Every year this happens. A team wins the Cup and we go into some kind of praise-amplification cycle, the usual result of which is a conclusion that all future Cups will be won as this latest one was.
It's all fine and good as long as it remains theory, that is until you go out and overpay Rob Scuderi.
As we enjoy the interminable season finally coming to an end, I offer this thought. Perhaps Chicago might not have won the Cup had their opposition offered a credible goaltending option.
Last night was only one example, but again Leighton was shaky. Two of the goals allowed, including the OT Stanley Cup Winner, were minor league stuff.
When in recent memory can you remember a Stanley Cup finalist putting forward a serious bid with a goalie that was pulled twice, allowed 3.96 goals a game and saved less than 88% of shots. He played well in one win, but that hardly balances two of his losses in which he allowed about 25% of shots to go in.
To sum up, Michael leighton was sub-par and by letting in some of the goals he did, effectively cut the Flyers chances off at the knees.
Still, I choose not to entitle the piece with Michael Leighton's name, as this was all to be expected. Miraculaous shut out run aside, Leighton is a player with this kind of checkered history. A borderline NHLer with up and down numbers. It shouldn't have surprised anyone that his miracle streak was just that, a miracle streak.
Really Philadelphia management is to blame.
It starts as these things usually do with drafting. Since they drafted Roman Cechmanek in 2000 (their last credible goalie graduate), the Flyers have selected 15 goalies in all. All told from those 15, they have received 2 NHL games of sub 0.800 goaltending. Not pretty. The lessons they learned in the late 1990s when their last thrust into contention was on were clearly unlearned, as they constantly have goaltending further down the list than nearly everything else. Though they've sprung for two third round goalie choices in the past two seasons, prior to that their reliance on free agency meant they had little time for goalies before round 5.
Speaking of free agency, they often get distracted there too. I'm not necessarily saying that goalies can be plucked out of thin air in July, but it might be easier if the kitty isn't always already spent to find someone adequate.
Ray Emery was a great example of Philly's approach to goaltending on the cheap. Always willing to spring big money for the next bully in line, they frequently find themselves looking for the bargain basement option come September. Esche, Biron, Boucher, Emery, leighton, not exactly a crew that sends shivers down the spine of shooters.
And then there are trades. Never mind that Philly might have turned down a great bargain in December with the potential Halak deal. That bears no meaning next to the fact that they had built a team to win in the present with several excellent young and middle age stars ready to shine, yet failed to trade a single piece of their depth when Ray Emery first showed himself to be missing a step and then underwent fairly major surgery before the trade deadline.
It's fair to say that Philly's management didn't react because they never thought this possible, even with a goaltender. Fine. But making the playoffs and winning the Cup were clearly in the plans when they signed all their forwards to long-term millions and then traded the future couple of first rounders for Pronger. Philly were a team built for now, or thereabouts. So why leave playoff qualification, and ultimately playoff success in the court of a gamble like Boucher? Or Leighton?
In my mind, it's quite a big mistake. And now, quite a big opportunity missed..
Who should be more aggrieved?
I'm as happy as anyone to see Mike Richards close to tears. He must feel pretty aggrieved by management's ponderous approach to shoring the back end. Peter Laviolette too. He coached a storm to get his team as far as it did, yet being cuffed by the Leighton/Boucher options must have been hard. Finally, Chris Pronger, who still dominant might wonder how many more Cup runs he can coax out of himself.
Yet, as unhappy as those should be, could it be that Canadiens fans and perhaps Bruins fans even more so should be cursing their luck.
Coming into the Bruins game in relief, Michael Leighton was a 0.902 career goalie with no NHL playoff experience. In the 2.5 games he played vs. Boston to rescue the Flyers from 3-1, he laid down a shutout to end the series with a 0.943 save % and 1.54 GAA. Against Montreal, it was 3 more shutouts en route to a 0.950 save % and a 1.41 GAA.
Had he played as he did in the final, Boston would have likely scored 5 more goals in 2.5 games and Montreal was owed 10 more. Had he played at his career NHL rate, Boston would have expected 3 more goals and Montreal a further 7.
That's not to say both teams didn't have a part in Leighton's supremacy, or that Philly's D didn't also. Merely to say that we all knew one day Leighton wouldn't be making some of the saves he seemed to be able to make against both Bruins and Habs, and we knew we'd feel a little bit unlucky to have faced him at the one time in his career he looked a genuine starter.
Showing posts with label Finals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Finals. Show all posts
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Stanley Cup Drama
"Game 7, Stanley Cup final". How many kids have uttered this line?
The stuff of NHL legend is the stuff of street hockey routine.
On the eve of the 4th Stanley Cup Final game 7 of the decade, i thought it was a good time to talk about the hockey that's actually being played once again.
Contrary to what you might expect with 2 months of hockey played on the back of 6 months of hockey, it's rare for Stanley Cup finals to go the distance. In fact, only 14 series have gone to Game 7 in 69 runnings of that format. Prior to that, there were 8 Games 5's over 20 seasons sing that format.
Now, for all of us neutrals watching tomorrow, I don't think anything less than a close contest will do. And for anyone else who's lived out this dream on the street, unleashing the final buzzer beating shot in Game 7 (in OT, no doubt), a game with a late and dramatic goal is the only tonic to replace the team we actually care about.
Don't hold your breath for that either. Only 2 of those 22 series that went the entire distance were forced into overtime. On top of that, only 5 were settled by a goal coming any time after 10 minutes in the third (and one of those was at 10:30). In reality, it's just as likely that the game winning goal will come when you are settling down to watch in the first (4 have) or at least within the first two periods of the game – allowing for a 3rd period of clock-watching – as 9 Game 7's and 4 deciding Game 5's have done.
The good news is that the Detroit Red Wings are there. This is their NHL-leading 8th Stanley Cup Game 7, albeit their first in 45 years. Detroit has won 4 (one behind Toronto's record 5) and lost 3 (one behind Vancouver's city record of 4). More to the point, in the past at least, Detroit liked leaving it late. Both OT games featured Detroit, both also featured a Red Wings Cup parade. The 1950 final vs. the New York Rangers, with a winning goal in second overtime, must have been the perfect tension we are looking for. Their win 4 years later vs. us was alright, but for the obvious flaw.
Anyway, let's see. Triple OT?
Montreal in Game 7's
Over the years, Montreal has featured prominently in Game 7's. Of our 24 Cup victories, 2 have come in Game 7's, while 2 others have come in the 5th game of a 5-set (3 of which featured Blackhawks as losers).
Montreal is the only team to lose in two consecutive Game 7's. Those 2 came in 1954 and 1955. Quite remarkable to think that team was an OT goal in 1954, and perhaps a late second period save in 1955 to prevent a momentum shift, away from 8 consecutive Stanley Cups. In any case, it does mean the team played in games they could have walked away with the Cup an astounding 8 years in a row.
While the Habs played in the very first 5-game series to go the distance (and won their first Cup), their other claim to notoriety must surely be the fact they staged the most anti-climactic of all Game 7's when they beat Chicago in 1965. To mirror the rest of the series, the Canadiens pushed their home ice advantage home within 14 seconds of the opening faceoff in a Game 7 non-contest that ended 4-0 (their 3rd shutout of the finals). It makes one who wasn't there wonder what on earth was going on.
Game-winning goals
The other feature of tomorrow night's show is the stars on offer. The repeat final is giving us another chance to watch the best offensive flair against the best defenceman in a generation. It also pits 2 high scoring teams with many scoring stars against each other.
If you were sitting in the Detroit equivalent of a Molson zone, fans might be shoving for position in the Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen or Hossa areas – that Stanley Cup winning free beer all the sweeter. The equivalent in Pittsburgh for those watching on Jumbotron will see jostling for Crosby, Malkin, Gonchar and Staal.
But despite the fact that stars win Cups and stars get to finals (and into the HHOF). Is your bet best placed on a shooter? Or do the nerves of the occasion lend to a chippy and unlikely goal source. The list is peppered with legends, that is until a 6'6" German named Uwe showed us in 1996 that, actually, anyone is eligible to score that goal. Since that time, it's been a parade in second-tier players, particularly in Game 7s (no offense Tanguay). This article I read this morning takes note and suggests some of the likely unlikelys to watch as potential Rupps.
The complete list of Game 7 winning goalscorers is here, with time of goal and final score, opponent and year:
Pete Babando (8:31 OT2, 4-3 Detroit over NYR, 1950)
Tony Leswick (4:20 OT, 2-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1954)
Babe Pratt (12:14 3rd, 2-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1945)
Pete Langelle (9:48 3rd, 3-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1942)
Henri Richard (2:34 3rd, 3-2 Montreal over Chicago, 1971)
Gordie Howe (19:49 2nd, 3-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1955)
Jari Kurri (14:59 2nd, 3-1 Edmonton over Philly, 1987)
Ruslan Fedotenko (14:38 2nd, 3-1 Tampa Bay over Calgary, 2004)
Mark Messier (13:29 2nd, 3-2 New York over Vancouver, 1994)
Alex Tanguay (4:57 2nd, 3-1 Colorado over New Jersey, 2001)
Frantisek Kaberle (4:18 2nd, 3-1 Carolina over Edmonton, 2006)
Michael Rupp (2:22 2nd, 3-0 New Jersey over Anaheim, 2003)
Andy Bathgate (3:04 1st, 4-0 Toronto over Detroit, 1964)
Jean Beliveau (0:14 1st, 4-0 Montreal over Chicago, 1965)
Those last 2 guys had to wait near a full hour to realise what heroes they had become on the night. Not the stuff of street hockey legend...
For tonight, though, money's gotta be on experience – Fedotenko in 3rd OT?
The stuff of NHL legend is the stuff of street hockey routine.
On the eve of the 4th Stanley Cup Final game 7 of the decade, i thought it was a good time to talk about the hockey that's actually being played once again.
Contrary to what you might expect with 2 months of hockey played on the back of 6 months of hockey, it's rare for Stanley Cup finals to go the distance. In fact, only 14 series have gone to Game 7 in 69 runnings of that format. Prior to that, there were 8 Games 5's over 20 seasons sing that format.
Now, for all of us neutrals watching tomorrow, I don't think anything less than a close contest will do. And for anyone else who's lived out this dream on the street, unleashing the final buzzer beating shot in Game 7 (in OT, no doubt), a game with a late and dramatic goal is the only tonic to replace the team we actually care about.
Don't hold your breath for that either. Only 2 of those 22 series that went the entire distance were forced into overtime. On top of that, only 5 were settled by a goal coming any time after 10 minutes in the third (and one of those was at 10:30). In reality, it's just as likely that the game winning goal will come when you are settling down to watch in the first (4 have) or at least within the first two periods of the game – allowing for a 3rd period of clock-watching – as 9 Game 7's and 4 deciding Game 5's have done.
The good news is that the Detroit Red Wings are there. This is their NHL-leading 8th Stanley Cup Game 7, albeit their first in 45 years. Detroit has won 4 (one behind Toronto's record 5) and lost 3 (one behind Vancouver's city record of 4). More to the point, in the past at least, Detroit liked leaving it late. Both OT games featured Detroit, both also featured a Red Wings Cup parade. The 1950 final vs. the New York Rangers, with a winning goal in second overtime, must have been the perfect tension we are looking for. Their win 4 years later vs. us was alright, but for the obvious flaw.
Anyway, let's see. Triple OT?
Montreal in Game 7's
Over the years, Montreal has featured prominently in Game 7's. Of our 24 Cup victories, 2 have come in Game 7's, while 2 others have come in the 5th game of a 5-set (3 of which featured Blackhawks as losers).
Montreal is the only team to lose in two consecutive Game 7's. Those 2 came in 1954 and 1955. Quite remarkable to think that team was an OT goal in 1954, and perhaps a late second period save in 1955 to prevent a momentum shift, away from 8 consecutive Stanley Cups. In any case, it does mean the team played in games they could have walked away with the Cup an astounding 8 years in a row.
While the Habs played in the very first 5-game series to go the distance (and won their first Cup), their other claim to notoriety must surely be the fact they staged the most anti-climactic of all Game 7's when they beat Chicago in 1965. To mirror the rest of the series, the Canadiens pushed their home ice advantage home within 14 seconds of the opening faceoff in a Game 7 non-contest that ended 4-0 (their 3rd shutout of the finals). It makes one who wasn't there wonder what on earth was going on.
Game-winning goals
The other feature of tomorrow night's show is the stars on offer. The repeat final is giving us another chance to watch the best offensive flair against the best defenceman in a generation. It also pits 2 high scoring teams with many scoring stars against each other.
If you were sitting in the Detroit equivalent of a Molson zone, fans might be shoving for position in the Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen or Hossa areas – that Stanley Cup winning free beer all the sweeter. The equivalent in Pittsburgh for those watching on Jumbotron will see jostling for Crosby, Malkin, Gonchar and Staal.
But despite the fact that stars win Cups and stars get to finals (and into the HHOF). Is your bet best placed on a shooter? Or do the nerves of the occasion lend to a chippy and unlikely goal source. The list is peppered with legends, that is until a 6'6" German named Uwe showed us in 1996 that, actually, anyone is eligible to score that goal. Since that time, it's been a parade in second-tier players, particularly in Game 7s (no offense Tanguay). This article I read this morning takes note and suggests some of the likely unlikelys to watch as potential Rupps.
The complete list of Game 7 winning goalscorers is here, with time of goal and final score, opponent and year:
Pete Babando (8:31 OT2, 4-3 Detroit over NYR, 1950)
Tony Leswick (4:20 OT, 2-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1954)
Babe Pratt (12:14 3rd, 2-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1945)
Pete Langelle (9:48 3rd, 3-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1942)
Henri Richard (2:34 3rd, 3-2 Montreal over Chicago, 1971)
Gordie Howe (19:49 2nd, 3-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1955)
Jari Kurri (14:59 2nd, 3-1 Edmonton over Philly, 1987)
Ruslan Fedotenko (14:38 2nd, 3-1 Tampa Bay over Calgary, 2004)
Mark Messier (13:29 2nd, 3-2 New York over Vancouver, 1994)
Alex Tanguay (4:57 2nd, 3-1 Colorado over New Jersey, 2001)
Frantisek Kaberle (4:18 2nd, 3-1 Carolina over Edmonton, 2006)
Michael Rupp (2:22 2nd, 3-0 New Jersey over Anaheim, 2003)
Andy Bathgate (3:04 1st, 4-0 Toronto over Detroit, 1964)
Jean Beliveau (0:14 1st, 4-0 Montreal over Chicago, 1965)
Those last 2 guys had to wait near a full hour to realise what heroes they had become on the night. Not the stuff of street hockey legend...
For tonight, though, money's gotta be on experience – Fedotenko in 3rd OT?
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Lidstrom Opens The Door
Niklas Lidstrom, the first European captain to win a Stanley Cup (congratulations), opened a door last night...
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
"Clearly, times have changed. North American players are not the only ones who are leaders - evidenced by Lidstrom's historic moment Wednesday night."
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
"I don't know who thinks they're not … that's ridiculous," Red Wings coach Mike Babcock said of European players. "You're living in the past if you believe that."
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
"... (he) uses Nicklas Lidstrom's captaincy to question why Europeans have been in the NHL for 21 years, and there were 13 European captains this year, but Lidstrom was only the first European captain to lift the Cup."
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)