Game #32Refs Travel Back In Time; Calling Foot-In-Paint Heritage Rules

Details

Date: 15/12/2011
Opponent: Flyers
Location: Montreal

Loss: 3-4

Habs Goalie: Price (L)
Opposition Goalie: Bobrovsky (W)

Habs goalscorers: Desharnais, Leblanc, Cole
Opposition goalscorers: Talbot, Zolnierczyk, Simmonds, Meszaros

Play of the game

Cole's goal wasn't the prettiest of the night, but it was the goal that let the Flyers know that we were for real, that they would have to work hard to beat us. It was a PP goal on a night when we should have scored more of those, but at least we scored one. I always like scoring at the end of the period, this is because momentum rarely carries through the intermission and taking advantage of the type of momentum that we had going at the end of the second was paramount.

Dome hockey team

The 6 players we're playing in a no changes, do or die contest in the dome

Forwards

David Desharnais - Game Puck
I was very happy with Desh's play tonight. He scored a goal and an assist and was our best forward throughout. His goal was a smart goal, the type of goal one would expect from a player like David, a player that has had to be very smart just to make it to the show.

Erik Cole
Erik played another good game and because of it was a no-brainer for the dome. Other than the stellar offence, that he obviously brought, there were hits, 4 of them in all. Is it just me or is he a better player now than the one we remember in Carolina?

Michael Cammalleri
I am starting to feel a bit bad for Camms. He is getting a very bad reputation of late and I think it all stems from his low goals total. To call him useless other than when he scores is a bit unfair to him as a player. He isn't Cole or Plekanec, but he isn't Darche, Nokelainen or Blunden either. One thing that he rarely gets credit for is his defensive play, specifically his play on the PK. Tonight he played over 3 minutes man-down and helped the Habs go 6 for 6 against the hot Flyers. Oh, there were also 7 shots (10 attempts). The goals aren't going in, but the effort was there tonight, in both ends. The goals, I assure you, will come.

Defencemen

PK Subban
Kaberle was OK, but didn't do enough on the PP to work his way to the dome. Gill was solid throughout, but his wasted offensive opportunities were frustrating to watch. Didn't like what Campoli brought tonight, scary in his own end at times. A player that I was happy with was Subban. Nothing flashy, just good strong, positional hockey. He doesn't get many a night off when it comes to tough assignments, tonight was no exception.

Josh Gorges
I was happy to see Emelin back in and was happy with the 6 hits. I even liked the pinches he made, but I still felt that tonight Josh was my man. For many of the same reasons as PK, Gorges finds himself in yet another dome.

Goaltender

Carey Price
Carey has had better nights, but he wasn't that bad. The Flyers are a good team and unless you are excellent you can expect at least 2 against you. I guess we won't win many games by letting in 4 goals, but I didn't feel that anyone could have done a much better job than he did. Oh wait, there is one: Chris Lee. If he learned the rules of hockey we likely would have won this game.

Comments

A loss isn't great, it is zero points after all. But, when we accept that we can see that the Habs put the effort in tonight. There were good chances and they played well enough at both ends to warrant a win on most nights. There are things, however, that we can't control. Those that we can control include the PP and making sure that we go more than 1/9. This has been the story of our season and will continue to be until we turn it around. We can't blame the Habs too much though as guys like Cammalleri, Desharnais, Subban and Weber are no Kovalev, Koivu, Markov or Streits when it comes to playing with an extra man. So, we can't expect to be top of the league anymore, but I guess asking for Kaberle to turn us into a top-20 team would be a suitable Christmas wish.

Things that we can't control are things like the reffing. Tonight I felt that there were three goals that could have gone the other way. All were because of goalie interference type things and all three calls went against the Habs. The first was a Montreal goal that got called back. Lee called the famous 1999 (non cup-winning, of course) foot in the blue rule. Remember the one where a player like Cole screens the goalie, doesn't touch him, but has his skates in the painted ice that really has no purpose whatsoever? Ya, of course you do. The next two were called as goals for Philly. Both goals involved contact on Price, both probably should have been disallowed. It is thus surprising that Lee can find a hockey helmet big enough as he didn't even have the courtesy to seriously review any of those calls. The call on the ice stood all three times. We may not have won the game had these three (or even one of them) gone our way, but it would have helped. The good thing is that we don't really have to change the way we played, we just have to change who we let ref our games.

Philly's Mess Catches Up With Them

Richards, Carter. Gone, gone.

This good news for the Habs is ostensibly bad news for the Flyers and their fans. Richards and Carter were a big part of the Flyers success and a huge reason the team ever got close to a Stanley Cup without a goalie.

But that's where it all goes wrong isn't it?

Without a goalie.

For most teams, not having a good goalie is a problem. For Philadelphia it's a brain-devouring complex. That's why instead of applying a bit of patience and recognizing what a good thing they may have pulled from thin air in Bobrovsky, they went out and did what they always did and signed, signed, signed.

Bryzgalov is a good goalie, don't get me wrong. I like him, I like his chances in Philly. But you will note that Anaheim let him go, that Phoenix let him go, that Phoenix doesn't have any Cups.

A goalie simply can't do it all. Let me rephrase that, a goalie not named Thomas or Hasek can't do it all. A team needs to put talent at all positions and use their salary allowance wisely to do that.


Philly's real problems

A lot of articles on yesterday's trades say things like "Holmgren managed to unload Carter's long-term contract/Richards salary cap millstone".

I think these comments are way off the mark. Both players were paid in the $5 million range and both performed to the level of their salary, which in the world of guys paid that much means they were bargains.

What's more, the salary cap hasn't been going anywhere but up, even through the worst financial period in modern US/Canadian history. As the proportion that a $5 million salary takes up shrinks, the better a long-term deal for a producing player paid at that level looks.

Saying nothing about intangibles at all, I can firmly say that Richards and Carter were not the salary cap problems in Philadelphia. If anything, they were among the contracts that permitted them to spend with abandon at times.

The real problems in Philly come in at the back end.

The Pronger deal wasn't expensive at the time, but it was a gaffe to sign him long-term past his 35th birthday. This contract is central to their problem.

Timonen is another. If Price/Halak was a luxury, Pronger/Timonen was a bigger one. Both players are paid to be #1 Dmen, but the name implies there can only be one #1 Dman. The other became the most expensive second fiddle in the league.

And it didn't stop there. Rather than fill out a roster like everyone else in the league would with prospects and a couple of cheaper contracts at the back (to defend other teams' fourth lines), Holmgren put $3 million players at every hole.

The Flyers biggest cap problem was their luxury defense, which got them 7th best D in the East with 6 less GA than Florida.

Other than their $22 million defence corps, Philly also took on the dead weight contract of Kris Versteeg. In fact, they repeated their luxury buying attitude up front with a third line that included double millionaires all around.


Fix is temporary

Philly found a temporary fix for immediate cap space, but based on the Bryzgalov signing, it won't be used for prudent and conservative rebuilding. In fact, when the grossly overpaid forward comes in as the replacement for Carter/Richards, fans will most likely be wondering what these deals were for.


Habs news more encouraging

The Habs did better in the last couple of days with their signings and seem less likely to implode their plan and go schizophrenically down the garden path. While I'll always lament Gauthier for not getting in on action like Ville Leino or Andrej Meszaros, I at least admire his commitment to the plan he thought was working last spring. Holmgren on the other hand...

The Flyers moves do also serve the Habs well since this team was a chief rival and those two players were chief nemeses. Some fans will point to the danger of the rebuild for the Habs more distant future, but the contracts at the back, together with the quick trigger of Holmgren seem to provide the insurance that this team won't be a perennial problem.


I guess this whole thing just shows that making a cap mess will catch up with your team at some point. Chicago's mess cost them a lot, but they have a Cup to show for it. Philly, mere games away, just got a mess.

Can Teams Bring Contracts Forward For Reneging?

A few sources today are reporting that the NHL is taking a hard line after Kovalchuk and may investigate a few contracts that they have previously approved.

Among those to be potentially investigated (if you believe any of the claims) would be those of Marian Hossa, Roberto Luongo, Chris Pronger and Marc Savard.

Never mind that the league won't be able to take away the Stanley Cup enabled by their previous soft stance. I prefer to see it in a different way.

If the league is dead set on killing all long-term front-end heavy contracts, let's get serious. What about making Gomez sign a new deal?

After all, he was one of the original new-era 7-year deal boys. His final season is paying him less than half of his first $10 million season.

And what about other teams who may want voided cap hits? Like Philly on Daniel Briere's $6.5 million? Maybe Detroit's rivals would want to investigate Franzen and Zetterberg.

Wouldn't seem fair otherwise, would it?

Habs v. Flyers Hope You Enjoyed Your Day Off Hockey

The last few nights have been luxurious. I haven't even played a second, haven't had to block one of 320 shots, and I appreciated a rest from the playoff onslaught. The Montreal fans I met and shared drinks with last night all felt the same. Some time off was welcome, a weekend without two hockey games a chance to remember real life.

I can only imagine that it was 100 times better for the players. Grab some time at home, see the kids, watch a movie, skip the media for a day or two.

Back to the grindstone today though.


Last night, I encountered a lot of trepidation for this upcoming series. Many times, I was asked the same question: "Which team would I have preferred for the Canadiens opponent?"

Each time, I answered the same way: "The team that lost".

A playoff series is a trying for any team. A 7-game series is a true test of any team's mettle. In my humble opinion, any team that can beat the same opponent 4 times in such a short span deserves to at least receive the credit they deserve for that win.

Coming into this series, both Montreal and Philadelphia are getting less than value for what they have done till now. Though Boston may have collapsed, it was Philly sticking with the task and staying out of the box that paved the way to victory. Forgotten, already in the shadow of their historic comeback is they beat many peoples' number one Eastern team (the Devils) very handily with a makeshift goaltending team. Montreal too has been questioned. Beating Pittsburgh the way they did still not worthy enough to earn them credit for their Washington victory.

But it doesn't matter. New Jersey, Boston, Washington and Pittsburgh are behind. Montreal and Philadelphia are worthy contenders for the Eastern crown because they are standing. Even if we can't quite explain how or why.

As I look forward and try to predict a series outcome, I find it difficult. The series till now offer little guidance. Philly has shown the ability to overcome trapping with goaltending, but that doesn't make them stand out from Washington or Pittsburgh as opponents. Montreal has pounced on rickety defences for timely scoring, but haven't yet had need, real need to make Plan Bs on attack.

The season series isn't much help either. 2-2 all told. Philly boosters look to February's back-to-back to say Montreal is outclassed, but conveniently overlook Game 4, the playoff clinching (in retrospect) 1-0 shutout from Halak.

It's an interesting series, and far from predictable. Let's consider the matchups:


Goaltending

Montreal has Halak. So far the best goalie in the playoffs, one of the best in the season. Has won in pressure games, has stoned Ovechkin, Malkin, Crosby and Backstrom.

Philadelphia had a charmed run from Boucher, but now must rely on Michael Leighton. It was Boucher that won the shootout to attain the playoffs and overcame Parise and Kovalchuk. Leighton so far has been great, but one wonders if the anemia of Boston's attack, and overcoming Satan and Recchi (in 2010, not 1998) means a little less than what Halak has put forward.

My edge here goes to Montreal. Anyone who has ever written off a goalie (ahem) will know that the edge is often les than it seems.


Defence

Montreal has has allowed so many shots that stats bashers are having fits. The fact it is systematic troubles some even more. Still, letting a goalie see shots and clearing rebounds has been the priority since Game 5 in Washington and it's been taken on board as the priority. Gill has been an obstruction machine while the whistles are away, and should still be. Gorges, Spacek and co. also pretty good at what they do.

Philadelphia has been impressive in this regard. Against NJ, the corps allowed only a single ES goal against in their 4 wins. Pronger's name gets mentioned a lot, but Montreal mustn't overlook Timonen who drew the big assignments two years ago and blanketed Koivu to little acclaim.

Even with a Markov return, Philly has the edge here. Their lack of penalties against Boston shows why building around obstructers like Pronger, Carle, Coburn and Timonen works if you can make the playoffs on a shootout. Though I think there's something to Martin's use of his staff on D, I can't shake the feeling I'd like those bigger bodies when the whistles are buried.


Forwards

Montreal has 2.5 lines spread over three lines for scoring. Gionta, Cammalleri and Kostitsyn are real threats, while Gomez, Plekanec and Lapierre have found ways to get things done. The defensive play of the forwards is top notch, and shouldn't be forgotten.

Philly has shooters and star power. Richards is a big-game player. Briere and Gagne are earning their money and the supporting cast have goals in them.

Without Jeff Carter and Ian Laperriere in the lineup, the Flyers depth is tested. The match-up is close. If Pouliot ever awoke, this would be a Montreal edge. However, even as a staunch supporter, I've stopped waiting for that. The same could be said for Philly with a return from injury or a new scorer emerging. Until then, this is a push.


By tally that's even in my mind. My thought is that these two teams, both winners in 5 precipice games so far (if you include making the playoffs) aren't here to make up numbers.

Though I'd love to relish a Canadiens victory over a weekend off from hockey watching duties in a couple of weeks, both teams behaviours so far point to a pitched battle.


On a final note, I'd like to offer a word to the know-it-alls who grace the panel TV shows. The idea that this series is all for naught, and that SJ and Chicago are playing for the Cup starting this week is insulting. It's insulting to the players, as it is to we who watch. While it's true that both Montreal and Philly will both be underdogs because of points accumulated, the reporters would do well to remember that both Eastern outfits were among their precious predictions for Cup glory merely 18 months ago. Some picked Philly this fall.

I have learned a valuable lesson about the playoffs again this year from a certain Hal Gill. The lesson is that the regular season might as well be filed under completely irrelevant come May. The players who succeed in piling up wins in winter months are not the same players who make up series winners necessarily. Those same reporters, currently falling over in adoration of Toews and Thornton shouldn't forget this either.

Champions have to be made somewhere. 7 and 8 may be meeting for the Prince of Wales trophy, but it was not from luck alone, nor does previous luck determine future outcomes. Making the Stanley Cup final will be a formidable achievement for one of these teams. Don't think either would be satisfied at that.


Go Habs Go.

Canada V. Russia

18 years ago, Sidney Crosby was probably just getting washed up for another day at nursery school – it was the eve of the Canada:Russia (CIS) Olympic Hockey final in Albertville, France.

At the other end of the scale, Sergei Fedorov was parlaying an excellent rookie campaign into an 86-point season with a resurgent Wings team. Alex Kovalev, important figure last time around, he was on the ice in France. Fresh off a WJC gold medal in the same year, the young phenom played all 8 games and chipped in a goal as Russia beat Lindros' (and Juneau's) Canada.

The last time they faced each other on Olympic ice, the scene was Torino, Italy. Kovalev sealed Canada's fate this time, with a PP marker in a tight 2-0 victory in the QF.


Experience in one-game knockouts key

You just cannot buy this experience, and no amount of Ovechkins, Duncan Keiths, or Mike Richards can change that.

As we will another Crosby:Ovechkin showdown for the TV producers, it may well be that this game turns on what some of the more seasoned veterans do. Niedermayer and Pronger have been facing Kovalev and Fedorov since before lockout was a dirty word.

Many seem to be quick to dismiss the old guard after a result went the wrong way for Canada – as Brodeur, Pronger and Niedermayer must make way for Luongo, Doughty and Keith in the minds of the columnists. But I wonder. Calling on those gold medal memories, whether they be from 1992 or 2002, may just be the deciding factor in the end.

Fedorov is one of the granfathers of one-game knockout experience in this tournament. This is his 3rd Olympics, he has played for Russia more than 10 times (and may have played more often if called upon). While he's not the game-changer he once was, Fedorov may just have a trick or two left up his sleeve for tonight's spectacle. Canada would be silly to forget that. They'd do well to remember their own grisled vets.


Canada and Russia beware

A final lesson is this. In 2006, the round robin set the stage for a Canada:Russia early showdown for supremacy. In 2006, it was met with the same hoopla and hype. Neither Canadians, nor Russians need reminding that in 2006 it was Sweden and Finland who contested the Gold and neither team wore any medals on the planes home.

While this game is interesting and exciting, it is no more than a playoff clincher, an April game. There are no spoils other than a further game from here, there are no guarantees. And as the two great rivals prepare to battle to the death, I can tell you there are a few Finns, Swedes and Americans thinking just the same.


Here are some trips down memory lane for those who don't remember last time:

BBC: Russia see off champions Canada

Playing The System GMs That Are Ahead Of The Curve

Every time you hear that Saku Koivu is gone because he couldn't fit under the cap, think again.

Koivu, by virtue of celebrating his 35th birthday this November and not earlier was eligible to sign one of those brain-bustingly long salaries that could have been averaged out to a minimal cap hit.

You know the ones that Detroit and Scotty Bowman's Blackhawks are handing out?


Now, I fully believe that Gainey wanted the space on the team and not the space in the balance book when he waved goodbye to Saku, but what about some of his other signings? Where was the creativity when he signed up 30-year old Brian Gionta to a financially tying $5 million cap hit for the next 5 years?

It got me thinking about the better GMs in the NHL and what they have been doing to show up their slower peers.


The long contract

This summer has seen the advent of the extended contract beyond the age of 40 years old.

The idea behind the long contract has been a round a while now. The Islanders broke the ice with a 15-year deal to Rick DiPietro back in 2006. The Flyers gave out a few, most notably to Mike Richards.

But it was not until the Red Wings came along and signed Henrik Zetterberg that the manipulation of numbers really came into effect.

The DiPietro deal, you see was the same salary for every year of the contract. At the time, one could argue that it was an overpay for the player, an argument that only seems to take on more credence as time goes by. It was in effect, just a really bad long contract.

Ditto the Mike Richards deal. The Flyers handed out the deal to a 22-year old who'd had one decent year earlier in his breakout season. They ended up paying him a wad more than they could have been for the past year and by virtue of his age, the benefit of retirement is unlikely to help them. It opened the door for a trade later in the contract, but Holmgren just didn't have the same grasp on the possibilities as his sleeker peers. After all, a two-way forward like Mike Richards (if he's all we have to hear is from Flyers fans) will not be an untradeable asset by the age of 34. If he is, who would take on the $5.75 million cap hit anyway? Only teams covering the minimum...

The Zetterberg deal was different. It used term to reduce the average to a superstar player. Henrik will be paid a worthy salary of $7+ million for the next 9 seasons, then when he turns 37, he'll drop to half with 2 seasons at $1 million for the flourish. The drastic drop means the Wings pay the player over $7 million, but at a $6 million cap hit. Should he do the Forsberg and opt for cruising the Stockholm archipelago by his late 30s, the Wings have a minor cap coup and Zetterberg gets most of his money.

Always a team to push limits, the Wings went further with their next extension. Johan Franzen is tied to the team until the age of 39 as well, but at a bargain price just under $4 million a year on the cap. He will of course be paid well over $5 million a season (like Gionta) until his late 30s, but then opens the window to Scandinavian motor-boating with 4 final seasons where he'd only be collecting $7 million in all.


The Red Wings have set a revolution in place in this regard, but leave it to the master (and Holland's teacher) to show everyone that it can be done even better than that. The Marian Hossa contract is that masterpiece. In designing a contract that pays Hossa $3.5 million over the last 4 seasons, they were able to secure a $7.5 million dollar player at 2/3 the cap hit. Not only that, he stole Hossa from under the Wings' very noses.

While heralded in some quarters as madness, the reality is closer to genius. As this Ottawa Citizen article stated a few weeks ago:

"The unspoken reality. GMs expect players to retire before those contracts are actually fulfilled -- but that seven- or 12-year term brings the average of the contract down to a very manageable level."

Retirement is the key, and right now the possibilities to push this kind of salary are almost limitless. One blogger asks why stop at 12, 15 years; why not 30 years?

And he's right for asking, because although there are limits on contracts offered to players over the age of 35, there's no current limit as to the number of years a player of age 22 (like Carey Price for example) could be signed for. 30 seems ridiculous, but really why stop there?


Loophole will be closed

Upstanding NHL citizen, rarely jealous, spiteful or arrogant, Brian Burke is upset about the lack of fair play. And, he, along with other slowpokes, will probably see the loophole closed so that they can continue to get to grips with 1-year deals.

Funny how some loopholes seem more despicable than others to ole Brian.

Incidentally, as a Habs fan, I want this loophole closed and fast. It hardly seems fair that we be the only team still paying what the cap hit says to players whose performance is far from guaranteed. I think it's only fair that other teams, no matter how good their GMs should also be held to terrible contracts instead of being able to wriggle out, just because they are better at their jobs than their rivals.



"You're not thinking 4th dimensionally"

Gainey it seems is not in the same plane as his mosre successful rivals, at least not as a devious pursuer of vitory at all costs. After all, in addition to adding one of the worst value contracts in the whole league to his roster, he also gave out two of the most questionable deals of the summer to Cammalleri and Gionta.

I think he's failed us in this regard, he's not near the head of the class. And, just as Doc Brown scolded Marty for being such a simpleton (even after 2.5 movies worth of time travelling), I could see better GMs scolding Gainey for his summer:

Bob: "But I don't want Gionta for 22 years, I only want him for 5."

Doc Bowman: "Sign him for 22 years with every year after 40 at current league minimum. If he retires, you don't pay him."

Bob: "Still, that's almost 5 years of Gionta that I don't want."

Doc Bowman: "Bob, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally. Have you ever made a trade? Have you ever thought about how to become the best GM? Cap hits are important. By averaging salary over more time, you can reduce the cap hit for a future suitor. You make an untradeable asset tradeable, even within your ridiculous $5 million per year period..."


The man who tries so hard

Speaking of rivals, it's hard not to chuckle at poor Paul Holmgren who tries his very best to keep up with the Detroits and Chicagos of the world.

It started with Richards, whose contract we deem just expensive and unnecessarily unbalanced. It got even more comical with Briere and then Timonen. But this summer he really took the cake.

Taking his inspiration from Franzen and Hossa, Holmgren promptly signed newly acquired Chris Pronger to a long-term deal, well past the date where he'd be on the team. He even overpaid in a trade for the privilege.

At first glance what he did was OK. He signed a 34-year old defenceman to several years, the final ones (which he hopefully wouldn't play) at league minimum. What Paul didn't grasp was this – Chris Pronger had a contract already. His next contract will come into force next summer (and here's the tragedy) after he turn 35. If there was any doubt, it was cast aside when the league said that's how it would treat the deal.

Oops.

While trying to put together one of the best contracts in history, he has unwittingly added another chapter to the comedy of errors in the Flyers organization post-lockout. If Pronger retires instead of playing for $500 K, Holmgren's successor will be taking a $5 million cap hit for an empty locker – which would probably be up there for worst NHL contract ever. All's not lost though, he could force Pronger to play as he slows down and just have a really slow and ineffective defender for the very same cap hit.


Maybe Gainey missed saving a few million on Gionta, but at least he didn't Holmgren his team into a hole. Oh, it'll be fun to play those 2014-15 Flyers...

Hart Trophy Follow-up: Offense vs. Defense

It seems like fans have spoken - some on this site, some elsewhere. If the Habs were to have a legitimate shot at the Hart trophy, our best chance would fall to Kovalev.

Despite mine and Tobalev's arguments for Andrei Markov, it seems that history, at least, would be on their side not ours.

If you put aside Bobby Orr who was outscoring all the forwards anyway, it seems giving this trophy to a defenseman went out of style before the end of World War II, about 65 years ago. Other than "Number 4", Chris Pronger is the only defenseman to win the trophy over that period. Interestingly, if you look back to 1999-2000, the scoring was down and the top scorers were either on teams having a mediocre seasons (Jagr, Selanne, Kariya) or probably a little further than the league would want to go (Pavel Bure, Mark Recchi).


I think one thing is relatively clear: Hart trophy voters in general love scorers.

This is probably because it fits better with the image the league wants to put out: a high-flying, fast-paced game with exciting goalscoring galore. This is all well and good, but most hockey fans at least recognise, if not endorse, the idea that a good defenseman is not only valuable, but invaluable for a team to move forward and succeed.

In fact, no one other than Dominik Hasek (who was a human highlight reel and league advertisement on his own) has been able to beat a forward who has more than 100 points. With Ovechkin very close already and blowing the league away with goalscoring, he looks to be a trophy frontrunner. Malkin is there too, with close to 100 points himself, but on a team that threatens to play past April.

Considering defensemen log the most minutes, often direct the PP and the PK, start the majority of plays and (the best ones) score relatively well, it is puzzling to see them get so little recognition.

Take only the example of Niklas Lidstrom. He now has first right of refusal to the Norris trophy, it seems. Detroit, a perennial regular season giant would always seem to be a place to look to find a Hart trophy winner. Alas, Lidstrom has no Hart trophies. Perhaps this is the year to finally honour the man many would put forward as the MVP of the past decade. In retrospect, it looks like the league missed its golden opportunity when a flight of fancy gave the trophy to a goaltender who dragged his team into the playoffs while Lidstrom led his team to top of the table, 15 points clear of any other team, 28 points clear of Theodore's bunch, and ultimately to a Stanley Cup.


In keeping with my thinking on Markov, I think Lidstrom must win the trophy. He leads all D in scoring (again) and leads the league in +/- with an incredible +39 (not rare for him either). What's more, his team is once again the class of the league, as in 2002.

Would you Kovalev supporters get behind a Lidstrom for Hart push, or are you Ovechkin or Malkin folk, through and through?


Around the league this story repeats itself over and over. Look at a successful team and most of the time you will find a successful forward and a successful D or G. For me, I look at the sucess and many defenseman led teams:

Anaheim: Niedermayr more so than Getzlaf
Dallas: Zubov more so than Ribeiro
Detroit: Lidstrom more so than Datsyuk
Montreal: Markov more so than Kovalev

And a number of goalie led ones:

New Jersey: Brodeur more so than Parise
San Jose: Nabokov more so than Thornton
Boston: Thomas more so than Savard
New York: Lundqvist more so than Jagr

There are of course many "team" teams and those led by superstar forwards like Pittsburgh and Ottawa, but I don't look much further than Detroit, Dallas, Anaheim and think we would be in the right company...

Up the defensemen! Go Habs Go.