LOL. The Sedins were a joke. Talented with the puck, but way too wimpy for NHL playoff success. Two of the most over-rated players of my generation.

I've never seen a "superstar" get so few shots on net.

I remember playing fantasy hockey for years, and all of the star forwards would have like 250-300+ SOG for the season, except Henrik.. Henrik would have like 84 SOG in 82 games.
- bochangs

Henrik's the passer...how were Danny boys shots on goal?

During the regular season they were one of the NHL's weakest defensive teams

Where does this come from?
- Garnie

From the amount of shots per game they allowed.

Henrik Sedin > Nick Backstrom
- LeftCoaster

Yeah but Gretzky > Hull. What's your point? Both awesome.

From the amount of shots per game they allowed.
- james_tanner1

Goals are the single most important stat in the game. The Lightning finished 22nd in the league in SA/GP allowing 32.7 shots per game played. The team who finished 10th, Calgary, allowed 31.1 SA/GP. So if the Lightning allowed 1.6 less shots per game they would then be one of the better defensive teams in the league?

Henrik is "the passer"

Exactly. Didn't shoot the puck, didn't score many goals, didn't play physical, didn't kill penalties.

One dimensional, Over-rated.

Daniel was a better player but I still don't consider him HOF.

Backstrom is much better than either Sedin ever was. If only he didn't have to play under that whiner Barry Trotz

Henrik is "the passer"

Exactly. Didn't shoot the puck, didn't score many goals, didn't play physical, didn't kill penalties.

One dimensional, Over-rated.

Daniel was a better player but I still don't consider him HOF.
- bochangs

They're both great players.

The end

Henrik is "the passer"

Exactly. Didn't shoot the puck, didn't score many goals, didn't play physical, didn't kill penalties.

One dimensional, Over-rated.

Daniel was a better player but I still don't consider him HOF.
- bochangs

I consider you a mouth breather.

I never said Henrik or Daniel aren't great players. They are just over-rated. They have always been talked about as top 10 players in the NHL until the last couple of seasons, but to me, they were always more "top 100" not "top 10".

Not denying that they are great talents, but over-rated by a mile.

I never said Henrik or Daniel aren't great players. They are just over-rated. They have always been talked about as top 10 players in the NHL until the last couple of seasons, but to me, they were always more "top 100" not "top 10".

Not denying that they are great talents, but over-rated by a mile.
- bochangs

So the guys 65th and 73rd all time in scoring were never considered top 10 players during their careers.

LOL WUT

They had long healthy careers for sure. But if you look at points per game, I bet it isn't 64th or 73rd all time. And that is all they did, was put up points (mainly assists, mainly on the powerplay). One-dimensional. I think Phil Kessel put's up more body checks in the run of a season.

As long as they keep playing the way they did in the first two games, Backs being out just gives him some rest time for the finals.

I never said Henrik or Daniel aren't great players. They are just over-rated. They have always been talked about as top 10 players in the NHL until the last couple of seasons, but to me, they were always more "top 100" not "top 10".

Not denying that they are great talents, but over-rated by a mile.
- bochangs

They were one of the best teams in the NHL for years, they made a Final, and they are among the best players to never win a Cup. I don't think they are overated at all. Karl Sedin, their third brother, isn't even in the NHL and he should go to the hall of fame just because having triplets in there would be sweet.

Henrik Sedin - 0.805 points per game (172nd all time)
Daniel Sedin - 0.797 points per game (183rd all time)

A few players as an example with more points per game in their careers:

Doug Weight
Rick Tocchet
Brad Richards
Dany Heatley
Marc Savard
Jason Spezza
Mats Sundin
Paul Kariya

I'd like to know how the blogger can explain that two teams using two players Orpik and Girardi that he thinks are terrible, in top 4 defenseman roles have made it to the Conference finals?

James, I'd agree with you if hitting and physical play was eliminated from the NHL. If there was no such thing as physicality in the NHL, the Sedins may have been top 30 all time NHL players.

They had a great team every year, and then when things got ramped up and gritty in the playoffs they choked non-stop.

Yes they did make the finals one year when Luongo stood on his head, but never won anything!

Henrik Sedin - 0.805 points per game (172nd all time)
Daniel Sedin - 0.797 points per game (183rd all time)

A few players as an example with more points per game in their careers:

Doug Weight
Rick Tocchet
Brad Richards
Dany Heatley
Marc Savard
Jason Spezza
Mats Sundin
Paul Kariya
- bochangs

Its almost as if the longer you play, the harder it is to keep your points per game rate higher. Everyone on that list played less games except for Sundin who is in the HOF, so great job

I'd like to know how the blogger can explain that two teams using two players Orpik and Girardi that he thinks are terrible, in top 4 defenseman roles have made it to the Conference finals?
- MJL

Orpik isn't in the top-4, by pairing or ice time.

James, I'd agree with you if hitting and physical play was eliminated from the NHL. If there was no such thing as physicality in the NHL, the Sedins may have been top 30 all time NHL players.

They had a great team every year, and then when things got ramped up and gritty in the playoffs they choked non-stop.

Yes they did make the finals one year when Luongo stood on his head, but never won anything!
- bochangs

The Canucks lost only because a god had taken Thomas' body.

Goals are the single most important stat in the game. The Lightning finished 22nd in the league in SA/GP allowing 32.7 shots per game played. The team who finished 10th, Calgary, allowed 31.1 SA/GP. So if the Lightning allowed 1.6 less shots per game they would then be one of the better defensive teams in the league?
- MJL

The best team's in the NHL allow 28 shots per game, the Lighting allowed 32.

5v5 shots/ 60 is a much more reliable and predictive stat than goals, or total shots in all situations.

Only three of the bottom ten SA/60 (5v5) teams made the playoffs. That being said, three of the top five teams in SA/60 missed the Playoffs. All three of those teams probably should have made it though (St Louis, Dallas and Carolina were playoff teams screwed over by awful goalies, injuries to their good goalie, or in the case of the Blues, trading one of their best players and miss the playoffs by one point).

James, I'd agree with you if hitting and physical play was eliminated from the NHL. If there was no such thing as physicality in the NHL, the Sedins may have been top 30 all time NHL players.

They had a great team every year, and then when things got ramped up and gritty in the playoffs they choked non-stop.

Yes they did make the finals one year when Luongo stood on his head, but never won anything!
- bochangs

So let me get this straight: despite being weak, one dimensional and non-physical, the Sedins were able to overcome this and be "only" Hall of Famer players in the world's toughest league, but your main problem with them is that they aren't in the top 30 of all time?


In a league that's 100 years old, if you're top 200-300 you're pretty much amazing.

LOL. The Sedins were a joke. Talented with the puck, but way too wimpy for NHL playoff success. Two of the most over-rated players of my generation.

I've never seen a "superstar" get so few shots on net.

I remember playing fantasy hockey for years, and all of the star forwards would have like 250-300+ SOG for the season, except Henrik.. Henrik would have like 84 SOG in 82 games.
- bochangs

Well this is inaccurate.

The best team's in the NHL allow 28 shots per game, the Lighting allowed 32.

5v5 shots/ 60 is a much more reliable and predictive stat than goals, or total shots in all situations.

Only three of the bottom ten SA/60 (5v5) teams made the playoffs. That being said, three of the top five teams in SA/60 missed the Playoffs. All three of those teams probably should have made it though (St Louis, Dallas and Carolina were playoff teams screwed over by awful goalies, injuries to their good goalie, or in the case of the Blues, trading one of their best players and miss the playoffs by one point).
- james_tanner1

I find it humorous that you engage with MJL every blog lol doesn't it get old for you?

I'd like to know how the blogger can explain that two teams using two players Orpik and Girardi that he thinks are terrible, in top 4 defenseman roles have made it to the Conference finals?
- MJL

The Blogger would like to point out that hockey is a team game which also has salary cap and the team with the best player in the league just missed the playoffs, and that furthermore two of the final four teams are on PDO benders that are unsustainable and which led to them thinking they are contenders when they are, at best, borderline playoff teams. These playoffs also feature a career average goalie playing like an all time great, so anything can happen. Like I always say, who wins an NHL game is a coin-flip due to the salary cap. I also think it's pretty much universally agreed that Orpik and Giardi are awful.

I find it humorous that you engage with MJL every blog lol doesn't it get old for you?
- j.boyd919

Well it got old fighting with him, but now I just treat it like any other question. Sometimes it allows me to write a bit on what's interesting to me. I mean, he is very representative of how people still view the game, so think he actually does foster some interesting discussions.