MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,842
- 16,589
Pretty much the same for me. Actually, the net result of the discussions for me was that Brad Park went down.
Round 2, Vote 2 (HOH Top Defensemen)
- Thread starter TheDevilMadeMe
- Start date
Pretty much the same for me. Actually, the net result of the discussions for me was that Brad Park went down.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Edmonton had Kevin Lowe, who usually played on another pairing from Coffey. Lowe took the toughest defensive assignments for the team (which is why there is a minority of hockey fans who want to induct Lowe into the HHOF).
(Coffey's most common partner was Charlie Huddy).
(Coffey's most common partner was Charlie Huddy).
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,276
- 2,823
Agreed. The discussion should help our votes be better informed. But we don't want it to turn into groupthink, where people vote to match the group.
You can look at the previous round's vote if you really want some info. But the current discussion may have changed some minds as well.
Epsilon
#basta
By the way, I want to thank Hockey Outsider for making the detailed post about Chelios and Robinson that I really wanted to do but haven't had the to sit down and really hash out. He basically hit all the points I was going to.
Ranking Fetisov is getting harder and harder. I had him 10th last round, could be 8th in this one, I just don't know.
Ranking Fetisov is getting harder and harder. I had him 10th last round, could be 8th in this one, I just don't know.
Here are scoring for "pairs", seasons 1981-82 to 1986-87 (based on HSP gamelogs).
All situations combined.
(I'm a bit stressed up as I don't know if deadline is tonight, plus it's bedtime, but will double check later.)
Paul Coffey|Wayne Gretzky|94|230|324|105|125|109|215|324|152|63
Paul Coffey|Jari Kurri|52|119|171|46|73|78|93|171|46|47
Paul Coffey|Glenn Anderson|16|83|99|33|50|54|45|99|27|18
Paul Coffey|Mark Messier|32|66|98|30|36|33|65|98|35|30
Paul Coffey|Charlie Huddy|19|49|68|30|19|18|50|68|27|23
Paul Coffey|Mike Krushelnyski|8|30|38|11|19|17|21|38|10|11
Paul Coffey|Dave Hunter|11|22|33|15|7|15|18|33|10|8
Paul Coffey|Ken Linseman|8|16|24|6|10|9|15|24|10|5
Paul Coffey|Dave Lumley|6|18|24|11|7|9|15|24|6|9
Paul Coffey|Mark Napier|7|15|22|7|8|6|16|22|9|7
Paul Coffey|Pat Hughes|2|18|20|9|9|12|8|20|5|3
Paul Coffey|Kevin McClelland|4|13|17|10|3|6|11|17|5|6
Paul Coffey|Willy Lindstrom|7|9|16|4|5|4|12|16|5|7
Paul Coffey|Matti Hagman|7|8|15|5|3|6|9|15|6|3
Paul Coffey|Randy Gregg|8|6|14|4|2|2|12|14|6|6
Paul Coffey|Jaroslav Pouzar|2|12|14|8|4|9|5|14|4|1
Paul Coffey|Craig MacTavish|5|8|13|4|4|5|8|13|5|3
Paul Coffey|Dave Semenko|4|9|13|4|5|6|7|13|4|3
Paul Coffey|Risto Siltanen|5|6|11|2|4|2|9|11|5|4
Paul Coffey|Raimo Summanen|3|8|11|3|5|5|6|11|2|4
Paul Coffey|Grant Fuhr|4|6|10|6|0|0|10|10|2|8
Paul Coffey|Tom Roulston|2|7|9|4|3|5|4|9|0|4
Paul Coffey|Marc Habscheid|2|5|7|2|3|3|4|7|3|1
Paul Coffey|Esa Tikkanen|0|7|7|6|1|6|1|7|0|1
Edit: And here's for ES only:
Paul Coffey|Wayne Gretzky|54|130|184|55|75|63|121|184|87|34
Paul Coffey|Jari Kurri|30|69|99|28|41|46|53|99|27|26
Paul Coffey|Glenn Anderson|6|43|49|16|27|29|20|49|14|6
Paul Coffey|Mark Messier|14|31|45|12|19|15|30|45|20|10
Paul Coffey|Charlie Huddy|10|31|41|19|12|11|30|41|15|15
Paul Coffey|Dave Hunter|8|22|30|15|7|15|15|30|8|7
Paul Coffey|Mike Krushelnyski|3|18|21|6|12|8|13|21|8|5
Paul Coffey|Dave Lumley|4|16|20|9|7|8|12|20|5|7
Paul Coffey|Kevin McClelland|4|13|17|10|3|6|11|17|5|6
Paul Coffey|Mark Napier|7|9|16|5|4|4|12|16|7|5
Paul Coffey|Pat Hughes|2|11|13|6|5|8|5|13|2|3
Paul Coffey|Willy Lindstrom|5|7|12|4|3|3|9|12|4|5
Paul Coffey|Jaroslav Pouzar|1|11|12|7|4|8|4|12|3|1
Paul Coffey|Dave Semenko|3|8|11|3|5|5|6|11|4|2
Paul Coffey|Raimo Summanen|3|8|11|3|5|5|6|11|2|4
Paul Coffey|Ken Linseman|4|6|10|2|4|1|9|10|5|4
Paul Coffey|Craig MacTavish|3|7|10|3|4|4|6|10|3|3
Paul Coffey|Randy Gregg|5|4|9|3|1|2|7|9|4|3
Paul Coffey|Matti Hagman|4|4|8|2|2|3|5|8|4|1
Paul Coffey|Tom Roulston|2|5|7|3|2|4|3|7|0|3
Paul Coffey|Marc Habscheid|2|4|6|2|2|3|3|6|2|1
Paul Coffey|Marty McSorley|2|3|5|2|1|2|3|5|0|3
Yes, Huddy.
Edit again: Have added ES as "percentage" of Coffey's ES totals that year:
Paul Coffey|Total|116 | 263 | 379 | 137 | 126
Paul Coffey|Wayne Gretzky| 0.466| 0.494| 0.485| 0.401| 0.595
Paul Coffey|Jari Kurri| 0.259| 0.262| 0.261| 0.204| 0.325
Paul Coffey|Glenn Anderson| 0.052| 0.163| 0.129| 0.117| 0.214
Paul Coffey|Mark Messier| 0.121| 0.118| 0.119| 0.088| 0.151
Paul Coffey|Charlie Huddy| 0.086| 0.118| 0.108| 0.139| 0.095
Paul Coffey|Dave Hunter| 0.069| 0.084| 0.079| 0.109| 0.056
Paul Coffey|Mike Krushelnyski| 0.026| 0.068| 0.055| 0.044| 0.095
Paul Coffey|Dave Lumley| 0.034| 0.061| 0.053| 0.066| 0.056
Paul Coffey|Kevin McClelland| 0.034| 0.049| 0.045| 0.073| 0.024
Paul Coffey|Mark Napier| 0.060| 0.034| 0.042| 0.036| 0.032
Paul Coffey|Pat Hughes| 0.017| 0.042| 0.034| 0.044| 0.040
Paul Coffey|Willy Lindstrom| 0.043| 0.027| 0.032| 0.029| 0.024
Paul Coffey|Jaroslav Pouzar| 0.009| 0.042| 0.032| 0.051| 0.032
Paul Coffey|Dave Semenko| 0.026| 0.030| 0.029| 0.022| 0.040
Paul Coffey|Raimo Summanen| 0.026| 0.030| 0.029| 0.022| 0.040
Paul Coffey|Ken Linseman| 0.034| 0.023| 0.026| 0.015| 0.032
Paul Coffey|Craig MacTavish| 0.026| 0.027| 0.026| 0.022| 0.032
Paul Coffey|Randy Gregg| 0.043| 0.015| 0.024| 0.022| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Matti Hagman| 0.034| 0.015| 0.021| 0.015| 0.016
Paul Coffey|Tom Roulston| 0.017| 0.019| 0.018| 0.022| 0.016
Paul Coffey|Marc Habscheid| 0.017| 0.015| 0.016| 0.015| 0.016
Paul Coffey|Marty McSorley| 0.017| 0.011| 0.013| 0.015| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Lee Fogolin| 0.026| 0.004| 0.011| 0.000| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Garry Lariviere| 0.009| 0.011| 0.011| 0.022| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Esa Tikkanen| 0.000| 0.011| 0.008| 0.015| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Larry Melnyk| 0.009| 0.004| 0.005| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Laurie Boschman| 0.009| 0.004| 0.005| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Kent Nilsson| 0.000| 0.008| 0.005| 0.007| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Gord Sherven| 0.000| 0.008| 0.005| 0.007| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Billy Carroll| 0.000| 0.008| 0.005| 0.007| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Andy Moog| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Grant Fuhr| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Ken Berry| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Mike Forbes| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.007| 0.000
Paul Coffey|Moe Lemay| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.000| 0.008
Paul Coffey|Kevin Lowe| 0.000| 0.004| 0.003| 0.000| 0.008
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I've seen the argument that MacInnis might have had more total value than Coffey because he was more valuable in later years, after Coffey fell off the map. Would anyone be willing to make the same argument vis-a-vis MacInnis and Park?
I don't think MacInnis has a case over either of them if we just look at their primes, as Park and Coffey each have a 7-8 year period better than any corresponding period for MacInnis.
I don't think MacInnis has a case over either of them if we just look at their primes, as Park and Coffey each have a 7-8 year period better than any corresponding period for MacInnis.
Last edited:
Chelios PK stats partly the result of great goalies?
I've read that Chelios have great PK stats, and that he has had it for three(?) different teams?
I tried to get focus on that some day ago, but without much response.
Have you thought about what goaltenders he had behind him? Wasn't it Roy, Belfour, Hasek? I'm in a very hurry now, but thought that was interesting.
Goalies are said to be the most important player of the team, and perhaps especially so during PK.
Chelios have great defensive rumour. But perhaps to some extent it might be explained by his goalies? (Not fully, but perhaps partly? Perhaps to an extent slightly overlooked?)
I've read that Chelios have great PK stats, and that he has had it for three(?) different teams?
I tried to get focus on that some day ago, but without much response.
Have you thought about what goaltenders he had behind him? Wasn't it Roy, Belfour, Hasek? I'm in a very hurry now, but thought that was interesting.
Goalies are said to be the most important player of the team, and perhaps especially so during PK.
Chelios have great defensive rumour. But perhaps to some extent it might be explained by his goalies? (Not fully, but perhaps partly? Perhaps to an extent slightly overlooked?)
The 2nd part is very telling and causes even further confusion into Coffey value in making his teams better at winning. Personally I'd rather have at least 5-6 of the other Dmen in this group of 10 if I was starting a team from scratch and could have their careers and i think for the most part that Coffey played in optimal conditions throughout much of his career.
To the 1st part I think both Wayne and Mario break 180 without Coffey, R71 get my back on this one..lol
Potvin during prime?
Before I go away for a while, I wonder a thing about Potvin too...
It is sort of new(s) to me that he is so highly regarded alltime. When I grew up, I remember he and Robinson being great defencemen, along with Savard and Salming and a few others (plus of course some non-NHL:ers). I had the impression, during that time, that Robinson was rated above Potvin.
During last month, he has been very praised here as being "good at everything", dominating, great leader, "best/MVP player on the dynasty NYI", etc.
Has he always been regarded as highly (as here during the last month or so)? Or is a case of (perhaps unlike Coffey??) someone who in hindsight have appeared better and better?
Please discuss more (if you want to). It's basically just a few guys here discussing, and a few of them focus on a single subject or so.
Before I go away for a while, I wonder a thing about Potvin too...
It is sort of new(s) to me that he is so highly regarded alltime. When I grew up, I remember he and Robinson being great defencemen, along with Savard and Salming and a few others (plus of course some non-NHL:ers). I had the impression, during that time, that Robinson was rated above Potvin.
During last month, he has been very praised here as being "good at everything", dominating, great leader, "best/MVP player on the dynasty NYI", etc.
Has he always been regarded as highly (as here during the last month or so)? Or is a case of (perhaps unlike Coffey??) someone who in hindsight have appeared better and better?
Please discuss more (if you want to). It's basically just a few guys here discussing, and a few of them focus on a single subject or so.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
Not sure what to make of the last comment either than it probably shows why Shore went so high since no one saw him play and there is little proof that can be expanded on since the stats of the day are not as complete as they are today.
Yes a goal is a goal is a goal except when we talk about Richard alter on there will be a ton of focus on his clutch goals I suspect.
Scoring of course is a more important aspect of the game for forwards than Dmen so players like Coffey and Richard won't be treated exactly the same in this regard.
Do we really need actual evidence that some of Coffey's points came in games where the score was 9-3, 6-2, 5-1 ect...? I'm pretty sure that in his days in Edmonton that some of those points came in those situations and like I said it would be great to do the legwork and when i have time in retirement or find a quicker way to do it I will.
Coffey's career and statistical dominance was due in part to his fortunate position to play in Edmonton, heck he didn't even replicate the same level with Mario (maybe that's something to bring up in a Wayne and Mario argument and that's the part about being the product of his team he would have been an offensive force on any team but less so statistically without Wayne and Edmonton) and it's always important to ask questions when looking at obvious differences in any players career.
I'm not saying that an answer can always be found but to investigate and wonder about possibilities is extremely important.
Also I'm not questioning his offensive level of play or his importance to some very good teams but the overall level of play and his importance historically is open to debate.
BraveCanadian
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2010
- 14,860
- 3,832
With the pile of personal hardware, accolades and championships he's sitting on, I would agree.
The results speak for themselves despite the attempts at revisionism.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
There is no revistionism about Coffey's weak defensive play. It was commented on throughout his career.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Agree. All I ever heard from my hab fan friends and family from 1990 to, oh, about 1998, was how they never should have traded Chelios away for Savard.
Most of us looked at Shore extremely critically, and he did end up dropping one spot from where he was canonically ranked.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Fixed Lines or Units
Pappyline is very accurate. The other consideration is that except misconducts coincidental minors and majors produced 4 on 4 and 3 on 3 situations so there were scrambled lines like you see in the five minute overtime.
Pappyline is very accurate. The other consideration is that except misconducts coincidental minors and majors produced 4 on 4 and 3 on 3 situations so there were scrambled lines like you see in the five minute overtime.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,197
- 14,635
I'm sure that Coffey got a number of points in blowout games, but your comment is generic and lacks precision. Coffey averaged just over 120 points over his five best seasons. If you exclude his "blowout points", would he have become an 110 point scorer? 100 points? 70?
Furthermore, a number of defensemen have played on dominant teams (Orr, Harvey, Kelly, Potvin and Robinson all played on teams that were roughly as dominant as the Oilers). I've never heard anybody suggest that they earned cheap points in blowouts. Was Coffey the only player to rack up cheap points in blowouts?
What somebody should do, if they want to pursue this argument, is compare Coffey's offense, minus any "blowout points", to that of his contemporaries to see how far ahead Coffey really is. Yes, it's a lot of effort (I certainly don't have time for it), but is it really fair to use this as an argument against Coffey when it could just as easily be used against Potvin and Robinson, who both played on teams that won a lot of blowouts too?
====
We seem to be in agreement in the sense that I didn't have Coffey in my top five this round. I just find that many people have a knee-jerk reaction ("he was bad defensively!") with Coffey. There was a clear trade-off and it's easy to focus on the downside without focusing on the upside (game-breaking offensive dominance likely matched only by Orr).
Furthermore, a number of defensemen have played on dominant teams (Orr, Harvey, Kelly, Potvin and Robinson all played on teams that were roughly as dominant as the Oilers). I've never heard anybody suggest that they earned cheap points in blowouts. Was Coffey the only player to rack up cheap points in blowouts?
What somebody should do, if they want to pursue this argument, is compare Coffey's offense, minus any "blowout points", to that of his contemporaries to see how far ahead Coffey really is. Yes, it's a lot of effort (I certainly don't have time for it), but is it really fair to use this as an argument against Coffey when it could just as easily be used against Potvin and Robinson, who both played on teams that won a lot of blowouts too?
====
We seem to be in agreement in the sense that I didn't have Coffey in my top five this round. I just find that many people have a knee-jerk reaction ("he was bad defensively!") with Coffey. There was a clear trade-off and it's easy to focus on the downside without focusing on the upside (game-breaking offensive dominance likely matched only by Orr).
Last edited:
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Red Kelly Trade II
During the 1959-60 season Red Kelly was not a happy camper in Detroit. Eventually Kelly was traded to the Rangers as part of a trade for Bill Gadsby. Kelly refused to report and the trade was annulled.
Most of the trade details are available in Eddie Shack's career transaction.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/shacked01.html
Throw in that later Shack was traded to the Leafs, McNeill was claimed by the Rangers, Gadsby was traded to the Rwed Wings for career minor leaguer Les Hunt, Kelly to the Leafs for Marc Reaume and the key players wound up at their destinations eventually.
In Toronto both Allen Stanley(1960,1961,2nd AST) and Carl Brewer(1962, 1st 1963) so there was no real need to play Kelly at left defense.
Kelly at center made sense. Mahovlich needed a center - his 1960-61 season - 48 goals justified the trade. Imlach offered a misdirect re Beliveau but the fact remains Mahovlich needed a center when playing the other four teams.
Good hockey trade that considered a players remaining skills and team needs.
During the 1959-60 season Red Kelly was not a happy camper in Detroit. Eventually Kelly was traded to the Rangers as part of a trade for Bill Gadsby. Kelly refused to report and the trade was annulled.
Most of the trade details are available in Eddie Shack's career transaction.
http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/shacked01.html
Throw in that later Shack was traded to the Leafs, McNeill was claimed by the Rangers, Gadsby was traded to the Rwed Wings for career minor leaguer Les Hunt, Kelly to the Leafs for Marc Reaume and the key players wound up at their destinations eventually.
In Toronto both Allen Stanley(1960,1961,2nd AST) and Carl Brewer(1962, 1st 1963) so there was no real need to play Kelly at left defense.
Kelly at center made sense. Mahovlich needed a center - his 1960-61 season - 48 goals justified the trade. Imlach offered a misdirect re Beliveau but the fact remains Mahovlich needed a center when playing the other four teams.
Good hockey trade that considered a players remaining skills and team needs.
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
...and the other thing to consider in the blowout argument is did Coffey only get those 4-5 points because it was a blowout or was it only a blowout because Coffey had 4-5 points. When did he get his points? In a 7-2 blowout, if Coffey gets 2 of the goals and assists on another of the first 4 goals scored, you can hardly accuse him of running up the score or counting those points as inconsequential now can you?
In other words, does the blowout even happen if not for Coffey? Not an easy answer there and no way to answer it without actually going back and watching the game(s) in question.
Either way, whether or not said player does or doesn't deserve those points in a blowout is not a very valid argument imo.
Last edited:
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,276
- 2,823
Potvin has long been ranked highly in an all-time sense.
In 1997, the Hockey News released a top-100 list of NHL players, compiled by voters who included many longtime hockey writers, coaches, and observers. I believe the voting was conducted as early as 1995 or 1996.
Denis Potvin was ranked 19th on that list, highest of any defenceman up for voting this round. Robinson was rated 25th. (It was an NHL list, so didn't consider Fetisov's prime. And Chelios, Coffey, and MacInnis were still active.)
Some people have criticised the list for putting too much emphasis on winning Stanley Cups. But that wouldn't apply to Potvin vs Robinson, who both played for NHL dynasty teams.
Re: your question about Paul Coffey's penalty killing, check out my post 41. Edmonton while Paul Coffey was there had one of the best penalty kills of all time, when you give them credit for their SHG's. (See the TmSH+ column - it takes SHG's into account.) On the other hand, Coffey had a relatively small role on the penalty kill, when compared to other defencemen. Anyone know if he usually played on the first unit or on the second unit? Or whether Gretzky and Kurri usually played on the first unit or second unit?
You commented on Chelios and his team performance on the penalty kill. I agree that he played with strong goaltending, and that probably helped his team performance. But you could say the same about Scott Stevens and other top penalty killing defencemen. In general, I wouldn't take Chelios' team rankings as a precise measure of his performance. It's a crude indicator, but there's not much else we have in terms of stats for penalty killing.
In defence of the penalty killing stats I posted and TDMM posted, players who played a lot on the penalty kill do tend to have above-average team performance in the long run. And players who combine high usage with strong team performance tend to be those with the best reputations. So I think the stats are picking up on something. They just aren't precise measurements.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Please elaborate on the bolded statement. I have never heard anything about this before. Multiple sources have basically the same account of the story:
http://www.redwingalumni.com/legendKelly.jsp
Sounds like things were just fine and dandy until Kelly dared to mention his injury the previous season to a reporter.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,197
- 14,635
That's another good point. Hypothetically, let's say Coffey scored 1 goal and 3 assists in a game that Edmonton wins 9-3. At a first glance, one could discount the points that Coffey earned because it was a blowout.
However, I think you'd need to dig deeper than that. If it was 6-3 going into the third, and Coffey recorded 3 points, then I'd be tempted to discount those points, because the outcome of the game had already been decided (essentially). However, if Coffey scored 3 points in the first period to help Edmonton come back from a 3-1 deficit to take an early 4-3 lead, then he would have contributed to important goals, even though the game later turned into a blowout.
This argument is far more subtle than simply saying that Coffey earned a lot of cheap points because he (though apparently not Orr, Potvin, Harvey, Robinson and Kelly!) played for a great team.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Why?
I tried to address the why he mentioned the injury to the reporter. Seems that it was to counterbalance perceptions of eroding skills.
I tried to address the why he mentioned the injury to the reporter. Seems that it was to counterbalance perceptions of eroding skills.
I think the statistical record leans more heavily on Wayne being a strong influence on the "extra" points.
During Coffey's peak in Edmonton his points were 126,121 and 138. In Pittsburgh it was 113,103 and 93.
Look there is no doubt that Coffey was tremendously gifted offensively but the gap between him and a guy like Potvin, Kelly or Bourque isn't as large as the raw stats make it out to be IMO.
Who knows maybe we will discuss this more in the next round.
This was my main point and hopefully someone will do some research on it when they get a chance. My last post on Coffey's 3 peak seasons with Wayne and Mario respectively also indicate a slight indicator of increased offensive due to Wayne and Edmonton both in regular season and playoffs.
I'm guessing that when the numbers are run that Coffey will have more "blowout points" and the fact that the 5 other guys mentioned in this post were considerably better defensively is why they will be ranked higher.
i agree with TDMM and 70s that montreal was hurt by trading chelios. '93 was a fairly anomalous playoff season (upsets), and habs were generally mediocre for a long time afterwards.
injury is the main reason for no one scoring 180p without coffey.
probably only 2 players have had the ability to score 180p (especially considering eras). both were on pace for more than 180 without coffey, but got injured.
gretzky scored at a 191p pace in '88 without coffey, but missed 18 games. oilers' top offensive d-men were smith, huddy and lowe.
in '93, lemieux would surely have scored 180p if healthy. possibly also in '96 (188p pace)
imo, team D is probably as important or more important in those PKs than goalies. habs, chicago and DRW were all elite defensive teams.
DRW more often had goalies like osgood and legace, and never had a top 3 PK with hasek in net.
'04: legace, joseph (hasek played 14 games)
'06: legace, osgood
roy also played only about 55-60% of games when chelios played for habs.
chelios was an excellent PKer, even after age 40. even in new rules he was very good. probably the best PK d-man i have seen.
very smart player (imo, he did not need to be nearly as dirty as he was to be great), and even though he was not big, was very effective physically near the net and on the boards.
gretzky was a better ES scorer than lemieux. lemieux relied more on PP.
coffey was also more of an ES scorer.
Ad
Latest posts
-
98.5 The Sports Hub FELGER - Could trading Swayman be the right move?- Latest: Bruinfanatic
-
-
Upcoming events
-
GAME 5 - Toledo Walleye @ Kansas City Mavericks - Kansas City Mavericks leads series 3-1.Wagers: 2Staked: $75.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Edmonton Oilers @ Dallas Stars - Edmonton Oilers leads series 1-0Wagers: 10Staked: $7,729.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 3 Boston Celtics @ Indiana Pacers - Boston leads series 2-0Wagers: 3Staked: $1,900.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
