The Habs are 2-1, not 22-10.
If you want to hold Therrien's corontation. Stop.
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Friday, January 25, 2013
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
Pleased As Punch With Bergevin
The overwhelming feeling I am getting from the Canadiens media these last few days is that they are a happy bunch. And why not?
To understand how pleased they must be, it bears reflecting on where they were just a year ago.
With Gauthier in charge and Jacques Martin installed as coach, the world of soundbytes and stories was getting to be hard work. Gauthier a man who rarely had a press conference, and when he did said nothing of substance, and Martin genuine in his plainness, just honestly taking everything in stride and wondering what the fuss was about.
I sincerely believe that that constituted a moment of panic for the gigantic media machine that has assembled itself to live parasitically off the Canadiens. Without the fruits of preferred access, without privelege of any extra information, what was there to be to continue to define the professional media with the amateur pundit?
With all access pass provided by full broadcast of every game and tightened communication strategies limiting all expression from top to bottom, the distinction was to stay at time and the salary commanded.
If the Gauthier way had time to fully establish itself as the way forward, one would have to guess that higher ups at media outlets would resort with the Canadiens press to many of the same measures they have implemented for the reporting of all other news -- syndication with copy and pastes.
I think we understood just how real this fight was for the media and just how dire they believed their own circumstances to be when the Markov affair unfolded last fall. Not many paid to provide elaborate coverage was able to scoop Gauthier on the status of the best player in town. They reacted as if they had been duped. Really they had been made obsolete for an instant. If the media genuinely knew nothing of Markov, then why would we defer to their opinions instead of the hordes of willing and even fresh-viewed amateurs who go about their coverage with more joy and reckless abandon.
The Gauthier removal was the blessing they craved, and I wonder whether or not they had their say. The Canadiens, you see, are not so far removed from the media machine that they feed, they certainly enjoy the reach and notoriety it can give the team. A paid crew will still write reviews on a season laid dead months before. Publicity that would not be guaranteed from amateurs fatigued with the thought of hockey in bleu, blanc, rouge.
And their relief was further enhanced by the hiring of Marc Bergevin. Never mind that he speaks French for a minute (although that certainly is important). The fact he is a personable character who seems to have no qualm with open policy is much more valuable to the machine. Today I read Bertrand Raymond's opinion on the matter and it reads like a Hallelujah. He even retreads every former GM he has known, praising those who enhanced his life and slagging those who did not. It's telling that Andre Savard comes out with a shinier review than Sam Pollock. The vilification of Gainey and Gauthier is a contrast to the apology he offers for the affable Rejean Houle.
So understand then that the media has more than one agenda here, or so it seems to me. I say understand, to you knowledgeable folks I should say don't forget. Bergevin will ultimately be judged for the hockey he manages to coax from a team he puts together, but that judgment is a way off. Until such time, it seems he will be cast in rays of appreciation just for smiling, talking and letting the media back in. I would think that the media being as pleased as punch with man in a year should not determine how each fan feels about the situation. Just my observations.
On the coach
I guess now Marc is in his chair, the attention of the organization and the speculation moves firmly to the position of head coach.
It's an interesting decision, and I hope to offer more comment in a full reflection on the topic.
I do have some preliminary questions/concerns:
What are the criteria really going to be?
I ask because M. Raymond rambled briefly on how HNIC misunderstands Quebec when they might suggest someone like Quenneville. His line: "Heureusement, le nom de Quenneville vient de s'effacer de lui-même" is a troubling stance for a fan who wants the best candiate available. Especially when it is followed by discussion on the glory years of Savard-Therrien.
I understand the importance of language as a factor in the decision, but funnily I look at the Cunneyworth episode from a different lens than many. Most fans weren't in constant uproar over Cunneyworth (well not until they realised he would lose more than Martin). The fanbase was surprisingly accepting, I thought, actually.
I all factors should be weighed in a balance. With the GM, I feel comfortable this was carried out. Bergevin won out because he was a serious candidate. He happens to be from Montreal, and this definitely weighed in, but it doesn't stand out as his main quality.
A candidate like Michel Therrien for me is a non-starter, and I'mappalled to see his name in the mix. Yes he did pretty well with the Penguins, but he has certainly been outdone by a fair margin by the newcomer Bylsma, and most of the time without the same arsenal. He was not in my estimation part of some golden age with the Habs, but part of a dark age, and I surely recall rejoicing at his departure more than any other. Would he be on a list that did not start with language? Not one you'd be happy to not have to include Quenneville on.
Anyway, enjoy the Flyerless playoffs and catch up soon.
To understand how pleased they must be, it bears reflecting on where they were just a year ago.
With Gauthier in charge and Jacques Martin installed as coach, the world of soundbytes and stories was getting to be hard work. Gauthier a man who rarely had a press conference, and when he did said nothing of substance, and Martin genuine in his plainness, just honestly taking everything in stride and wondering what the fuss was about.
I sincerely believe that that constituted a moment of panic for the gigantic media machine that has assembled itself to live parasitically off the Canadiens. Without the fruits of preferred access, without privelege of any extra information, what was there to be to continue to define the professional media with the amateur pundit?
With all access pass provided by full broadcast of every game and tightened communication strategies limiting all expression from top to bottom, the distinction was to stay at time and the salary commanded.
If the Gauthier way had time to fully establish itself as the way forward, one would have to guess that higher ups at media outlets would resort with the Canadiens press to many of the same measures they have implemented for the reporting of all other news -- syndication with copy and pastes.
I think we understood just how real this fight was for the media and just how dire they believed their own circumstances to be when the Markov affair unfolded last fall. Not many paid to provide elaborate coverage was able to scoop Gauthier on the status of the best player in town. They reacted as if they had been duped. Really they had been made obsolete for an instant. If the media genuinely knew nothing of Markov, then why would we defer to their opinions instead of the hordes of willing and even fresh-viewed amateurs who go about their coverage with more joy and reckless abandon.
The Gauthier removal was the blessing they craved, and I wonder whether or not they had their say. The Canadiens, you see, are not so far removed from the media machine that they feed, they certainly enjoy the reach and notoriety it can give the team. A paid crew will still write reviews on a season laid dead months before. Publicity that would not be guaranteed from amateurs fatigued with the thought of hockey in bleu, blanc, rouge.
And their relief was further enhanced by the hiring of Marc Bergevin. Never mind that he speaks French for a minute (although that certainly is important). The fact he is a personable character who seems to have no qualm with open policy is much more valuable to the machine. Today I read Bertrand Raymond's opinion on the matter and it reads like a Hallelujah. He even retreads every former GM he has known, praising those who enhanced his life and slagging those who did not. It's telling that Andre Savard comes out with a shinier review than Sam Pollock. The vilification of Gainey and Gauthier is a contrast to the apology he offers for the affable Rejean Houle.
So understand then that the media has more than one agenda here, or so it seems to me. I say understand, to you knowledgeable folks I should say don't forget. Bergevin will ultimately be judged for the hockey he manages to coax from a team he puts together, but that judgment is a way off. Until such time, it seems he will be cast in rays of appreciation just for smiling, talking and letting the media back in. I would think that the media being as pleased as punch with man in a year should not determine how each fan feels about the situation. Just my observations.
On the coach
I guess now Marc is in his chair, the attention of the organization and the speculation moves firmly to the position of head coach.
It's an interesting decision, and I hope to offer more comment in a full reflection on the topic.
I do have some preliminary questions/concerns:
What are the criteria really going to be?
I ask because M. Raymond rambled briefly on how HNIC misunderstands Quebec when they might suggest someone like Quenneville. His line: "Heureusement, le nom de Quenneville vient de s'effacer de lui-même" is a troubling stance for a fan who wants the best candiate available. Especially when it is followed by discussion on the glory years of Savard-Therrien.
I understand the importance of language as a factor in the decision, but funnily I look at the Cunneyworth episode from a different lens than many. Most fans weren't in constant uproar over Cunneyworth (well not until they realised he would lose more than Martin). The fanbase was surprisingly accepting, I thought, actually.
I all factors should be weighed in a balance. With the GM, I feel comfortable this was carried out. Bergevin won out because he was a serious candidate. He happens to be from Montreal, and this definitely weighed in, but it doesn't stand out as his main quality.
A candidate like Michel Therrien for me is a non-starter, and I'mappalled to see his name in the mix. Yes he did pretty well with the Penguins, but he has certainly been outdone by a fair margin by the newcomer Bylsma, and most of the time without the same arsenal. He was not in my estimation part of some golden age with the Habs, but part of a dark age, and I surely recall rejoicing at his departure more than any other. Would he be on a list that did not start with language? Not one you'd be happy to not have to include Quenneville on.
Anyway, enjoy the Flyerless playoffs and catch up soon.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
The Problem With Us
Now that Cammalleri is gone without filling Habs fans appetite for complaining, we have turned our attentions elsewhere.
The unfortunate recipient of the majority of our attentions of late has been PK Subban.
I actually wrote what I thought was a nice piece on why Subban should be suspended but not traded yesterday. Alas, it was lost when I idiotically pressed backspace to set my browser back a page. For some reason it wasn't autosaved at all. Anyway, the gist was he made a dirty hit (at least one) near the boards that was penalized but not harshly enough for my liking. But that this by no means affects his standing as a core member of the team going forward in my eyes. I think I actually noted he was THE core member.
So I wrote it, but you've read the same elsewhere. Let's move on.
Once again my fascination with the team and its players is matched by my fascination with those of us who follow. Incidentally, it was PK who brought this to the fore, this time with a quote:
Fascinating quote really. It cuts as sharply to the bone as one of his sharp defensive end turns (which incidentally I can't perform myself, as Tobalev will attest).
Subban is right you know. Coaches do yell at players all the time. My coaches often yelled at me, shunned me, scowled. Of course they also praised, explained and coached. But this isn't a treatise on coaching methods. It's about observers of that.
What about a coach yelling at a player is newsworthy?
In Subban's mind, the answer is nothing at all. But that's not how the Montreal media work. Subban is part of a running story line right now and this fits into that very nicely. The story goes that the coaches are unhappy with Subban and that his place on a pedestal (again assumed) is no longer available to him. Indeed, from that we must extrapolate that his place on the team is no longer safe. For some more sensational yarnspinners, he's being offered actively around the league.
Subban of course is right. To the coach, this is not news. To the player this is not news. It could only constitute news to those unfamiliar with the workings of a hockey team. Or perhaps those that need pieces to fit a budding narrative.
I liked how he handled the microphones here. Even if he was misquoted by typo "And he doesn’t for the veterans too".
Us vs. them
The other fascinating things about Subban's quote is the way it opens: "I have a great relationship with Randy and I’d hate for you guys to ruin that..."
What did the receivers of this quote think Subban meant by ruining it? Perhaps they might have thought he meant publishing stories about being yelled at in practice? That seems to be in keeping with the rest of his thought.
So precisely what he hoped might not happen is what indeed did happen. This story is on every outlet. Including (and this is important) this one.
Important. I have been reading it. You have been reading it. I just wrote about it and you are reading about it again now. When Subban said "you guys" we shouldn't feel exempt from the statement the way Pat Hickey obviously feels himself exempt from being tarred with the media brush.
We, bloggers, readers, media, fans. We are all part of this ridiculous machine that takes power from its own momentum. It is fascinating and fun to watch and comment on. But you know what? It's nowhere near as fun as a playoff win, or a graduation from from a playoff round.
I think it's high time we take a serious look in the mirror here. While it's fun for armchair GMs to contemplate their power over a team, we must admit that on all evidence the power we wield is mostly disruptive. A positve report on a player or a surprise inclusion in a dome is not news, but a player missing a practice, a bit of hard coaching is.
In reality, the Canadiens and PK wouldn't seek a separation unless there was a real problem lurking under the surface. But real problems might have been patched before, whereas as now under the constant watch of twitter, there's little room to breathe let alone let off the necessary amounts of steam.
If we are putting the team in a position of weakness, we only hurt our own hopes. If we are brining scorn on the city by lapping up this common, yet widely unreported, BS, then we deserve the reputation we are breeding.
Good on PK for putting it so eloquently. He may yet coach us to the slick hockey savvy population we hold as image for ourselves.
The unfortunate recipient of the majority of our attentions of late has been PK Subban.
I actually wrote what I thought was a nice piece on why Subban should be suspended but not traded yesterday. Alas, it was lost when I idiotically pressed backspace to set my browser back a page. For some reason it wasn't autosaved at all. Anyway, the gist was he made a dirty hit (at least one) near the boards that was penalized but not harshly enough for my liking. But that this by no means affects his standing as a core member of the team going forward in my eyes. I think I actually noted he was THE core member.
So I wrote it, but you've read the same elsewhere. Let's move on.
Once again my fascination with the team and its players is matched by my fascination with those of us who follow. Incidentally, it was PK who brought this to the fore, this time with a quote:
“I have a great relationship with Randy and I’d hate for you guys to ruin that,” Subban said “I’m a young guy and I need to be coached and that’s what he’s doing. Coaches and players are never going to agree on all things but at the end of the day, I’m 22 years old and so it doesn’t matter what I think. He’s the coach.
“You can’t be messing up drills,” Subban said of the incident Tuesday. “One of the drills I screwed up and he let me know about it. That’s a part of the game. I don’t think that’s a big deal.
“He’s going to tear a strip off me again this year, maybe a couple of times, but if we’re going to make a deal out of it every time, that’s not beneficial to our team,” added Subban. ‘I’m not the only young guy here. He does it for the other young guys. And he doesn’t for the veterans too.”
Fascinating quote really. It cuts as sharply to the bone as one of his sharp defensive end turns (which incidentally I can't perform myself, as Tobalev will attest).
Subban is right you know. Coaches do yell at players all the time. My coaches often yelled at me, shunned me, scowled. Of course they also praised, explained and coached. But this isn't a treatise on coaching methods. It's about observers of that.
What about a coach yelling at a player is newsworthy?
In Subban's mind, the answer is nothing at all. But that's not how the Montreal media work. Subban is part of a running story line right now and this fits into that very nicely. The story goes that the coaches are unhappy with Subban and that his place on a pedestal (again assumed) is no longer available to him. Indeed, from that we must extrapolate that his place on the team is no longer safe. For some more sensational yarnspinners, he's being offered actively around the league.
Subban of course is right. To the coach, this is not news. To the player this is not news. It could only constitute news to those unfamiliar with the workings of a hockey team. Or perhaps those that need pieces to fit a budding narrative.
I liked how he handled the microphones here. Even if he was misquoted by typo "And he doesn’t for the veterans too".
Us vs. them
The other fascinating things about Subban's quote is the way it opens: "I have a great relationship with Randy and I’d hate for you guys to ruin that..."
What did the receivers of this quote think Subban meant by ruining it? Perhaps they might have thought he meant publishing stories about being yelled at in practice? That seems to be in keeping with the rest of his thought.
So precisely what he hoped might not happen is what indeed did happen. This story is on every outlet. Including (and this is important) this one.
Important. I have been reading it. You have been reading it. I just wrote about it and you are reading about it again now. When Subban said "you guys" we shouldn't feel exempt from the statement the way Pat Hickey obviously feels himself exempt from being tarred with the media brush.
We, bloggers, readers, media, fans. We are all part of this ridiculous machine that takes power from its own momentum. It is fascinating and fun to watch and comment on. But you know what? It's nowhere near as fun as a playoff win, or a graduation from from a playoff round.
I think it's high time we take a serious look in the mirror here. While it's fun for armchair GMs to contemplate their power over a team, we must admit that on all evidence the power we wield is mostly disruptive. A positve report on a player or a surprise inclusion in a dome is not news, but a player missing a practice, a bit of hard coaching is.
In reality, the Canadiens and PK wouldn't seek a separation unless there was a real problem lurking under the surface. But real problems might have been patched before, whereas as now under the constant watch of twitter, there's little room to breathe let alone let off the necessary amounts of steam.
If we are putting the team in a position of weakness, we only hurt our own hopes. If we are brining scorn on the city by lapping up this common, yet widely unreported, BS, then we deserve the reputation we are breeding.
Good on PK for putting it so eloquently. He may yet coach us to the slick hockey savvy population we hold as image for ourselves.
Monday, December 05, 2011
The Media and Their Gauthier
If you were following the Habs last week, the superficial story was of 1 win and two losses and a lot of trouble scoring at times.
The "background" story of the week was the status of Andrei Markov. He went from near return to further surgery and had peoples' faith in the Canadiens following his shadow.
Still deeper was the "story" that many a journalist was trying to spin: that the Canadiens organization and its public relations mask were failing the team's followers. This today within an article on Markov by Dave Stubbs:
I responded last week to blogger JT for a comment along the same lines. I am not as convinced as many that the Habs are doing "a disservice both to their fans and to themselves" by not sharing information. The telling omission, I think, is "the media" which should fit right between "their fans" and "themselves", as the real disservice is probably felt most fully (if it's felt by the other two parties at all) by them.
The way we used to get our Habs news was very much through this organizationally-led method. We could watch a game on TV, but to know more, or to partake in a little bit of analysis and discussion we had the choice of radio, vignette show or newspaper.
While Stubbs is right that Habs news is tweezered by three groups, what he is referring to here is almost exclusively this old-fashioned type of news. The questions whose answeres can still be guarded by the organizations.
I wonder if anything has changed at all in this regard. After all, when the Gazette ran a newspaper and put out two stories a day on the Canadiens (one in four invariably being the precis of the events), the Markov shaped hole was simply filled by a story on Louis Leblanc and no one knew better, or at least no one could reply or inquire in real time about the issue on the collective mind.
The media in slagging off Gauthier seems to me to be protesting the lack of material offered as it relates to the expected rate of output expected, no demanded, by this new model of information distribution and consumption characterised by websites just like HI/O.
While Gauthier being more forthcoming would be nice (its hard to be too warm about standoffish personalities), I don't think that the media would ultimately have their needs filled in this way.
What I see apart from information gatherers on the internet (and the enduring myth propagated by snobs that commenters are infants) is that one-time consumers of information have become information generators. A game like hockey, with events by the split second generates its own news if you look. We now have dozens of websites looking at almost every piece of data gathered by the NHL themselves. In addition, several really good efforts are being made by fans to explain previously unexplained aspects of the game.
The uber-consumers of hockey information mostly just want to talk hockey, argue hockey. I know because I'm one.
I can be equally occupied by the discussion of Markov coming back or the analysis that Kostitsyn is hurting the team, and any number of imagined storylines. This sometimes seems lost on some. If all the minutes in between games can't be filled with the "wonderful" audio clips from Brossard skates, innovation may be required. Innovation would lead to a different level of coverage, one that might not depend so parasitically on arranged press conferences; cutting and pasting newspaper content online is not innovation, complaining about how the organization is not providing anything to write about after three games in four days is not innovation.
The Markov case and the ensuing criticism of Gauthier has been telling. In the choice between analysis and paralysis, the latter was favoured. And to top it off, stories about paralysis are forwarded to feed an appetite for hockey.
The recurring trend is beginning to sound a dull knell from across the icy fields.
The "background" story of the week was the status of Andrei Markov. He went from near return to further surgery and had peoples' faith in the Canadiens following his shadow.
Still deeper was the "story" that many a journalist was trying to spin: that the Canadiens organization and its public relations mask were failing the team's followers. This today within an article on Markov by Dave Stubbs:
Today’s Canadiens choose to distribute information not in a pail or even a glass but in a thimble, a disservice both to their fans and to themselves. This by-the-drop policy is written in seventh-floor Bell Centre executive suites, the club’s need-to-know approach mostly a you-don’t-need-to-know.
So Habs news isn’t now so much harvested as it is tweezered by three groups: the mainstream media; the keen observers on the Internet, some of whom have good insight and even solid sources; and the cyberspace experts who dispense the real truth – and how shocking it is! – until their moms call them for supper.
I responded last week to blogger JT for a comment along the same lines. I am not as convinced as many that the Habs are doing "a disservice both to their fans and to themselves" by not sharing information. The telling omission, I think, is "the media" which should fit right between "their fans" and "themselves", as the real disservice is probably felt most fully (if it's felt by the other two parties at all) by them.
The way we used to get our Habs news was very much through this organizationally-led method. We could watch a game on TV, but to know more, or to partake in a little bit of analysis and discussion we had the choice of radio, vignette show or newspaper.
While Stubbs is right that Habs news is tweezered by three groups, what he is referring to here is almost exclusively this old-fashioned type of news. The questions whose answeres can still be guarded by the organizations.
I wonder if anything has changed at all in this regard. After all, when the Gazette ran a newspaper and put out two stories a day on the Canadiens (one in four invariably being the precis of the events), the Markov shaped hole was simply filled by a story on Louis Leblanc and no one knew better, or at least no one could reply or inquire in real time about the issue on the collective mind.
The media in slagging off Gauthier seems to me to be protesting the lack of material offered as it relates to the expected rate of output expected, no demanded, by this new model of information distribution and consumption characterised by websites just like HI/O.
While Gauthier being more forthcoming would be nice (its hard to be too warm about standoffish personalities), I don't think that the media would ultimately have their needs filled in this way.
What I see apart from information gatherers on the internet (and the enduring myth propagated by snobs that commenters are infants) is that one-time consumers of information have become information generators. A game like hockey, with events by the split second generates its own news if you look. We now have dozens of websites looking at almost every piece of data gathered by the NHL themselves. In addition, several really good efforts are being made by fans to explain previously unexplained aspects of the game.
The uber-consumers of hockey information mostly just want to talk hockey, argue hockey. I know because I'm one.
I can be equally occupied by the discussion of Markov coming back or the analysis that Kostitsyn is hurting the team, and any number of imagined storylines. This sometimes seems lost on some. If all the minutes in between games can't be filled with the "wonderful" audio clips from Brossard skates, innovation may be required. Innovation would lead to a different level of coverage, one that might not depend so parasitically on arranged press conferences; cutting and pasting newspaper content online is not innovation, complaining about how the organization is not providing anything to write about after three games in four days is not innovation.
The Markov case and the ensuing criticism of Gauthier has been telling. In the choice between analysis and paralysis, the latter was favoured. And to top it off, stories about paralysis are forwarded to feed an appetite for hockey.
The recurring trend is beginning to sound a dull knell from across the icy fields.
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Lion of November
The Real Player of the Month
It's not been officially announced yet, but when they get the chance the Canadiens will announce they are giving to the Molson Cup for November to guess who? Who else?
The fan vote actually kept it close this time with 14 star points for Price over Gionta and Cole (with 13 and 12 respectively). If it were up to the media, Price won this outright with 23 star points on 7 selections, his next nearest media darlings Cole and Pacioretty with 8 each. Gionta? The media star selectors didn't like his month much.
We've been over how this is geared to goalies, especially those that play 60 minutes of all but 3 games in a month. It's almost a win he's in mentality for the star selectors, fans or not.
As you know from recent posts, goalies can take no such thing for granted with us. We prefer to see what all systems cough up for candidates and decide from a short list.
So, there you have it: Lion of the Month.
Cole
From zero to hero, literally for Erik Cole this year. An absolute non-factor in training camp and the first several games of the season. Given how much of a factor he is game in, game out now it seems absurd to even think about that.
The flag goes up for Erik because over 14 November games, he managed to stand out enough to get 10 nods for the dome and 4 player of the game pucks. As forward performances go, this is outstanding. It shows he both stood out in wins and was providing good performances in losses.
Stats-wise, it's easy to dismiss his 5 goals and 5 assists off-hand. After all it's on a pace for 30 goals and 60 points (not exactly rampant for a good month). But a deeper look reveals little intricacies. 4 of his goals were first goals (so critical to Canadiens success) and another was a gamewinner.
He also drove play and good play for much of the month. He was on the ice for a team high 101 scoring chances, 71 of which were on net (not misses). He seemed the main engine of that in fact, with an impressive 32 scoring chances of his own over the month. This is made more impressive by the fact that his line was doing so much attacking they had relatively little defending to do, 56 scoring chances against, 41 on target. Shows that he worked for his excellent GF/60 (3.58) and GA/60 (1.79) ratings.
Not that it's the right time to highlight the PP (Anaheim looms large), but you should only have nightmares imagining where it would be without Cole. On for 4 PP goals, 2 of which were his own, he topped all in effectiveness by time but Kostitsyn who didn't really play this month anyway.
Price
It was very much a rebound month for Price. Coming from a 0.900 he could have followed his teammates into further mediocrity. He didn't.
Instead, he posted a great month where he was twice the NHL player of the week, grabbed 2 shutouts and gained loads of ground on the rest of the NHL goalies in the leaderboards. Overall for the month he was a cool 0.929 with a 1.97 GAA. As is often the case with the Habs, the goalie did not sync with the team, so the win-loss of 5-4-2 doesn't look great, but that shouldn't reflect on him.
Price also made an impression in the dome/puck standings. 10 domes from 11 starts (with the missed dome very much in dispute), he couldn't seem to have done much more. He also picked up 2 game pucks along the way making him the clear second by some margin in those standings.
Perhaps more outstanding than any other stat for Carey though is his 0.980 save percentage while shorthanded. Facing 49 PP shots, he turned a full 48 away. It's no cliche that that the goalie is the best penalty killer when you see numbers like that.
Lion of November: Carey Price
I'd say it's closer than the media had it, but in an up and down month a few star selections can really skew a picture that way. Even so, I have to say that both media and fans got it right in November. I am going to override the dome/puck scores this time and say Carey Price was the player of the month.
If you look back at November, the notable achievements were two shutout wins and incredible penalty killing efficiency. Carey Price had a huge hand in both. What's more, one could argue that without this kind of month from him, the team would have slipped into a position with no escape route. As it is they're in the thick of things due to the play of their goalie and a few others.
The fan vote actually kept it close this time with 14 star points for Price over Gionta and Cole (with 13 and 12 respectively). If it were up to the media, Price won this outright with 23 star points on 7 selections, his next nearest media darlings Cole and Pacioretty with 8 each. Gionta? The media star selectors didn't like his month much.
We've been over how this is geared to goalies, especially those that play 60 minutes of all but 3 games in a month. It's almost a win he's in mentality for the star selectors, fans or not.
As you know from recent posts, goalies can take no such thing for granted with us. We prefer to see what all systems cough up for candidates and decide from a short list.
So, there you have it: Lion of the Month.
Cole
From zero to hero, literally for Erik Cole this year. An absolute non-factor in training camp and the first several games of the season. Given how much of a factor he is game in, game out now it seems absurd to even think about that.
The flag goes up for Erik because over 14 November games, he managed to stand out enough to get 10 nods for the dome and 4 player of the game pucks. As forward performances go, this is outstanding. It shows he both stood out in wins and was providing good performances in losses.
Stats-wise, it's easy to dismiss his 5 goals and 5 assists off-hand. After all it's on a pace for 30 goals and 60 points (not exactly rampant for a good month). But a deeper look reveals little intricacies. 4 of his goals were first goals (so critical to Canadiens success) and another was a gamewinner.
He also drove play and good play for much of the month. He was on the ice for a team high 101 scoring chances, 71 of which were on net (not misses). He seemed the main engine of that in fact, with an impressive 32 scoring chances of his own over the month. This is made more impressive by the fact that his line was doing so much attacking they had relatively little defending to do, 56 scoring chances against, 41 on target. Shows that he worked for his excellent GF/60 (3.58) and GA/60 (1.79) ratings.
Not that it's the right time to highlight the PP (Anaheim looms large), but you should only have nightmares imagining where it would be without Cole. On for 4 PP goals, 2 of which were his own, he topped all in effectiveness by time but Kostitsyn who didn't really play this month anyway.
Price
It was very much a rebound month for Price. Coming from a 0.900 he could have followed his teammates into further mediocrity. He didn't.
Instead, he posted a great month where he was twice the NHL player of the week, grabbed 2 shutouts and gained loads of ground on the rest of the NHL goalies in the leaderboards. Overall for the month he was a cool 0.929 with a 1.97 GAA. As is often the case with the Habs, the goalie did not sync with the team, so the win-loss of 5-4-2 doesn't look great, but that shouldn't reflect on him.
Price also made an impression in the dome/puck standings. 10 domes from 11 starts (with the missed dome very much in dispute), he couldn't seem to have done much more. He also picked up 2 game pucks along the way making him the clear second by some margin in those standings.
Perhaps more outstanding than any other stat for Carey though is his 0.980 save percentage while shorthanded. Facing 49 PP shots, he turned a full 48 away. It's no cliche that that the goalie is the best penalty killer when you see numbers like that.
Lion of November: Carey Price
I'd say it's closer than the media had it, but in an up and down month a few star selections can really skew a picture that way. Even so, I have to say that both media and fans got it right in November. I am going to override the dome/puck scores this time and say Carey Price was the player of the month.
If you look back at November, the notable achievements were two shutout wins and incredible penalty killing efficiency. Carey Price had a huge hand in both. What's more, one could argue that without this kind of month from him, the team would have slipped into a position with no escape route. As it is they're in the thick of things due to the play of their goalie and a few others.
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Gotta Love Kovalev
Gauthier didn't answer our pleas, but true to form Alexei Kovalev pulled a boring summer out of the fire and made some news from thin air.
Well maybe more bitter air than thin air. Kovalev let loose in one of those wonderful tell all Russian media interviews that always surface (and then get denied) just when we need them.
As he is accustomed to doing with a puck on his stick, Kovalev cut through the defence and scored some direct hits on the Ottawa organization, defensive coaches and the media.
On the media:
On Cory Clouston:
On the way to coach:
It seems to me there are some hard truths in there:
1) Don't slam players if you are a media hotshot who is carting beer in your hand luggage. That shame is worth taking many name-calling interviews for.
2) Or don't slam those players who can invent such a believable rumour.
3) Cory Clouston was all over the map. Having your players fear you is one 3hing, having them draw a blank when challenged on team strategy is quite another.
4) Coaches who don't have the courtesy to talk to their players about their reasoning, especially those older than the coach with decades more experience on an ice sheet should be fired. it's bad man management, it's a bad plan from the start. You may remember a coach called Carbo.
Bruce Garricoh didn't take the news with grace:
You'd think Garrioch would get resounding "hear ye" for an article that lays one more slam on the mostly ineffective Senator from the local fans. Not so, the first sample of comments show that carting beer through x-ray detectors is a less sought after skill than stickhandling on the half boards:
You have to give it to Kovy. Yesterday, we were reading the umpteenth report on how Erik Cole will get Montreal 2 more ES goals this season. Today, we can pick between credibility of stories from Russia, coaching techniques and battle of wits for a news story. He really can strike at any time to create a thing of beauty from out of nothing.
Well maybe more bitter air than thin air. Kovalev let loose in one of those wonderful tell all Russian media interviews that always surface (and then get denied) just when we need them.
As he is accustomed to doing with a puck on his stick, Kovalev cut through the defence and scored some direct hits on the Ottawa organization, defensive coaches and the media.
On the media:
Sovetsky Sport: You have a reputation of showing up one night but disappearing the next. Is this a fair characterization?
Kovalev: One journalist wrote it when I was still playing in New York, and then it all started. There are such reporters, who don’t watch hockey, don’t understand it — but they will still say that Kovalev doesn’t give his all. That he plays whenever he wants. They are short on their own opinion.
Kovalev: There are different journalists. My opinion of Ottawa journalists is that they don’t watch hockey at all. When they fly with the team and go through the (metal detector) at an airport, their bags are filled with beer. You realize right away what these people do when they write about the NHL. Let them make up nonsense about me. But I am happy with what I have done.
On Cory Clouston:
Sovetsky Sport: Sergei Gonchar threw his hands in the air when I asked what style of game Ottawa plays. What do you say to that question?
Kovalev: In two seasons I still couldn’t understand the ideas of our coach Cory Clouston. It seemed that he scoffed at some players.
On the way to coach:
Kovalev: You have to treat players kindly. If you leave someone on the bench you should explain why it happened. This is coach’s job. But when a player is benched and doesn’t understand what is happening, he becomes lost.
It seems to me there are some hard truths in there:
1) Don't slam players if you are a media hotshot who is carting beer in your hand luggage. That shame is worth taking many name-calling interviews for.
2) Or don't slam those players who can invent such a believable rumour.
3) Cory Clouston was all over the map. Having your players fear you is one 3hing, having them draw a blank when challenged on team strategy is quite another.
4) Coaches who don't have the courtesy to talk to their players about their reasoning, especially those older than the coach with decades more experience on an ice sheet should be fired. it's bad man management, it's a bad plan from the start. You may remember a coach called Carbo.
Bruce Garricoh didn't take the news with grace:
Just like he did during his short, failed stint with the Senators, the selfish underachieving winger is blaming everybody but himself for why he’s out of the NHL and headed to the Kontinental Hockey League on a two-year deal.
You'd think Garrioch would get resounding "hear ye" for an article that lays one more slam on the mostly ineffective Senator from the local fans. Not so, the first sample of comments show that carting beer through x-ray detectors is a less sought after skill than stickhandling on the half boards:
Hmmm...lets compare credentials here, shall we?
Alex Kovalev: 1st Round Draft Pick in 1991. Outscored entire draft class of that year. Stanley Cup Champion. 1300+ games played. 400+ goals. 1000+ points.
Bruce Garrioch: Local hack. Fawns over popular home town players he doesn't want to lose favour with regardless of their play. Makes up quotes from fictional "league executives". May still live in mom's basement.
Yep, pretty clear to me where the sour grapes are emanating from....
You have to give it to Kovy. Yesterday, we were reading the umpteenth report on how Erik Cole will get Montreal 2 more ES goals this season. Today, we can pick between credibility of stories from Russia, coaching techniques and battle of wits for a news story. He really can strike at any time to create a thing of beauty from out of nothing.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Game Today on Hockey Night In Canada
The play that rocked the Habs happened Tuesday. Since that time many have had their chance to respond.
The Canadiens and Bruins responded in words and action that very night in the third period and following. The 24-hour sports reels let their opinions known. Canadiens management responded. The NHL did. Air Canada and yesterday Via.
But hockey's biggest vehicle and most important collection of voices has yet to have their full time on the soapbox.
Hockey Night in Canada goes to air just before the Canadiens face the Penguins today. They will show that game as well.
Usually I would watch this on RDS. But as someone interested in where the debate on the Max Pacioretty hit and its effect on future NHL violence will go, I think I'd better listen up to what the voices of the nation will tell the nation to think.
The blunt end of the argument is bound to be coming from Ex-Bruins collaborators Don Cherry and Mike Milbury. Cherry will be of particular interest. The man of a million crusades has made unnecessary hitting one of his longest crusades. Hitting that happens on icing plays, that is. It will be interesting to see if he is a man of principle or a man incapable of sequestering his allegiance and distaste for the parties involved. He has surprised before, so you never know.
More subtle, and probably more influential in the long run, are the views of the long-time hockey journalists. Those that can wrap their thoughts in a bit of eloquence. They will interview their handpicked opinions and they'll interview each other. Between all this we'll get a picture of the bloc of opinion that could actually move the NHL.
Ron MacLean will be central of course, as he is the ringmaster with hands in every spinning pie. He has actually given us a short preview of what he thinks. It's an interesting preview, with a few puzzling turns, such as:
I think, like me, many who care about this issue seriously are still not quite ready to dive headlong into worrying about backpasses gone wrong or blatantly missed scoring opportunities. The memory of events and the significance of the decisions ahead mean that thoughts are still whirling about on this.
I'll be watching the game with interest as always. But as much interest will be directed to the debate and discussion that will be happening in all available moments between plays.
Have a good Saturday. All the best to Pacioretty and family. Go Habs Go.
The Canadiens and Bruins responded in words and action that very night in the third period and following. The 24-hour sports reels let their opinions known. Canadiens management responded. The NHL did. Air Canada and yesterday Via.
But hockey's biggest vehicle and most important collection of voices has yet to have their full time on the soapbox.
Hockey Night in Canada goes to air just before the Canadiens face the Penguins today. They will show that game as well.
Usually I would watch this on RDS. But as someone interested in where the debate on the Max Pacioretty hit and its effect on future NHL violence will go, I think I'd better listen up to what the voices of the nation will tell the nation to think.
The blunt end of the argument is bound to be coming from Ex-Bruins collaborators Don Cherry and Mike Milbury. Cherry will be of particular interest. The man of a million crusades has made unnecessary hitting one of his longest crusades. Hitting that happens on icing plays, that is. It will be interesting to see if he is a man of principle or a man incapable of sequestering his allegiance and distaste for the parties involved. He has surprised before, so you never know.
More subtle, and probably more influential in the long run, are the views of the long-time hockey journalists. Those that can wrap their thoughts in a bit of eloquence. They will interview their handpicked opinions and they'll interview each other. Between all this we'll get a picture of the bloc of opinion that could actually move the NHL.
Ron MacLean will be central of course, as he is the ringmaster with hands in every spinning pie. He has actually given us a short preview of what he thinks. It's an interesting preview, with a few puzzling turns, such as:
"When I hear "Pacioretty could have ended up in a wheelchair," it makes me think we go too far teaching such fear. A wheelchair life is different, but it could be better than the one before and until we grow into a less superficial take on the gift of life we'll run aimlessly trying to interpret the forces of life, from floods and fires to crimes and accidents as though they give technical and instructive shape to the abstract."I'm sure his thoughts will become much clearer after we've heard him debate Stephen Brunt and sit beside Don Cherry.
I think, like me, many who care about this issue seriously are still not quite ready to dive headlong into worrying about backpasses gone wrong or blatantly missed scoring opportunities. The memory of events and the significance of the decisions ahead mean that thoughts are still whirling about on this.
I'll be watching the game with interest as always. But as much interest will be directed to the debate and discussion that will be happening in all available moments between plays.
Have a good Saturday. All the best to Pacioretty and family. Go Habs Go.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Islanders Preview
In the wacky world where Leafs and Canadiens lead Penguins and Capitals, where Devils and Sabres forget their gains of a season past, it's perhaps not surprising that the AHL entry in the East, the NY Islanders, are off to a good start.
Here's what LIW has to say about them:
Key match-ups
Canadiens PK and Islanders PP
The Habs have squirmed out of trouble and gained points this year through a combination of timely scoring and timely defence. Nothing has been more timely than their PK which ranks second in the league at over 90%. The Islanders have the 5th ranked PP at 26.2% and have used it to get their wins. James Wisniewski may or may not get 90+ points this year, but he currently has 8 in 6 games thanks to PP action.
Subban and Tavares
A cocky rookie and a cocky sophomore. Apparently they're even best friends and having dinner together pre-game. With Markov out, Subban has been a key and will continue to be an important piece of the Habs tonight. With all the Islanders injuries, Tavares is even more prominent than PK on his team and looks to continue to impress tonight. Look for PK to offer his usual feistiness and make a point of putting friendship aside as he attempts to steal the spotlight.
Gionta and Mottau
All the hype about finding a winger for Gionta and Gomez could be ended with a good performance (by that I mean stats, stats, stats) from none other than Gionta and Gomez. There aren't many worse defensive brigades than on Long Island. Gionta knows this, he knows how to get the media off his back and he knows Mike Mottau as the -11 defender on the mostly positive +/- 2007-08 Devils. Step around him, push him aside and put this media story to bed Captain.
Media and Bloggers
The Islanders love their bloggers. The Montreal media is uptight and uppity at the sight of outsiders. Though they probably won't meet tonight in Montreal, the access at the Nassau Colisseum later in the week means they might. Should be fun.
Momentum
Andrei Kostitsyn believes in hard work. Carey Price no longer craves exorcism. The momentum on the Habs is squarely moving in the right direction. They look like a team that can finally get ready for games against beatable opponents and the first period should be theirs.
Islanders the Habs covet
John Tavares
He's the kind of player that can make the difference between running with the pack every year and cruising into the playoffs, a special offensive talent. The Canadiens, and everyone else, crave these sorts of players.
Dwayne Roloson
A back-up you're not afraid to use.
Habs the Islanders covet
Scott Gomez
An American who can help them attain the salary floor. What's not to like?
Josh Gorges
A cheap defender who can actually defend. They're not as common as one thinks. If they were Radek Martinek wouldn't have had a career.
Impact of this result
This is a game for points and not much else. I can't see a lasting rivalry coming between these two teams, as the Islanders will find a way to make their way back to disarray by the offseason.
Here's what LIW has to say about them:
Key match-ups
Canadiens PK and Islanders PP
The Habs have squirmed out of trouble and gained points this year through a combination of timely scoring and timely defence. Nothing has been more timely than their PK which ranks second in the league at over 90%. The Islanders have the 5th ranked PP at 26.2% and have used it to get their wins. James Wisniewski may or may not get 90+ points this year, but he currently has 8 in 6 games thanks to PP action.
Subban and Tavares
A cocky rookie and a cocky sophomore. Apparently they're even best friends and having dinner together pre-game. With Markov out, Subban has been a key and will continue to be an important piece of the Habs tonight. With all the Islanders injuries, Tavares is even more prominent than PK on his team and looks to continue to impress tonight. Look for PK to offer his usual feistiness and make a point of putting friendship aside as he attempts to steal the spotlight.
Gionta and Mottau
All the hype about finding a winger for Gionta and Gomez could be ended with a good performance (by that I mean stats, stats, stats) from none other than Gionta and Gomez. There aren't many worse defensive brigades than on Long Island. Gionta knows this, he knows how to get the media off his back and he knows Mike Mottau as the -11 defender on the mostly positive +/- 2007-08 Devils. Step around him, push him aside and put this media story to bed Captain.
Media and Bloggers
The Islanders love their bloggers. The Montreal media is uptight and uppity at the sight of outsiders. Though they probably won't meet tonight in Montreal, the access at the Nassau Colisseum later in the week means they might. Should be fun.
Momentum
Andrei Kostitsyn believes in hard work. Carey Price no longer craves exorcism. The momentum on the Habs is squarely moving in the right direction. They look like a team that can finally get ready for games against beatable opponents and the first period should be theirs.
Islanders the Habs covet
John Tavares
He's the kind of player that can make the difference between running with the pack every year and cruising into the playoffs, a special offensive talent. The Canadiens, and everyone else, crave these sorts of players.
Dwayne Roloson
A back-up you're not afraid to use.
Habs the Islanders covet
Scott Gomez
An American who can help them attain the salary floor. What's not to like?
Josh Gorges
A cheap defender who can actually defend. They're not as common as one thinks. If they were Radek Martinek wouldn't have had a career.
Impact of this result
This is a game for points and not much else. I can't see a lasting rivalry coming between these two teams, as the Islanders will find a way to make their way back to disarray by the offseason.
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Three Star Search
Ooh they're seething in the press gallery these days. The Montreal Canadiens have teamed with Bell to usurp one of the cherished duties of the Montreal media. The three stars are to be chosen from now by the fans.
Mike Boone says he prefers the old system. Dave Stubbs isn’t quite so straight-ahead, but adds more than a tinge of lament to his article on tradition lost today.
At least Stubbs was civil. Mike Boone, as he often does, repeatedly refers to Canadiens fans as a group encompassing a significant number of “goobers” and “knuckle draggers”. At least he didn’t try to hide his elitism.
I am not altogether opposed to Boone’s position. And, I admit to being elitist enough myself to think that a fan vote in answer to the very inadequate question: “Who do you think will win the three star poll?” will undoubtedly turn up some strange vote leaders.
And the votes are bound to be very strange indeed because the question being asked isn’t the only absurdity. The system is flawed at this stage. The three stars are decided by total votes. Fans are only voting for a single player, so a unanimous choice is bound to be accompanied by some interesting third stars. Unaware, Bell seems, of the advances in online technology that allow for multiple selections.
Then there’s the game-winning goalscorer clause. The Canadiens “reserves the right to award the first star of the game to a player scoring the game-winning goal with less than minute to play in regulation time, in overtime or in a shootout.” A shootout goal? Great. Nothing like automatic selections to stir the pot a bit.
So Boone may well have a point.
But really what’s been lost?
Stubbs notes how this tradition has evolved and tells at length the road it has taken pass from media to fans. Boone again is less the diplomat. He suggests the choice has been stripped from expert hands (given to people who don't know o=hockey as well as he and his brethren). The media he says provide:
Understanding of hockey (people who do, media, people who don’t, fans)
Guaranteed expertise
Guaranteed objectivity
I’ll pause to let you recover your breath.
I think the explosion in blogging and everything else in the Habs new media world might have helped the lesson on media limits to be learned. And, if the fan vote makes the three star voting an irrelevant appendix to the game. I would suggest this continues an established tradition, rather than establishing a new one.
Let’s take last season as a mere glimpse into the guaranteed hockey expertise and objectivity employed by the former three star selectors.
The Molson Cup standing are based on home games only, keep that in mind. Keep in mind also, these results, strange as they may be, all came from media selection, no fan input.
First over the season was Jaroslav Halak, who played in 22 different home games. His statistics at home included 14-6-2, 2.32 GAA and 0.917 Save %. Not shabby. For this he garnered no less than 15 star selections, missing out seven times only.
Carey Price is even more informative. He placed second in Molson Cup standing (we know). He starred in 20 games for the Habs last season in Montreal pulling an unlikely 14 star selections from the hat to go with 6 games in which he missed. His stats were 6-10-3, 2.76 GAA and a 0.904 Save%.
We had Brian Gionta down for 12 game pucks in the regular season to go with 42 domes in 61 games played. He was not in our opinion the 4th best player on the team last season behind both goalies, no less. But then maybe that’s our elitism talking.
It strikes me that maybe their guaranteed objectivity comes only after making sure they select a goalie first. Oh, and they they abide by the OT scorer rule too. Heaven forbid hockey knowledge ever acknowledges a defensive player.
Carey Price will win anyway
Besides, what’s all the fuss about anyway?
Between the ineptly worded question, the formula, the expertise and the objectivity, I think we all know the goalie fetish in Montreal will win all. Last season’s back and forth in the three stars battle of I’m right/you’re wrong choices isn’t evaporated yet. And voters have already proven that a whiff of 0.910 is enough to bring in the votes.
He nearly won last year. With starts and the inevitable increase in wins, he’s bound to pull in votes. The fans have picked the goalie. The press have picked the goalie. Both or either will continue to do so. So let's not pretend this change matters more than it does. If you still long for definitive picks based on individual preferences and whims, then you'll always have our Domes and Game Pucks to satiate your appetite.
As for the press, they actually gain. Now in addition to locker room drivel they will have fan delusion to discuss after games. It’s actually set to be a boon to show their objectivity and expertise. Maybe they’ll see that when they’ve simmered down a bit.
Mike Boone says he prefers the old system. Dave Stubbs isn’t quite so straight-ahead, but adds more than a tinge of lament to his article on tradition lost today.
At least Stubbs was civil. Mike Boone, as he often does, repeatedly refers to Canadiens fans as a group encompassing a significant number of “goobers” and “knuckle draggers”. At least he didn’t try to hide his elitism.
I am not altogether opposed to Boone’s position. And, I admit to being elitist enough myself to think that a fan vote in answer to the very inadequate question: “Who do you think will win the three star poll?” will undoubtedly turn up some strange vote leaders.
And the votes are bound to be very strange indeed because the question being asked isn’t the only absurdity. The system is flawed at this stage. The three stars are decided by total votes. Fans are only voting for a single player, so a unanimous choice is bound to be accompanied by some interesting third stars. Unaware, Bell seems, of the advances in online technology that allow for multiple selections.
Then there’s the game-winning goalscorer clause. The Canadiens “reserves the right to award the first star of the game to a player scoring the game-winning goal with less than minute to play in regulation time, in overtime or in a shootout.” A shootout goal? Great. Nothing like automatic selections to stir the pot a bit.
So Boone may well have a point.
But really what’s been lost?
Stubbs notes how this tradition has evolved and tells at length the road it has taken pass from media to fans. Boone again is less the diplomat. He suggests the choice has been stripped from expert hands (given to people who don't know o=hockey as well as he and his brethren). The media he says provide:
Understanding of hockey (people who do, media, people who don’t, fans)
Guaranteed expertise
Guaranteed objectivity
I’ll pause to let you recover your breath.
I think the explosion in blogging and everything else in the Habs new media world might have helped the lesson on media limits to be learned. And, if the fan vote makes the three star voting an irrelevant appendix to the game. I would suggest this continues an established tradition, rather than establishing a new one.
Let’s take last season as a mere glimpse into the guaranteed hockey expertise and objectivity employed by the former three star selectors.
The Molson Cup standing are based on home games only, keep that in mind. Keep in mind also, these results, strange as they may be, all came from media selection, no fan input.
First over the season was Jaroslav Halak, who played in 22 different home games. His statistics at home included 14-6-2, 2.32 GAA and 0.917 Save %. Not shabby. For this he garnered no less than 15 star selections, missing out seven times only.
Carey Price is even more informative. He placed second in Molson Cup standing (we know). He starred in 20 games for the Habs last season in Montreal pulling an unlikely 14 star selections from the hat to go with 6 games in which he missed. His stats were 6-10-3, 2.76 GAA and a 0.904 Save%.
We had Brian Gionta down for 12 game pucks in the regular season to go with 42 domes in 61 games played. He was not in our opinion the 4th best player on the team last season behind both goalies, no less. But then maybe that’s our elitism talking.
It strikes me that maybe their guaranteed objectivity comes only after making sure they select a goalie first. Oh, and they they abide by the OT scorer rule too. Heaven forbid hockey knowledge ever acknowledges a defensive player.
Carey Price will win anyway
Besides, what’s all the fuss about anyway?
Between the ineptly worded question, the formula, the expertise and the objectivity, I think we all know the goalie fetish in Montreal will win all. Last season’s back and forth in the three stars battle of I’m right/you’re wrong choices isn’t evaporated yet. And voters have already proven that a whiff of 0.910 is enough to bring in the votes.
He nearly won last year. With starts and the inevitable increase in wins, he’s bound to pull in votes. The fans have picked the goalie. The press have picked the goalie. Both or either will continue to do so. So let's not pretend this change matters more than it does. If you still long for definitive picks based on individual preferences and whims, then you'll always have our Domes and Game Pucks to satiate your appetite.
As for the press, they actually gain. Now in addition to locker room drivel they will have fan delusion to discuss after games. It’s actually set to be a boon to show their objectivity and expertise. Maybe they’ll see that when they’ve simmered down a bit.
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Habs Media Tells Us What They Really Think
Last week, the day that Carey Price signed his contract, there was a conference call. The media were invited to ask questions of the young netminder and Team 990 broadcast the thing live. Only in Montreal, I know.
The vast majority of the call was from a script. Same old questions and Carey's same old rehearsed answers. I tuned in on the dial, but I didn't really "tune in". A funny thing happened part way through, though - a new voice and some unexpected questions. Turns out a blogger got in on the call.
The first question he asked caught me off guard and so I didn't catch it all. It sounded largely like effusive praise. The second question, however, was the moment that made listening in worthwhile. Launy "The" Scwartz asked Price if he was working on anything specifically in the summer. Whether he was taking steps to improve his lateral movement and his glove hand (I had a chuckle at that point, bold question). It was interesting bacause for the first time on the call, Price hadn't got an answer ready-made on his tongue. He knew questions would come about Halak, about the contract, about striking and about his touring rodeo show. But someone questioning his glove hand? That was a poser.
Price sidestepped the answer, but the interest in the questions didn't end there..The mainstream media apparently took some offense to the questions. This article on AllHabs chronicles the whole thing, but here are a few choice quotes:
It also led to some general discussion on who should and who shouldn't be permitted to ask questions at these events. The general feeling I got from the AllHabs summary was that once again the mainstream guys just can't handle having keen amateurs stealing any airtime:
“A journalist around the Montreal Canadiens would come from being around the club, having a sense of what is going on in the room, and you’re able not only to hear the words that are being spoken but you’re able to interpret them a little bit and able to analyze them a little bit.”
This clearly re-sparked the debate around the blogger vs. mainstream media question in Montreal again.
AllHabs pointed out the terribly self-fulfilling definition of a journalis above. Only those allowed into the dressing room are journalists. And only those currently allowed into the room are allowed in. So, only the current gang are journalists. Never mind that others can do a good job of finiding stories from outside the room, never mind that the dressing room material is pure rehearsed garbage. The clique must stand.
In my experience, the media play friendly for a while but are quick to show their disdain when they are threatened. It's only natural of course, as they have the most to lose (their jobs). In the past the threatened mainstream has been downright nasty, and bigger blogs than this have been bullied by the crew for doing so little as linking stories.
Now I don't have to tell you why I think blogs are necessary and most times superior to mainstream material. For the subset of fans that crave to look deeper into happenings, stats, backgrounds and stories, the mainstream media just don't cut it. I started reading blogs because they took different angles and dealt with issues more interesting to fans like me. I started writing because I thought other like-minded folk would like more and different takes on the subject matter.
This story just call this whole thing to attention again. Did I want to know what Carey price felt about the media reports about him striking? Not really. Did I want to know what he'd been working on in the summer? Yes, I did.
The fact that it took a blogger to ask the question after a summer without a smidgen of news for these Habs beat reporters to write up tells a tale all itself. Sure, there were a few off-beat questions, but this is noth8ing new. The blogger still scored the gamewinner on this conference call. Some others continued to hit post after post.
The vast majority of the call was from a script. Same old questions and Carey's same old rehearsed answers. I tuned in on the dial, but I didn't really "tune in". A funny thing happened part way through, though - a new voice and some unexpected questions. Turns out a blogger got in on the call.
The first question he asked caught me off guard and so I didn't catch it all. It sounded largely like effusive praise. The second question, however, was the moment that made listening in worthwhile. Launy "The" Scwartz asked Price if he was working on anything specifically in the summer. Whether he was taking steps to improve his lateral movement and his glove hand (I had a chuckle at that point, bold question). It was interesting bacause for the first time on the call, Price hadn't got an answer ready-made on his tongue. He knew questions would come about Halak, about the contract, about striking and about his touring rodeo show. But someone questioning his glove hand? That was a poser.
Price sidestepped the answer, but the interest in the questions didn't end there..The mainstream media apparently took some offense to the questions. This article on AllHabs chronicles the whole thing, but here are a few choice quotes:
“I think it was embarrassing. It was a total fellatio festival. The guy is ridiculous. If he wants to talk to Price that way let him show up at an autograph signing.”
- Mike Boone
“The reporter/goalie/fan on Carey Price conf call was ridiculous. Carey u were unlucky, u have potential. Embarrassing and very sad.”
- Tony Marinaro
It also led to some general discussion on who should and who shouldn't be permitted to ask questions at these events. The general feeling I got from the AllHabs summary was that once again the mainstream guys just can't handle having keen amateurs stealing any airtime:
“A journalist around the Montreal Canadiens would come from being around the club, having a sense of what is going on in the room, and you’re able not only to hear the words that are being spoken but you’re able to interpret them a little bit and able to analyze them a little bit.”
This clearly re-sparked the debate around the blogger vs. mainstream media question in Montreal again.
AllHabs pointed out the terribly self-fulfilling definition of a journalis above. Only those allowed into the dressing room are journalists. And only those currently allowed into the room are allowed in. So, only the current gang are journalists. Never mind that others can do a good job of finiding stories from outside the room, never mind that the dressing room material is pure rehearsed garbage. The clique must stand.
In my experience, the media play friendly for a while but are quick to show their disdain when they are threatened. It's only natural of course, as they have the most to lose (their jobs). In the past the threatened mainstream has been downright nasty, and bigger blogs than this have been bullied by the crew for doing so little as linking stories.
Now I don't have to tell you why I think blogs are necessary and most times superior to mainstream material. For the subset of fans that crave to look deeper into happenings, stats, backgrounds and stories, the mainstream media just don't cut it. I started reading blogs because they took different angles and dealt with issues more interesting to fans like me. I started writing because I thought other like-minded folk would like more and different takes on the subject matter.
This story just call this whole thing to attention again. Did I want to know what Carey price felt about the media reports about him striking? Not really. Did I want to know what he'd been working on in the summer? Yes, I did.
The fact that it took a blogger to ask the question after a summer without a smidgen of news for these Habs beat reporters to write up tells a tale all itself. Sure, there were a few off-beat questions, but this is noth8ing new. The blogger still scored the gamewinner on this conference call. Some others continued to hit post after post.
Friday, January 29, 2010
Canadiens Coverage
When Did The Zoo Become A Jungle?
Not that long ago, I used to catch my Canadiens games on Saturday nights, my statistics in the Tuesday Gazette and my coverage in a couple of daily pieces from September to May. Back then, players called the Montreal Canadiens media frenzy a zoo.
If that's so, what is it now? The jungle?
Thankfully I can watch all games without a pinwheel and a media guide to find the coverage. And, I'll be honest, I like being able to regulate how much coverage I take in – which I can easily do, because there's far more than I would ever want or need.
I'm sure it's the same for all of you. It's a good time to be a fan and voracious consumer of sporting and other news.
On the whole, I think the expanded coverage has been a good thing. More is said about games, more is analyzed, more is recorded. Blanket statements like "Kovalev had a terrible season" are harder to make with the evidence to refute such generalizations.
But as an observer of events, I'm wondering if many (indeed any) players would take the same view. And if not, would being coerced into an untenable situation like this play out in the results, the fatigue we've seen...
A bridge too far?
On December 8, 2008, the Canadiens opened a state-of-art practice facility in Brossard, with beautiful ice, gyms, spa-like facilities, the works. But don't be fooled, Little George (that's Gillett) didn't bankroll this facility solely to help the team be more competitive, he planned this facility to benefit the organization (i.e., his bank balance) as well.
The way he would turn it to moneymaker was by integrating Canadiens practice into the Canadiens hype machine. Cleverly, the design of the facility included a viewing gallery. It wasn't long before it also became the place to stage a daily press conference and loose reporters on the dressing room.
Since the practice facility opened the Habs went 26-24-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs and now 25-25-5 in 2009-10 for a 51-53-5 record (or if you prefer 51-58). It's worth noting that the pre-Brossard Habs from 2008-09 were a rather rosier 15-6-5, defending Eastern conference champions and looked to be heading in the right direction.
It would be foolish to put down all the woes of the team to increased media scrutiny. But in certain cases it may be more feasible. We can think for instance of players who don't seem to like the camera as much, who don't seem to thrive with extra eyes and ears on them. Koivu comes to mind, several of the summer departed. I'll just pick one player from a hat, though: Carey Price.
Since Brossard, it has been 10-12-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs, and 11-17-4 in 2009-10. For those who don't read Allan Walsh, that'd be 21-33-10 (or 21-43). Remarkable when you think of his Calder trophy challenge and his 13-4-4 record before his every move was simultaneously tracked by 60 iphones from the southshore. Don't think wins count for anything? Fine, I'll do it your way. 3.15 and 0.895 in 2008-09, 4.11 and 0.878 in the playoffs, and 2.73 and 0.913 in 2009-10. Contrast that with 2.36 and 0.920 in 21 starts.
Carey's not unlike other Habs players in that he laps up the media when it's winning times. But when there's losses, he does get that noticeable "What the hell do you think I'll say?" look about him. He's not alone in the dressing room, but his case is most easily illustrated in numbers. A retroactive analysis proves little, so treat as food for thought. Just interesting that someone who doesn't seem to like the excessive coverage might be affected in the one area of his undertakings that the majority of his fans actually care about.
Today's story
I bring all this up because as I was reading the morning rounds, the story that dominated on the off day in this losing run was the Markov v. Price ten-word exchange.
I didn't need the new reports coming out to understand that people working to common goals often disagree. I didn't even need Pat Hickey's piece to know this has a precedent in the Montreal Canadiens locker room. I've been on teams, I've been a member of society, I think anyone who has knows how much value to put in strong words after an emotional fall.
But be it boredom, the stretch for anything to talk about, the loss of perspective, this became the big story of the moment.
TSN who dips in and out of Canadiens coverage only when things go wrong enough to interest their Toronto following followed up their initial story on the word-of-mouth report of rift with this story. The hug, of course, as meaningless as the initial words. The look to the media...
At least TSN only reported it. Michel Bergeron seems to be personally offended that a player who sees fit enough to question, even ridicule nightly on another inane tabloid gossip session would turn around and mock him and his gang. Habs Inside/Out did the usual upgrade on RDS and provided some pro journalism, but did Dave Stubbs really need to tweet every other ten seconds from Brossard? Finally, the fact that the most professional reporter in the scrum (that'd be Arpon Basu) is also airing his personal frustration on this matter (albeit about a different element of the debacle) is more striking.
It was these reports that made me think things were getting out of hand.
The players on the Canadiens were already among the most scrutinized in the league before twitter ever existed, and before every day had a press conference. But they've been asked to take on even more. I for one think Komisarek mooing, Price engaging in mock hugs – this is all fair play. What's more, I think players should be allowed to opt out of the jungle whenever they feel like doing so. I know some think it's some kind of right to have every question answered whenever they come asking, but I disagree. The players are there to play hockey, and god forbid practice playing hockey, not to be story generators for reporters looking to fill more air time and columns of type than should ever be afforded to a sporting endeavour.
I think it's high time the Habs take a look at limiting the ridiculous practice of opening their training facility to everyone. Now that George "I finance my debts with sports teams" Gillett is gone, I think there's a window to do it.
Again, this is only me, I wanted to know what you (some of the most sensible and loyal fans of the Habs) think:
Has it gone too far?
Could this be hurting the team?
Is this why we don't have a captain?
Do we need twitter updates by the minute from Canadiens practices?
Do we really benefit from seeing our idols behind the doors that used to be pretty much closed?
If that's so, what is it now? The jungle?
Thankfully I can watch all games without a pinwheel and a media guide to find the coverage. And, I'll be honest, I like being able to regulate how much coverage I take in – which I can easily do, because there's far more than I would ever want or need.
I'm sure it's the same for all of you. It's a good time to be a fan and voracious consumer of sporting and other news.
On the whole, I think the expanded coverage has been a good thing. More is said about games, more is analyzed, more is recorded. Blanket statements like "Kovalev had a terrible season" are harder to make with the evidence to refute such generalizations.
But as an observer of events, I'm wondering if many (indeed any) players would take the same view. And if not, would being coerced into an untenable situation like this play out in the results, the fatigue we've seen...
A bridge too far?
On December 8, 2008, the Canadiens opened a state-of-art practice facility in Brossard, with beautiful ice, gyms, spa-like facilities, the works. But don't be fooled, Little George (that's Gillett) didn't bankroll this facility solely to help the team be more competitive, he planned this facility to benefit the organization (i.e., his bank balance) as well.
The way he would turn it to moneymaker was by integrating Canadiens practice into the Canadiens hype machine. Cleverly, the design of the facility included a viewing gallery. It wasn't long before it also became the place to stage a daily press conference and loose reporters on the dressing room.
Since the practice facility opened the Habs went 26-24-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs and now 25-25-5 in 2009-10 for a 51-53-5 record (or if you prefer 51-58). It's worth noting that the pre-Brossard Habs from 2008-09 were a rather rosier 15-6-5, defending Eastern conference champions and looked to be heading in the right direction.
It would be foolish to put down all the woes of the team to increased media scrutiny. But in certain cases it may be more feasible. We can think for instance of players who don't seem to like the camera as much, who don't seem to thrive with extra eyes and ears on them. Koivu comes to mind, several of the summer departed. I'll just pick one player from a hat, though: Carey Price.
Since Brossard, it has been 10-12-6 in 2008-09, 0-4-0 in the playoffs, and 11-17-4 in 2009-10. For those who don't read Allan Walsh, that'd be 21-33-10 (or 21-43). Remarkable when you think of his Calder trophy challenge and his 13-4-4 record before his every move was simultaneously tracked by 60 iphones from the southshore. Don't think wins count for anything? Fine, I'll do it your way. 3.15 and 0.895 in 2008-09, 4.11 and 0.878 in the playoffs, and 2.73 and 0.913 in 2009-10. Contrast that with 2.36 and 0.920 in 21 starts.
Carey's not unlike other Habs players in that he laps up the media when it's winning times. But when there's losses, he does get that noticeable "What the hell do you think I'll say?" look about him. He's not alone in the dressing room, but his case is most easily illustrated in numbers. A retroactive analysis proves little, so treat as food for thought. Just interesting that someone who doesn't seem to like the excessive coverage might be affected in the one area of his undertakings that the majority of his fans actually care about.
Today's story
I bring all this up because as I was reading the morning rounds, the story that dominated on the off day in this losing run was the Markov v. Price ten-word exchange.
I didn't need the new reports coming out to understand that people working to common goals often disagree. I didn't even need Pat Hickey's piece to know this has a precedent in the Montreal Canadiens locker room. I've been on teams, I've been a member of society, I think anyone who has knows how much value to put in strong words after an emotional fall.
But be it boredom, the stretch for anything to talk about, the loss of perspective, this became the big story of the moment.
TSN who dips in and out of Canadiens coverage only when things go wrong enough to interest their Toronto following followed up their initial story on the word-of-mouth report of rift with this story. The hug, of course, as meaningless as the initial words. The look to the media...
That Price then looked up at the media seats at the Montreal Canadiens practice facility made it clear the gesture was in response to a report this week of a confrontation between the two in the club's dressing room.... perhaps most significant of all.
At least TSN only reported it. Michel Bergeron seems to be personally offended that a player who sees fit enough to question, even ridicule nightly on another inane tabloid gossip session would turn around and mock him and his gang. Habs Inside/Out did the usual upgrade on RDS and provided some pro journalism, but did Dave Stubbs really need to tweet every other ten seconds from Brossard? Finally, the fact that the most professional reporter in the scrum (that'd be Arpon Basu) is also airing his personal frustration on this matter (albeit about a different element of the debacle) is more striking.
It was these reports that made me think things were getting out of hand.
The players on the Canadiens were already among the most scrutinized in the league before twitter ever existed, and before every day had a press conference. But they've been asked to take on even more. I for one think Komisarek mooing, Price engaging in mock hugs – this is all fair play. What's more, I think players should be allowed to opt out of the jungle whenever they feel like doing so. I know some think it's some kind of right to have every question answered whenever they come asking, but I disagree. The players are there to play hockey, and god forbid practice playing hockey, not to be story generators for reporters looking to fill more air time and columns of type than should ever be afforded to a sporting endeavour.
I think it's high time the Habs take a look at limiting the ridiculous practice of opening their training facility to everyone. Now that George "I finance my debts with sports teams" Gillett is gone, I think there's a window to do it.
Again, this is only me, I wanted to know what you (some of the most sensible and loyal fans of the Habs) think:
Has it gone too far?
Could this be hurting the team?
Is this why we don't have a captain?
Do we need twitter updates by the minute from Canadiens practices?
Do we really benefit from seeing our idols behind the doors that used to be pretty much closed?
Monday, July 13, 2009
Gagnon Asks:
Who Will You Blame Now?
Could be an interesting debate, but I feel the answer's already in.
Maybe Francois has missed it, maybe I'm imagining things, but from what I saw and read the people who blamed Koivu for everything wrong with their team and their failed dreams moved on to Andrei Kostitsyn some time around March.
Why Kostitsyn?
Indeed, I have asked that question myself. I suppose for people who could find ways to blame Koivu for all ills of the past 5 years, though, the question isn't why Andrei, but why not?
Coming from that angle, you can really start to narrow down the choices, and it makes it easier than justifying why (especially for players who are doing just fine, best among their peers, even). You can eliminate those that you'll never be able to get a critical mass of booers behind and those that you wouldn't ever criticise thanks to their special skills.
Why not blame:
Koivu?
We've done our work now, he's a goner. Check it out, we even dug up this really relevant Ribeiro stuff a few days before the playoffs as a going away present
Kovalev?
That committee is already established to work in cooperation with this one
Lang?
Injured and no one would buy it
Bouillon? Dandenault? O'Byrne?
As bad as they are sometimes, they don't play enough to change outcomes
Brisebois?
I can't believe how humble he is, and so strong to come back to Montreal, too (actually, same as above)
Kostopoulos? Latendresse? Lapierre? Metropolit?
Trying their best, just have limits
Markov?
He is making it hard on us. We certainly don't like that he doesn't speak French, but then he doesn't really speak at all. Plus, slamming the best player we have might make us look stupid
Price? Halak?
Can't criticise goalies, all commentators (all former goalies) will get angry
Tanguay?
Come on...
Komisarek?
Blocks like 2456 shots while playing goalie on the PP
Sergei Kostitsyn? D'Agostini? Pacioretty?
Young, learning to play in the NHL
Plekanec?
He'd probably want to sit in on meetings and table new reasons to criticise, too much work
Higgins?
Getting his trade value to sink any lower could be really counterproductive here
Hamrlik?
Good possibility, but he's oh so boring
Laraque?
He might cry to the commissioner or tell us we're not in his league
Gainey?
Doesn't react to criticism – may react by spiting us
See, you can really start to narrow down with a little view into the mind of a Saku critic:
Yup, Andrei Kostistyn really doesn't offer us any reason to not choose him. It's his own fault really. Yes he may be our best first round pick in 10 years, but in a way that's what we look for – first rounders who succeed. Plus, we could have had so many others in his place (though without Koivu, they'd be right in line for this prestigious place themselves). We can also keep our embroidered Coalition to Oust Captain Koivu (COCK) gear – we'll just think of a new "C".
There may not have been a good reason to criticise Kostitsyn in January when the Coalition to Oust Captain Koivu general meeting decided they had achieved their most recent mandate. Luckily, someone noted that being a 25-goalscorer with so many goals already, he'd probably go through a statistical slump that they could talk up no matter how he actually played. Another coalition member left smugly (with a leave it to me guys) confident that years of noticing Koivu didn't shake hands with every child would stand him in good stead to rustle up hype over a deplorable act.
The scandal
Remember the scandal? Of course you do.
Now we all call it the scandal, but of course with the benefit of the facts, we know that in terms of criminal seriousness, the Kostitsyns were not in trouble at all. Sure they were mentioned. Sure, it was a distraction (though strangely it seemed to spark wins, not losses). And of course the great organization would want to avoid things like this. But really it was pretty low-key.
Tellingly, the night before the "scandal" broke, the cartoon tabloid writers were drumming up one heck of a storm. To borrow from James Mirtle's piece on the topic:
Let me join with James in asking what all the fuss was about back then:
Yet the damage to the Kostistyns has been done, hasn't it?
No one really cared whether they were criminal or not, what will be remembered is that game with frenzied hacks claiming the scoop of the century – and that said scoop implicated the Belarussians. It's propaganda 101, people don't care too much about the facts. Give them a "juicy" (to borrow a term from the man himself) headline and they'll remember that.
Gagnon himself
Am I dreaming that it's Kostitsyn. Apparently not. The man asking the question in July answered his own question 2 months earlier.
May 5th, 2009 on Team 990 radio (look for it in the little player on the right hand part of the screen) – Francois Gagnon did a number on the alpha target and thought he'd throw Sergei under the same train.
And, since "Gagnon is always scrupulously fair and brilliantly analytical in his assessments of players and teams", it won't be long before the rest of the media catch up to this little trend.
Jacques Demers
Now I'm not suggesting that Jacques Demers is some kind of mastermind behind the Koivu coup or that he had anything to do with targeting Andrei Kostitsyn. But for me Jacques is a bit of a bell weather. That's to say, he seems to get swept along by whatever underlying campaign is currently ongoing.
His capacity to be down on Kostitsyn before games, in between periods and after games was amazing. It would only take 3 goals without a goal sometimes (did I mention 25-goalscorer = 1 goal every 3 games or so) to call for him to be sat down. After that news story broke, though, every penalty by Kostitsyn became a crime, every bad line change was reason for analysis and discussion, every time he passed he should have shot, every time he shot he should have passed.
And while certain players benefit from the "learning the game" excuse, there's no such excuse for Kostitsyn. He's spent that now (he of 186 NHL games). It was interesting to see how a player scoring 49 goals over two seasons could be trashed so thoroughly towards the end of this past season. It was fun when juxtaposed with the hyperbole reserved for others scoring 30 goals over – talked up as the most glorious progression a prospect has ever seen.
It will be a shame if Kostitsyn really does cop it for the lack of another lightning rod (Koivu)on the team. Perhaps Gainey thought he could protect him by bringing in the two highest paid Canadiens ever – one of whom is sure to do less than his salary, draft status, trade return or signees missed to take him would warrant. Perhaps, he'll be gone as Gagnon so rabidly asserted.
I can only hope that those who wish to spread displeasure for the sake of it – no matter what shape their coalition now takes – will be the most disappointed of all Habs "fans" this season.
Maybe Francois has missed it, maybe I'm imagining things, but from what I saw and read the people who blamed Koivu for everything wrong with their team and their failed dreams moved on to Andrei Kostitsyn some time around March.
Why Kostitsyn?
Indeed, I have asked that question myself. I suppose for people who could find ways to blame Koivu for all ills of the past 5 years, though, the question isn't why Andrei, but why not?
Coming from that angle, you can really start to narrow down the choices, and it makes it easier than justifying why (especially for players who are doing just fine, best among their peers, even). You can eliminate those that you'll never be able to get a critical mass of booers behind and those that you wouldn't ever criticise thanks to their special skills.
Why not blame:
Koivu?
We've done our work now, he's a goner. Check it out, we even dug up this really relevant Ribeiro stuff a few days before the playoffs as a going away present
Kovalev?
That committee is already established to work in cooperation with this one
Lang?
Injured and no one would buy it
Bouillon? Dandenault? O'Byrne?
As bad as they are sometimes, they don't play enough to change outcomes
Brisebois?
I can't believe how humble he is, and so strong to come back to Montreal, too (actually, same as above)
Kostopoulos? Latendresse? Lapierre? Metropolit?
Trying their best, just have limits
Markov?
He is making it hard on us. We certainly don't like that he doesn't speak French, but then he doesn't really speak at all. Plus, slamming the best player we have might make us look stupid
Price? Halak?
Can't criticise goalies, all commentators (all former goalies) will get angry
Tanguay?
Come on...
Komisarek?
Blocks like 2456 shots while playing goalie on the PP
Sergei Kostitsyn? D'Agostini? Pacioretty?
Young, learning to play in the NHL
Plekanec?
He'd probably want to sit in on meetings and table new reasons to criticise, too much work
Higgins?
Getting his trade value to sink any lower could be really counterproductive here
Hamrlik?
Good possibility, but he's oh so boring
Laraque?
He might cry to the commissioner or tell us we're not in his league
Gainey?
Doesn't react to criticism – may react by spiting us
See, you can really start to narrow down with a little view into the mind of a Saku critic:
Yup, Andrei Kostistyn really doesn't offer us any reason to not choose him. It's his own fault really. Yes he may be our best first round pick in 10 years, but in a way that's what we look for – first rounders who succeed. Plus, we could have had so many others in his place (though without Koivu, they'd be right in line for this prestigious place themselves). We can also keep our embroidered Coalition to Oust Captain Koivu (COCK) gear – we'll just think of a new "C".
There may not have been a good reason to criticise Kostitsyn in January when the Coalition to Oust Captain Koivu general meeting decided they had achieved their most recent mandate. Luckily, someone noted that being a 25-goalscorer with so many goals already, he'd probably go through a statistical slump that they could talk up no matter how he actually played. Another coalition member left smugly (with a leave it to me guys) confident that years of noticing Koivu didn't shake hands with every child would stand him in good stead to rustle up hype over a deplorable act.
The scandal
Remember the scandal? Of course you do.
Now we all call it the scandal, but of course with the benefit of the facts, we know that in terms of criminal seriousness, the Kostitsyns were not in trouble at all. Sure they were mentioned. Sure, it was a distraction (though strangely it seemed to spark wins, not losses). And of course the great organization would want to avoid things like this. But really it was pretty low-key.
Tellingly, the night before the "scandal" broke, the cartoon tabloid writers were drumming up one heck of a storm. To borrow from James Mirtle's piece on the topic:
Jacques Demers: "Honestly, there are things I know, and what looks like what's going to come out [in the papers] tomorrow, I swear to you, I thought about Mr. Beliveau tonight ... and I just hope I'm dreaming. I'm a proud Canadien, the Canadiens are my life, and I hope I'm dreaming but I don't think I am."
Michel Bergeron: "I feel the same way. It's unbelievable. Tomorrow, hockey will be second. I don't like at all what I've heard today."
Bob Hartley: "If everything we've been told is true, I've never seen that in my life. If it's true, I'm going back to Atlanta [joking]"
Michel Bergeron: "The Canadiens are my roots, and my idols, like you guys...and it looks like the foundation is going to be shaken. Not just for the Quebecois but for anyone who wears the Canadiens sweater around the country. To me, what's happened, it's unacceptable".
Cyberpresse.ca reporter Rejean Tremblay, meanwhile, said he's recently received calls from police, a lawyer and those close to the team, and that the tales he's hearing are "juicy."
Let me join with James in asking what all the fuss was about back then:
"For now, given what information we have, I think you can chalk all this up to the fact these are two young guys from another country who were caught up in the wrong crowd."
Yet the damage to the Kostistyns has been done, hasn't it?
No one really cared whether they were criminal or not, what will be remembered is that game with frenzied hacks claiming the scoop of the century – and that said scoop implicated the Belarussians. It's propaganda 101, people don't care too much about the facts. Give them a "juicy" (to borrow a term from the man himself) headline and they'll remember that.
Gagnon himself
Am I dreaming that it's Kostitsyn. Apparently not. The man asking the question in July answered his own question 2 months earlier.
May 5th, 2009 on Team 990 radio (look for it in the little player on the right hand part of the screen) – Francois Gagnon did a number on the alpha target and thought he'd throw Sergei under the same train.
And, since "Gagnon is always scrupulously fair and brilliantly analytical in his assessments of players and teams", it won't be long before the rest of the media catch up to this little trend.
Jacques Demers
Now I'm not suggesting that Jacques Demers is some kind of mastermind behind the Koivu coup or that he had anything to do with targeting Andrei Kostitsyn. But for me Jacques is a bit of a bell weather. That's to say, he seems to get swept along by whatever underlying campaign is currently ongoing.
His capacity to be down on Kostitsyn before games, in between periods and after games was amazing. It would only take 3 goals without a goal sometimes (did I mention 25-goalscorer = 1 goal every 3 games or so) to call for him to be sat down. After that news story broke, though, every penalty by Kostitsyn became a crime, every bad line change was reason for analysis and discussion, every time he passed he should have shot, every time he shot he should have passed.
And while certain players benefit from the "learning the game" excuse, there's no such excuse for Kostitsyn. He's spent that now (he of 186 NHL games). It was interesting to see how a player scoring 49 goals over two seasons could be trashed so thoroughly towards the end of this past season. It was fun when juxtaposed with the hyperbole reserved for others scoring 30 goals over – talked up as the most glorious progression a prospect has ever seen.
It will be a shame if Kostitsyn really does cop it for the lack of another lightning rod (Koivu)on the team. Perhaps Gainey thought he could protect him by bringing in the two highest paid Canadiens ever – one of whom is sure to do less than his salary, draft status, trade return or signees missed to take him would warrant. Perhaps, he'll be gone as Gagnon so rabidly asserted.
I can only hope that those who wish to spread displeasure for the sake of it – no matter what shape their coalition now takes – will be the most disappointed of all Habs "fans" this season.
Friday, May 01, 2009
Robinson Leaves Door Ajar
Apparently, Larry Robinson is at least interested in the possibility of coaching the Canadiens. Says so here on RDS (hopes up? – proceed with caution, it’s RDS).
The first encouraging thing about this is that not everyone in the known world is afraid of the Montreal media and the attention from the fans. The second encouraging thing is that Larry knows a thing or two about defence and has made some pretty average players into league-wide exemplars of the back end.
As far as I’m aware, Larry Robinson does not really meet the francophone criterion set forth by team president Pierre Boivin, though he probably gets by in French. But if there’s anyone who can skirt that rule it will be a Canadiens hall-of-famer. We should take advantage of that possibility while we can, because pretty soon the youngest hall-of-famer will be in retirement.
The downside of Larry Robinson is his record as a head coach. Apart from his consecutive Stanley Cup finals with NJ when blessed with Niedermayer and Brodeur in their primes, as well as a then healthy Scott Stevens; Larry hasn’t been that impressive. He also withdrew from coaching the Devils because the pressure was getting to him – you heard right, the Devils. He seems to thrive as an assistant coach, however. And, I think we all hoped he might fit into that role here too.
If you think about that scenario, you could almost have Larry coaching the team and token other guy as the face for the media, but who essentially performs the role of assistant in decision making and coaching capacities. I think something like that could really work.
The fact that it’s even a possibility is very encouraging indeed.
The first encouraging thing about this is that not everyone in the known world is afraid of the Montreal media and the attention from the fans. The second encouraging thing is that Larry knows a thing or two about defence and has made some pretty average players into league-wide exemplars of the back end.
As far as I’m aware, Larry Robinson does not really meet the francophone criterion set forth by team president Pierre Boivin, though he probably gets by in French. But if there’s anyone who can skirt that rule it will be a Canadiens hall-of-famer. We should take advantage of that possibility while we can, because pretty soon the youngest hall-of-famer will be in retirement.
The downside of Larry Robinson is his record as a head coach. Apart from his consecutive Stanley Cup finals with NJ when blessed with Niedermayer and Brodeur in their primes, as well as a then healthy Scott Stevens; Larry hasn’t been that impressive. He also withdrew from coaching the Devils because the pressure was getting to him – you heard right, the Devils. He seems to thrive as an assistant coach, however. And, I think we all hoped he might fit into that role here too.
If you think about that scenario, you could almost have Larry coaching the team and token other guy as the face for the media, but who essentially performs the role of assistant in decision making and coaching capacities. I think something like that could really work.
The fact that it’s even a possibility is very encouraging indeed.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Interesting Games To Come
Eastern Playoff Match-ups In The Balance
The Candiens snuck in the back door of the playoffs, but only after storming right up to the house a week ago. And they'll now be starting the postseason as the coldest and least sexy option for pundits.
Out two potential opponents are reasonably hot after having cooled spells of their own pass behind them. New Jersay, also cold, has mystique, experience and the best goalie of time on their side and the three teams from 4 to 6 in the conference are the hottest of them all.
One silver lining for the Canadiens in this whole race is that they won't be facing any of those three, though perhaps they might relish playing one of the Pennsylvania two based on record and goaltenders. They, of course, can't play the Devils no matter how much the Devils would like an elixir for their recent levelling off. It's down the Boston or Washington.
The way the papers have been writing it, you'd think the choice were up to us fans. Of course, it isn't; and thanks to the Canadiens recent disdain for winning, the choice has nothing to do with them either. No, because the New York Rangers sorted their own fate by beating the Flyers, the Canadiens position is up to the Rangers now.
That on its own would offer little to no intrigue at all. What does spice it up, however, is the log jam from 4th to 6th. One of those teams will be starting on home ice, one of them will play the Devils (is that a good or bad thing at this point?) and two will play each other. And, due to the way the last games fell, the last game for each team will be matchups between the bottom six seeds in the conference.
The reason I feel these two days (The Flyers and Rangers ply tomorrow) could get a bit interesting is because this is the one time of year that teams feel justified and able to throw a game for their own gain. Last season, the Penguins properly recognised that Ottawa Senators (a spent force) would be a better opponent than the Boston Bruins. Their decision to bench their best players (generally rest through the game) and subsequent loss meant that the Canadiens won, they got an easy first round and were refreshed enough to plough through everyone until Detroit. In other words, their thinking was sound and their strategy correct. This season, I can't help but think the same will play out.
Game 1: Carolina vs. New Jersey
This game has playoff pedigree and it could be the first round match-up. It also pits the hottest playoff team vs. the coldest. Carolina has owned New Jersey thus far. but they have handled the other teams as well. In a world where games could be fixed, neither team wants to win here. If New Jersey conspire to lose, they can be sure not to face Carolina. Carolina might not be so compliant as they might well want to face the team they've beaten most.
Game 2: Philadelphia vs. Islanders
This game should be interesting, because if Philly win they will put themselves in the driver's seat for determinging their own fate. They lose the tie breaks to both Pittsburgh and Carolina so would be 6th right now without a game in hand. They could guarantee themselves 6th with two losses. But do they want to play the Devils? Their records against potential opponents seems to suggest that the Devils would be a good bet. They beat Carolina handily, but all games were complete before Carolina turned it around via Cole, Brind'amour and Ward.
The Islanders have nothing to win or lose in this one. They are last in the NHL come what may. I can't see them not trying to win really. Not being able to win, I can see that...
Game 3: Pittsburgh vs. Montreal
This is the game where neither team holds their own fate. However, because games 1 and 2 are in the afternoon, Pittsburgh will have a clear idea of what they might be able to do. Depending on who comes out of that Carolina game on top, and whether or not Philly decides to gamble with positioning, Pittsburgh could have options.
Personally, I think Pittsburgh would take Philadelphia if they could. It offers the worse defence and the worse goalie. The series would be offensive and energetic, just what they seek. And they have the better guns. If Pittsburgh want to face Philly, they'll have to win. But, if Carolina win, will Pittsburgh prefer the hot Hurricanes or the cold Devils. They didn't particularly separate themselves or stumble against either, so that would be a matter for them to decide. If I were them, I'd be avoiding Carolina...
Game 4: Rangers vs. Philadelphia
Now all is known. The Rangers will be in position to choose Washington or Boston. The Flyers might be in position to choose to. Anything's possible here. And this will be the one that decides Montreal's fate if the Habs get a point tonight.
A lid on the Schneider affair...
I haven't been watching RDS on television this holiday weekend, but I thought I'd note they hadn't apologised for their errant reports, at least online. Not that I expected them to. Pat Hickey almost does here:
But absolves himself from taking the bait because the Habs were so darned secretive.
Now rumblings about Markov too. Again good news. And, once again, in almost total contradiction of reports presented to us as fact...
I guess if there's one thing you must believe from what the media has aired and printed over the past two months on the Habs, nothing rings truer than Mathieu Schneider's words. I'd only add the caveat: "You can't believe most of what you hear either."
Out two potential opponents are reasonably hot after having cooled spells of their own pass behind them. New Jersay, also cold, has mystique, experience and the best goalie of time on their side and the three teams from 4 to 6 in the conference are the hottest of them all.
One silver lining for the Canadiens in this whole race is that they won't be facing any of those three, though perhaps they might relish playing one of the Pennsylvania two based on record and goaltenders. They, of course, can't play the Devils no matter how much the Devils would like an elixir for their recent levelling off. It's down the Boston or Washington.
The way the papers have been writing it, you'd think the choice were up to us fans. Of course, it isn't; and thanks to the Canadiens recent disdain for winning, the choice has nothing to do with them either. No, because the New York Rangers sorted their own fate by beating the Flyers, the Canadiens position is up to the Rangers now.
That on its own would offer little to no intrigue at all. What does spice it up, however, is the log jam from 4th to 6th. One of those teams will be starting on home ice, one of them will play the Devils (is that a good or bad thing at this point?) and two will play each other. And, due to the way the last games fell, the last game for each team will be matchups between the bottom six seeds in the conference.
The reason I feel these two days (The Flyers and Rangers ply tomorrow) could get a bit interesting is because this is the one time of year that teams feel justified and able to throw a game for their own gain. Last season, the Penguins properly recognised that Ottawa Senators (a spent force) would be a better opponent than the Boston Bruins. Their decision to bench their best players (generally rest through the game) and subsequent loss meant that the Canadiens won, they got an easy first round and were refreshed enough to plough through everyone until Detroit. In other words, their thinking was sound and their strategy correct. This season, I can't help but think the same will play out.
Game 1: Carolina vs. New Jersey
This game has playoff pedigree and it could be the first round match-up. It also pits the hottest playoff team vs. the coldest. Carolina has owned New Jersey thus far. but they have handled the other teams as well. In a world where games could be fixed, neither team wants to win here. If New Jersey conspire to lose, they can be sure not to face Carolina. Carolina might not be so compliant as they might well want to face the team they've beaten most.
Game 2: Philadelphia vs. Islanders
This game should be interesting, because if Philly win they will put themselves in the driver's seat for determinging their own fate. They lose the tie breaks to both Pittsburgh and Carolina so would be 6th right now without a game in hand. They could guarantee themselves 6th with two losses. But do they want to play the Devils? Their records against potential opponents seems to suggest that the Devils would be a good bet. They beat Carolina handily, but all games were complete before Carolina turned it around via Cole, Brind'amour and Ward.
The Islanders have nothing to win or lose in this one. They are last in the NHL come what may. I can't see them not trying to win really. Not being able to win, I can see that...
Game 3: Pittsburgh vs. Montreal
This is the game where neither team holds their own fate. However, because games 1 and 2 are in the afternoon, Pittsburgh will have a clear idea of what they might be able to do. Depending on who comes out of that Carolina game on top, and whether or not Philly decides to gamble with positioning, Pittsburgh could have options.
Personally, I think Pittsburgh would take Philadelphia if they could. It offers the worse defence and the worse goalie. The series would be offensive and energetic, just what they seek. And they have the better guns. If Pittsburgh want to face Philly, they'll have to win. But, if Carolina win, will Pittsburgh prefer the hot Hurricanes or the cold Devils. They didn't particularly separate themselves or stumble against either, so that would be a matter for them to decide. If I were them, I'd be avoiding Carolina...
Game 4: Rangers vs. Philadelphia
Now all is known. The Rangers will be in position to choose Washington or Boston. The Flyers might be in position to choose to. Anything's possible here. And this will be the one that decides Montreal's fate if the Habs get a point tonight.
A lid on the Schneider affair...
I haven't been watching RDS on television this holiday weekend, but I thought I'd note they hadn't apologised for their errant reports, at least online. Not that I expected them to. Pat Hickey almost does here:
You can't believe everything you read.
That was Mathieu Schneider's message last night after he made a dramatic return to the Canadiens lineup.
He said fans in Montreal got the message he was through for the season from the media, but the Canadiens and Schneider have to share some of the blame because they kept everyone in the dark about the nature of his shoulder injury.
But absolves himself from taking the bait because the Habs were so darned secretive.
Now rumblings about Markov too. Again good news. And, once again, in almost total contradiction of reports presented to us as fact...
I guess if there's one thing you must believe from what the media has aired and printed over the past two months on the Habs, nothing rings truer than Mathieu Schneider's words. I'd only add the caveat: "You can't believe most of what you hear either."
Friday, February 20, 2009
Don't Believe What You Read
Reporting On Canadiens A Shambles
You know what they say in internet land: "More haste, more speed"
Desperate reporters look to desperate measures as they would prefer to scoop anything from the murky waters of the online channel than scoop nothing at all.
Unfortunately, the result for the rest of us. Those who would rather know the truth in an hour than 15 guesses at what the truth might be now is often confusion and, ultimately, frustration.
On the same day as all this, I found this classic quote from a classy champion:
It could have been said about this sorry situation and not Luis Felipe Scolari's dismissal at Stamford Bridge. Had Sir Alex been so unlucky as to be tuned into RDS two days ago, I'm sure he'd concur.
The Kovalev story
The Kovalev story this week started easily enough. The news that he would be benched for 2 days came straight from the horses mouth and wasn't preceded by any speculation or rumours of the news.
But this juicy tidbit was spotted as a cash cow right from the start. Every newspaper and every blog had posted news of the press conference announcement within a few minutes. I tried to get something out as fast as I could - it probably earned me a good 30 cents just from hits (cash cow, indeed)...
The real cash from this story was in the spinning out, not in the initial report. The obvious fabrications sprung up remarkably quickly. No sooner had Gainey stopped talking that someone in the French press reports that Gainey has been trying to trade Kovalev for 2 weeks (to the Western conference, no doubt). The story is so predictable. It could be true, but it probably wasn't. We move on.
The next predictable part of the saga is Kovalev's musings on this matter via – you guessed it – the Russian press. This old cherry is a good one because it assumes (probably rightly) that not many in Montreal read Cyrillic, much less check up on Pravda by the day. The story as it was released can be found here: Prêt à partir, Kovalev blâme les jeunes.
This was as lazy as it was unprofessional. Back in 2007, La Presse broke a story that was either fabricated or shoddily translated. Back then it was purported that Kovalev, said the same things as this time. Kovalev denied it. The Canadiens investigated and decided their was no foundation to it. And the coup de grace, La Presse's alleged source came on Quebec French radio and refuted that Kovalev said any of this things the rag claimed he did.
This time it was not La Presse, but a locked-out employee (who used to work for La Presse). De Foy's sources, according to his CKAC interview were as watertight as La Presse requires – he merely claims he has a Russian friend in common with Kovy (not that he told the Russian friend these things, even). Even if Kovalev did tell his friend these things, it's hardly bullet-proof [The other night I told Tobalev I would stop watching the Habs if they started Carey Price without him earning a minute of it – clearly that was a heat of the moment exaggeration on my part]. De Foy, as a journalist with access to players (when they don't hang up on him...) could hold a higher standard. He chose not to. He instead favoured the scoop (again).
Still one rogue journo is not the end of the world. That is if any of the others held a high standard with regard to sourcing.
Within minutes of the initial report (see here for timing comment 1 to 15, about 30 minutes), RDS had it up. Given the reliability of La Presse's sources in the past, and the fact it was a recycled story line, you'd hope RDS spent the time checking the validity. It strikes me they probably didn't. As pleased as I am to be able to turn the TV on any time and listen to a new debate on the Canadiens, RDS yesterday showed just how low their standards are.
They weren't alone. The once excellent Habs Inside/Out, who I once praised near daily, were among the more professional; were also hapless in their own terror of being scooped. They waited an astounding ten minutes to become a tertiary source. Pat Hickey followed with this. There were more.
The Montreal media caught out by false reports? Try idleness...
As a blogger we hear at length how inferior we must be to the great professionals because we don't have access to dressing rooms and to players. Yet in this situation, in a breaking situation where a call to a player could have resolved the whole thing and saved embarrassment, they chose to print.
One reporter did end up doing some reporting. With a sccop that should thoroughly humiliate the self-important Habs writing community, Darren Dreger of TSN broke the news. He wrote to Kovalev.
The usual suspects picked up this story just as quickly. RDS swept their previous story under the rug, hence the absence of a link here today. Habs Inside/Out at least admitted they had no idea what was going on.
The whole episode, precipitated by the search for the scoop and the fear of being scooped, is wholly disappointing.
Operation Axe
First, let me say that this mass arrest from the Montreal police (with the minor exception of a few Habs players) is great news for Montreal as a community. I don't have the full details (CBC reports), but a sting planned over almost 3 years, the biggest in Montreal history, did well to bring in so much.
As far as Operation Axe affects the Canadiens, you'd think the journalists fresh off their adrenaline-induced flurry of the previous 24 hours might have shown some restraint. But again this story was rushed to our bandwidths without much diligence. The first reports only spoke of the hype (generated by La Presse, of course). But as soon as the flimsiest of details came out, the half-baked products were uploaded.
I have spewed enough vitriol above and don't think i need to retread the same ground. Needless to say, the initial reports full of sensation were picked up by nearly everyone. As the light dawned on the situation this morning, and the story gets duller by the minute for conspiracy theorists, the alternate version is presented as a competing news story.
Friend and fellow blogger Robert L does the business on this episode. If you haven't had enough of ragging on the media, give his latest a read.
Eric Engels
I would be negligent if I didn't give a special nod to my fellow blogger Eric Engels who has also called for better standards of journalism from this group. Quite an indictment from a member of Hokeybuzz.com, no? His comments can be found at the bottom of this article.
The irony
You have to admit the irony of the whole situation is fun to take in.
The networks and press that flounder to get out stories criticising and cutting down players on the Montreal Canadiens, essentially for not doing their jobs properly, are doing so all the while neglecting the values of journalism. The result is they look as big fools on the page as Sergei Kostitsyn after a giveaway with a failed deke at the Vancouver blueline.
If Gainey had the power, I think he'd be suggesting a mandated vacation for certain non-performers in the press. Overheard via a common Azerbaijani friend of mine and Gainey's:
As an editorialist rather than a reporter it's easy for me to point the finger, maybe too easy. I'm sure the demands of the reporting job are heavy and that I too would have trouble. However, I would be remiss in my own role as commentator on Canadiens and their media if I did not at least shine the light on this embarrassing episode. I don't think I'm alone with 2 bloggers in feeling a bit ashamed of our brethren here...
What I do know is that the internet and 24-hour news has changed everything for the news media. I can see that some aren't able to keep up...
Desperate reporters look to desperate measures as they would prefer to scoop anything from the murky waters of the online channel than scoop nothing at all.
Unfortunately, the result for the rest of us. Those who would rather know the truth in an hour than 15 guesses at what the truth might be now is often confusion and, ultimately, frustration.
On the same day as all this, I found this classic quote from a classy champion:
"Their haste is a reflection of the sad way the game is going, with everyone from owners, the board members, the supporters and the media demanding instant success and showing absolutely no patience in the pursuit of their ambition."
It could have been said about this sorry situation and not Luis Felipe Scolari's dismissal at Stamford Bridge. Had Sir Alex been so unlucky as to be tuned into RDS two days ago, I'm sure he'd concur.
The Kovalev story
The Kovalev story this week started easily enough. The news that he would be benched for 2 days came straight from the horses mouth and wasn't preceded by any speculation or rumours of the news.
But this juicy tidbit was spotted as a cash cow right from the start. Every newspaper and every blog had posted news of the press conference announcement within a few minutes. I tried to get something out as fast as I could - it probably earned me a good 30 cents just from hits (cash cow, indeed)...
The real cash from this story was in the spinning out, not in the initial report. The obvious fabrications sprung up remarkably quickly. No sooner had Gainey stopped talking that someone in the French press reports that Gainey has been trying to trade Kovalev for 2 weeks (to the Western conference, no doubt). The story is so predictable. It could be true, but it probably wasn't. We move on.
The next predictable part of the saga is Kovalev's musings on this matter via – you guessed it – the Russian press. This old cherry is a good one because it assumes (probably rightly) that not many in Montreal read Cyrillic, much less check up on Pravda by the day. The story as it was released can be found here: Prêt à partir, Kovalev blâme les jeunes.
This was as lazy as it was unprofessional. Back in 2007, La Presse broke a story that was either fabricated or shoddily translated. Back then it was purported that Kovalev, said the same things as this time. Kovalev denied it. The Canadiens investigated and decided their was no foundation to it. And the coup de grace, La Presse's alleged source came on Quebec French radio and refuted that Kovalev said any of this things the rag claimed he did.
This time it was not La Presse, but a locked-out employee (who used to work for La Presse). De Foy's sources, according to his CKAC interview were as watertight as La Presse requires – he merely claims he has a Russian friend in common with Kovy (not that he told the Russian friend these things, even). Even if Kovalev did tell his friend these things, it's hardly bullet-proof [The other night I told Tobalev I would stop watching the Habs if they started Carey Price without him earning a minute of it – clearly that was a heat of the moment exaggeration on my part]. De Foy, as a journalist with access to players (when they don't hang up on him...) could hold a higher standard. He chose not to. He instead favoured the scoop (again).
Still one rogue journo is not the end of the world. That is if any of the others held a high standard with regard to sourcing.
Within minutes of the initial report (see here for timing comment 1 to 15, about 30 minutes), RDS had it up. Given the reliability of La Presse's sources in the past, and the fact it was a recycled story line, you'd hope RDS spent the time checking the validity. It strikes me they probably didn't. As pleased as I am to be able to turn the TV on any time and listen to a new debate on the Canadiens, RDS yesterday showed just how low their standards are.
They weren't alone. The once excellent Habs Inside/Out, who I once praised near daily, were among the more professional; were also hapless in their own terror of being scooped. They waited an astounding ten minutes to become a tertiary source. Pat Hickey followed with this. There were more.
The Montreal media caught out by false reports? Try idleness...
As a blogger we hear at length how inferior we must be to the great professionals because we don't have access to dressing rooms and to players. Yet in this situation, in a breaking situation where a call to a player could have resolved the whole thing and saved embarrassment, they chose to print.
One reporter did end up doing some reporting. With a sccop that should thoroughly humiliate the self-important Habs writing community, Darren Dreger of TSN broke the news. He wrote to Kovalev.
The usual suspects picked up this story just as quickly. RDS swept their previous story under the rug, hence the absence of a link here today. Habs Inside/Out at least admitted they had no idea what was going on.
The whole episode, precipitated by the search for the scoop and the fear of being scooped, is wholly disappointing.
Operation Axe
First, let me say that this mass arrest from the Montreal police (with the minor exception of a few Habs players) is great news for Montreal as a community. I don't have the full details (CBC reports), but a sting planned over almost 3 years, the biggest in Montreal history, did well to bring in so much.
As far as Operation Axe affects the Canadiens, you'd think the journalists fresh off their adrenaline-induced flurry of the previous 24 hours might have shown some restraint. But again this story was rushed to our bandwidths without much diligence. The first reports only spoke of the hype (generated by La Presse, of course). But as soon as the flimsiest of details came out, the half-baked products were uploaded.
I have spewed enough vitriol above and don't think i need to retread the same ground. Needless to say, the initial reports full of sensation were picked up by nearly everyone. As the light dawned on the situation this morning, and the story gets duller by the minute for conspiracy theorists, the alternate version is presented as a competing news story.
Friend and fellow blogger Robert L does the business on this episode. If you haven't had enough of ragging on the media, give his latest a read.
Eric Engels
I would be negligent if I didn't give a special nod to my fellow blogger Eric Engels who has also called for better standards of journalism from this group. Quite an indictment from a member of Hokeybuzz.com, no? His comments can be found at the bottom of this article.
The irony
You have to admit the irony of the whole situation is fun to take in.
The networks and press that flounder to get out stories criticising and cutting down players on the Montreal Canadiens, essentially for not doing their jobs properly, are doing so all the while neglecting the values of journalism. The result is they look as big fools on the page as Sergei Kostitsyn after a giveaway with a failed deke at the Vancouver blueline.
If Gainey had the power, I think he'd be suggesting a mandated vacation for certain non-performers in the press. Overheard via a common Azerbaijani friend of mine and Gainey's:
"We don't need them the way they are performing their duties right now."
As an editorialist rather than a reporter it's easy for me to point the finger, maybe too easy. I'm sure the demands of the reporting job are heavy and that I too would have trouble. However, I would be remiss in my own role as commentator on Canadiens and their media if I did not at least shine the light on this embarrassing episode. I don't think I'm alone with 2 bloggers in feeling a bit ashamed of our brethren here...
What I do know is that the internet and 24-hour news has changed everything for the news media. I can see that some aren't able to keep up...
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Like A Fish Needs A Bicycle
Farber Can Take His Attitude Elsewhere
Michael Farber, one-time Gazette Sports writer, has written the following piece for Sport Illustrated's website:
Lecavalier doesn't need Montreal
After reading this piece, I for one think Farber should reserve his Montreal Canadiens commentary to his annual December-time piece that tries to tell us what the Habs PP is all about. Last year he said it was all Koivu. this year, he implies that he thought Streit was the impetus for success. Short memories aside, I am not here to criticise his assessment of PP tactics. Maybe he should just call it a day.
I wish to take issue with his Lecavalier piece.
It's written in the most annoying of styles (be kind if I ever use it here), the letter to the player. Still more annoying is it's peppering with lines like these:
And why is that Michael?
Numerous reasons apparently:
1) Hockey - more specifically, the Canadiens -- is bigger than ever
2) You have your Stanley Cup
3) And you don't have the need to come "home" because, even though most people don't know this about you, you are a worldly guy with an open spirit (as they say in French)
For the first argument, Farber induces the childish and age-old argument that he could do without the media. After all hockey is a religion here now (Oh, is it Farber? Have you been to the course then when they concluded that? I was mistaken for thinking the course was examining the similarities, I didn't know the conclusion had been published).
Farber should ask Alex Tanguay how hard it is for players coming to Montreal. I don't think Alex has spent more than a half-hour on TV so far. No one has questioned his $6 million salary and he fades into the background because he wants to. I guess that wouldn't support the argument, though. In any case, Tanguay only shows that the media looks worse from the outside than it is on the inside.
His second argument is not much more convincing. But then I probably just forgot that once players win once they are sated for victory and all its spoils. Vincent has his sights on the President's trophy now, the coveted trophy he hasn't won yet.
His third argument makes as much sense as the other two.
It's a confusing piece from a writer I respect, and (dare I say) like reading. Maybe he did it so RDS would pick it up in translation as they did. Maybe he did it because he was bored. Maybe he did it to work up a storm: I don't even want Lecavalier and I'm all wound up now.
Montreal doesn't need Farber. Not if this is the best he can offer nowadays...
Lecavalier doesn't need Montreal
After reading this piece, I for one think Farber should reserve his Montreal Canadiens commentary to his annual December-time piece that tries to tell us what the Habs PP is all about. Last year he said it was all Koivu. this year, he implies that he thought Streit was the impetus for success. Short memories aside, I am not here to criticise his assessment of PP tactics. Maybe he should just call it a day.
I wish to take issue with his Lecavalier piece.
It's written in the most annoying of styles (be kind if I ever use it here), the letter to the player. Still more annoying is it's peppering with lines like these:
This deal makes sense to everybody but you.
And why is that Michael?
Numerous reasons apparently:
1) Hockey - more specifically, the Canadiens -- is bigger than ever
2) You have your Stanley Cup
3) And you don't have the need to come "home" because, even though most people don't know this about you, you are a worldly guy with an open spirit (as they say in French)
For the first argument, Farber induces the childish and age-old argument that he could do without the media. After all hockey is a religion here now (Oh, is it Farber? Have you been to the course then when they concluded that? I was mistaken for thinking the course was examining the similarities, I didn't know the conclusion had been published).
Farber should ask Alex Tanguay how hard it is for players coming to Montreal. I don't think Alex has spent more than a half-hour on TV so far. No one has questioned his $6 million salary and he fades into the background because he wants to. I guess that wouldn't support the argument, though. In any case, Tanguay only shows that the media looks worse from the outside than it is on the inside.
His second argument is not much more convincing. But then I probably just forgot that once players win once they are sated for victory and all its spoils. Vincent has his sights on the President's trophy now, the coveted trophy he hasn't won yet.
His third argument makes as much sense as the other two.
It's a confusing piece from a writer I respect, and (dare I say) like reading. Maybe he did it so RDS would pick it up in translation as they did. Maybe he did it because he was bored. Maybe he did it to work up a storm: I don't even want Lecavalier and I'm all wound up now.
Montreal doesn't need Farber. Not if this is the best he can offer nowadays...
Friday, October 24, 2008
Blogging the NHL
Habs Inside/Out A Rare Ally Among Mainstream Media
Blogging the NHL
Habs Inside/Out A Rare Ally Among Mainstream Media
More than a week late on this one, but you'll have to forgive my oversight. A wedding and a wonderful winning streak had come in the way of this article and the blogsite.
As I often try to do when I notice conflict and contrast in hockey and its loyal media, I wanted to write a piece about two recent stories I had come across. The first, and most encouraging, was this one from Habs Inside/Out about adding new bloggers to the site and the second was this one from Puck Daddy about the Oilers losing a blogger.
I'll begin with the latter...
Blogger booted
It was during the Oilers first game of the season that blogger Dave Berry of Covered in Oil was accosted by press (gang) guys and asked to cease his blogging activities from the Oilers pressbox. I won't recount the whole story, but if you want to read the drama, read on at Dave's last entries here and here.
The fact that I neither read nor particularly have any inclination to read live blogs while I'm watching a game is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is, the Oilers have overstepped the mark on this occasion. Berry was doing nothing to contravene any oath he had taken or any law of society. He merely ticked off the brass, at which point they had to invent a set of rules which they would then go on to impose for all of 24 hours.
Their battle, as has been pointed by many a commentator, is rather futile. Anyone watching on TV, at the game with a blackberry or even still in the pressbox can easily live blog negative thoughts about the team if they want to. Covered in Oil, even, is still up and running, and will probably just replace Dave by someone else at some point.
What's more, even though the content was largely negative, how many people did the Oilers think this material was reaching. Judging by their comments, its probably only in the low thousands.
No, all the Oilers have ended up doing in this mixed up situation is anger a lot of very very vocal people. The story of the incident has been picked up by every hockey blogger under the sun (it must have if I'm in on it too) and every corner of the hockey playing universe. In terms of PR for the organisation, it was a -10 – I didn't read a single article taking the Oilers side here.
For me, as interesting as the saga was, what intrigued me more was who ratted Mr. Berry out in the first place.It must have been:
a) someone reading the blog that night (especially because it emerged the problem was content)
b) someone who doesn't like the idea of live blogging
c) someone who had contact with the Edmonton Oilers press guys
As big and popular as blogging is, I think it's a stretch to believe that anyone to do with the hockey team operation or ownership would be reading snide remarks instead of watching their team. This leads me to believe that it was either another blogger or someone from the traditional media.
Now, I thought that bloggers stuck together. And all the response in this case leads me to believe that is true, even though Berry did try to drag a couple of peers down with him belatedly.
So, that leaves the big bad media. Berry, a member of both fraternities himself, even expressed that were he not blogging he'd have had nothing to do while waiting for his quotes anyway. That throws the "too busy working" alibi right out the window. Yeah, I think the Edmonton media landed a scoring low here.
After all, there is a certain implicit agreement in the "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" arrangement between bloggers and media who work together. In the case of the Oilers organisation, it went to the extreme - the blogger was dissing his team and those "scratching his back". They decided to tell Mommy and Daddy.
Gosh, the media really do have their knickers in a twist over this new-fangled blogging thing, don't they...
... Well not all of them actually.
The progressive team @ Habs Inside/Out
Though I don't always agree with their take on matters involving hockey, I have to hand it to the boys from the Gazette and the blog they have nurtured over the past two seasons. I think they deserve acknowledgment for their efforts here.
For one thing the blog is done in the right spirit. It neither takes itself too seriously, nor does it take hockey too seriously. It simply provides an addendum to all the material that is published in its parent publication, the Montreal Gazette. This hasn't stopped the main page and Mike Boone's blog from being the most complete, up-to-date and reliable source for Canadiens material (in English, I should qualify).
The other thing the blog has done right has been to embrace the bloggers. I can't say that I have personally experienced their favour on too many occasions (there was a recent link attributed to another blog), but I still laud them for interacting and even linking with bloggers like Robert L, TC Denault, the Four Habs Fans and others. The step they have taken to formalise this relationship by serialising some of these authors on their Other Wing page, is either ahead of the times or right with them, depending where you're from. And the manner in which they interact with the bloggers does them credit too.
Habs fans should count themselves very lucky to have these guys. And, when you think about it, English Habs fans are the luckiest of all – with probably the most intense and disproportionate amount of coverage of any team in the NHL (given the size of our group).
So, in general, can bloggers and the media get along?
I think they can. Other than Habs Inside/Out, I think that there are countless examples showing that they can. In Long Island they fraternise, and in Washington they get along too. Thankfully Edmonton is one of a few teams who tread a more archaic path.
Personally, I don't think Tobalev or I would have any problem getting along with any of the professional Habs media (though as I said, we would have plenty to debate and disagree about – hockeywise).
Incidentally, I also wonder whether co-habitating is the right approach for everyone at the end of the day. I think the root of blogging and what makes it powerful and compelling is its independent nature. On this occasion, I tend to agree with Matt (the Flames fan) at Battle of Alberta, when he says:
It is certainly a dilemma that some lucky bloggers get to deal with. It's still all theoretical to me.
In any case, I am thankful I support Montreal, where the door to the halls of media discussion has been left wide open with a sign saying "Welcome bloggers".
As I often try to do when I notice conflict and contrast in hockey and its loyal media, I wanted to write a piece about two recent stories I had come across. The first, and most encouraging, was this one from Habs Inside/Out about adding new bloggers to the site and the second was this one from Puck Daddy about the Oilers losing a blogger.
I'll begin with the latter...
Blogger booted
It was during the Oilers first game of the season that blogger Dave Berry of Covered in Oil was accosted by press (gang) guys and asked to cease his blogging activities from the Oilers pressbox. I won't recount the whole story, but if you want to read the drama, read on at Dave's last entries here and here.
The fact that I neither read nor particularly have any inclination to read live blogs while I'm watching a game is neither here nor there. The fact of the matter is, the Oilers have overstepped the mark on this occasion. Berry was doing nothing to contravene any oath he had taken or any law of society. He merely ticked off the brass, at which point they had to invent a set of rules which they would then go on to impose for all of 24 hours.
Their battle, as has been pointed by many a commentator, is rather futile. Anyone watching on TV, at the game with a blackberry or even still in the pressbox can easily live blog negative thoughts about the team if they want to. Covered in Oil, even, is still up and running, and will probably just replace Dave by someone else at some point.
What's more, even though the content was largely negative, how many people did the Oilers think this material was reaching. Judging by their comments, its probably only in the low thousands.
No, all the Oilers have ended up doing in this mixed up situation is anger a lot of very very vocal people. The story of the incident has been picked up by every hockey blogger under the sun (it must have if I'm in on it too) and every corner of the hockey playing universe. In terms of PR for the organisation, it was a -10 – I didn't read a single article taking the Oilers side here.
For me, as interesting as the saga was, what intrigued me more was who ratted Mr. Berry out in the first place.It must have been:
a) someone reading the blog that night (especially because it emerged the problem was content)
b) someone who doesn't like the idea of live blogging
c) someone who had contact with the Edmonton Oilers press guys
As big and popular as blogging is, I think it's a stretch to believe that anyone to do with the hockey team operation or ownership would be reading snide remarks instead of watching their team. This leads me to believe that it was either another blogger or someone from the traditional media.
Now, I thought that bloggers stuck together. And all the response in this case leads me to believe that is true, even though Berry did try to drag a couple of peers down with him belatedly.
So, that leaves the big bad media. Berry, a member of both fraternities himself, even expressed that were he not blogging he'd have had nothing to do while waiting for his quotes anyway. That throws the "too busy working" alibi right out the window. Yeah, I think the Edmonton media landed a scoring low here.
After all, there is a certain implicit agreement in the "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" arrangement between bloggers and media who work together. In the case of the Oilers organisation, it went to the extreme - the blogger was dissing his team and those "scratching his back". They decided to tell Mommy and Daddy.
Gosh, the media really do have their knickers in a twist over this new-fangled blogging thing, don't they...
... Well not all of them actually.
The progressive team @ Habs Inside/Out
Though I don't always agree with their take on matters involving hockey, I have to hand it to the boys from the Gazette and the blog they have nurtured over the past two seasons. I think they deserve acknowledgment for their efforts here.
For one thing the blog is done in the right spirit. It neither takes itself too seriously, nor does it take hockey too seriously. It simply provides an addendum to all the material that is published in its parent publication, the Montreal Gazette. This hasn't stopped the main page and Mike Boone's blog from being the most complete, up-to-date and reliable source for Canadiens material (in English, I should qualify).
The other thing the blog has done right has been to embrace the bloggers. I can't say that I have personally experienced their favour on too many occasions (there was a recent link attributed to another blog), but I still laud them for interacting and even linking with bloggers like Robert L, TC Denault, the Four Habs Fans and others. The step they have taken to formalise this relationship by serialising some of these authors on their Other Wing page, is either ahead of the times or right with them, depending where you're from. And the manner in which they interact with the bloggers does them credit too.
Habs fans should count themselves very lucky to have these guys. And, when you think about it, English Habs fans are the luckiest of all – with probably the most intense and disproportionate amount of coverage of any team in the NHL (given the size of our group).
So, in general, can bloggers and the media get along?
I think they can. Other than Habs Inside/Out, I think that there are countless examples showing that they can. In Long Island they fraternise, and in Washington they get along too. Thankfully Edmonton is one of a few teams who tread a more archaic path.
Personally, I don't think Tobalev or I would have any problem getting along with any of the professional Habs media (though as I said, we would have plenty to debate and disagree about – hockeywise).
Incidentally, I also wonder whether co-habitating is the right approach for everyone at the end of the day. I think the root of blogging and what makes it powerful and compelling is its independent nature. On this occasion, I tend to agree with Matt (the Flames fan) at Battle of Alberta, when he says:
There's a reason I've never attempted to contact the Flames organization, get a press pass, an interview, or the like. Actually, there's two reasons, the first of which is that I like this blog the way it is: it's personal, I don't owe anyone any favours, and I don't have to abide by anyone's rules and guidelines but my own.
It is certainly a dilemma that some lucky bloggers get to deal with. It's still all theoretical to me.
In any case, I am thankful I support Montreal, where the door to the halls of media discussion has been left wide open with a sign saying "Welcome bloggers".
Friday, May 02, 2008
Reasons to Believe: Updated
Wow, not being overwhelmed by everyone's positivity. Maybe it takes an extra day?
The reasons are slowly accumulating though, thanks to replies from positive fellow fanatics Tru7h and Stevens. Keep more coming...
Believe:
1) Saku Koivu
The best pressure player I have ever seen on any team I support. In the past 4 NHL seasons, he has played in 6 elimination games. In those 6 games, he has 2 goals and 9 assists, and has been the star of most as well. That's even without considering his victories over terrible injuries and illness. Can he play better? We may find it hard to conceive how he might, but he will – it's what he does. And, so for Captain Courageous:
And, how many times has he done just that?
2) Carey Price's form since his 2008 anointment (Tru7h)
Prior to this series, Carey has always been able to bounce back into his best form.
3) Elimination games (Tru7h)
The Canadiens have a way to play big in these even BIGGER games. I guess some guys just thrive in that pressure cooker environment of "do or die" (see Koivu).
4) The fans
21,273 screaming fanatics behind the Habs on Saturday.
5) Bob Gainey (Tru7h)
With his team facing elimination, I honestly believe that Gainey will step-in to tell Carbo to cut the crap and play his best lineup.
6) It has been done before (Stevens)
Makes me feel that this has to be the team that pulls off something crazy. Like what was already said, Philly beat us 3x in a row, why can't we do it to them?
7) The Canadian media has jumped off the bandwagon
Ottawa
Toronto
Winnipeg
I feel that this is good in two ways. First, any feeling of unreasonable expectations will be temporarily eased. Second, it will turn the mentality into more of a siege mentality – where the coaches and team will add the desire to proving people wrong to their motivations.
8) The desire to prove people wrong
Worked well in those recent playoff upsets. Worked well following pre-season write-offs. Worked well when the ability to win the East was questioned.
9) Philly's victim currency has run out
People (even in Philadelphia) have had enough of the Flyers pathetic conspiracy theories and crying games.
And, finally, another good blogger has more positives in a good post on The H Does Not Stand For Habs
I know there's more. Send in your own reasons as we build up to this big game...
The reasons are slowly accumulating though, thanks to replies from positive fellow fanatics Tru7h and Stevens. Keep more coming...
Believe:
1) Saku Koivu
The best pressure player I have ever seen on any team I support. In the past 4 NHL seasons, he has played in 6 elimination games. In those 6 games, he has 2 goals and 9 assists, and has been the star of most as well. That's even without considering his victories over terrible injuries and illness. Can he play better? We may find it hard to conceive how he might, but he will – it's what he does. And, so for Captain Courageous:
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'
And, how many times has he done just that?
2) Carey Price's form since his 2008 anointment (Tru7h)
Prior to this series, Carey has always been able to bounce back into his best form.
3) Elimination games (Tru7h)
The Canadiens have a way to play big in these even BIGGER games. I guess some guys just thrive in that pressure cooker environment of "do or die" (see Koivu).
4) The fans
21,273 screaming fanatics behind the Habs on Saturday.
5) Bob Gainey (Tru7h)
With his team facing elimination, I honestly believe that Gainey will step-in to tell Carbo to cut the crap and play his best lineup.
6) It has been done before (Stevens)
Makes me feel that this has to be the team that pulls off something crazy. Like what was already said, Philly beat us 3x in a row, why can't we do it to them?
7) The Canadian media has jumped off the bandwagon
Ottawa
Toronto
Winnipeg
I feel that this is good in two ways. First, any feeling of unreasonable expectations will be temporarily eased. Second, it will turn the mentality into more of a siege mentality – where the coaches and team will add the desire to proving people wrong to their motivations.
8) The desire to prove people wrong
Worked well in those recent playoff upsets. Worked well following pre-season write-offs. Worked well when the ability to win the East was questioned.
9) Philly's victim currency has run out
People (even in Philadelphia) have had enough of the Flyers pathetic conspiracy theories and crying games.
And, finally, another good blogger has more positives in a good post on The H Does Not Stand For Habs
I know there's more. Send in your own reasons as we build up to this big game...
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Goalies And Such: The All-Important Game 4
Slow news day. The main news: "The absence of news."
You know what? Today I am proud of Carbonneau again.
He has entered the game.
He's hitting back at John Stevens' ridiculous victim role-play with some mind games of his own.
Of course the Canadiens know who will be starting. They knew 5 minutes after the last game, they knew at lunch yesterday, they knew at all the press conferences. They knew all along. But by witholding their choice they do a lot more than annoy overly anxious bloggers.
He forces the Flyers coaches to brief their players on Halak (time waster?)
And, he temporarily puts their gameplan on hold.
You could ask, do the Flyers even care? My answer is that they should. They have scored their goals largely by exploiting a weakness that someone must have identified in Price (high shots). Evidence for this is not only in the goals they've scored (the ones that weren't deflections) but also in the fact that every time they get a clean shot, he shoots high. Were it not for their scouting (or luck in catching Price at a bad time), they might not be so thrilled with their goalscoring output right now.
Admittedly, it's not the be all and end all to the Flyers plans, and it won't prevent them from sorting out the other deficiencies in their game, or talking about containing forwards or hitting defencemen. But their plan cannot be complete. At least not until the last minute now.
Carbonneau, in making the goalie question linger for 48 hours, has also taken most of the media heat off the players. As the media publish an update every hour about the fact we still don't know who is in goal, they have taken a break from chipping in their usual criticism of Markov, Streit and Plekanec. When you play the same team 4 times in 8 days, and more, you need this sort of media leadership from the coach. I have an opinion about who should start, for certain, but I don't care about when I discover the starter - when the anthems are sung for all I care.
The Flyers care, that's why I'm happy.
Go Habs Go.
You know what? Today I am proud of Carbonneau again.
He has entered the game.
He's hitting back at John Stevens' ridiculous victim role-play with some mind games of his own.
Of course the Canadiens know who will be starting. They knew 5 minutes after the last game, they knew at lunch yesterday, they knew at all the press conferences. They knew all along. But by witholding their choice they do a lot more than annoy overly anxious bloggers.
He forces the Flyers coaches to brief their players on Halak (time waster?)
And, he temporarily puts their gameplan on hold.
You could ask, do the Flyers even care? My answer is that they should. They have scored their goals largely by exploiting a weakness that someone must have identified in Price (high shots). Evidence for this is not only in the goals they've scored (the ones that weren't deflections) but also in the fact that every time they get a clean shot, he shoots high. Were it not for their scouting (or luck in catching Price at a bad time), they might not be so thrilled with their goalscoring output right now.
Admittedly, it's not the be all and end all to the Flyers plans, and it won't prevent them from sorting out the other deficiencies in their game, or talking about containing forwards or hitting defencemen. But their plan cannot be complete. At least not until the last minute now.
Carbonneau, in making the goalie question linger for 48 hours, has also taken most of the media heat off the players. As the media publish an update every hour about the fact we still don't know who is in goal, they have taken a break from chipping in their usual criticism of Markov, Streit and Plekanec. When you play the same team 4 times in 8 days, and more, you need this sort of media leadership from the coach. I have an opinion about who should start, for certain, but I don't care about when I discover the starter - when the anthems are sung for all I care.
The Flyers care, that's why I'm happy.
Go Habs Go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)