times it's the other guys, the supporting players, that step up their games. Patrick Kane is a key player for Chicago, but prior to that Finals against Philadelphia it had mostly been Jonathan Toews, and Kane ended up with the series winner. When Pittsburgh won the Cup, it was Max Talbot who scored the game-winner. Pascal Dupuis, Matt Cooke, and Talbot all raised their games. JC: So what's the difference between those players who can elevate their games and those who can't? Is it emotion? Attitude? I think one of the reasons Henrik was so successful last year was because of his swagger. He had that "yeah, I'm the best player in the league" attitude. When Daniel came back, it seemed to have disappeared. MS: Right now - emotion, attitude, swagger - Henrik doesn't have it. But in the regular season I don't think there's any need for it. It's going to build up. The only guy that does show some swagger is Bieksa. The Sedins are quiet players. I think Henrik giving Bieksa the 'A' is a challenge for him to get back to his former level. Those 42, 43 point seasons may be an anomaly but he's still an effective player when his head's on straight. JC: So who's the X factor for the Canucks in the playoffs? MS: Well, obviously it's Luongo. For me, it's two players: Mason Raymond and Jannik Hansen. We know that Raymond's got great speed and can put the puck in the net, but but he hasn't elevated his game in the playoffs yet. (In 22 playoff games he has only 7 points.) The other is Hansen, because he has the feistiness needed to make things happen in the postseason. I remember back in that Dallas series, Stars fans were going, "who is this guy?" JC: Gillis made an honest attempt to make this team better this offseason. If there's anything I noticed this year, it's that this team is so much faster. Speed kills, but we don't know how that will translate to playoff hockey. MS: We are faster and bigger, but I don't think we're grittier than we were last year. Torres isn't really an upgrade hitting-wise over Steve Bernier. Malhotra's an upgrade over Wellwood but he's not the sort of guy who'll just lay guys out. We really won't know the playoffs. The playoffs are tighter defensively but the Sedins are good playoff players because they won't necessarily create the room, but they can certainly find the open areas. They make space with their playmaking, not their physicality. They're 30 years old - still relatively young - and are still learning how to play better with each passing playoff series. JC: Alright, the real questions. Do the Hawks have our number? Vigneault hasn't announced who is starting Friday vs. Chicago, but I think you can't not start Luongo. Starting Schneider is a clear white towel message. MS: Ohhhh. Not right now, but certainly last year. We've been blown out only once this season. If the Canucks put up a good fight, what else do you want? Maybe the Hawks will be better in the season but come playoff time their lack of depth will hurt. Vancouver was vastly overrated last year. We were the underdogs in that series - the four best teams were Detroit, Chicago, San Jose, then Vancouver. The thing about the West is, any team can beat any team. The level of parity is so high, if you're off your game one night it can result in a disaster. If there is a mental edge, it's what they've done in the past. The Canucks have to continue to ride Luongo but also depends on how he losses the game. The team collapsed as a whole. Losses means the team has to look at itself as a whole, not just the goalie, unless there were some flagrantly bad goals. The Canucks have one of the best sports psychologists on staff. Chicago's lower in the standings. The Canucks should be better. JC: What about the Wings? We usually play moderately well against them. MS: No, they don't have our number either. We play the Wings tough, all the time. The Canucks just recently won 6-4 against them. That being said, the Wings are still the best team in the West, and in a 7-game series I'd still take the Wings because their best players can elevate their game. So far, the Canucks' players haven't. Guys like Dan Cleary, Tomas Holmstrom, and Johan Franzen are good in the regular season, but great in the playoffs. Kesler, Burrows, and Raymond weren't so good last year. Let's not let the Sedins off the hook - they should elevate their game too, but I do think they were better than Naslund and Bertuzzi. Depth is key. JC: If you look at some of the league's best playoff performers - Crosby, Mike Richards, Datsyuk, Zetterberg - these are guys who play in all situations of the game. The Sedins don't kill penalties. Part of the reason is because they don't have to, and also by blocking shots you're risking injury, but the upside is that when your team can't find their rhythm, you can get your best players more involved in the play. If I were to build a team, I'd like to have a franchise player I can play in every situation. MS: The Sedins not playing PK doesn't hurt them. If they're not on the ice because the team's constantly killing penalties then the team has to be more disciplined. The Canucks aren't built around 2 players, and that gives the Sedins the opportunity to really focus on one thing (scoring). The Sedins are great talents, but the Canucks don't have a standout talent like Ovechkin or Crosby. There is no shining star. The Canucks are built like a football team - you need everyone to perform their specific role for them to succeed. If special teams can't produce then you hope the depth can hold up. <img src="http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/86020661.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=77BFBA49EF8789215ABF3343C02EA54809ADCC78F7DA45A9E4E03DA6F564D905B4F7DACE93165AFCE30A760B0D811297"class="imageFloatRightFramed">JC: One thing I really noticed that year was the lack of net presence. Chicago had Byfuglien, Ladd, and Eager in Luongo's face the entire time. The Canucks have trouble against the Blues because David Backes is cemented in front of the net. MS: I agree, and that's my only bone to pick. It certainly adds yet another dimension to our potent attack. We lack that physical element. We're bigger, in fact, we always have been, but I don't think we're grittier than before. Torres can be a perimeter player sometimes too. We are missing a David Backes type. It's demoralizing for teams to have someone in front of the net you can't move. The Canucks defense was torn about by Byfuglien. Edler wasn't strong enough, Bieksa had the strength but not the frame. I think that's why Alberts could surprisingly play a big role on this team when it comes to clearing the crease. Look what Andy Sutton was able to do in Ottawa. He put players flat on their butts all the time. JC: It almost feels like this team is built for the regular season than the playoffs. If you look at how the Flyers were built last year, them going deep shouldn't be all that surprising. They had great veteran leadership and a great mix of size, talent, and grit. I picked the Flyers to upset that year because I knew they could go far. MS: I'm gonna play the devil's advocate and say it depends on who they play. Against almost all the teams they're good. The Canucks have trouble with Chicago, and I know that contradicts with what I said previously, but you just don't know how this team will fare against this version of the Hawks in the playoffs. Last year, Quenneville totally outcoached Vigneault. I think, line for line, other than that top line with Zetterberg and Datsyuk, we have the advantage in regards to the other 9 forwards, so I like how we match up against the Wings. JC: Let's talk Luongo, since he's the biggest X factor. I don't like his contract, and there are people who are already saying Luongo's overpaid, but he's still one of the better goalies in the West. What do you think? MS: Luongo's play has slipped but I think Kiprusoff's play has slipped more. A quarter of the way through the season, my top 5 West goalies are: Bryzgalov, Hiller, Backstrom, Quick, and Halak. But in the playoffs everything changes. I don't like the Luongo extension either - it's pro-rated, but I think if we could get him just a shade cheaper at around $5 million we might be able to afford to keep Bieksa. He brings an element no other defenseman on our team does and maybe he does need a change of scenery but we need players like him in the playoffs. JC: Vigneault says the window for this team to win is between now and 1 or 2 years down the road. I tend to agree with him. Canucks in 5 years - how many Cups? 1? 2? None? MS: I have to disagree with Vigneault. I think the window longer than that. Edler and Raymond are still young. The Moose is well-stocked. Granted, Luc Bourdon's untimely death set this franchise back a little, but it's more like a ten-year plan. Ideally, our top players will be ready to make a significant impact in 5 years. Look at the Red Wings. From 1980 to their Cup win in 1997 (their first in ages), they were eliminated from the playoffs 11 times, and only 4 times did they at least reach the Conference Finals. When you're building a team you're going to fail a lot in the beginning, because that's the feeling you have to know to succeed later on. Vancouver has no tradition of winning and that works against them. Vigneault is no Scotty Bowman, but at least the consistency is there. Would you rather be successful long-term or be a potential one-hit wonder like the Hawks with their cap issues? They still have yet to sign Seabrook and could only afford Marty Turco. Don't get me wrong, Chicago could still end up being competitive but it will be difficult. Maybe it's because I haven't lived through 40 years of disappointment, but we have to be patient. As long as we draft well, we'll stay competitive. It wasn't too long ago people were labelling Hodgson as a bust, but history has shown that the World Jrs. MVP, and it should've been Hodgson, no doubt, go on to have good NHL careers. (Past winners include Eberle, Malkin, Ovechkin, Parise, Cammalleri, and Iginla). The Canucks and Blackhawks face-off Friday night. We'll have to see what kind of team we really have.

Lombardi has lots of work ahead of him in order to keep the core together, which is why I said the Kings will remain competitive if he can get them to sign cap-friendly contracts. For the record, I was never a fan of Alex Auld and never believed he would be a legitimate NHL starter. The Sedins, however, I had thought topped out at 80-90 points (still debatable, really). It's hard to project the future but the Kings definitely have the right pieces. I agree that Burke lacks the patience but keep in mind he is in a hockey mad market. He's under constant pressure to deliver. I've seen Seguin play a couple times and he's a real heady player, but also cocky. Kessel's an elite talent - the things he's managed to do without any help is quite incredible - and even though it's still too early to tell if the Bruins can land another top 10 pick it tips the scales in their favour. Two talents for one? I'll take it. Ovechkin as a consistent scorer - do you really think so? His goal production has dropped and it's not a lack of effort. I'm playing devil's advocate here, but maybe a lot of teams have just figured him out and it's harder for him to score like he used to. Either that or teams are locking in on him, which has really allowed Semin to shine. End to end I'd say he's one of the most dangerous players but in the offensive zone he doesn't have the versatility Crosby or Stamkos provides. I would've given the Adams to Ramsay but he's an easy pick because the Thrashers have won 6 straight. Take that streak away and they're a .500 team. The Bolts have stayed consistent most nights and the Thrashers roster is deeper. Asides from top end talent the Bolts' defense and goaltending doesn't compare to Atlanta's.