Showing posts with label Conn Smythe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Conn Smythe. Show all posts

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Streak Three

Confused Fans Need To Remember The Aim

streak

noun 1 a long, thin mark of a different substance or colour from its surroundings. 2 an element of a specified kind in someone’s character: a ruthless streak. 3 a spell of specified success or luck: a winning streak.

verb 1 mark with streaks. 2 move very fast in a specified direction. 3 informal run naked in a public place so as to shock or amuse.

— DERIVATIVES streaker noun streaking noun.

— ORIGIN Old English, related to STRIKE.



The Canadiens are on a losing streak. It is worth remembering the definition from above.

It's a funny thing that in the past few years, I have come to associate Canadiens winning or losing with the word streaky.

In other parts of the world, there are many types of bacon. Back bacon is the most commonly sold and consumed. But you can also get streaky bacon. Streaky bacon is what we might call bacon in Canada. In fact, if you buy Canadian bacon, it is invariably the streaky kind. So allowing for the spelling variation of our French cousins (Canadien), even in the world of charcuterie, the Canadiens are synonymous with streakiness.

The Habs have fulfilled this affiliation recently (since the lockout really) with their play. There's no regular win-loss-win-loss-win. We can't depend on them beating any team no mater how lowly, nor can we depend on them losing to any team no matter how lofty.

But you know what? We aren't alone.

Remember those Flyers last year – the ones that looked contenders as they mauled us in round 2? They lost 10 games in a row midseason last year. Washington, though people hailed Boudreau as the greatest thing since sliced bread, streaked their way into the playoffs too; this year they are topping us thanks to a mssive streak. Buffalo, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, Carolina, all our peers are as streaky as the rest.


Fans

As fans streaks are hard to take. Win or lose. But they are certainly integral to the experience. Streaks are what allow us to dream, to grumble, to hope, to despair.

The emotional ride is what watching and caring for the adopted team is all about. If I think about my mood after a loss, I can say it is as sour as my temperament after a win is bubbly. Streaks are borne as a fan, because the reward of the next win will be greater. Cup droughts can heighten the taste for that champagne once again.

One Canuck fan I read about today (at Dennis Kane's blog) has had enough with streaks. He has given up on the Canucks.

Now, far be it from me to criticise a man who is choosing to spend more time with his wife or child. I think it is a great call on his part.

But is being a fan all or nothing? Is there no option for weekends only? Highlights during the season, whole games in the playoffs? Watching when you feel like it?


The aim

I used to get tied up in every win and loss, just like that poor renounced Canuck fan. Every losing streak was painful to endure. But after years of watching the Habs rollercoaster and, more importantly, watching our rivals make finals and win Cups; I decided that we may be getting carried away with the wrong thing. I think I found a way to proof myself against streakitis.

My immunity: solidifying the expectations for the team into points they need to make the playoffs (in the case of this year – with a few games to spare), has shown the streaks for what they really are: spells of specified success, insufficiency or (of course) luck.

A loss is just a goal against in the game of the season, where a tie spread over all rivals is enough to get another period of hockey (particularly if you can lose in OT a lot). A 10 point lead in December is no safer than a 3-1 lead coming into the second intermission – 5 points clawed back and it's a jittery closing session.

Now when the Canadiens lose three in a row, I update my points left in the 98-o-meter and do a quick calculation. I revise the date and leave the phrase: Ahead of the pace in place. Even when it's not ahead of the pace, I can look at that pace, and as long as it's around 1.1 to 1.3; I'm breathing fine.

It's worth remembering these goals every once in a while too. We want a Stanley Cup not a President's trophy (enjoy that Sharks). We want wins, not Plekanec goals. We want to play our best hockey in May, not January.

Wisdom, as they say, comes from the mouths of babes (courtesy of the best Habs interview in an age – a coup considering the 100 some-odd scrum was scooped by a blog on this one):
"Interviewer: It's the centennial season for the Canadiens, and the team finished first in the conference last season. How do you handle the expectations from fans and media that your team should win the Stanley Cup this season?

Sergei K: Our main goal is to make the playoffs. And once we get there, everyone will try and play their best game..."


Timing

The Canadiens are currently in 5th place in the Eastern conference. As I mentioned, they are ahead of the 98-point pace. In fact, they're ahead of last year's pace. There's no need to panic, no need to do what Richard formerly a 7th man for the Canucks (number retired and all) and jump – his team is tied 7th, btw.

Streaks in the regular season, by and large reflect the general expenditure of energy and the turn of luck of a given period. If luck is what you make, then it all comes down to energy. (So you know I'm not getting a 22 on my jersey, by effort, I mean directed skill as a team – players making extra effort to control passes, protect possesion, create space, etc.).

A study of two consecutive seasons watching the Senators showed me that when you're expending more effort to get wins (and thus streak) is much more important than how much you streaked over a season (i.e., 105 points > 113 points, if done right):

- In 2005-06, the Sens got off to their usual blistering start with a 19-3-0 record going into December. They finished the year top of the division on the back of that achievement. A look at how they got their 52 wins shows that their streaks were ill-timed – 13 wins by Game 15; 26 wins by Game 35 (20 games); 39 wins by Game 58 (23 games); and 52 wins by Game 82 (24 games)

– 2006-07 (the year they made the finals), they seemed to have learned something. The only accumulated 48 wins, but they were more constant instead of slipping each quarter – 12 wins by Game 25; 24 wins by Game 45 (20 games); 36 wins by Game 62 (17 games); and 48 wins by Game 82 (20 games)

Consequently, Daniel Alfredsson, the man who would have won the Conn Smythe trophy, scored 87 points in 2006-07 compared to 103 the year before.


The relevance here to the Canadiens is the pacing. Last season, the Canadiens came into Game 68 with 36 wins. 15 games later, they had 47. It was admirable they gave their all to win the division, clinch home ice and beat the Penguins, but ultimately, their timed outburst of energy fooled none of those who'd been focusing on how the playoffs would go, rather than how the standings would look.

Carey Price blamed fatigue for his form. He was tired because he was used in all those nerve-wracking late season wins. He was tired because he had never played on a team that had so many meaningful games in a row. Kovalev burned energy in those last months too, as did Plekanec and Komisarek. It was rookie errors from a team that had no idea what winning in the regular season should feel like, much less what winning in the playoffs was all about.

This season, like the Senators of Cup year, the Habs have behaved like a team heading for 48 or so wins the whole way. They have put the experience of being good into confidently carrying themselves as a good (if not surprising) team: 12th win in Game 21 (one quarter mark); 24th win by 40th game (half-way mark).

Their lack of urgency is nothing to be alarmed with. Their lack of urgency is something to hope they can maintain as they clinch points and a berth.


On that note, let's not do a Richard the 7th and get all in a huff over 3 losses, 4 losses, whatever. Nor get over the moon like a fair-weather Bruins fan basking in Tim Thomas' string of wins. As we turn on the televisions for another game in Florida, banish the words "must-win", "costly defeat" and all the others and remember the game:

98 points, 4 wins, 4 wins, 4 wins, 4 wins...

Thursday, January 08, 2009

Habs Leafs

Guest Preview

One of the wonderful benefits that the Score Sports Federation provides us with is a natural set of bloggers to argue and share thoughts with about hockey and the NHL in Canada. Ahead of only the second all-Canadian meeting for the Habs since LIW joined the Federation, I spoke with Sean of Down Goes Brown about the Leafs, our rivalry and the game tonight.

I put a few questions to Sean about some obvious topics and some that hopefully are not so obvious. Read on to see his responses.

Sean also put some very creative and cleverly worded questions to me, you can see my answers on his site now.

Q1) We look at your team a foreign fans and think Kaberle, Toskala and Antropov... Can you tell us from a Leafs perspective who the players to look for tonight will be?

Sean: Nik Hagman is just a solid, smart player who can skate and score and play defense. He's been the best of Fletcher's acquisitions. Jonas Frogren is a crazy Nordic viking on the blueline who doesn't score much, but is the sort of guy who likes to block shots with his face. Dominic Moore is having a career year on the checking line - he's got great wheels, and will continue to contribute until he's dealt at the deadline for a second round pick.

Also, this Grabovski kid isn't bad. You've probably never heard of him.



Q2) By the same token, who are the players you as Leafs key on when you think of a match up with the 2008-09 Canadiens (if you recognize anyone on our roster anymore)?

Sean: Well, the main guy we'll be keying on is Tom Kostopoulos. He's going down. You do not want to get into a "hitting-from-behind" battle with a team that employs Ryan Hollweg. Kostopoulos better hope that whichever purse he steals this week has a gun in it.

Other than that, we watch for the usual suspects: Koivu, Kovalev, Lang, and all the various other divers. And of course, we'll try to convince Carey Price it's a playoff game so that he'll completely wet the bed.



Q3) We have an interesting history between our teams. But in all honesty, is this rivalry petering out a bit? Do you hate the Canadiens as much as perhaps you used to?

Sean: The rivalry has been pretty dormant since it's been a while since both teams were good at the same time. But it's still easily the Leafs best rivalry. There have been occasional mini-rivalries like the Senators, but at the end of the day nobody cares about Ottawa. I get more excited for Habs games than any other team, by far.

All that said, here's the weird thing: I don't actually hate the Habs, or their fans. I hate plenty of other teams, but there's a grudging respect for Montreal. The Senators could fold tomorrow and no Leaf fan would care, but the Habs are different. The rivalry still feels like it means something, and I hope it heats up again soon.



Q4) Mats Sundin. Open wound, I know. Would you have taken him back if he turned down Vancouver?

Sean: Leaf fans don't agree on Sundin, but virtually nobody wanted him back. Half of us are too mad at him, and the other half know that this season is about a high draft pick and Sundin would only hurt that. If he had re-signed after the deadline, or even during the summer, we would have welcomed him back. But once he finished taking fishing trips or shilling for gambling web sites and got around to actually thinking about hockey in November, he was dead to me. I look forward to him faking an injury to get out of the Canucks/Leaf game in February.


Q5) If you're not in the playoffs, I'm assuming you hope for a lottery position. Let's say the chips fall for you: Hedman or Tavares?

Sean: After watching the World Juniors, I've been sporting a Tav-erection for two straight weeks. Besides, the Leafs have far more blue-chip defensive prospects than we do forwards. Which is to say, we currently have one blue-chip defensive prospect.


Q6) Will Justin Pogge crack it soon? How bad will the save percentages have to be to pull the trigger on that? It looks to us, the casual observers, like you have a David Aebischer situation on your hands.

Sean: Pogge should play regularly in the NHL when he's ready, and it suits his development path. That's the only criteria. Toskala has been shaky this year, and Joseph has been brutal, but that doesn't matter this year. It's about the future, so if Pogge isn't ready then he should be in the AHL. And that's especially true since he hasn't been all that sharp the past few years, and is starting to look like he may not be the blue-chip prospect we were hoping for.

And if Toskala is traded and Joseph plays so badly the rest of the year that we drop into last place overall, well, that's a risk we'll just have to take. Cough.



Finally, as with the Calgary preview, we had a look at some players, people and places that mean something to either side. I asked both Sean from Down Goes Brown and our own Tobalev to state whatever came to mind (in a word or two) when they read the following list (the answers are good):

a) Shayne Corson
Sean (Leafs): Head-kicker
Tobalev (Habs): Bar fights

b) Jonas Hoglund
Sean (Leafs): Sundin's excuse
Tobalev (Habs): How was he good on the Leafs?

c) Ken Dryden
Sean (Leafs): Stop talking
Tobalev (Habs): Could have been the best ever

d) LA Kings
Sean (Leafs): Kerry Fraser high stick gretzky scores ears bleeding can't stop cutting myself argh i hate you...
Tobalev (Habs): 1993 Finals collapse

e) Conn Smythe
Sean (Leafs): Maple Leaf Gardens
Tobalev (Habs): Patrick Roy


Never one to shy away from controversial statements, apparently. Thanks Sean for taking part. As for you dear readers, Down Goes Brown is a great blog to get the pre-game and post-game analysis from the Leaf perspective and to correct Sean about some of his wild claims regarding the Habs (or just generally mock because he had to mention Dominic Moore in an answer about best players).