Polemic Hockey

The buggy usually turns back into a pumpkin.

Recent Cinderella runs have been absolutely thrilling but also have usually fallen short.

In the last 15 years, there have been some amazing ones. I'm not convinced to this day that the 1999 Buffalo Sabres (#7 seed) should have lost, but they did. This was Dominik Hasek at his finest. In 2006, the Edmonton Oilers were defeated only by a stacked Carolina team that was itself something of a Cinderella in 2002.  The two best are the 2010 Flyers and the 2003 Ducks. The Flyers only even made the playoffs on a shootout goal in the last game of the regular season and had to overcome a 0-3 deficit against the Bruins in the second round. The 2003 Ducks swept the then-champion Red Wings out of the playoffs, beat the Pacific division champ Dallas Stars and then limited the Minnesota Wild to one goal in a conference final sweep. The Ducks even survived a Scott Stevens check, with Paul Kariya coming back and scoring a dramatic goal.

The Ducks made it to game 7, but had to play it on the road in New Jersey and while they got the closest, their coach turned into a pumpkin as well.

The similarities between the 2003 Ducks and the 2012 Kings are eery. Both teams had 95 regular-season points. Both teams beat a 110+ point first round opponent and a 109+ point opponent in the second round. In the third round, both teams beat weaker opponents with 95 and 97 points. Both head into the finals with a 12-2 record.

This sounds like, on the one hand, these were two underrated teams that are showing total dominance. On the other hand, both are clearly fueled by a hot goalie, and dependent upon him for success. Neither the 2003 Ducks nor the 2012 Kings have any experience in the deeper rounds of the playoffs and neither are offensively dominant. Also, there is the simple fact that the Devils just faced their strongest opponent and the Kings just faced their weakest and the Kings have more time either to rest—or rust. And with goalies on a hot streak, rust is more likely.

The Devils are experienced as an organization. They have appeared in 1 of 4 of Stanley Cup Finals in the last 20 years. Martin Brodeur has won Stanley Cups and Gold Medals. He has diffused hot goalies like Jonathan Quick before (see: Giguere, J.S., Lundquist, Henrik, etc.)

Otherwise, the teams are very similar. Ilya Kovalchuck is a slightly better forward than Anze Kopitar, but Drew Doughty is slightly better than any Devils defenseman. Marek Zidlicky and Slava Voynov's strengths and weaknesses even out. Zajac and Parise can go toe-to-toe with Richards and Carter. There is a slight edge strength wise for the Kings with Penner, but Zubrus is more skilled and not weak there either.

But unless it's a Cinderella effect of its own, the Devils are simply deeper upfront. Any continued production of tying or go ahead goals from the 4th line by them will give the Devils an edge. A similar thing occurs on D. While the Kings best defenseman are marginally better, their depth defenseman are worse. Lacking a home-ice advantage, those pairings will see a lot of Kovalchuk (probably Voynov, Martinez, and Matt Greene).

Having a slightly better set of top forwards and defensemen would create a good advantage if the Kings used it on the power play, but they have not been strong there.

So, even though Jonathan Quick has been playing better, I'm not sure he's playing so much better than Marty that it makes up for the psychological and experiential difference, which is likely quite fragile given the hot-knife-through-butter-like experience of the Kings in the playoffs.

I have always wanted to see a team headed to the finals win a game 7. Win a couple of games coming from behind and win games either at home or on the road depending on where the disadvantage is. (Road wins are only much better if you're playing more games on the road). And winning some in OT is great too. Coming from behind in a series is also a hallmark of a team with the psychological determination necessary to get all the way without relying on always dominating. The Kings have only done this a little bit. The Devils have done all of these things this time around.

So, even though the Kings are apparently the favorite, I think there are a lot of "intangibles" that should make this at least a close series, but the "pumpkin" factor, to me, gives the slight advantage to New Jersey.

Devils in 7.

No matter what happens in the Eastern Conference Final, a team from the New York TV market and the LA Kings will be playing each other for the Stanley Cup. That pits the top media market in the country against the #2 market. This happened previously in 2003.

In 2010, #3 Chicago faced #4 Philadelphia. Last year, it was #5 Boston versus the #3 Canadian market, Vancouver. Pittsburgh is only #23 but Detroit is #11. In 2007, the LA market was in the finals as well.

Anyway, this should be a perfect experimental test of the entire theory that the "New NHL" is built upon. The salary cap was supposed to bring parity between rich teams and poor, the rule changes were supposed to make the game more appealing. In addition to these changes, the most favorable circumstances have presented themselves, with teams from the expansion areas either winning or competing deep into the playoffs for the Stanley Cup. (Tampa Bay, Carolina, Anaheim, Dallas, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and San Jose have all made trips to the conference finals recently.) In addition, big market teams, ostensibly with a lot of exposure have done well also.

And, if that isn't good enough for you, American teams with large old school fan bases, like Philadelphia, Boston, Chicago, New York, Pittsburgh, and Detroit have all been very successful recently.

Given the circumstances, the league should be firing on all cylinders. Revenue should be skyrocketing. The economy can be factored in, but player salaries are comparable to 15 years ago even though ticket prices are not.

How can it possibly be, then, that this is not the case?

My hypothesis—which stands ready to be confirmed or falsified in the next few years—is, and always has been, that the "build it and they will come" philosophy is too simplistic and has (and will) continue to fail. It's not just Atlanta. Atlanta was never a good team. Even traditional hockey markets have failed to become sustainably profitable and competitive.

Part II of my hypothesis is that overexpansion and talent-pool dilution, and not the scapegoats of defensive systems, equipment, and the position of the lines on the ice are responsible for the subjective reduction in the quality of play. (I never thought it got worse, personally.)

The NHL should have expanded; don't get me wrong. Hockey is the most exciting sport on earth. The combination of skills and speed and danger combine for a sport unlike any other. Yet a more incremental approach would have been wiser.

Perhaps one day a team in Atlanta will succeed, but that would only come to pass by making hockey a national sport, slowly. Incrementally growing the territory while not underserving the source of most of the players (i.e. Canada, Minnesota, etc.) would have been the way to go. By now maybe we would be at 30 teams; maybe not.

If the league can't get where it is under these circumstances (and we'll hear them cry poor during the upcoming contract negotiations) then it's their plan that's flawed.

For a team that was nearly swept out of a series, the Coyotes sure seemed to focus a lot on one play that only cost them because they were too busy whining about it.

Read this.

What struck me as so hilarious about this article is that all through the game, Darren Pang, who is a Coyotes homer announcer during the regular season, was making comments about Coyotes players flopping and diving.

But here's what really happened: the alleged knee incident happened. The Coyotes freaked out. They lost their focus and got scored on on the next shift when the injured player wouldn't have been out there anyway.

It's not as if they were worn down by being down 1 D man for shift after shift and lost in game 7. They were never going to come back in this series and it was their thuggery and cheap play earlier in the series that made it that way.

And that's all assuming you don't believe there's anything wrong with a team owned and controlled by the NHL playing in the finals.

Embarrassing year for my picks, but it's already a great year for the Devils.

Third Round: Kings in 5.

What happens when a hot goalie meets an equally hot goalie? The better team wins.

I really just made terrible, credibility destroying predictions on this round, didn't I? The Blues are toast, the Kings are good. The Nashville series isn't over yet. Out east, the Rangers are leading because of a 3OT goal and the Devils are only not up 3-0 because of an overtime loss.

I would love to see 40 year old Martin Brodeur beat the Rangers in the conference final which would sort of redeem the primal Devils trauma of Matteau Matteau Matteau. Winning the Cup would close the case on whether he or Patrick Roy is the best goalie of all time in Brodeur's favor.

I guess Vancouver has to be rethinking how horrible they were when the other Presidents Cup contender is getting the same ass kicking they got. The Kings are interesting.

What happened, they ask?

In short: a niche and regional sport got drunk on the national attention brought to it by Wayne Gretzky and overexpanded in markets that couldn't or wouldn't reliably support quality franchises and robbed Canada of teams in the process. The result was a diluted talent pool that the Ahabs leading this quest thought they could replace with imports from Europe.

Twenty years of rule changes, management-friendly labor deals, ticket price increases, and taxpayer subsidized arena deals haven't improved the quality of play and certainly hasn't boosted hockey above the #4 sport (which it is if you're only counting white men in the U.S. and Canada and college football and the NFL are one sport and you agree with me that NASCAR is not a sport).

Stanley Cup winning teams in Denver, Dallas, Tampa Bay, Anaheim, and Carolina have failed to really ignite the sport nationwide. It has failed to produce the giant television contract that was supposed to do so much of the work here. My god, this is the first year all of the first- and second-round games have been nationally televised! (If you count OLN Versus "NBC Sports" as national.)

This is the equivalent of closing down a bunch of oil wells in Saudi Arabia and moving them to the middle of the Atlantic. Why? Because hockey players come from Canada. You cannot have hockey without hockey players. And while the major juniors and other minor leagues are extremely popular in Canada, fondness for the sport alone cannot develop the kind of talent needed to produce the kind of quality game that people want.

There are a few successes. The long-term presence of hockey in Southern California has produced a number of recent NHL players, including first-round draft choices from the area. But can a kid born and bred in Raleigh ever face the competition level required to hone him into an elite player without moving?

It's 2012. The gig is up. This 20 year experiment can't be blamed on free agent salaries, the neutral zone trap, or goalie equipment any more.

Move the Coyotes to Quebec, this summer. Move the Islanders to the Greater Toronto Area next year. (If Greater New York can support 3 teams, I bet Toronto could support 4.) Move Columbus to the GTA as well—or Vancouver or Western Ontario. Ten teams. There should be no fewer than 10 Canadian teams in the NHL.

An even better option? Do that and close 5 other teams.

After going a Maggie The Monkeyish 4 for 8 in the first round (wtf Vancouver, Boston—I can live with getting Pittsburgh and Chicago wrong), I think I'm ready to make some better picks in the second round.

St. Louis vs. Los Angeles

No team looked better to me in the first round than the Blues. Every skater was always in the right place and their goaltending looked great. They made the Sharks look bad. You might wonder about their lack of experience, but the Kings don't have any either. St. Louis in 7—and I expect the Blues to at least go to the finals, and I'd say they're my favorite to win the Cup right now.

Phoenix vs. Nashville

Nashville has the defense and the goaltending. Is this their year? Maybe. They need to do this quickly to be convincing too. Phoenix should not have beat Chicago. Nashville in 5.

New York vs. Washington

Holtby is doing something of the "hot goalie" thing, but it doesn't look like the cheap coaching trick of making reducing Ovechkin's minutes to get him to do something is working out all the great. Remember when the big stars scored in the post-season too? You know, in the "dead puck era?" Yzerman, Sakic, Lemieux, Gretzky, Niedermayer, Jagr, Hull?

As much as I hate the Rangers, they have mitigated a lot of what I hated about them by actually, you know, building a team instead of poaching one. (Remember how they got Theo Fleury, Jagr, Lindros, half the Edmonton Oilers, and a bunch of other ginormous flops?) But whatever I may think of them, they are a good team. There's just too much drama in the DC. Rangers in 7.

Philadelphia vs. New Jersey

A few years ago, I would have picked the Devils. And the fact that they lost to the Flyers the last two times would have been enough for me to be convinced that Marty would have somethin' extra special for their ass. But he's just not up to it anymore. And their coach is a little green.

Well, actually, the part of the team that isn't over the hill is also too green with rare exception. Lou Lamoriello used to talk about having freshman, sophomores, juniors, and seniors. Now, he has freshman, a handful of sophomores, few juniors, a bunch of seniors and a few grad students like Brodeur. Their PK is shit, their power play isn't as good as it should be with Kovalchuk (another non-playoff star—give me Claude Lemieux or even Stumpy Thomas ffs). And Marty basically personally blew at least 1 game this round.

Yeah, they beat the Panthers in OT in a game 7. But that was a team with an undeserved home ice advantage, a shitty retread goalie, a bunch of spare parts, and a hothead coach. OK, so the Flyers have a hothead coach—but one with a ring. And they just shelled the Penguins. It was gory.

Flyers in 7.

Embarrassing on the record forecast: Blues over Nashville, Flyers over Rangers. Blues over Flyers.

First, Wayne says the playoffs are "risqué," and now a major Canadian newspaper wonders if we haven't seen a return to the "Dead Puck Era." (This on the basis of an interview with Sharks GM Doug Wilson who has the sorriest bunch of playoff chokers south of the Fraser River)

As if Phil Esposito scoring 60 goals and Wayne Gretzky scoring 90+ goals a seasons was the norm, not an aberration. And you might point out that there Steve Stamkos scored 60 this year.

As I've always said, "Dead Puck Era" is code for any hockey game not scoring 8-7 dominated by a couple of forwards who can't play defense and appear on cereal boxes.

Another thing parity means is that teams have to rebuild (and therefore dismantle) quicker. You don't have time (or much at least) to wait for a group to "gel." If they don't work, you have to deal with it. Cap issues, earlier free agency, and the deemphasis of the franchise goalie all spell this.

Some GMs have adapted to the quick rebuild issue, but only a couple have gotten the flip side. Philadelphia is the best example of a team that has really changed gears without waiting for even more dismal failure.

Sure, they lost in the final just two short years ago. But that didn't stop their management from blowing the team up and they are much better now.

So, if there aren't major trades involving San Jose, Detroit, Vancouver, Chicago (just to name a few of this years playoff teams that have gone deep recently) there is something wrong. No movement clauses are a big problem for San Jose, but this core has done not gotten it done—it's a team that's supposed to win the Cup, not get bounced early. It's been 10 years+ since the Sharks were mediocre. Time to stop grading them on a curve and expect a winner there.

In case you're wondering why these playoffs are so damn good: Wayne thinks they're—and I quote—"risqué". That's all you need to know. If it's good hockey, get out the fainting couch for Hwayne.

Nobody could have predicted that "The New NHL" would fail. Now, hockey pundits are finally starting to admit that the rule changes might have something to do with all of the concussions and may actually be reducing scoring.

Bring back the red line.
Get rid of the trapezoid.
Enforce the crease rule.
Respect the different skills of all positions, not just forwards and scoring.

Washington started to live up to expectations and crushed the mediocre Rangers, who overperformed their skill level.

Philadelphia took advantage of the less-than-stellar appearances that Ryan Miller made, and Buffalo couldn't get it done when he wasn't there to steal the game.

Pittsburgh almost made it. Seems like they would have won with Crosby and/or Malkin.

Boston and Montreal was the best series in the East in the first round and in the top 3 overall.

(1) Washington vs. (5) Tampa Bay
Washington in 5
Tampa Bay relied on another round of Roloson acrobatics to beat the seriously depleted Pittsburgh. Washington is much better.

(2) Philadelphia vs. (3) Boston
Philadelphia in 7
If the Flyers have settled on Boucher and he's solid, they should be able to eek this one out. They've shown some grit this year.

...what this means... (1) Washington vs. (2) Philadelphia with Washington losing to Vancouver in the finals.

Vancouver almost choked after the champs decided that they weren't going out like that. They won't be able to spot Nashville 3 games like that as long as Nashville keeps playing the way they have.

The Coyotes collapsed along with Bryzgalov and under the strain of the uncertainty of where the franchise would be located. Maybe it was a lot more real than last year when they used those anxieties as their fuel.

The Ducks couldn't keep Nashville's tenacious forwards out of their zone and had mediocre goal tending. Rinne didn't show he can steal a series in this one and Nashville's PK will have to be better against the Sedins.

The Sharks look shaky. The Kings were without their best forward and came close to pulling off the upset, but just couldn't finish it in OT. They were close.

Give that, here are my picks for round 2 out west:

(1) Vancouver vs. (5) Nashville
Vancouver in 6
Rinne will have to steal the series and he showed no indication in the first round he could do that. The Canucks are as deep at forward as the Ducks were and deeper everywhere else.

(2) San Jose vs. (3) Detroit
Detroit in 7
The Wings aren't going to give San Jose three wins in OT and aren't going to give up a 4 goal lead. San Jose's shaky goaltending will get even more pressured by Detroit and San Jose has not shown the guts to beat Detroit or any other elite team in the playoffs. Detroit might take a game or two to get back into game shape.

...Resulting in (1) Vancouver vs. (3) Detroit with Vancouver winning in 7 and bringing the Cup back to the West Coast after a 4 year absence and back to Canada after an 18 year absence.

(1) Vancouver versus (8) Chicago/Dallas
Vancouver in 5
I'm not going to bother waiting to see who wins the 8 seed. Neither of them are going to beat the Canucks.

(2) San Jose versus (7) Los Angeles
San Jose in 6
Fans have waited for 20 years for this series. When the Sharks came into being, they were a bottom-tier team, while the Kings enjoyed their run with Wayne Gretzky in his prime. After the Kings went into their dark ages, the Sharks emerged, slowly but surely, as a competitive team every year. Neither team has won a Stanley Cup, and only the Kings have been to the finals, just once. I am hopeful that this is the most exciting series to watch.

The Sharks have talent at every position but they have problems in the playoffs. I think a lot of that had to do with their former goaltender. He had decent stats, but he never really stole a series. But I could be wrong. There could be more than one problem here. Still, I think they have the experience, the hunger, and the talent to outshine the Kings, their anemic power play, and their depleted forwards.

Shark Weak on NHL won't be until later on.

(3) Detroit versus (6) Phoenix
Phoenix in 7
The playoffs are still about goaltending first. I'm gonna make this my "against the grain" pick because of Bryzgalov on the one hand and Howard on the other. There's not much else that needs to be said.

(4) Anaheim versus (5) Nashville
Anaheim in 6
Anaheim has something to talk about with their goaltending situation, but they have two backups playing fantastic and one starter with a great playoff record with a few days to get back to 100%. Still, the Ducks are a nasty team that can score with an underrated D corps. Nashville will have to figure out how to stop two lines. Rinne will have to steal the series for them, because they can't score and their PP is terrible.

What this means:
Round 2: VAN vs. PHX, SJ vs. ANA, WAS vs. TAM, PHI vs. BOS.

Prediction time!

Washington vs. New York Rangers
Washington in 5.
New York is actually a better offensive team than the Capitals, and have a better overall plus/minus. But New York doesn't have the scoring depth to hang in there. Washington will have to get quality 'tending in order to go deep, but I think they've got this one.

Philadelphia vs. Buffalo
Philadelphia in 4
Ryan Miller versus the Flyers. Nuff said.

Boston vs. Montreal
Boston in 7
This is probably going to be a bit bloody, but Boston has more of everything.

Pittsburgh vs. Tampa Bay
Tampa in 6
Pittsburgh has a good core group leftover from their Cup run, but they aren't the same team and injuries have depleted them. Tampa has some experience as well and also some youthful energy, which seems to be the post-lockout mix for success.

No.

First of all, Lamoriello imposes very tough standards of judgment on everyone including himself. This is one of the things I admire about him. This is why I think it's more than fair to pass this kind of judgment on the man himself.

The Devils are at a crossroads this season, one they haven't really faced in 20 years. They are out of the playoffs. They have no long term solution for a coach. Marty Brodeur is no longer capable of playing at a high level for 70 games and the playoffs, but he still has it. Should he be re-signed? There's no long term solution there. Who knows what it will take to get Zach Parise under contract. A lot of the team's bad contracts still have another year on them.

And while the season ended on a great run, that run was unproductive. Sure, Ilya Kovalchuk saved some face for everyone by getting to 30 goals, a spectacular proportion of which were game winning. But now the team is faced with building from the forward ranks back, something that completely breaks their formula. And they won't even have a lottery pick to deal with it (though all of the goalies and defensemen except one are likely to still be available at #7). But they didn't even make the playoffs. I'm not sure that would have meant anything for the long-term health of the organization, but it might have made things look a little better. But this is an organization where only winning a Stanley Cup is a successful season. Lou's standards again.

There are many NHL teams in worse shape than the Devils. There are many that always seem to have potential and never do anything about it. But most of those teams and their fans are resigned to it (though the world changed for Hawk fans fast, didn't it?).

So, no. I don't take it back. Lou should either step aside, or focus more on being the team's CEO and promote someone else to the GM slot. But first he needs to find a long-term coach and a goalie.

The Devils' reporter Tom Gulliti tweeted tonight that a year ago, the Devils were in first place and tonight they are in last place. And while that tells a tale all on its own, the real story of the Devils decline from perennial Cup contenders stems from the abject failure of the team's management to adapt to the salary cap era.

Remember, the coaching carousel at one point included Lou himself after Larry Robinson's second stint (or was it his third?) behind the bench failed in yet another nervous breakdown. This was the first season after the lockout when the Devils also tried to bring back Alexander Mogilny and Vladimir Malakhov, both of whom were epic failures costing the Devils almost $10m in cap space until the Devils wiggled out.

Over four years ago, I started raising this red flag. At that time, there was an abject failure not only to transition to the cap era, but a failure to prepare by signing the right players to replace departing hall of fame defensemen Niedermayer and Stevens.

At some point, the build from the goal forward philosophy seemed to be deemed fulfilled simply by having Martin Brodeur in net. Now, the failure to replace the blue line corps is being compounded by the failure to give Martin Brodeur rest, and he is now burning out and may be more or less done. There is no replacement in sight. In other words, not only is the d-corps being filled with anonymous AHL jobbers, the net soon will be too.

But that's ok, because this philosophy has apparently been abandoned. Perhaps it should be. Perhaps the post-lockout NHL is simply so turned off by skill at any position other than forward that adapting to it is a must. But turning over the keys of the franchise to Ilya Kovalchuk has cost this team perhaps the most valuable of all of the seasons for which he is under contract: the last useful season of Martin Brodeur's career. This should have been their year.

It was Lou that allowed Scott Niedermayer to leave, even if it was through his failure to acquire his brother, who, res ipsa loquitur, was good enough for the team because he played here later. It was Lou that could never replace Pat Burns, probably because most coaches are scared to death to play for him. It was Lou that resigned Malakhov and Mogilny and signed McGillis. It was Lou that brought Bobby Holik of all people back. It was Lou that allowed Martin Brodeur to continue to play 70+ games per season even after it became clear this was bad. It was Lou that went all in on Ilya Kovalchuk. It was Lou that groomed John MacLean as one of the worst coaches in NHL history.

Is that a harsh standard of judgment? Maybe, but it's Lou's own. In fact, as is well documented on this site, I know that the media and the league applies ridiculous standards and double standards to the Devils. Is it because of Lou? In part, perhaps. But it is what it is. It can't be gotten around through a dominant team anymore.

It's time for Vanderbeek to send Lou off with the honor and dignity he deserves as the best general manager of the 20 year period from 1985-2005 and the architect of one of the NHL's most durable dynasties.

But it's time for a new direction.

People seem to be reacting to the Ducks win over the Sharks as the Ducks stealing a game they didn't deserve to win. I think that's true simply based on the gameplay. But to the extent that this has built in bias that the Sharks are a good team and the Ducks are a bad team, it's false.

The Ducks are a very average team. But, no matter what we want to think, the Sharks are a bad team. They deserve their place in the standings.

In the salary cap era, you don't get 5 years to win a Cup with your team. You get a very, very short window. They blew it.

The NHL has more or less completed the transition into the look and feel of a salary-capped league. That is, not only are there not dynasties in the sense of multiple, repeat championships, there is also rapid turnover in who the elite teams are, or even who the playoff teams are.

This means anyone can win each year. Chicago had a good "warm up" playoff run in 2009, but it might have been tough to pick them to win it all even still.

Player mobility is up even more. The importance of veteran defenseman is greatly reduced. This may not be by design, because the market for defensemen was greatly inflated. But the elimination of goaltending as a dynasty- or even consistency-making element of a team, worthy of being a franchise player, is also complete. And it is by design. Brodeur will probably be the last of his kind for a while.

This is all to say that I think that the value of a prediction under these circumstances is even sillier than it used to be. Sure, someone will name the proper team. But the meaningful information that that guess could have been made on is so greatly reduced as to suggest it was dumb luck, and nothing else.

Still, there are some things you can see after 10 games or so about a team. Some just aren't cohesive or mentally able to win. Those teams probably won't be Cup contenders.

So, on the basis of even less meaningful information than before, I present my predictions for 2011.

Stanley Cup: Los Angeles Kings
Eastern Conference Champion: Washington Capitals

Final Four: LAK, WAS, STL, MTL

Playoff Teams: LAK, DET, VAN, STL, DAL, CHI, ANA, COLO; PHI, WAS, MTL, PIT, NYR, BOS, OTT, TOR

...based on the hockey Internets, it seems that now that the Devils have signed a player to a 17-year cap it is now a crime against God and humanity. Just like the trap and goalies handling the puck.

So here's my chance to walk everything back and say how great Kovalchuk is and blah blah.

While I admit to being skeptical of Lou Lamoriello having offered the kind of amounts being rumored (and if he did, I think he's off his rocker), this kind of pants-on-fire reporting from Tom Gulitti is silly. It's not really news that a signing of that magnitude would impact the Devils' ability to resign anyone. Duh.

Ilya Kovalchuk is probably one of the top three goal scorers in the NHL right now. He is an exciting player. He will put people in seats, and I don't see him scoring less than 30 goals a season any time soon.

But take a look at the last several Cup winners. Solid goaltending is still required, but it isn't the sine qua non anymore. You need defensemen still, of course. But a pack of young forwards has been the key to every recent winner. Think Kane and Toews, Crosby and Malkin, Datsyuk and Zetterberg, Getzlaf and Perry. Guys like Selanne and Hossa only played supporting roles.

Every team purportedly in the Kovalchuk bidding already has this going and needs a top six forward, not a top one forward, not at the asking prices. The role Kovalchuk would play on a potentially winning team doesn't justify the bank- and cap-breaking salary demands he's making.

The Islanders are probably the best fit, but the NY media says they never made the big offer people were saying. The Devils would have to trade a player who has a no trade clause, probably for nothing in return. I can't see how the Flyers arrange the cap room and fill out their roster. The Kings are building something special and fit the template of the young dynamic teams that are winning these days, but they can't break their cap for Kovy without risking losing important elements of their young core. Dean Lombardi is one of the smartest GMs in hockey and he showed it by backing off here.

If I was a GM and Kovalchuk really wanted to play on my team, I'd offer him a 2 year $10m deal to give him the chance to show what he's made of in the playoffs. His two appearances so far haven't impressed.

Well, I said Pens in 6 and Flyers in 6 on Facebook before this started. Heh.

Sharks/Wings

The last time the Sharks faced the Wings in the playoffs, in 2007, they were up in game 4 and about to take a 3-1 series lead. They didn't and they lost the series. So, as for many teams, beating the Wings is the test of whether or not a team will have playoff success. Indeed, more so that ever this year. I think the odds are good that the Sharks will get to the finals if they can win here. Big "if." But it's their series to win or lose. The Wings aren't good enough to beat them if they don't psyche themselves out. Sharks in 7.

Hawks/Canucks

Interesting rematch. Van beat a good LA team, but the Hawks didn't exactly live up to expectations against the Preds. The Hawks are the kind of team that will get stopped butt cold by a hot goalie. Luongo made some key saves but in he second round, especially late, but you cant have an off night like Luongo is prone to. Hawks in 7.

I didn't watch enough games this year to make a qualified thorough post-mortem, but I'll say this much:

The pundits are almost always wrong about the Devils and what they need to do, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Marty needs to quit playing so many regular season games. Period.

And I'll just add that the d-corps is nothing compared to the teams that won cups. Back in 2000, GM Lamoriello said that he traded to get Claude Lemieux back because the Devils had too many of the same kind of player. That is true again now.

The Devils are probably as deep in forward scoring now as they've ever been, except maybe 2000-01, but as thin on D as they have been since 1991. Lou says he is trying to sign Ilya Kovalchuk. Fine, but how about getting a defenseman of that caliber?

All you need to see to be convinced that the "new rules" or "post-lockout rules" in hockey are complete, utter bullshit is the first 20 seconds on this clip. This is clearly "interference" by Recchi—Kennedy isn't within 5 feet of the puck and hasn't touched it yet—but it's guts and it's an awesome play. Assuming you're not a Sabres fan, would you rather plays like this are made, or called dead by a ref's whistle? If you answer is the latter, you must reject the new rules, reject the spin of calling the decade prior to the lockout the "dead puck era" and rename it the "guts counted" era.



Hell, the Associated Press seemed to think it was the lead story of the game.

P.S. You could also call it "when everything other than finessy scoring counted." Goaltending counted more. Everything mattered. But, hey, why care about hardcore fans when you can sell Ovechkin and Crosby pinups to fair-weather fans in Kentucky.

Sharks apologists can continue to make excuses. The goal was a fluke. Heatley was out. Fine—all of that is true. But it's the kind of things that teams on a trajectory for a Cup overcome, especially against first round opponents that are significantly weaker. Or appeared that way on paper.


In the end, the fact that the Sharks couldn't score one goal on 51 shots speaks just as loudly as the Colorado goaltender's 51 saves.


They sure seem to have a way of running into a hot goaltender, don't they? Maybe someone will start to ask: when will the Sharks get the hot goalie? Not until they make a change.

Every year, games 1 and 2 completely change the goalposts. Before the playoffs started we expected to see total domination by the Sharks and Capitals. After game 1, and well into game 2 in each series, we wondered if the #8 seed was going to run away with it. Then, the #1 team wins game 2 and it seems to change everything.

Let's just remember that even a win in 6 was lower than our original expectations for both of these teams. The usual source of playoff underachievement in the face of such predictions is goaltending. It has been not good enough for both teams. Both could win their series in 5 games yet, though I doubt that will happen. If they do, they will have to contend with teams in the next round where this lack of goaltending, unless it gets better, could be a critical difference.

Let's just say I'm from Missouri City, Missouri and I need to be shown more than once. Winning "an upset" in game 2 is not going to convince me that either of these teams will make it into the finals.

Time for depth to make its appearance in this series for the Devils. They will need to get at least two goals from either their PP, PK, Defenseman of third/fourth line players. Indeed, they need three goals from these sources to win Game Two. Assuming they are essentially third line players, I would like to see Rolston and/or Clarkson score a goal.

The other adjustment the Devils need to make is on the PK. White is the only player that they have who is big enough to contend with Pronger in the crease. White will have to keep an eye on Pronger and battle him in front of the net when he moves in from the point. Both front of the net goals that Pronger scored were against pusillanimous smaller defending players.

Really, the Flyers were lucky to win Game 1 and Game 2 would have probably been 4-2 absent the criminal 1997-style officiating. If Boucher were truly as good as he was in his rookie run he would have established himself somewhere in the past ten years. Enough quality chances against him and he will fold.

Let's Go Devils!

Labels: Clarkson, Depth, Devils, Flyers, Game Three, nhl, Officiating, playoffs, Rolston

Win or lose tonight, it's clear that Nabokov is soft in the playoffs. Nobody could have predicted.

Oy.

It has to be a terrible, terrible day to be a Sharks fan. I can't imagine the anxiety. Arguably, they have been the best and most consistent team in California since Gretzky left. But that argument breaks down around this time of year. The 00s were the decade of the Ducks in California hockey. It began with a miraculous run to game 7 of the finals in 2003 which prefaced a conference finals run in 2006, California's first Stanley Cup in 2007, a playoff appearance in 2008, and bookended by a dramatic upset of the President's Trophy winners in the first round in 2009. That President's Trophy winner, was, of course, the Sharks.

Now they are on the verge of being eclipsed by their other southern neighbor, the Kings. If not this year, then next year it seems all but certain.

The hockey press/media, who is doing everything possible to ruin the sport, have embodied the two poles of ridiculousness on this issue. Hours before the puck dropped yesterday, San Jose columnist Ross McKeon declared that a decade of underachieving in the playoffs by the Sharks is totally irrelevant to this year. Maybe he was writing a propaganda piece. Maybe he was just really optimistic. But how could he not see what was coming?

The minute the Sharks gave up the first goal, everyone other hockey journamalist began writing their "choke" storyline. And once they lost game 1 at home, they submitted them for print. Indeed, what McKeon was really blind to wasn't the statistics, nor was it the Xs and Os of executing a hockey game. Rather, it was the self-fulfilling prophecy, the snowballing effect that a loss, any loss in any game in this series would have, and the psychological consequences of it.

The San Jose Mercury News spent roughly half of their article on the game relating it to past failures. Their other article? Speculating, once again, on whether Patrick Marleau will be the fall guy for the loss. I don't think you can argue with a straight face that none of this has any effect at all. It's certainly not the whole story. As I write this, I still believe San Jose will win this series. But it will have an effect.

I'm having trouble finding anyone except the usual Colorado chauvinists who think the Sharks won't win this series. There were more than a few people that thought they were stepping into it last year with the Ducks. At the end of the day that means that a loss in this series will be an even bigger choke.

I'll take the Caps in 4, the Devils in 6, Sabers in 7, and Pens in 4.