SUNRISE, Fla. — A rare goalie fight broke out with 14 minutes left in Monday night’s game between the two-time defending Stanley Cup champion Florida Panthers and San Jose Sharks that had become increasingly chippy with post-whistle pushing and shoving.

Florida’s Sergei Bobrovsky beelined from his crease to even things up after San Jose’s Alex Nedeljkovic injected himself into a scrum in the corner.

Bobrovsky told reporters after the game he felt Nedeljkovic’s reaction to the hit was “a little bit too much” and “over the line.”

“I went to make sure to get him and let him know,” he said. “I felt just like I made a decision and went straight into it.”

In a postgame interview with NBC Sports California, Nedeljkovic said “I was just doing my best not to get punched. He came out swinging, so I was just trying not to lose any teeth. It might have straightened my nose out a little bit more, but I don’t want it that way.”

Panthers fans chanted, “Bobby! Bobby!” after the two netminders were done tussling. Cheers followed when Bobrovsky returned from a brief trip to the locker room.

According to ESPN Research, Nedeljkovic is the fifth goaltender in NHL history with a goal, assist and fighting major in his career, joining Ron Hextall, Billy Smith, Chris Osgood and Mike Smith.

Bobrovsky and Nedeljkovic each were issued a 5-minute major penalty for fighting and an additional 2-minute penalty for leaving the crease to take part in an altercation. Both goalies stayed in the game, which San Jose won 4-1.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A few minutes into the second quarter of UConn’s dominant 85-47 win over Notre Dame on Monday, which moved the top-ranked Huskies to 19-0 this season, Sarah Strong took a pass from Ashlynn Shade and drained a 3-pointer from the top of the key to reach 1,000 career points. 

Strong, who finished with 18 points, 11 rebounds, three assists, three steals and three blocks in another impressive all-around showing, needed just 59 games to reach the 1,000-point milestone. In UConn history, only Maya Moore and Paige Bueckers have gotten there faster (both 55 games). 

“I’m not surprised that she’s gotten to 1,000 this quickly because it’s consistent every night. She doesn’t go two or three games where it comes up empty,” UConn coach Geno Auriemma said after the win. “Her consistency is what stands out — kinda like Paige and Maya, same thing — and her efficiency. Those 1,000 points come in the context of what we’re trying to do as a team.”

For the season, Strong is now averaging 18.6 points, 8.3 rebounds, 4.5 assists, 3.6 steals and 1.7 blocks on absurd 60.3/41.1/90 shooting splits. And she’s doing all of that in just 27.3 minutes a night because UConn’s games are almost never competitive in the fourth quarter. 

Strong leads the Huskies in scoring, rebounding, steals, blocks and field goal percentage, and already has three games with at least 15 points, 10 rebounds, three assists, three steals and three blocks. (Notably, those performances have come against Michigan, Ohio State and Notre Dame.) Every other player in NCAA Division I women’s basketball this season has a combined six such outings. And forget the 50/40/90 club, Strong is on pace to be the founding member of the 60/40/90 club.

Because Strong plays so little compared to many of the top players in college basketball, her counting stats aren’t at the top of major statistical categories. But she leads the country in win shares (6.4), box score plus-minus (plus-30.2), and PER (47.2). Her per-100 possession numbers are also out of this world: 37.2 points, 16.3 rebounds, 9.2 assists, 7.3 steals and 3.2 blocks. She’s on pace to become the first player in NCAA Division I women’s basketball history to have a season with per-100 numbers of at least 30 points, 15 rebounds, five assists, five steals and three blocks. 

However you want to slice it, Strong is having a historic season, and is well on her way to being named Naismith Player of the Year. After yet another big win for the Huskies, let’s take a closer look at what makes Strong so special. 

Offensive machine

Strong has reached double figures in every game this season, and has only shot below 50% once — UConn’s win over Michigan where she went 7 of 15 (46.7%). While she scores most of her points in the paint, she’s comfortable all over the floor and her versatile skillset gives her an answer to whatever opponents throw her way. 

Just look at her shot chart (which has not yet been updated to include Monday’s game). She’s shooting 76.9% at the rim, 57.7% in the mid-range and 41.1% from 3-point range. Stunningly, she is more than 10% above the NCAA Division I average from every single spot on the floor besides corner 3s, where she’s only 8.8% above. 

Strong’s balance on the offensive end is incredible. Her three most common play types, per Synergy Sports, are transition, spot up and post up. Her frequency for each is nearly identical, and she ranks in the 90th percentile or better in efficiency for all three. 

Strong can run the floor in transition, knock down open jumpers, attack off the bounce and cook in the post. 

What are defenses supposed to do, especially when Strong is an excellent passer who rarely makes mistakes. She boasts a  2.53 assist-to-turnover ratio and Monday’s win was just the fourth time this season that Strong has had three or more turnovers in a game. Furthermore, Strong is on pace to become just the ninth player in Division I history to average more than four assists and fewer than two turnovers with a usage rate of at least 25%.  

Defensive force

As great as Strong is offensively, she’s equally impressive on the defensive end. 

Not only does Strong lead the Huskies in defensive rebounding, steals and blocks, she leads the country in defensive win shares (2.6) and defensive box score plus-minus (plus-12.7). She’s also fourth in the country in steal rate (the percentage of opponent possessions that end in a steal by Strong when she’s on the floor) at 7.5% and second in the country in Hakeem rate (a stat created by CBB Analytics which simply combines a player’s steal and block rates) at 15.2%. In other words, when Strong is on the floor, 15.2% of opponent possessions end with her stealing the ball or blocking a shot. 

Thanks in large part to Strong, UConn has the best defense in the country. CBB Analytics’ team defensive rating stats go back to the 2018-10 season; UConn’s 70.6 defensive rating this season is the best on record. 

Strong’s positional sense is brilliant, and she has quick hands and good instincts. And much like on the offensive end, her versatility is a major asset. At 6-foot-2, she has the size and strength to battle in the paint, but she’s quick enough to hang on the perimeter. 

She’s just as liable to strip a ball-handler as she is to jump a passing lane or come up with a huge block.

Another impressive aspect of Strong’s defense is that she rarely fouls. She’s fouled out once in 59 career games and has had more than three fouls just five times. This season, she’s averaging a paltry 1.5 fouls per game.

The bad news for the rest of the country is that Strong is only a sophomore and still has room to improve. 

“She’s not even halfway there to where I hope we can help her get,” Auriemma said after UConn’s win over Villanova earlier this month. “She’s not even halfway there. Not even close.”

The Hall of Fame voting results from the Baseball Writers’ Association of America will be announced Tuesday at 6 p.m. ET, with two center fielders looking to join Jeff Kent, who was elected in December in the Contemporary Era Committee voting, in the Class of 2026.

A year ago, I wrote of the 2025 candidates for the Hall of Fame, “This year’s ballot is probably the weakest since the early 2000s.” Well, the 2026 edition is probably even weaker. The 2025 ballot at least featured newcomers Ichiro Suzuki and CC Sabathia, who were elected along with Billy Wagner. Pitcher Cole Hamels is the only newcomer to the ballot in 2026 with more than 50 career WAR.

Here’s one way to look at it. The 2026 ballot features 27 players worth a combined 1,282 WAR, with 11 exceeding 50 career WAR. The 2013 ballot featured 37 candidates. The top 27 that year were worth 1,672 combined WAR and included 16 players who exceeded 50 career WAR.

The kicker: Nobody made it that year. That said, 10 players from that ballot have since been elected to the Hall of Fame. And while only Carlos Beltran and Andruw Jones have a chance to make it this year, this ballot — despite its relative lack of star power — will likely feature several future Hall of Famers, as well.

Here’s what to look for in the results from Tuesday’s announcement, remembering the general guidelines:

• A player needs to receive votes on 75% of ballots to get elected (not rounded up).

• A player needs 5% to remain on the ballot.

• Writers can vote for a maximum of 10 players.

• A players can remain on the ballot for 10 years.

Will Beltran and Jones get in?

Last year, Beltran received 70.3% of the vote in his third year on the ballot, while Jones received 66.2% in his eighth year. According to Ryan Thibodaux’s Hall of Fame tracker, Beltran is polling at 89.2% of the publicly revealed ballots, with Jones at 83.5%. That doesn’t necessarily mean they will get in. Last year, Beltran polled at just above 80% before the announcement, so he lost 10 percentage points when the final results came in, and Jones was at 72.4%, so he lost about six percentage points. While it’s looking good, it still might be a nervy night for both.

One thing to note: We could use more center fielders in the Hall. In looking at Hall of Famers who had their most career value from 1960 and on, center fielders are tied with designated hitters as the least represented position (and that’s counting Frank Thomas as a first baseman). Starting pitchers obviously have the most, but look at the breakdown for position players:

Catcher: 7
First base: 11
Second base: 7
Third base: 8
Shortstop: 7
Left field: 7
Center field: 4
Right field: 12
DH: 4

The four center fielders: Willie Mays, Andre Dawson (who started more games in right field, but two-thirds of his career value came as a center fielder), Kirby Puckett and Ken Griffey. It’s not that Hall of Famers must be equally distributed across positions, but it’s a little frustrating that voters have been so favorable to relievers (nine have been elected among that group) while so tough on center fielders. The recent Contemporary Era ballot was basically designed to get Dale Murphy elected — and he still didn’t get in.

Beltran is a strong Hall of Fame candidate. With 70.0 career WAR, he ranks fourth among center fielders since 1960, behind Mays, Mike Trout and Griffey. Beltran’s traditional counting stats also are impressive, with 435 home runs, 2,725 hits and 1,587 RBIs. That sounds like a Hall of Famer. Jones is less of a slam dunk with 62.7 WAR that relies heavily on his defensive metrics, but that’s still seventh among center fielders since 1960 (counting Reggie Smith as a right fielder).

How will Chase Utley do?

Utley is the third-highest returning vote-getter, after polling at 39.8% in 2025. He’s at 67.9% on the public ballots, which is a nice increase from 51.6% of the pre-announcement vote he received last year. This is just his third year on the ballot, so the momentum looks positive. Utley is similar to Todd Helton, who was elected in 2024 on his sixth time on the ballot. Both were players with a very high peak value, with Helton earning 37.5 of his 61.8 career WAR in a five-year stretch from 2000 to 2004 and Utley earning 39.7 of his 64.6 WAR from 2005 to 2009.

Utley’s career also is in contrast to the recently elected second baseman Kent:

Utley: .275/.358/.465, 259 HR, 1,025 RBI, 1,885 H, 117 OPS+, 64.6 WAR
Kent: .290/.356/.500, 377 HR, 1,518 RBI, 2,461 H, 123 OPS+, 55.4 WAR

Utley had a higher peak value and better defensive metrics (although not necessarily a great defensive reputation), while Kent had longevity and better counting stats (and an MVP Award, which eluded Utley). Utley versus Kent mirrors the overall issue that Hall of Fame voters must consider: Do you prefer a player with a high peak value — Utley had 41 wins above average as compared with 26 for Kent — or one who simply played for a longer time? Historically, the BBWAA favors career length over peak value. Utley will be a good test to determine if we’re seeing more of a shift — or at least more appreciation — for high peak performance.

How will Cole Hamels do in his first year on the ballot?

Utley is joined on the ballot this year by fellow 2008 World Series star Hamels, who was National League Championship Series and World Series MVP for the Philadelphia Phillies. Hamels has 163 career wins and no Cy Young Awards but with 57.9 career pitching WAR. That’s pretty close to Sabathia’s total of 61.8, and Sabathia sailed in on his first ballot. Hamels has the better adjusted ERA (123 to 116). The big difference, of course, is that wins column: Sabathia won 251 games.

Hamels and Felix Hernandez, back for his second time on the ballot, can be considered part of a new generation of pitchers for voters to consider: They have fewer innings and fewer wins (King Felix won 169 games) than your conventional Hall of Fame starting pitcher, sure. But perhaps the standards must change for starters who debuted in the past 20 years; otherwise, the Hall will be closed to nearly an entire generation of starting pitchers (except a few obvious candidates, Clayton Kershaw, Justin Verlander, Max Scherzer and Zack Greinke among them). Hernandez received 20.6% of the vote last year, which isn’t a strong starting point but also doesn’t mean he’ll never get elected; we just mentioned Helton’s election in Year 6, after starting at 16.5% in his first year.

How strong are the cases for Andy Pettitte and Mark Buehrle?

I ran this comparison last year:

Sabathia: 251-161, 61.8 WAR, 3,577 IP, 3.74 ERA, 116 ERA+
Pettitte: 256-153, 60.7 WAR, 3,316 IP, 3.85 ERA, 117 ERA+
Buehrle: 214-160, 60.0 WAR, 3,283 IP, 3.81 ERA, 117 ERA+

Buehrle didn’t have as many wins, although he recorded 15 in his final season, so he could have stuck around and easily won a lot more games. Over his final five seasons, Sabathia went 46-46 with a 4.21 ERA and 8.6 WAR, so it’s not as if he added a lot of value to get all those extra wins. Buehrle also never had the luxury of pitching for the Yankees and their high-powered lineups, but he did win a World Series with the White Sox in 2005. If the argument is Sabathia had a higher peak value, well, check out career wins above average:

Sabathia: 28.2
Pettitte: 29.8
Buehrle: 29.3

Pettitte received just 27.9% of the vote in 2025, with Buehrle at 11.4%. Hamels, by the way, had 35.9 WAA, with Hernandez at 24.5.

Who else has a shot down the road?

Dustin Pedroia and David Wright were on their way to the Hall of Fame before injuries shortened their careers. Pedroia still finished with 51.8 career WAR and Wright with 49.1, which at least makes them viable Hall candidates. Unfortunately, both finished with fewer than 2,000 career hits. That total has generally been a nonstarter for a post-World War II potential Hall of Famer, although in recent years, the special committees have elected Dick Allen, Tony Oliva and Gil Hodges, each with less than 2,000 hits. If Jones does make it in after finishing with 1,933 hits, he’ll be the first position player the BBWAA will have elected with fewer than 2,000 hits since Ralph Kiner in 1975.

Pedroia received 11.9% of the vote in his first year on the ballot, while Wright received 8.1% in his second year. While they are Hall of Fame long shots right now, the combination of a weak ballot and perhaps a changing emphasis to peak value could help them gain some momentum. If Jones and Utley eventually get elected, it could crash the 2,000-hit barrier that the BBWAA has enforced — and help Pedroia and Wright down the road. (Buster Posey will join the ballot next year, and he finished with 1,500 hits.)

What about A-Rod and Manny?

Finally, Alex Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez. Rodriguez is on the ballot for the fifth time and Ramirez for the final time. Rodriguez recently told The Athletic he has “divorced” himself from the idea that he’ll make the Hall of Fame. After receiving 37% of the vote last year, that’s probably the case. Barry Bonds got to 66% in his final year and Roger Clemens 65%, and as the electorate gets younger and more forgiving, maybe Rodriguez has a chance. But Clemens and Bonds also were polling over 50% in their fifth year. Bonds and Clemens also failed to receive any support in the recent Contemporary Era vote that elected Kent.