Stargazing: Eriksson Named NHLs' 3rd Star of the Week
Stargazing is a daily assortment of Dallas Stars and Texas Stars news, and whatever other random ramblings are bouncing around inside our heads.
Dallas Stars left wing Loui Eriksson has been named the NHL's Third Star of the week. On a day when we've been reflecting on the first half of the season, trying to figure out what the heck is going on around here, that is a nice little pick me up. It seems recognition in this form for Dallas Stars players is seldom at best, but Loui's 5 goals last earned him the honor. Here is the release.
Mike Heika was doing the same thing we are, trying to figure out what it all means at the halfway point, and he tempered Loui's recent accomplishments a little bit:
Loui Eriksson had a monster month with 7 goals and 11 assists for 18 points in 13 games. Unfortunately, Eriksson was minus-2 in that span.
This did not escape the notice of the Stars coaching staff. The declining defensive play of what we call the Stars top line crescendoed with Dallas' 4-1 loss to Colorado, and Craig Ludwig's on-air comments disparaging Neal and Erikssons' defensive play. Jere Lehtinen promptly replaced James Neal, and this gave Loui the freedom to put the cherry on top of a solid month with a New Years Eve hat trick. Mr. Eriksson, we beg you keep it up.
Elsewhere in hockey land, the World Junior Championship in Saskatoon takes center stage. Last night the United States defeated Sweden in their semi-final match, and will face team Canada in the final on Tuesday. If you haven't been watching this, you have been missing out. The NHL Network has brought this tournament to the states in beautiful high definition, and I have really enjoyed it these last two years. Though Dallas doesn't have any prospects there this year, I highly recommend keeping one eye on the Stars and Stripes on Tuesday while you're watching the Stars take on the Devils.
But wait, there's more: Your busy Hockey Tuesday is even more jam packed than you thought, because Defending Big D Live is going on the air after the Devils' game to bring you our second ever post game show. Between dissecting the result in NJ, and the rising tensions amongst the mixed Canadian/American Defending Big D staff while the WJC Final is on, you won't want to miss it.

Richard Durrett asks if the Dallas Stars can change their spots halfway through the year...
The Stars have played 41 games, exactly halfway through the 2009-2010 season and they are 18-12-11 and have 47 points. Right now, that's four points out of the eighth and final playoff spot, but Dallas does have a game in hand on the teams in front of them.
In other words, Dallas has a pretty average record. It's a very competitive Western Conference, so a three- or four-game winning streak could dramatically change how they look in the standings.
But is this team capable of one of those streaks? They really haven't done it all season. ...
...It's not too late to find something and make a huge playoff push. But now that Dallas has reached the halfway point, the clock starts ticking a little faster.

THN put together an all-decade team and Jere Lehtinen made the cut. Mark Stepneski explains...
The Hockey News has put together an All-Decade team and Jere Lehtinen is the one current Dallas Star to make it. Two former Stars are on it as well - Willie Mitchell and Jussi Jokinen.
THN didn't pick just the best players of the decade, they put together what they would be the best team as its All-Decade team. That would be players that would slot in on two top scoring lines, a checking line and an energy line. They also picked defensemen that could be slotted from one through six. The picked a starting goalie and a backup as the All-Decade backup. They picked a couple of specialists too.
Lehtinen made is on the checking line. They slotted Mitchell in on the 3rd defensive pairing. Jokinen is labeled the team's shootout specialist.
Head on over to Andrew's Stars Page to see the entire lineup.

"We've been what our record says we are – up and down," said Brad Richards, who leads the team in scoring with 48 points. "We've had some good spurts, and we've had some bad spurts."
"We've been OK, and OK is not good enough," Crawford said after the loss to the Canucks, which kept Dallas from picking up points on the seventh-place team in the West. "We have to be better than OK, and we're definitely capable of it. That's what we're striving for.
"That word 'determination' is thrown around a lot – and you see it in some players most of the time, guys like Loui Eriksson, Brenden Morrow, Jere Lehtinen," Crawford said. "But we need a few of our other guys to get it in larger doses."
"We have to improve our consistency," Richards said. "It's halfway through the season, and you've got to realize where you are. It's not the first week of the season where you can just say, 'Whatever, we'll get going.' There are only 41 games left to get to a position where we've got a chance. Games go by quick if you don't keep your foot on it."

If an attacking player has the puck deflect into the net, off his skate or body, in any manner, the goal shall be allowed. The player who deflected the puck shall be credited with the goal.
The goal shall not be allowed if the puck has been intentionally kicked with his skate or foot, using a distinct kicking motion, and subsequently enters the net.
A goal shall be allowed unless a distinct kicking motion is evident.
I know I shouldn't be bringing this up again. I'll just leave it at that.

Nothing really exciting, to tell you the truth. The team is healthy and lines look the same as they did Saturday:
Eriksson-Richards-Lehtinen
Neal-Ribeiro-Ott
Morrow-Wandell-Benn
Some combination of Petersen-Sutherby-Modano-BarchGrossman-Robidas
Skrastins-Daley
Fistric-NiskanenWoywitka
Turco
Auld
That sounds like a good thing to me. These players might benefit from some more consistency in the lineup night in and night out. And personally, I'd like to see more Sutherby.

0 recs |
15 comments
|
Comments
Rule 57
Rule 57 refers the reader to Rule 70, which says it is no goal when the puck deflects off a skate and there is a distinct kicking motion. That’s why whether it was intentional or not is irrelevant. You have to read everything.
Sigh...
You guys….
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
by Brandon Worley on Jan 4, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
It is a bit confusing...
Rule 57 states several times that an intentionally kicked puck shall be ruled a no goal, and uses the word “intentional” in several different places. Then it refers to THIS rule:
Kicking the puck shall be permitted in all zones. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who uses a distinct kicking motion to propel the puck into the net. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who kicks a puck that deflects into the net off any player, goalkeeper or Official.
A puck that deflects into the net off of an attacking player who does not use a distinct kicking motion, is a legitimate goal.
This only says “distinct kicking motion”. So no judging whether it was intentional or not.
It doesn’t matter anyway, since the Stars shouldn’t have lost the game by one goal as it was. That non-goal didn’t really matter in the long run.
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
I don't think there's a way to 100% controversy proof the rule
Unfortunately, it seems like Morrow is involved in just about every one of these controversies.
If you allow goals like the one that was overturned on Saturday, then players would be taught to ‘push the pile’ so to speak to absolve the offending player of blame. You definitely don’t want that.
OTOH, I go back to Game 5 of the San Jose series from two years ago when Morrow had two goals overturned, one of which was propelled into the net by his skate. Problem was, he was getting cross checked from behind and wasn’t even looking down at the puck. At that point, it was clear his actions were more out of self preservation. It’s clear there was no intention to kick the puck into the net.
So what do you do in that instance?
I guess leave the rule the way it is.
Defending Big D Free to use and easy to join, as well as easy to use and free to join!
TheStarsFans Like your neighborhood bar, but drunkier
YNWA Because do you really want to root for ManU?
I smiled when I posted this...
Because I know my argument doesn’t hold water. I’m just causing trouble.
I wouldn’t think it was a bad call if the first call on the ice was ‘no goal’. My real problem is how there was enough evidence to overturn a call of a good goal on the ice, and why it took as long as it did. Like Morrow said.
I still don’t see how Morrow propelling a game tying puck into the net against (St. Louis?) with his groin is a good goal, and that isn’t. Some garbage is good and some garbage is bad. That seems to be the gist of it.
And it’s nice that the game has come this far in ten years…there was a time when having two feet in the crease wouldn’t have even warranted a conversation.
Rulebook
The rule book is basically an outline of the rules. On top of that there is the NHL officiating casebook, which is goes into even great detail about various rules. The latest one I have has about 2 1/2 pages devoted to kicking pucks and outlines several different scenarios. The league sends out memos or what they call interpretation bulletins to clarify matters when needed.
The bottom line is a puck can’t be propelled into the net by a distinct kicking motion regardless of the player’s intention. The league has made that clear in everything it has said and written about the rule.
Just from reading the two rules themselves.
It’s clear it shouldn’t be a goal.
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
by Brandon Worley on Jan 4, 2010 4:46 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I wholeheartedly agree about wanting to see more Sutherby.
Barchie’s got speed but Sudsy is head and shoulders above on puck handling skills. Mo with Suds & Pete is a pretty highly skilled forth line and Suds is pretty good at defending his teammates when needed.
As to the Morrow goal, my husband went to great length with many replays in extreme slow motion to prove to me that it was not a good goal. Gah. So my apologies to Sarah/Schtimpy27!
“I still don’t see how Morrow propelling a game tying puck into the net against (St. Louis?) with his groin is a good goal..”
Do HG and I really need to explain this???
Oh, and hey Mark!
Supporting your local ice troll, 24/7/365
HG is sweet and innocent and has no idea what you're talking about
LOL!!! Scoring with your groin is key to the survival of Stars fans (and other humans – yes I distinguish between the two) but questionable in goal scoring if there is a kicking motion.
The bottom line is we aren’t going to win many games scoring only one goal a game.
I must have this thing for hockey boys from Whitby with the initials JN.
Laughs2loud probably meant the recent skate goal...
But I cannot stop giggling at the thought of a husband having a super slow motion replay argument with a wife while repeatedly referencing Morrow’s groin. Most men try to limit the amount of wife-related Morrow groin recap viewage in the house, no?
Sigh. It was the recent skate no goal.
If it had been the groin good goal, I wouldn’t have minded so much. :P
Supporting your local ice troll, 24/7/365
Daley is good at that.
Defending Big D: A Dallas Stars blog on SBN: easy to use, free to join.
by Brandon Worley on Jan 4, 2010 5:56 PM CST via mobile up reply actions






















