Suck it, Detroit....

[Jackman_the_Iceman]

and btw, I remember that incident. Nolan was going after Jackman and Jackman wouldn't fight. Nolan got a penalty. You were so proud of how composed Jackman was.

Jackman didn't draw just a penalty on Nolan, he also drew a penalty from another Shark in the same scrum.

We Blues fans were also tired of certain d-men(Pronger) taking stupid penalties because a pest got under their skin. He showed composure under pressure. He was just adding to his list of leadership qualities that year.

[deadphish]

Just getting back on topic.....




SUCK IT, DETOILET!!!!!!!

YOU JUST GOT ERIK JohnsOWNED.

[deadphish]

Oh and I wanted to add...

SUCK IT LONG.....

SUCK IT HAAAAAHD.

[WestCoastWingsFan]

I was reading the lets-go-wings forum and wow, are they obsessed with Jackman. Every third post was about Jackman.

They still whine and cry about Jackman winning the Calder instead of Zetterberg.

Jackman deserved to win it. If Zetterberg would have played better, he would have won it...but he didn't...and he didn't.

Played better? Yea, after all, it's not like he led all rookies in scoring that year. O, wait a minute, he did. He also logged a lot of time on the PK and PP units. How much time did Jackman log on the PP?

Oh yeah, well how many fights did Zetterberg get in? How many guys did he clear out in front of the net? How many times did he beat Owen Nolan's ass?

Playing well as a rookie on defense, is a lot more difficult than playing well as a rookie on offense. I am sure that was a factor in the voting.

Like I said, if Zetterberg had played better...he might have won.

The Wings have had loads of success...but some Wings fans have to bitch about not winning a Calder trophy a handful of years ago?
Friggin' spoiled bastards.

So now we give out awards based on fights? Or knocking someone down? Get real dude. I've never once heard any voter say that, and neither have you.

It's not like Jackman is all that good at fighting anyway. Or did you miss this?:

I promise you the defense/offense dichotomy didn't factor into the voting. While it is true that being a two way rookie defenseman is more difficult than being a rookie on offense, being a stay at home defenseman is the easiest position in all of hockey. If the voters had understood that, Jackman wouldn't have gotten any 1st place votes. Jackman was given the Calder bc the sportswriter who covers hockey at the typical American newspaper is a basketball junkie who doesn't know piss about hockey and only writes about it bc he drew the shortest straw. They heard Don Cherry raving about how Jackman should get the Calder and thought "Well hey, Don Cherry's a name I recognize. If he says it, then I'll go along." There's no better evidence that the American "hockey" press have their heads up their asses than that they actually take that xenophobic fruitcake seriously. Those of us who are actually knowledgeable about the sport understand that Dumb Cherry is a complete asshat.

Don't forget Z plays on the Wings, who regularly roll 4 lines. On just about any other team, Zatta would have played 20+ minutes a game his rookie year and netted about 60-70 points. But in spite of his limited minutes, he was still the rookie scoring leader. How many rookie forwards are regularly counted on as part of the penalty kill? How should he have played better? What else did he need to show he was the best rookie that year?

No one is bitching about Zetterberg not winning the Calder. We're just pointing out that he did deserve to win it. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really mean anything. Trust me, we would much rather have Z than Jackman and the Calder. So would anyone with a functioning brain.

[deadphish]

I was reading the lets-go-wings forum and wow, are they obsessed with Jackman. Every third post was about Jackman.

They still whine and cry about Jackman winning the Calder instead of Zetterberg.

Jackman deserved to win it. If Zetterberg would have played better, he would have won it...but he didn't...and he didn't.

Played better? Yea, after all, it's not like he led all rookies in scoring that year. O, wait a minute, he did. He also logged a lot of time on the PK and PP units. How much time did Jackman log on the PP?

Oh yeah, well how many fights did Zetterberg get in? How many guys did he clear out in front of the net? How many times did he beat Owen Nolan's ass?

Playing well as a rookie on defense, is a lot more difficult than playing well as a rookie on offense. I am sure that was a factor in the voting.

Like I said, if Zetterberg had played better...he might have won.

The Wings have had loads of success...but some Wings fans have to bitch about not winning a Calder trophy a handful of years ago?
Friggin' spoiled bastards.

So now we give out awards based on fights? Or knocking someone down? Get real dude. I've never once any voter say that, and neither have you.

It's not like Jackman is all that good at fighting anyway. Or did you miss this?:

I promise you the defense/offense dichotomy didn't factor into the voting. While it is true that being a two way rookie defenseman is more difficult than being a rookie on offense, being a stay at home defenseman is the easiest position in all of hockey. If the voters had understood that, Jackman wouldn't have gotten any 1st place votes. Jackman was given the Calder bc the sportswriter who covers hockey at the typical American newspaper is a basketball junkie who doesn't know piss about hockey and only writes about it bc he drew the shortest straw. They heard Don Cherry raving about how Jackman should get the Calder and thought "Well hey, Don Cherry's a name I recognize. If he says it, then I'll go along." There's no better evidence that the American "hockey" press have their heads up their asses than that they actually take that xenophobic fruitcake seriously. Those of us who are actually knowledgeable about the sport understand that Dumb Cherry is a complete asshat.

Don't forget Z plays on the Wings, who regularly roll 4 lines. On just about any other team, Zatta would have played 20+ minutes a game his rookie year and netted about 60-70 points. But in spite of his limited minutes, he was still the rookie scoring leader. How many rookie forwards are regularly counted on as part of the penalty kill? How should he have played better? What else did he need to show he was the best rookie that year?

No one is bitching about Zetterberg not winning the Calder. We're just pointing out that he did deserve to win it. In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really mean anything. Trust me, we would much rather have Z than Jackman and the Calder. So would anyone with a functioning brain.

Less blabbering and more sucking please. KTHXBYE

[cprice12]

I was reading the lets-go-wings forum and wow, are they obsessed with Jackman. Every third post was about Jackman.

They still whine and cry about Jackman winning the Calder instead of Zetterberg.

Jackman deserved to win it. If Zetterberg would have played better, he would have won it...but he didn't...and he didn't.

Played better? Yea, after all, it's not like he led all rookies in scoring that year. O, wait a minute, he did. He also logged a lot of time on the PK and PP units. How much time did Jackman log on the PP?

Oh yeah, well how many fights did Zetterberg get in? How many guys did he clear out in front of the net? How many times did he beat Owen Nolan's ass?

Playing well as a rookie on defense, is a lot more difficult than playing well as a rookie on offense. I am sure that was a factor in the voting.

Like I said, if Zetterberg had played better...he might have won.

The Wings have had loads of success...but some Wings fans have to bitch about not winning a Calder trophy a handful of years ago?
Friggin' spoiled bastards.

So now we give out awards based on fights? Or knocking someone down? Get real dude. I've never once heard any voter say that, and neither have you.

I never said that's all that determined who won.
But being a rookie and pushing guys around, getting in players faces, in addition to being great defensively is a plus.
And the Nolan incident could very well have been the deciding factor in Jackman winning the Calder. He showed tremendous poise, toughness, brains and leadership in that run in. It got a lot of press.

It's not like Jackman is all that good at fighting anyway. Or did you miss this?:

He can hold his own, and fought quite well in his rookie season. He hasn't fought much since his shoulder injuries.

I promise you the defense/offense dichotomy didn't factor into the voting. While it is true that being a two way rookie defenseman is more difficult than being a rookie on offense, being a stay at home defenseman is the easiest position in all of hockey. If the voters had understood that, Jackman wouldn't have gotten any 1st place votes. Jackman was given the Calder bc the sportswriter who covers hockey at the typical American newspaper is a basketball junkie who doesn't know piss about hockey and only writes about it bc he drew the shortest straw. They heard Don Cherry raving about how Jackman should get the Calder and thought "Well hey, Don Cherry's a name I recognize. If he says it, then I'll go along." There's no better evidence that the American "hockey" press have their heads up their asses than that they actually take that xenophobic fruitcake seriously. Those of us who are actually knowledgeable about the sport understand that Dumb Cherry is a complete asshat.

I see. So does this tarnish Lidstrom's Norris trophies then?
I mean, afterall...it's just a bunch of asshats voting, right? Or is that just when a Red Wing loses a category?

I love Don Cherry's passion and humor.
I don't take everything he says with a grain of salt...but I love listening to him. It's like listening to a Brett Hull interview. Fun to listen to, but you can't always take him serious.
And I doubt the sports writers based their vote on Cherry's analysis. There is probably a better chance of Wings fans being right about the refs playing favorites game in and game out.

Don't forget Z plays on the Wings, who regularly roll 4 lines. On just about any other team, Zatta would have played 20+ minutes a game his rookie year and netted about 60-70 points. But in spite of his limited minutes, he was still the rookie scoring leader. How many rookie forwards are regularly counted on as part of the penalty kill? How should he have played better? What else did he need to show he was the best rookie that year?

I'm not saying Zetterberg played bad. He had a very good rookie season. I'm saying he should have played better than he did if he wanted to win the Calder. It's pretty simple. If you lost, you should have played better to get more votes. Obviously the voters thought Jackman was the better player that year.

And let's get real here, if Zetterberg had been on another team that had been less talented offensively, the other team's best defenders are going against him every shift. One could argue that he was going against #3 & #4 defensemen his rookie year on Detroit instead of maybe #1 & #2 defenseman had he played on another team. I doubt he would have faired better on another team. He may have even faired worse depending on who his linemates would have been.

No one is bitching about Zetterberg not winning the Calder. We're just pointing out that he did deserve to win it.

WTF is the difference?
Listing reasons why he could have/should have won = bitching about the fact he lost

In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really mean anything.

Then why are you wasting your time posting this?

Trust me, we would much rather have Z than Jackman and the Calder. So would anyone with a functioning brain.

Then you should be satisfied with that fact...but here you are...in the middle of this discussion.

[Mellanby_equals_grit]

6"0 203 lbs losing to 6'4 220 lbs

ORLY!?!!11!!!

[the knob]

Curt with the massive pwnage.

And don't dis Grapes again, WCAH.

<------

[deadphish]

WCWF can't say diddly cux he is too busy


SUCKIN' IT!!!!!!!!!!

[WestCoastWingsFan]

I never said that's all that determined who won.
But being a rookie and pushing guys around, getting in players faces, in addition to being great defensively is a plus.
And the Nolan incident could very well have been the deciding factor in Jackman winning the Calder. He showed tremendous poise, toughness, brains and leadership in that run in. It got a lot of press.

Hundreds of players in the NHL push and get in guys faces, including plenty of rookies. It doesn't make you special, and they don't give out awards for it. The "Nolan incident," as you put it, didn't receive much attention, if any, outside of the local St. Louis media. I've never even heard of it outside of this board, and I follow hockey more diligently than most, including the people who write about it. And what's with this "great defense" crap? Jackman doesn't even play great D now, and he's been a better player over the past couple season than he was as a rookie. The guy's a solid role player, but he doesn't excel at anything.

He can hold his own, and fought quite well in his rookie season. He hasn't fought much since his shoulder injuries.

He's okay, but it's nothing to write home about. He's not a heavyweight by any stretch of the imagination.

I see. So does this tarnish Lidstrom's Norris trophies then?
I mean, afterall...it's just a bunch of asshats voting, right? Or is that just when a Red Wing loses a category?

Lidstrom has paid his dues. He didn't always receive fair treatment from the media. Don't forget that before Lids ever won a Norris, he finished 2nd three straight times. A lot of people think he should have won it those years. If he was Canadian, maybe he would have. At this point, Lids has kicked ass for so many years and has built up such a reputation for himself that if he deserves the Norris, he'll win it. Zetterberg, being a rookie, obviously didn't have that in his favor.

I love Don Cherry's passion and humor.
I don't take everything he says with a grain of salt...but I love listening to him. It's like listening to a Brett Hull interview. Fun to listen to, but you can't always take him serious.
And I doubt the sports writers based their vote on Cherry's analysis. There is probably a better chance of Wings fans being right about the refs playing favorites game in and game out.

We'll just have to disagree on that. Grapes certainly has passion, but what you call 'humor' I call idiocy. Let's just say I'm not the least bit surprised that the most boneheaded play in NHL postseason history happened on his watch and very possibly cost his team the Stanley Cup.

How can there even be any question that the writers based their vote on Cherry's analysis (if you can even call it that)? Nobody was propping up Jackman as a Calder candidate until Cherry said it. After that, you would see periodic blurbs in publications mentioning it, almost always accompanied by the Cherry quote. How many American hockey writers would have even known Jackman existed without Cherry? Most of them have difficulty naming anyone after Gretz, Orr, and Gordie Howe!

I'm not saying Zetterberg played bad. He had a very good rookie season. I'm saying he should have played better than he did if he wanted to win the Calder. It's pretty simple. If you lost, you should have played better to get more votes. Obviously the voters thought Jackman was the better player that year.

So voters never make a mistake? {See: last 2 Unites States Presidential elections} Are they always well informed? Do they never let bias affect their decision making?

Z did the best he could in the situation he was in. If he had scored 60-70 points, he probably would have won. Unfortunately, he didn't get enopugh ice time to do that. He still led all rookies in scoring (something that would normally guarantee him the Calder) in spite of the limited ice time he had. He also had the most complete game of any rookie, demonstrated by the fact that he played regularly on both the PP and the PK, both of which were among the best in the NHL. He was the best rookie that year by any objective standard. That alone should be enough to win the Calder. The voters just weren't sharp enough to understand it.

And let's get real here, if Zetterberg had been on another team that had been less talented offensively, the other team's best defenders are going against him every shift. One could argue that he was going against #3 & #4 defensemen his rookie year on Detroit instead of maybe #1 & #2 defenseman had he played on another team. I doubt he would have faired better on another team. He may have even faired worse depending on who his linemates would have been.

OK, let's get real. First off, teams typically stagger their defensive pairings rather than put their 1 and 2 defensemen together. They do this because they don't want their goalies to get lit up like Christmas trees when their weaker pairings are on the ice. Sort of the "don't put all your eggs in one basket" theory.

Secondly, Z played against the top defensive pairing all season. In the beginning, Zatta was on a line with Fedorov and Shanahan. I don't think I need to tell you the kind of attention THAT line received from opposing coaches. The situation didn't change after Z was moved to the "2 kids and a goat" line with Datsyuk and Hull. His new line played against the top defense pairing just as much as the Shanahan-Fedorov-Whoever line because the coaches knew it was equally dangerous.

Every team has talent. No matter who Zetterberg played for, he would have had talented linemates. And on a typical team, where he would have been given tons of ice time and free reign offensively, he would have racked up a ton of points, kind of like he's doing this season. On the two-way, 4 line Red Wings, that wasn't going to happen in his rookie season, although he did lead rookies in scoring, which is an amazing accomplishment considering the situation he was in.

WTF is the difference?
Listing reasons why he could have/should have won = bitching about the fact he lost

The difference is we're not getting emotional about it. We're just staing a simple fact: he was the best rookie and deserved to win the Calder. And by the way, his fellow players think so as well. When they were polled by TSN about who should its Rookie of the Year award, they voted Zetterberg by a landslide, a much larger margin than the one that gave Jackman the Calder. Do you really think a bunch of fish hacks know more about the NHL than the guys who are out there on the ice night-in night-out? Do you think YOU do?

Then why are you wasting your time posting this?

We're having a discussion. This is a DISCUSSION forum, right?

Then you should be satisfied with that fact...but here you are...in the middle of this discussion.

I am satisfied. Why shouldn't I be in this discussion?

[WestCoastWingsFan]

Curt with the massive pwnage.

And don't dis Grapes again, WCAH.

<------

Curt's never owned me, although I see you're still lining up to lick his boots. Pathetic.

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

[WestCoastWingsFan]

6"0 203 lbs losing to 6'4 220 lbs

ORLY!?!!11!!!

Never stopped Tie Domi. Or Calvin Murphy, for that matter. Tough is tough. Sorry, but Jackman isn't.

[deadphish]

Dude, just suck it and STFU.

[the knob]

Curt's never owned me, although I see you're still lining up to lick his boots. Pathetic.

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

I would call you the Aode of the Red Wings fans but that insults Aodes worldwidem.

I dub thee WestCoastToolBox.

[cprice12]

Curt with the massive pwnage.

And don't dis Grapes again, WCAH.

<------

Curt's never owned me, although I see you're still lining up to lick his boots. Pathetic.

You're in denial.
Maybe you should have a sit down session with Dr. Dooger in Flashchat.
He seems to talk on your level.

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

\
I'm an ignorant jackass because I disagree with you?
I thought I was rather civil in my disagreement with you in this thread.

Just let it go dude. Get over it. Jackman was the better player in 2003, but you guys have the better player NOW...so quit whining about the stupid 2003 Calder trophy.

God forbid the Blues actually beat the Wings at something.

[OS]

Tough is tough. Sorry, but Jackman isn't.

Based on your definition of tough, there is not a single tough player on the Detroit Red Wings roster.

And don't even think of mentioning Aaron Downey. He couldn't even hang on a last place team two seasons ago. Worthless as an enforcer...

[cprice12]

Tough is tough. Sorry, but Jackman isn't.

Based on your definition of tough, there is not a single tough player on the Detroit Red Wings roster.

And don't even think of mentioning Aaron Downey. He couldn't even hang on a last place team two seasons ago. Worthless as an enforcer...

All I know is...my dad could beat up his dad.

[SteveO]

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

I'm an ignorant jackass because I disagree with you?
I thought I was rather civil in my disagreement with you in this thread.

He means Grapes damnit!

[cprice12]

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

I'm an ignorant jackass because I disagree with you?
I thought I was rather civil in my disagreement with you in this thread.

He means Grapes damnit!

People need to be more specific nowadays.

[Steve Levy Sucks]

I'll stop dissing Grapes when he stops being an ignorant jackass. In other words; not gonna happen.

I'm an ignorant jackass because I disagree with you?
I thought I was rather civil in my disagreement with you in this thread.

He means Grapes damnit!

People need to be more specific nowadays.

It's like you have a 'grape' complex or something.