[das_hips]

I'm not sure I follow. You initially provided that Jacques Martin had an impedance on the teams offensive abilities while Alfredsson played on the same team as Hossa, and Havlat. Disregarding that they rarely played on the same line

You know what I recommend you do to see just how poor your "they rarely played on the same line" argument is? Go here.

That is a handy reference you have found. While I certainly am not going to undertake a project to prove that Alfredsson never collected a point with any of the 'star' players on the Ottawa Senators in 2003-04 (I'd expect more succesful results from selling my pubic hair on Ebay) you yourself said

Granted, as skippy would call me out on, this is a very small sample size (given it was yet another playoff loss to the Leafs), and I don't have the time nor inclination to see just what percentage of his points involved Hossa or Havlat on the ice with him

...and...

Am I cherry picking here? Absolutely. There are plenty of non-Hossa and non-Havlat goals that Alfie is on (hell, I'd already forgotten that Peter Bondra was a Sen for a bit), but your efforts to suggest that Alfie played in some non-Hossa and non-Havlat vacuum us absurd.

I never mentioned anything about the power-play. Let's be realistic here. Obviously, and this is beyond even the necessity to provide this, Ottawa's top forwards and defencemen are going to play on the power play. While you want to bring this into the discussion, I hardly see how it has anything to do with what I initally wrote, unless, of course, Mats Sundin, and Jarome Iginla play on some sort of decrepit power-play unit.

I looked at every game that Daniel Alfredsson played, and scored more than one point from January onwards in that season (a more reasonable sample), and found that, of those thirty points:

Marian Hossa was a contributor on four occasions, all on the power-play.
Martin Havlat was a contributor twice, both on the power-play.
Todd White, Bryan Smolinski, and Mike Fisher combined for 17 points in situations that did not involve the power-play. Tood White, Bryan Smolinski? A career second liner who is having a respectable year in Atlanta, a third line centre in Montreal. Not the the most offensively gifted forwards.

So when/where/how has my argument changed? I point to a number of pretty obvious factors. You took issue with me attributing Alfie's increased production to Spezza. In fact, you said it was perhaps the other way around, which is kinda funny given that you later claim they rarely play together. I guess just having Alfie on the bench makes Spezza tap into his true potential, if you are to believed. :lol:

When a third line (I think they call it an 'energy' line these days) scores a goal, it is against an opponents third line. To assert that when Alfredsson has scored, or done well against an opponent is done against a somewhat inferior line is probably without justification. If Ottawa were to play a low-scoring team, that team would most certainly apply a defensive approach to all elements of the game. When a top line, or a second line is on the ice, it is either matched by equal offensive talent, or a line consisting of defensive forwards (see Stanley Cup Finals, 2007).

Uh, that's kinda my point. Sundin is going to face the other team's #1 line, or best checking centre, each and every shift. Is Alfie? Or would the opposing coach reserve that player/line for the Spezza line? And, remember, it is YOUR argument that they rarely play together, and we can agree that Spezza's line is the #1 line, no?

That wasn't what I wrote.

And regarding the line combinations, clearly having Spezza, and especially Heatley on the line has helped Alfredsson, but you're ignoring the implication that he has made them better players as well. You're also ignoring the fact that Alfredsson played only a little more than half the year with that crowd last year, virtually none the year before, and neither were present before that.

.
So, yes. Alfredsson does currently play against the top checking line, or top offensive forwards. However, in the past, when his numbers were lower, it was likely against one of the two lines that didn't play against the top line, that being either the generic 'checking' line, or or the opponents most offensively gifted line.

Just to summarize,

Regarding the notion that Ottawa has had superior offensive depth than that of a Calgary, or Toronto, or whoever, I won't disagree.

and this

When a third line (I think they call it an 'energy' line these days) scores a goal, it is against an opponents third line. To assert that when Alfredsson has scored, or done well against an opponent is done against a somewhat inferior line is probably without justification.

were written to suggest that while Ottawa may have more depth than other teams, that has little impact on the the top, or top two lines, using the rationale that this additional depth will only benefit the team as a whole, by assuming that the third and fourth lines have more potential to be successful. The top line, or top two lines will always face the opponents best lines. It is the depth on the third and forth lines that I accept, but I will not contend that that is of substantial benefit to the top lines for the reason I provided.

Is it beyond comprehension that an NHL player would take a financially sound contract (5-8 years at that. How many players did the same that year, or have done so since?)

You mentioned players who signed contracts for several years who are being paid more than Alfredsson (with the exception of St. Louis),

Uh, they are being paid more because they signed their contracts after Alfredsson did. Again, do I again need to remind you of the concept of market rates?

Thanks for the brief introduction to economics. I was specifically looking for a response to the bolded portion of my previous quotation, to which you provided a bolded response that is in contradiction to half of my question. You did provide contracts that were negotiated after that, so I suppose that you and your immense knowledge in macroeconomics have won this round.

Also, I think it is kind of funny that you think Alfie's deal was all about doing what he could to stay when he structured his deal to get a $7.5 million signing bonus, mere months before the lockout. Seems to me that someone (or someone's agent) was expecting salaries to drop, or plateau, with the new CBA and as such made sure he got as much up front as he could. Funny that.

.
Months before the lockout? Yes, you're correct. Month's before the introduction of the roll-back? Nope.

No, just a few months before it was widely acknowledged that it was going to be a long drawn out battle, and Goodenow told players that they should be prepared to sit out for two seasons.

I'm sorry, had the suggestion of the 24% rollback even been brought to the forefront of the NHL/NHLPA negotiations, let alone a common understanding that the 2004-05 season would be cancelled? Granted a 5% rollback had been suggested by the PA in 2003, I'm not sure Alfredsson, or his agent had any reason to expect a 24% rollback. Alfredsson signed his contract in late March of 2004, six months before the following season would have started, 11 months before that season was cancelled, and 16 months before the NHL/NHLPA agreed to a deal, that included the 24% rollback.

Again, I never argued that. I argued your assertion that he took a paycut to stay in Ottawa. He didn't. While you've done your best to try and twist arguments, or turn the argument into something else, etc, the simple fact of the matter is his deal averaged out to a contract that was indicative of his value to the team at that time.

I was actually arguing that Daniel Alfredsson is a better captain than Mats Sundin (although he looked quite heroic last night, as he does many nights). While we can continue to argue about his salary, it should be noted that this was not the intent of my original comment, nor really a point of any substance.

Daniel Alfredsson is the first European Captain to take his team to the Stanley Cup. That must hurt.

First European Captain to lose the Stanley Cup too!

Touche...