The Puck Stops Here
Next entry: Best Defenceman So Far This Season
Previous entry: Top Goalie So Far This Season
A Lack Of Self-Discipline
by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 02:50 PM ET
Comments (58)
It is obvious that Sidney Crosby is one of the most talented players in the NHL. He has the ability to become the player who dominates a generation. He won the 2007 Hart Trophy as a 19 year old and seemed to be well on his way to a significant period as the standard bearer for the NHL. This is yet to happen. He was not a Hart Trophy nominee in either of the last two seasons. His team won the 2009 Stanley Cup, but he was not chosen as the Conn Smythe Trophy winner. Crosby remains one of the best players in the NHL, but he is unable to make the jump to be the best player in the game. I think one reason for this is immaturity and a lack of self-discipline. One clear symptom of this is his penalty total. Crosby has 31 penalty minutes so far this season. That puts him second on his Pittsburgh Penguins team (behind Jay McKee). He leads the NHL in minor penalties (with 13 - tied with Hal Gill of Montreal). There is no reason Sidney Crosby should lead the league in minor penalties.
Crosby is not a particularly large physical player. He does not play a defensive role - where sometimes taking a penalty is a better move than allowing a high percentage scoring opportunity. Most of Crosby’s penalties come from fouling and retaliating against the men assigned to check him. As Crosby is one of the top offensive threats in hockey he is always well checked (he is even more closely checked when Evgeni Malkin is hurt - leaving him as Pittsburgh’s only serious scoring threat)
Sidney Crosby has to be able to control his emotions enough to play under tight checking and to draw penalties without retaliating. Opposition players are finding it too easy to knock Crosby off his game and get him into the penalty box. Crosby does no good for Pittsburgh in the penalty box.
It is easy to forget that Crosby is only 22 years old. Self-discipline comes with maturity. Given a few more years, I bet it will be harder to draw Crosby into a penalty. In the meantime it has become a strategy when playing Pittsburgh to try to get Sidney Crosby in the penalty box. This is one clear symptom of the lack of self-discipline in Crosby’s game that may be keeping him from being the NHL’s best player.
Filed in: | The Puck Stops Here | Permalink
Tags: Pittsburgh+Penguins, Sidney+Crosby,
Comments
that crosby’s a little bitch… didn’t you read it?
Posted by perfection from LaLaLand on 11/10/09 at 03:02 PM ET
And keep in mind, this is 13 penalties on the Crosby Refereeing Scale.
That’s like dog years.
Posted by HockeyinHD on 11/10/09 at 03:31 PM ET
Posted by HockeyinHD on 11/10/09 at 03:31 PM ET
So like…you double it and add 30?
Posted by mrfluffy from Long Beach on 11/10/09 at 03:53 PM ET
Do you watch the penguins? He most certainly does play an important defensive role.
And whats the point here? So we’re lucky enough to have three players who are above the pack right now (Crosby, Ovie, Malkin), and just because he doesn’t stand as the clear cut number one there’s something wrong with that?
Posted by jason on 11/10/09 at 04:45 PM ET
Do you watch the penguins? He most certainly does play an important defensive role..
Yes I do watch the Penguins. Do you? It makes little snese to use Crosby is an important defensive role. He is the Penguins top scorer. He is not a defenceman. He is not a candidate for the Selke Trophy (as best defensive forward). It is a waste of Crosby’s talents to play him defensively - especially when the opposising team often puts their best checking unit on the ice against him. Why try to check the opposition’s checkers? Crosby is fifth on the Penguins in short-handed ice time (behind Staal, Cooke, Adams and Dupuis - these are forwards who play much more significant defnsive roles as they have far less total ice tiem than Crosby). It is almost never Crosby’s job to shut down an offensive star - and that is a situation where taking penalties may be more defensible.
And whats the point here? So we’re lucky enough to have three players who are above the pack right now (Crosby, Ovie, Malkin), and just because he doesn’t stand as the clear cut number one there’s something wrong with that?
Crosby could be better than he is. This is one relatively simple way that he can improve his game. Why not attempt to do it?
Is Crosby one of the three best players in the NHL? That is a bold claim for a player who was not one of the three Hart nominees in either of the last two years (and one that should be clearly true given his talent level - top three is possibly not shooting high enough). Crosby is currently 25th in scoring in the league this season. Is that good enough? It is definitely good, but it could and should be better.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 06:21 PM ET
And keep in mind, this is 13 penalties on the Crosby Refereeing Scale.
That’s like dog years.
+100 
Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 11/10/09 at 06:44 PM ET
Since lockout:
Crosby 1.34 pts per game
Ovechkin 1.31 pts per game
Malkin 1.25 pts per game
Datsyuk 1.15 pts per game
Joe Thornton 1.28 pts per game
Yup you’re right, how can anyone claim Crosby is one of the top three offensive players in the game? are we done now?
Posted by Greg on 11/10/09 at 06:51 PM ET
Posted by OlderThanChelios from Grand Rapids on 11/10/09 at 06:44 PM ET
Hey buddy, where have you been. I figured you would really like this post. Thought you would have a lot more to add than you did though. Something witty and funny but at the same time very tasteful. Oh well, just when you think you know an avatar.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————-
@ Greg way to bust out the facts.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 06:59 PM ET
Since lockout:
Crosby 1.34 pts per game
Ovechkin 1.31 pts per game
Malkin 1.25 pts per game
Datsyuk 1.15 pts per game
Joe Thornton 1.28 pts per game
I am arguing that Crosby has not progressed forward since his 2007 Hart Trophy. In fact he may be regressing.
Crosby first two years 1.39 pts per game since then 1.30 pts per game. Shouldn’t he be improving with time?
Ovechkin first two years 1.21 pts per game since then 1.40 pts per game.
He is improving.
Malkin first two years (year 2 + 3 since lockout) 1.19 points per game since then 1.35 points per game. He isw also improving.
Why is Crosby going the wrong direction? Over the shorter term than your numbers, Crosby is falling further and further behind despite once having been in the lead. Isn’t that troubling?
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 07:48 PM ET
While I agree he’s been taking too many penalties this year; I wouldn’t try to make claims against him as a result of not being a Hart nominee.
Sure last year he wasn’t nominated, but he wasn’t the Pens’ best player. Malkin had a great year and 10 more points. I think it’s entirely likely that if they were on different teams but performed the same last year, Sid would have been nominated.
But the year before he only played 53 regular season games. Even Pens fans would have to start considering the conspiracy theories if he got nominated for being injured almost half a season.
Posted by Bobart on 11/10/09 at 07:51 PM ET
Crosby is falling further and further behind despite once having been in the lead. Isn’t that troubling?
It’s not troubling if he’s playing a more defensive, more well-rounded game. He’s not scoring at the pace he once has (though, really, when you’re only 0.2 off your career high (at the age of 24) and playing a more well-rounded game, I don’t think you’ve regressed at all… but you like your stats!)
Posted by nw on 11/10/09 at 08:01 PM ET
He’s played alot more hockey with alot more off-ice responsibility than anyone else. I do think it has cought up to him a bit. But it’s nothing a long summer can’t fix. Unfortunately for the Pens that means a short playoff which is the last thing Sid wants.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 08:06 PM ET
@puckstopshere. what would you rather have? The extra 10-15pts that ratio works out to over 2 years, or a 7-1 record in the playoffs back to back trips to the Stanley cup finals over those two years. Crosby focusing on things other than just scoring is as much responsible for those to trips to the finals as if he maybe stayed out for two minute shifts, or maybe floated a little out by the blue line…Sid also starts a lot of shifts in his own end since he’s become one of the better faceoff artists in the game, but this could go on all night…
And hey, i get what you’re trying to do, and i realize that by responding each time, I’ve fallen into your trick, but you just wrote something hoping to get a reaction. and that’s fine, happens a lot actually.
Posted by Greg on 11/10/09 at 08:18 PM ET
Remember that Crosby was 18 and 19 years old when he was scoring at a higher rate than he is at 20,21 and 22. Nearly any player makes a big jump forward at ages 20,21 and 22 - the Malkin and Ovechkin comparisons have them improving while about 2 years older than Crosby.
It looks to me like Crosby has decided he is good enough to be a very good NHL player and lacks the hunger to be better than that. He has let himself get into bad habits (i.e. taking too many penalties) and is not being pushed to get out of them.
It is a shame because as good as Crosby has been, I think he has the talent to be even better. He could be the man who dominates the NHL for a decade, but he is fallign short of that.
This is the difference of Crosby going down in history as a Joe Sakic or Marcel Dionne or going down in history as a Mario Lemieux or Gordie Howe. Nobody would complain about him joining the first group, but he has the talent to join the second - doesn’t he? it would be a shame if he falls short.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 08:18 PM ET
Ovechkin first two years 1.21 pts per game since then 1.40 pts per game.
He is improving.
I think Backstrom/Semin/Green have more to do with this, than Ovechkin changing or stepping up his game over the past two years.
Posted by Greg on 11/10/09 at 08:20 PM ET
Oh man, just when i’m about to turn this off, now yo’uve proven you’ve never played any hockey, and probably should refrain from commenting/writing any further. If you think Crosby has no drive, meaning no work ethic, or desire to improve, you dont watch hockey or listen to people who do know hockey. wow…............
Posted by Greg on 11/10/09 at 08:23 PM ET
If you think Crosby has no drive, meaning no work ethic, or desire to improve, you dont watch hockey or listen to people who do know hockey.
I don’t think this at all. It is obvious that Crosby has the drive to be one of the best players in hockey and that requires a tremendous work ethic. It doesn’t look like he has the desire to push himself beyond that point (at least not yet in his career) and he has the talent that he could.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 08:28 PM ET
It looks to me like Crosby has decided he is good enough to be a very good NHL player and lacks the hunger to be better than that.
Obviously you’ve never seen Crosby during a practice.
Or before a practice, while he’s practicing.
Or after a practice, while he’s practicing.
If there is anyone in the LEAGUE that wants to get better every game, its Sidney Crosby. Just look at this season. He’s better at faceoffs and he’s improving his goal scoring ability. The only thing thats worse is his assists total, and thats because he has 2 players playing like absolute bums right now, and a PP coach that is an absolute idiot.
Seriously, the guy never stops training. You’re an idiot for even thinking that Sidney Crosby lacks hunger.
Posted by Kstewy16 on 11/10/09 at 08:32 PM ET
It doesn’t look like he has the desire to push himself beyond that point (at least not yet in his career)
Are you writing that maybe he’s just satisfied with where he is in his own game right now?
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 08:40 PM ET
“2 players playing like absolute bums” is supposed to say 2 linemates.
And guess what? He has 2 new bums on his line tonight!
Posted by Kstewy16 on 11/10/09 at 08:41 PM ET
Crosby first two years 1.39 pts per game since then 1.30 pts per game. Shouldn’t he be improving with time?
Ovechkin first two years 1.21 pts per game since then 1.40 pts per game.
He is improving.Malkin first two years (year 2 + 3 since lockout) 1.19 points per game since then 1.35 points per game. He isw also improving.
I’ll join the Penguins fans here and beat my head against the brick wall that is your reliance on taking statistics out of context and misreading what they mean.
Which of those three is considered the most complete hockey player at this point in his career? Just because Crosby’s offensive numbers are not improving does not mean that Crosby is not improving as a player. I’d take him now over his Hart trophy season in a heartbeat. I agree that he takes too many penalties out of frustration. That is something that absolutely will have to change for him. I know that Malkin is injured right now, so at this very point, this statement may not ring true, but Crosby does not need to be a guy that’s going to score 120 points per season and a responsible Penguins coach isn’t going to push him to do that. He needs to remain solid offensively and keep developing defensively.
As far as whether he’s costing himself a spot with the hockey immortals and merely settling for the also-very-very-goods, it’s simply way too early to call that. Yzerman is one of the immortals and that opinion is largely due to the fact that he was able to adjust his game from pure offensive talent to a complete defensively-responsible leader on the ice. While it’s way too early to compare Crosby to Yzerman, I think he remains on the right track. He just needs to grow up more.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 08:50 PM ET
Which of those three (Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin) is considered the most complete hockey player at this point in his career?
There is no doubt in my mind the most complete player of the three at this point is Alexander Ovechkin. The fact that Ovechkin has been MVP for two years running shows that opinion is quite commonly held. Last year 115 of 131 voters for the Hart Trophy picked Ovechkin as MVP (which if their is any logic to their vote means they thought he was the most complete player and absolutely NONE picked Sidney Crosby with their first place vote.
The Hockey News picked Ovechkin as the number one player in hockey this past summer.
Your question seems to imply that Crosby is the most complete player in hockey today, but who are these people who actually hold this opinion? Why do they hold it? Ovechkin is a better scorer. Ovechkin is a better physical presence. There is little difference between them in defence - there is no clear leader between them. Neither are used in the main defensive situations for their teams (and neither should be given the way it would be a waste of their offensive talents).
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 09:02 PM ET
There is little difference between them in defence
There is a huge difference in thier defensive responsibility by virtue of thier positions. A center takes draws and typically plays goal line to goal line.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 09:12 PM ET
Your question seems to imply that Crosby is the most complete player in hockey today, but who are these people who actually hold this opinion? Why do they hold it? Ovechkin is a better scorer. Ovechkin is a better physical presence. There is little difference between them in defence - there is no clear leader between them. Neither are used in the main defensive situations for their teams (and neither should be given the way it would be a waste of their offensive talents).
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 09:02 PM ET
You presume too much. I think Pavel Datsyuk is the most complete player in the NHL today. If you look at his points per minute, he led the league last year while winning his well-deserved second consecutive Selke trophy.
Ovechkin is amazing to watch and fantastically talented, but I don’t consider a guy who doesn’t play defense to be a complete player.
You are also absolutely wrong to say there is little difference between Crosby and Ovechkin defensively and I think you’ll have a hard time finding people who agree with that statement.
I Last year 115 of 131 voters for the Hart Trophy picked Ovechkin as MVP (which if their is any logic to their vote means they thought he was the most complete player and absolutely NONE picked Sidney Crosby with their first place vote.
You also presume too much when you confuse most valuable with most complete. They seem like they should be the same way, but most intelligent hockey fans know that we’re talking about completely different things.
I take Crosby over Ovechkin if I’m building a team around one of them. Does that mean he deserved the Hart over Ovechkin for the last two seasons? Absolutely not.
Finally, playing good defense is not a waste of offensive talent, you stat-junky. It does keep a guy from getting as many points as he’s capable of doing, but playing in the NHL is not about collecting stats, it’s about winning cups. Well here’s a good stat for you. Stanley cup championships:
Crosby: 1
Ovechkin: 0
(Datsyuk, the most complete player in the league: 2)
blah blah blah, team game blah blah. Ovechkin wasn’t complete enough to get his team to beat Crosby’s. That’s an intangible that you seem incapable of understanding.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 09:17 PM ET
Since when does winning an MVP mean you’re a complete player? Steve Yzerman was probably the most complete forward to ever play the game. The perfect package of offense, defense, grit, and leadership. So please tell me PSH, where are his Hart Trophy’s at?
Posted by Kstewy16 on 11/10/09 at 09:22 PM ET
@JJ
Leave the gun and take the cannolis.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 09:26 PM ET
There is a huge difference in thier defensive responsibility by virtue of thier positions. A center takes draws and typically plays goal line to goal line.
This is a theoretical difference at best. You looked at their position and little more to come up with it. Watch Ovechkin on the ice and watch Crosby on the ice. They cover their defensive zone with approximately equal responsibility - and both usually against the best checkers the opposition has to offer. I expect the two have approximately equal shots at winning the Selke Trophy. Last year, Ovechkin had 14 points (from four votes) for the Selke Trophy. Crosby received no votes at all. Looks like the voters thought Ovechkin is actually better defensively (despite his not being a centre). Maybe I was generous to Crosby calling it even.
One strong argument in favor of Ovechkin over Crosby is Corsi. Ovechkin repeatedly was near the top of the league in the many different ways I looked at things and Crosby was rarely in the top group. That is a strong argument that last season Ovechkin was a more complete
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 09:27 PM ET
Henri Richard “The Pocket Rocket”
11 Stanley Cups= Most Complete Player of all Time.
Not even close, but I get your drift JJ.
I still prefer Zetterberg to Datsyuk. He seems to show up a lot better in the playoffs. Just my opinion on that.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 09:32 PM ET
I think we do not agree on what is meant by “most complete player”. It seems most complete player according to many of these commenters means if you ranked a player’s separate skills, the most compelete player is the one who has the highest ranking on the worst list or lists (i.e. if we rank players separately according to defence, offence etc - the guy who is 12th best offence and 14th best defence is considered more complete than 1st defence and 16th offence - for example since his offence is better).
I would call the most complete player the player who gets his team the most wins over the course of a season. I don’t care if he plays all offence and no defence or all defence and no offence or some other combination. If his total package is worth more wins he is more complete.
Now the point where we argue is how best to assess a given player’s win shares.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 09:33 PM ET
Ovechkin getting Selke votes can be considered nothing less than an absolute joke. Also, I’ve contended that Corsi creates more noise than it takes away. I’m sure you’ll remember my argument from the post where you said that Malkin didn’t deserve Hart consideration based on his Corsi.
Also, I have to give you credit for straw-manning me away from the original point. Crosby is not regressing skill-wise; he is evolving.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 09:36 PM ET
the most compelete player is the one who has the highest ranking on the worst list or lists (i.e. if we rank players separately according to defence, offence etc - the guy who is 12th best offence and 14th best defence is considered more complete than 1st defence and 16th offence - for example since his offence is better).
Was Crosby the 12th best offensive player and the 14th best defensive player last year? Was Ovechkin the best offensive player and the 16th best defensive player or did you just make up those example numbers to make the argument sound considerably more ridiculous than it is?
Why is completeness only an individual stat taken in context of how many wins he brings in the regular season then? Crosby has brought his team more playoff victories than Ovechkin. Since playoff victories are more crucial to the point of the game (to win the Cup), Crosby has to be a more complete player, even by your definition.
You are right that there is a disconnect between what we consider complete to mean when discussing a player. KStewy mentioned offense, defense, leadership, and grit. I have to agree with those four features being the key building blocks of what makes up completeness. Unfortunately, leadership and grit are completely intangible categories and defense is so complex as to make it considerably less statistically tangible than offense. I feel Crosby is better defensively, a better leader, and as gritty as Ovechkin, who only has an advantage in offense. Therefore, I believe Crosby is a more complete player.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 09:45 PM ET
I don’t care if he plays all offence and no defence or all defence and no offence or some other combination. If his total package is worth more wins he is more complete.
Yeah, that must be why Goligoski is a better defenseman at this point in the season than Shea Weber?
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 09:47 PM ET
@PSH
To me there are 1 major compotent that is different in the 4 major sports.
Baseball - Skill (e.g. hand eye coordination)
Basketball- Athleticism (e.g. running , jumping)
Football - Cerebral (e.g. coaching, teamwork)
Hockey - Passion (e.g. playing hurt)
You seem to be a sabermetrics enthusiast and hockey is not conducive to sabermetrics because of the passion of the players. Just Sayin’
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 09:59 PM ET
As much as I love Stevie Y, Brian Trottier was the most complete player of all time 
This nonsense of trying to proclaim one player greatest is really ridiculous. There are really only three modern players that we can claim unequivocally were the best during their time…Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux. Howe was great, but it is the length of career and consistency throughout his career that makes him top 4 of all time. There were some other pretty good players during his time that in any given year would have ben called better.
This year, Kopitar looks pretty darn good. Is he the best player in the league? A few years ago, wasn’t it Lecavelier? Maybe its fun to argue “best”, but the league has so many great players now having an undisputed champion who is so much better at one thing (ala Gretzky, Lemieux) that we disregard his deficiencies is impossible.
My opinion is that Datsyuk is the best all around player, Ovechkin the best sniper, Crosby probably the best playmaker (discussing forwards only).
Lastly, not to diminish Ovechkin’s accomplishments, but his linemates are so much better than Crosby’s. If you use the example of the Trottier, Bossy, Gillies line as a model, or Gretzky, Kurri, whoever…where is Crosby’s finisher?
Posted by dip on 11/10/09 at 10:02 PM ET
The Crosby jock sniffers will never accept reality. Ovechkin can win 10 Hart Trophy’s in a row but will continue to be put down because his goaltending isn’t good enough to win a Cup. Pens fans can’t accept that the difference between Cindy and Alex is M Andre Fleury. Put him on the Caps and Alex has the Cup and Cindy does not. They also like to forget that it took Super Mario 5 years to win a Cup. Alex will match that feat this year.
Posted by eric from baltimore on 11/10/09 at 10:04 PM ET
Best by Decade
00’s Lidstrom
90’s Lemieux
80’s Gretzky
70’s Orr
60’s Hull,R.
50’s Howe
40’s Richard,M.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:06 PM ET
The Crosby jock sniffers will never accept reality. Ovechkin can win 10 Hart Trophy’s in a row but will continue to be put down because his goaltending isn’t good enough to win a Cup. Pens fans can’t accept that the difference between Cindy and Alex is M Andre Fleury. Put him on the Caps and Alex has the Cup and Cindy does not. They also like to forget that it took Super Mario 5 years to win a Cup. Alex will match that feat this year.
Posted by eric from baltimore on 11/10/09 at 10:04 PM ET
So which of the goaltenders that wasn’t good enough last year is suddenly going to be good enough this year?
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:14 PM ET
Brian Trottier was the most complete player of all time
centers who wore #19
Trottier begot Yzerman who begot Sakic who begot Thornton? Richards? who begot Tavares? Stamkos? (91’s the new 19).
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:14 PM ET
Also, I have to give you credit for straw-manning me away from the original point. Crosby is not regressing skill-wise; he is evolving.
Strangely he is evolving himself further and further from winning the Hart Trophy…
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 10:18 PM ET
Also, I have to give you credit for straw-manning me away from the original point. Crosby is not regressing skill-wise; he is evolving.
Strangely he is evolving himself further and further from winning the Hart Trophy…
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 10:18 PM ET
I keep forgetting you put more weight on winning the Hart than on the Stanley Cup.
Out of pure curiosity and not because I think it will strengthen or weaken either of our arguments, but do you have the figures handy for how many times the Hart winner has played on the Stanley Cup winning team?
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:21 PM ET
I knew there was one.
Was it you JJ that I had this thought with before?
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:25 PM ET
I keep forgetting you put more weight on winning the Hart than on the Stanley Cup.
The Hart Trophy is theoretically the measure of the best player in the NHL (of course sometimes voters are wrong). The Stanley Cup is theoretically the measure of the best team in the league (of course sometimes upsets happen).
When discussing how good players are it makes more sense to discuss how close they are to a Hart Trophy. When discussing teams, it makes more sense to discuss how close they are to a Stanley Cup.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 10:30 PM ET
how many times the Hart winner has played on the Stanley Cup winning team?
I think St. Louis was the last in ‘04. Maybe Messier before him in ‘90. Gretzky did it about 3 times in the 80’s.
It was more frequent in the pre 90’s because the best teams won a lot and usually had the best players. Edmonton-Gretzky, Montreal- LaFleur and so on. But now its very unusual.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:31 PM ET
I don’t pacifically remember having gone over this with you before, but it’s possible.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:32 PM ET
Oh Yeah Sakic in ‘01 too, just looked it up.My bad.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:33 PM ET
When discussing how good players are it makes more sense to discuss how close they are to a Hart Trophy. When discussing teams, it makes more sense to discuss how close they are to a Stanley Cup.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 10:30 PM ET
I get that, but I ultimately think Cups are more important and if Crosby evolving his game away from individual awards gives him the pieces he needs to get closer to more cups, then I think he’s going the right direction.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:36 PM ET
pacifically
Was this a antidote joke? Are you teating me? or a real mistake?
pacifically = specifically
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:37 PM ET
It was intentional. I should have used a wink, shouldn’t I have?
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:42 PM ET
Why the joke did I make that mistake ? somebody else?
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:43 PM ET
get that, but I ultimately think Cups are more important and if Crosby evolving his game away from individual awards gives him the pieces he needs to get closer to more cups, then I think he’s going the right direction
The problem with this argument is that a key piece of Crosby’s evolution to a cup winner is the addition of Evgeni Malkin on his team - the guy who was playoff MVP. Crosby managed two points in the Stanley Cup final. It wasn’t his finest hour - but that seems to have all been forgotten. Since his team won that proves he is somehow a better player than he was before his two point trip to the finals.
Posted by PuckStopsHere on 11/10/09 at 10:44 PM ET
Okay.
Anyway, again congrats on the wonderful news and I wish the best for everyone in your family.
Good Night. It’s time to go watch the late game.
Looks like tonight it’s that regular season juggernaut the San Jose Sharks. They’re playing the Predotors.
Hope it’s better than that Pitt disaster @ 7 on Versus. They’ve lost 4 out of 5, can you say hangover.
Posted by Lindas1st from New England on 11/10/09 at 10:47 PM ET
Crosby managed two points in the Stanley Cup final.
I thought it was three? But yeah, I’ve said myself that Malkin had more to do with their cup win than Crosby. That’s why I mention intangibles. He had more points in the series they lost to the Wings than he did in the one they won. The one cup doesn’t prove anything. If he never wins another, his evolution as a player will likely have proven to have taken a wrong turn. I don’t think that will ultimately prove to be the case.
Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 11/10/09 at 10:53 PM ET
I can’t belive a thread this long at TPSH and there’s only been one near mention of elite goal tending.
Posted by 42jeff from Minot, North Dakota on 11/11/09 at 02:46 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Missing Other League All Star Games
Top Defenceman So Far This Season
Karlsson Top Offensive Defenceman
About The Puck Stops Here
The Puck Stops Here was founded during the 2004/05 lockout as a place to rant about hockey. The original site contains over 1000 posts, some of which were also published on FoxSports.com.
Who am I?
A diehard hockey fan.
Why am I blogging?
I want to.
Why are you reading it?
???
Email: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
When learning from experts it’s best to learn personally from them, or from their blog. We can provide that with poker lessons blog, your home to learn poker personally.
Do you get shocked from the luck in the game of poker? Stop getting shocked and start being a Poker Shoker
Donate to Kukla’s Korner
Point of this story is….....................???
Posted by Greg on 11/10/09 at 02:51 PM ET