The Noon Number

by PeterMacKellar on Feb 1, 2012 12:01 PM EST in The Noon Number

GLENDALE, AZ - DECEMBER 28: Dennis Seidenberg #44 of the Boston Bruins celebrates with Joe Corvo #14 after Seidenberg scored the game winning goal in overtime against the Phoenix Coyotes during the NHL game at Jobing.com Arena on December 28, 2011 in Glendale, Arizona. The Bruins defeated the Coyotes 2-1 in overtime. (Photo by Christian Petersen/Getty Images)

66 - The percentage of Dennis Seidenberg's goals this season that have ended up being game winners. In addition to his red line goal last night against Ottawa, Seidenberg scored the game winner in the 2-1 OT win over Phoenix on December 28.

Only two other Bruins are close to Seidenberg's efficiency when it comes to game winning goals - Benoit Pouliot (four of eight) and Joe Corvo (one of two) are both at 50 percent.

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If Suter and Parise reach Free agency......

I would be excited at the prospect of trading Thomas and:

1. Promoting Rask and Khudobin
2. Making a run for either Suter or at least Parise.

We should be able to get good picks and prospects for Thomas in the offseason, but try to dump him in the West just in case he ever returns to last year’s form.

If Nashville and NJ let their men reach FA, I say we make them pay.

What do you guys say?

Oh and first.

by florida dodger on Feb 1, 2012 2:10 PM EST reply actions

First? Really? I can no longer take you seriously…

Our intention isn't to discuss this... it's to see if you can bleed.

by BobbyOrrsBastard on Feb 1, 2012 2:20 PM EST up reply actions

Oh and first.

This is me raising my eyebrow at this practice.

Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins

Hockey Blog Adventure is my blog but I'm way more active on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)

by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Feb 1, 2012 2:33 PM EST up reply actions

looking past the “first” bit,

1. Khudobin is not yet an NHL goalie
2. yes we all have wet dreams about AMERICAN HEROES Suter and Parise joining the Bruins

3. I’m pretty sure some other crazy team “making a run for it” will pick those guys up though

Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins

Hockey Blog Adventure is my blog but I'm way more active on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)

by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Feb 1, 2012 2:50 PM EST up reply actions

3 continuation – for a whole hell of a lot more than Chiarelli will be willing to give in terms of length, dollar or assets.

Our intention isn't to discuss this... it's to see if you can bleed.

by BobbyOrrsBastard on Feb 1, 2012 3:07 PM EST up reply actions

yep they’ll be the marquee free agents. I mean, look at this list: http://capgeek.com/free_agents.php

Although Dennis Wideman is a free agent….

Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins

Hockey Blog Adventure is my blog but I'm way more active on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)

by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Feb 1, 2012 3:22 PM EST up reply actions

Although Dennis Wideman is a free agent….

Hell

the

no.

In Memoriam: Dan Wheldon 1978-2011

by Arenacale on Feb 1, 2012 3:27 PM EST up reply actions

hey, so is Brad Boyes! We can finally have both!

by TomServo42 on Feb 1, 2012 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

The former, no thank you. The latter, I ruv.

Kick his ass, Seabass!

by phonymahoney on Feb 1, 2012 3:30 PM EST up reply actions

Also on the list

Randy Jones
Aaron Rome

You know, just for irony’s sake?

In Memoriam: Dan Wheldon 1978-2011

by Arenacale on Feb 1, 2012 3:33 PM EST up reply actions

Keep your friends close, your enemies on your team

by TomServo42 on Feb 1, 2012 4:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

words to live by.

in that case, i choose claude lemiuex and ulf samuelsson. call it ‘team neely’

Kick his ass, Seabass!

by phonymahoney on Feb 2, 2012 10:21 AM EST up reply actions

Detroit’s going to have a mighty sizable hole on the blue line and a whole lot of money to plug it with. I think we can count out the Nashville twins at the very least.

by TomServo42 on Feb 1, 2012 3:28 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t think it’s a given that Suter goes to Detroit just because Lidstrom retires. He might see that as a net gain of 0 (Lidstrom out, himself in), if it were me (I’m biased of course), I’d rather be the addition to the lineup in Boston than Lidstrom’s replacement in Detroit if contract is similar (and it could be).

by Michael Taylor on Feb 1, 2012 4:53 PM EST up reply actions

at least Parise

At least? At least Parise?!

Kick his ass, Seabass!

by phonymahoney on Feb 1, 2012 3:31 PM EST up reply actions

I’m not sure how this comment ended up in this particular post which doesn’t involve Thomas, Parise, or Suter.

I’m not excited about trading Tim Thomas by any stretch of the imagination.

Cornelius and BOB both have excellent points about Parise and Suter and their impending free agency. There’s no guarantee either player makes it there. We aren’t parting with the prospects to get them at the deadline (probably takes Hamilton to beat other others, that’s a no go). Once they make it to free agency, there’s no guarantee that some middling 6-10 seed doesn’t go crazy thinking that either of those guys is the one thing between that team and a cup and turns a great player’s contract into a cap choking albatross.

Now. If Parise or Suter are willing to sign in Boston for something sane, because we look like we’ll be perennial contenders for the near-medium future, then yes, this is an idea I’m willing to get on board with. If that’s the case though, I’m trading Thomas for the highest return, I don’t concern myself with where. There’s nothing that says he doesn’t just sign somewhere that bites us in the ass as soon as he reaches UFA and/or isn’t just traded there at the deadline.

by Michael Taylor on Feb 1, 2012 4:05 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Random

but I LOATHE the concept of GWG…

Our intention isn't to discuss this... it's to see if you can bleed.

by BobbyOrrsBastard on Feb 1, 2012 2:19 PM EST reply actions

I’ll bite: why so?

by TomServo42 on Feb 1, 2012 3:29 PM EST up reply actions

6-0 game gets a GWG same as last night’s 4-3 game. One goal was meaningful, the other useless.

Our intention isn't to discuss this... it's to see if you can bleed.

by BobbyOrrsBastard on Feb 1, 2012 3:39 PM EST up reply actions

How do you determine which 5 goals in the 6-0 game were the useless ones? Why is goal #4 in the 4-3 game any more notable than goals 1-3? That’s what I don’t like about the concept.

by Michael Taylor on Feb 1, 2012 3:59 PM EST up reply actions

It seems to imply that a player scored in a clutch situation to clinch a victory, but you both cite exceptions, common ones at that, that invalidate it as a useful metric. Decent for trivia though

by TomServo42 on Feb 1, 2012 4:23 PM EST up reply actions

I think I may have used it in a stat of the week for Pouliot, haha.

by Michael Taylor on Feb 1, 2012 4:31 PM EST up reply actions

Tom

I dont think anyone really uses GWG as a useful metric. Likes wins for a pitcher in baseball, GWG are predicated on many other factors and arent a real indication of how well player plays. It’s mainly just for the fans IMO

Keep Calm and Tim Tom

by Big Bad Me on Feb 1, 2012 10:16 PM EST up reply actions

Wins are still used by many as a meaningful metric for pitchers just as they are for goalies.

Our intention isn't to discuss this... it's to see if you can bleed.

by BobbyOrrsBastard on Feb 1, 2012 10:36 PM EST up reply actions

Those people are generally really old people

Your 2011 Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins

Hockey Blog Adventure is my blog but I'm way more active on Twitter.) GO BRUINS! (and Wild!)

by Cornelius Hardenbergh on Feb 2, 2012 8:49 AM EST up reply actions

Truthfully, I’m note even sure how they determine it. This was based off the NHL’s stat center, but they’ve listed way fewer GWG for the Bruins then the team has wins.

Johnny Boychuk - The infamous bottle of $100,000 champagne, I thought it was meh.

by PeterMacKellar on Feb 1, 2012 4:58 PM EST up reply actions