When the NHL announced that it was to create the All-Star teams for the Annual Classic by a live draft, the first thought in most peoples' minds was:
"Who will have the shame of being the last standing"
To soften the blow to the 6th goalie and the last defenceman taken, the league put in some rules to ensure these were picked by an earlier deadline. (They also softened the blow to the least deserving forward, er defenceman, when they made him an assistant captain with exemption from the draft)
But guess what. someone will still have to be picked last. What's more, with the use of cunning and guile we can all figure out who the last defender and goalie picked were anyway.
As Canadiens fans, we don't have the luxury of being from a city in the US where the NHL is really trying to promote itself right now, so we only have on representative at the game.
Carey price nearly won the write in ballots, but the always humble Penguins fans stuffed the boxes for their goalie before Christmas when his stats were so Un-Star. Carey made it anyway, either on merit or because every team has to have one representative -- you tell me.
In any case, what this all means is that just about the only reason to watch any of the festivities this weekend for the hardcore Habs fan is to see where Carey price will be selected. It should give a new barometer on Price -- what opposing players think of him.
Mock draft results
Ahead of the actual draft, one of the most popular things to do for people with 3 minutes to spare is to do a mock draft and publish it in their newspaper or on their web page. In these drafts, the columnists either pick who they'd select (credible?) or pretend to be Staal and Lidtsrom and pick that way (less credible?).
In order to get an idea of the odds for Carey, I had a browse through about 9 mock drafts to see where he stood (NHL I, NHL III, TSN, Cgy Herald, Can Press, SI, SN, Broadstreet Hockey).
At this point, I'd have to say that Carey Price is the odds on favourite to be selected with the very last pick of a goaltender. The chips seem to fall mostly this way:
1) Cam Ward
Those pretending to be Staal all took him first. Given that Staal is the one picking, it seems plausible that he might go for Ward.
7 first, 1 second, 1 fourth (never after Price)
2) Tim Thomas
The best goaltender in the league this year (and over the past few years) gets relegated by Ward, but no further.
2 first, 4 second, 3 third (once after Price -- TSN)
3) Jonas Hiller
The best save percentage over the last few years, a solid and consistent bet is recognized as such.
1 second, 3 third, 2 fourth, 3 fifth (twice after Price)
4) Marc-Andre Fleury
Having to earn a selection without an internet vote may prove harder for MAF. The pundits knock him down the few notches his career stats deserve.
3 third, 3 fourth, 2 fifth, 1 sixth (twice after Price)
5) Henrik Lundqvist
Lidstrom is Swedish, and Lundqvist is pretty reliable to a standard.
2 second, 1 fourth, 4 fifth, 2 sixth (thrice after Price)
6) Carey Price
One big fan in Darren Dreger, but also openly mocked by some fantasy drafters. He was the clear last choice form the limited selection here.
1 second, 2 fourth, 6 sixth
On form
On form alone, Carey would probably fare a bit better.
This season, he is tied for fifth among the All-Star goalies in save percentage, with 0.920, good for 13th in the NHL (tied with Ward). Carey's been good, but the league standard has gone up. He's been better at keeping the goals down, as he's 9th leaguwide in that regard (2.36) and better than both Hiller (2.50) and Ward (2.70). So let's say if this game wasn't in Carolina, then Carey would be well ahead of Cam. Then again, if it wasn't in Carolina, how would Shanahan explain Ward over Pavelec or Rinne?
If we take a regular season only view and remove playoff accolades and blushes, then Carey is also slightly better than both Ward and Fleury for a career.
Sorry folks, but unless this game is suddenly moved to a different venue, it looks like GAA numbers won't be enough to save Carey's uneasy stand until the 10th round of this draft.
If there's something we've learned about Carey in his short career, however, it's that thinking he has something to prove is a better mode than thinking he's proved something already. As far as the Habs go, it may be good for Price to add a little chip to his shoulder for the next time he faces Staal, or Richards, or St. Louis.
Showing posts with label Lidstrom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lidstrom. Show all posts
Friday, January 28, 2011
Friday, December 10, 2010
A Winged View Of Things
Big game tonight with the Red Wings. A throwback really, with the two teams both riding quite high. Must have felt tlike this in bygone eras.
As a prelude to the game, I was asked by Red Wings blogger, and extremely dedicated Norwegian hockey fan, to answer a few questions for his blog "Fight Night at the Joe". In turn, I asked him a few of my own. I'll post his answers below, and will link to the my answers on his site when they're up.
Fight Night at the Joe asks LIW:
1. The Habs have looked great so far this year, what reasons are behind the improvement from last year?
2. Will they be able to hold on for the entire season?
3. Which player do you guys plan to boo next?
4. Going into this game, what do you fear about the Wings? What should the Wings be looking out for?
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
(See answers on the Fight Night at the Joe pre-game post)
LIW asks Fight Night at the Joe:
1. Can you explain briefly how the Red Wings do it? Perennial contention, what's the secret?
The secret is pretty simple I think. First of all, the Wings have always drafted very well. They were very early on to focusing on Europe and got a lot of draft steals from Sweden and Russia. Generally good scouting has also helped.
Secondly, the Wings tend to never rush anyone. Except for in a few cases, prospects have to play at least a year, often more in the AHL before they get up to the NHL and they are well developed when they finally come up.
The Wings have also done very well at trading. There have been a few busts (Wendel Clark and Robert Lang come to mind), but most of the trades the last 20 years have been good and they have never been a team that will make a desperation trade.
Money is another factor, but that has been diminished after the lockout.
But one of the main factors in my eyes is that the Wings seem to be a team where players want to stay. Everyone, from the Illitches, through Kenny Holland and down to the role players, equipment guys and everyone else are part of the Wings family. They treat their players well, keep a consistent environment and everyone coming up through the system plays Red Wings hockey. Draft picks stay there their whole career and journeymen like Brad Stuart and Dan Cleary and outcasts like Todd Bertuzzi find a new home where they can get a role that fits them, adapt to the system and finally settle down. The players seem to be happy in Detroit, there is a winning culture and the team is usually the same from year to year, which is a huge factor in consistently winning. And they really take care of and value every player. They know how important role players are. Just look at Draper and Maltby.
Last of all, Nicklas Lidström. It is impossible to realize how good he is without watching the Wings every game and he has been a huge part in the last 20 years of success.
2. The Canadiens have lost Andrei Markov for the second straight season, essentially. Is there a single player on the Red Wings whose absence might lead to a significant dip in the standings?
The first player that comes to mind is Nick Lidström. As I said, even with his success I think he is underrated. He is so subtle and does all the little things right. You really need to watch them often to appreciate just how good he is at that. Teammates and fans call him the Perfect Human and it is fitting. When he makes a mistake it is shocking to us, cause usually he just doesn't make them. He is the team's leader, still one of the best, maybe the best defenseman in the NHL. He does a huge job shutting down the opponent's star players every night and is important offensively too. Zetterberg and Datsyuk are other guys that would be huge losses for the Wings.
3. Andrei Markov goes to free agency on a shaky knee. Would you want your GM to sign him?
That depends on the price. I wouldn't pay high money for an injury prone star defenseman, but if he came for a discount because he wanted to prove himself it would be interesting. Right now I don't think the Wings need a guy with his style, but if Nick retires he could be an interesting part of a solution to fill the hole that would leave.
4. Montreal has had amazing first periods thus far, and managed to impose their style on the opposition. From what I know, this is Detroit's M.O. Which team do you think will get to play their style tonight?
The Wings are terribly schizophrenic when it comes to starting games. Some days they are right no time and score one or two goals early, but other nights it seems like they need a period to get into the game. And it is very hard to predict which version will show up. Right now the team has lost three straight games (or, well, one was in OT) and in the two first they came out strong, but collapsed (end of road trip and first game back home, so I get it) and then on Wednesday they were terrible for the first 25 minutes against Nashville. I know Babcock goes insane over that, so hopefully he has whipped the team into shape so they come out strong, but I am very worried that the Habs can come out flying and roll over the Wings for some time before the Wings really wake up.
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
That is a difficult question. The Wings have not been good lately and the Habs are scary to me right now. And they have such a speedy group of forwards, so I am scared that they might be all over the Wings, rush them and make the Wings commit way too many turnovers. The Wings need to get into their groove a little and get their passing game going to be good and if the Habs can deny them that early, then that and Carey Price having a good game, can lead to this getting ugly.
However, I think the team and everyone around it are very disappointed in the last few games and I have to hope that they show up ready to go and out for blood. I think it will be a tight game, but I think that the Wings will win 4-2 with the fourth goal being an empty netter. I also think special teams might become the deciding factor, but it is hard to predict which way that will swing.
6. Finally. You live in Norway. How do you manage to follow the NHL. And why the Red Wings?
Following it is pretty easy these days. Back in the day, when it was just on TV, it was a pain and you couldn't see every game, but now I have something called ESPNPlayer, which is basically the European equivalent of GameCenter Live. Lets me watch every game live or on demand (I have the same for the MLB and NFL (shoot me, I'm a Lions fan)). And seeing as I'm a student and my part time job has evening shifts, I can have a semi-American sleep cycle and stay up to watch the games.
Why the Wings? The answer has two parts really. When I was three or four I got a Canucks jersey cause my dad had been in Vancouver. So I became a Canucks fan. However, when I got NHL on TV in 94-95 I realized that the Canucks bored me (aside from Bure) and my 6-7 year old fashion sense realized that the Canucks jerseys were ugly as sin. However I loved the Wings jerseys, I loved that they had a Russian line and some Swedes and I really loved Stevie Y, so I began rooting for them. Two straight years of playoff disappointment (horrifying finals loss and then a brutal conference final loss) only made me love them more. And then, in the summer of 96, I attended a hockey camp in Asker, right outside of Oslo and Scottie Bowman and Barry Smith came in and coached us for one afternoon and in the morning the next day. It was really cool and they were really nice to us and I remember that Scotty gave us stickers saying "Proud to be a Wings fan". That settled it and I've been a hardcore ever since. Used to fight my mom and dad to be allowed to see important games on school nights and everything.
Thanks to Fight Night at the Joe
Pretty cool to hear from a dedicated fan of a very special franchise. The answers to the questions above remind one about things that have been said about the Canadiens in the past, and things we hope might be said about them in the future.
Needless to say, we're a bit jealous about the Scotty Bowman meeting, all-time best coach and all. But then I've had Nicklas Lidstrom hold the door for me on my wedding day, so we'll call it even...
As a prelude to the game, I was asked by Red Wings blogger, and extremely dedicated Norwegian hockey fan, to answer a few questions for his blog "Fight Night at the Joe". In turn, I asked him a few of my own. I'll post his answers below, and will link to the my answers on his site when they're up.
Fight Night at the Joe asks LIW:
1. The Habs have looked great so far this year, what reasons are behind the improvement from last year?
2. Will they be able to hold on for the entire season?
3. Which player do you guys plan to boo next?
4. Going into this game, what do you fear about the Wings? What should the Wings be looking out for?
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
(See answers on the Fight Night at the Joe pre-game post)
LIW asks Fight Night at the Joe:
1. Can you explain briefly how the Red Wings do it? Perennial contention, what's the secret?
The secret is pretty simple I think. First of all, the Wings have always drafted very well. They were very early on to focusing on Europe and got a lot of draft steals from Sweden and Russia. Generally good scouting has also helped.
Secondly, the Wings tend to never rush anyone. Except for in a few cases, prospects have to play at least a year, often more in the AHL before they get up to the NHL and they are well developed when they finally come up.
The Wings have also done very well at trading. There have been a few busts (Wendel Clark and Robert Lang come to mind), but most of the trades the last 20 years have been good and they have never been a team that will make a desperation trade.
Money is another factor, but that has been diminished after the lockout.
But one of the main factors in my eyes is that the Wings seem to be a team where players want to stay. Everyone, from the Illitches, through Kenny Holland and down to the role players, equipment guys and everyone else are part of the Wings family. They treat their players well, keep a consistent environment and everyone coming up through the system plays Red Wings hockey. Draft picks stay there their whole career and journeymen like Brad Stuart and Dan Cleary and outcasts like Todd Bertuzzi find a new home where they can get a role that fits them, adapt to the system and finally settle down. The players seem to be happy in Detroit, there is a winning culture and the team is usually the same from year to year, which is a huge factor in consistently winning. And they really take care of and value every player. They know how important role players are. Just look at Draper and Maltby.
Last of all, Nicklas Lidström. It is impossible to realize how good he is without watching the Wings every game and he has been a huge part in the last 20 years of success.
2. The Canadiens have lost Andrei Markov for the second straight season, essentially. Is there a single player on the Red Wings whose absence might lead to a significant dip in the standings?
The first player that comes to mind is Nick Lidström. As I said, even with his success I think he is underrated. He is so subtle and does all the little things right. You really need to watch them often to appreciate just how good he is at that. Teammates and fans call him the Perfect Human and it is fitting. When he makes a mistake it is shocking to us, cause usually he just doesn't make them. He is the team's leader, still one of the best, maybe the best defenseman in the NHL. He does a huge job shutting down the opponent's star players every night and is important offensively too. Zetterberg and Datsyuk are other guys that would be huge losses for the Wings.
3. Andrei Markov goes to free agency on a shaky knee. Would you want your GM to sign him?
That depends on the price. I wouldn't pay high money for an injury prone star defenseman, but if he came for a discount because he wanted to prove himself it would be interesting. Right now I don't think the Wings need a guy with his style, but if Nick retires he could be an interesting part of a solution to fill the hole that would leave.
4. Montreal has had amazing first periods thus far, and managed to impose their style on the opposition. From what I know, this is Detroit's M.O. Which team do you think will get to play their style tonight?
The Wings are terribly schizophrenic when it comes to starting games. Some days they are right no time and score one or two goals early, but other nights it seems like they need a period to get into the game. And it is very hard to predict which version will show up. Right now the team has lost three straight games (or, well, one was in OT) and in the two first they came out strong, but collapsed (end of road trip and first game back home, so I get it) and then on Wednesday they were terrible for the first 25 minutes against Nashville. I know Babcock goes insane over that, so hopefully he has whipped the team into shape so they come out strong, but I am very worried that the Habs can come out flying and roll over the Wings for some time before the Wings really wake up.
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!
That is a difficult question. The Wings have not been good lately and the Habs are scary to me right now. And they have such a speedy group of forwards, so I am scared that they might be all over the Wings, rush them and make the Wings commit way too many turnovers. The Wings need to get into their groove a little and get their passing game going to be good and if the Habs can deny them that early, then that and Carey Price having a good game, can lead to this getting ugly.
However, I think the team and everyone around it are very disappointed in the last few games and I have to hope that they show up ready to go and out for blood. I think it will be a tight game, but I think that the Wings will win 4-2 with the fourth goal being an empty netter. I also think special teams might become the deciding factor, but it is hard to predict which way that will swing.
6. Finally. You live in Norway. How do you manage to follow the NHL. And why the Red Wings?
Following it is pretty easy these days. Back in the day, when it was just on TV, it was a pain and you couldn't see every game, but now I have something called ESPNPlayer, which is basically the European equivalent of GameCenter Live. Lets me watch every game live or on demand (I have the same for the MLB and NFL (shoot me, I'm a Lions fan)). And seeing as I'm a student and my part time job has evening shifts, I can have a semi-American sleep cycle and stay up to watch the games.
Why the Wings? The answer has two parts really. When I was three or four I got a Canucks jersey cause my dad had been in Vancouver. So I became a Canucks fan. However, when I got NHL on TV in 94-95 I realized that the Canucks bored me (aside from Bure) and my 6-7 year old fashion sense realized that the Canucks jerseys were ugly as sin. However I loved the Wings jerseys, I loved that they had a Russian line and some Swedes and I really loved Stevie Y, so I began rooting for them. Two straight years of playoff disappointment (horrifying finals loss and then a brutal conference final loss) only made me love them more. And then, in the summer of 96, I attended a hockey camp in Asker, right outside of Oslo and Scottie Bowman and Barry Smith came in and coached us for one afternoon and in the morning the next day. It was really cool and they were really nice to us and I remember that Scotty gave us stickers saying "Proud to be a Wings fan". That settled it and I've been a hardcore ever since. Used to fight my mom and dad to be allowed to see important games on school nights and everything.
Thanks to Fight Night at the Joe
Pretty cool to hear from a dedicated fan of a very special franchise. The answers to the questions above remind one about things that have been said about the Canadiens in the past, and things we hope might be said about them in the future.
Needless to say, we're a bit jealous about the Scotty Bowman meeting, all-time best coach and all. But then I've had Nicklas Lidstrom hold the door for me on my wedding day, so we'll call it even...
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Dynasty Building
The Dream and The Reality
Dynasty Building
The Dream and The Reality
Thanks to Four Habs Fans attack on mediocre reporters, blogs and hockey management, I was lucky enough to fall onto this quote from Pierre Boivin:
Is this PR at its very finest, or what?
I'll tell you what Pierre, although it sounds nice, your notion that good management is enough to contend forever is a falsehood through and through. Ask the Ottawa Senators or the New jersey Devils fans if they believe that tripe. Both those teams are very well managed and both face the inevitable fall due to the cyclical nature of NHL player development. New Jersey are a goaltender retirement away from being the Islanders and Ottawa are a goaltender meltdown away from the pinnacle they reached.
The cycle of success
The cycle of success in the NHL is dependent on two very important and unchangeable facts (at least for the time being):
1) Players get older, and apart from Chelios can't play forever
2) The worst teams get first choice from the 10 sure shot young players coming through
It would be a mistake to think otherwise.
Now, I anticipate hearing a heck of a lot about Detroit in the case that anyone decides to respond. Probably because they represent the singular example of a team that has succeeded consistently over the past 15 years. I will cut that argument off at the pass.
While I truly believe Detroit has done a nice job at maintaining a contender over the years, it must not be overlooked that over the years they largely did so with sending power, money and some of the highest free agent offers in the history of the league.
No one would withhold that Detroit signed free agents more intelligently than did their peers in the overspending club (Philly, Toronto and NYR), but spend they did. History will show that Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dominik Hasek and Chris Chelios all helped the Red Wings bridge the period when youngsters Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not yet ready to carry the team and Steve Yzerman was probably no longer up to hauling 20 guys on his back anymore.
We didn't notice the Wings cycle here because they buffered it with pure spending. Sure, it was good management, but a bit looser on the purse strings in Montreal and we could have seen the same. Take away the free agents and I don't think Detroit walks away with a Stanley Cup at all between 1999 and 2004.
Detroit's latest trick
Times have changed a lot in the New NHL, and Detroit can no longer rely on their pull to make teams of any 35 year-olds they choose. As far as I can glean, there is really only one trick to help a team overstay its time at the top: get your stars signed under their market value. This has been Detroit's latest boon.
In the world of salary cap hockey, Zetterberg at under $3 million a year seems like cheating. Even Datsyuk making less than both Mike and Brad Richards is a major coup.
If and when Zetterberg and Datsyuk actually ask to be paid what they're worth, even mighty Detroit will have troubles. But, for the time being their generosity has allowed Detroit to indulge in the Rafalskis and Hossas (both the premier signings of their respective years) of this league.
The problem is, and where I think Boivin's theory falls apart is that all players will eventually want a nice big nest egg to finish off their days of earning a living before fishing and golf happily ever after. Even the modest Zetterberg is rumoured to want his worth ($7 million +), the same goes for their young defence and forwards. Hoping to replace Filppula or Holmstrom from within is optimistic, Zetterberg and Datsyuk - improbable.
Our cycle of success
Our time at the top seems to be well orchestrated, probably because it happened just when Gainey said it should. But I'll remember that though we won the conference, we only made the playoffs by 12 points and owe that first place to Ray Emery as much as anyone. This year is a truer test actually, because the players groomed to take us to the top are actually coming of age now (Andrei K, Plekanec, Markov, Higgins, Komisarek, and Price to an extent). This year is really the beginning of what should be our peaking and time in the top tier. It makes the best of administrators very optimistic indeed.
Montreal owes a lot of its current flexibility to sensible signings and players looking like bargains at the end of the year. The bargain group is topped by Plekanec and Higgins, but also includes Andrei Kostitsyn, Komisarek and even Kovalev. Having these players locked in at reasonable numbers has allowed the flexibility to retool with Hamrlik, Lang and Tanguay. But as we all know the honeymoon only lasts so long, and some of these guys will want to be paid.
I believe that Montreal will do their best to make hay this year. But I hope the team can see beyond Boivin's hype because who really knows how long the sun will be shining on Montreal.
"Today, if you recruit and operate well, are well-managed and well-coached, and have strong fan support, there's no reason you can't have a team that's going to contend ... forever."
Is this PR at its very finest, or what?
I'll tell you what Pierre, although it sounds nice, your notion that good management is enough to contend forever is a falsehood through and through. Ask the Ottawa Senators or the New jersey Devils fans if they believe that tripe. Both those teams are very well managed and both face the inevitable fall due to the cyclical nature of NHL player development. New Jersey are a goaltender retirement away from being the Islanders and Ottawa are a goaltender meltdown away from the pinnacle they reached.
The cycle of success
The cycle of success in the NHL is dependent on two very important and unchangeable facts (at least for the time being):
1) Players get older, and apart from Chelios can't play forever
2) The worst teams get first choice from the 10 sure shot young players coming through
It would be a mistake to think otherwise.
Now, I anticipate hearing a heck of a lot about Detroit in the case that anyone decides to respond. Probably because they represent the singular example of a team that has succeeded consistently over the past 15 years. I will cut that argument off at the pass.
While I truly believe Detroit has done a nice job at maintaining a contender over the years, it must not be overlooked that over the years they largely did so with sending power, money and some of the highest free agent offers in the history of the league.
No one would withhold that Detroit signed free agents more intelligently than did their peers in the overspending club (Philly, Toronto and NYR), but spend they did. History will show that Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dominik Hasek and Chris Chelios all helped the Red Wings bridge the period when youngsters Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not yet ready to carry the team and Steve Yzerman was probably no longer up to hauling 20 guys on his back anymore.
We didn't notice the Wings cycle here because they buffered it with pure spending. Sure, it was good management, but a bit looser on the purse strings in Montreal and we could have seen the same. Take away the free agents and I don't think Detroit walks away with a Stanley Cup at all between 1999 and 2004.
Detroit's latest trick
Times have changed a lot in the New NHL, and Detroit can no longer rely on their pull to make teams of any 35 year-olds they choose. As far as I can glean, there is really only one trick to help a team overstay its time at the top: get your stars signed under their market value. This has been Detroit's latest boon.
In the world of salary cap hockey, Zetterberg at under $3 million a year seems like cheating. Even Datsyuk making less than both Mike and Brad Richards is a major coup.
If and when Zetterberg and Datsyuk actually ask to be paid what they're worth, even mighty Detroit will have troubles. But, for the time being their generosity has allowed Detroit to indulge in the Rafalskis and Hossas (both the premier signings of their respective years) of this league.
The problem is, and where I think Boivin's theory falls apart is that all players will eventually want a nice big nest egg to finish off their days of earning a living before fishing and golf happily ever after. Even the modest Zetterberg is rumoured to want his worth ($7 million +), the same goes for their young defence and forwards. Hoping to replace Filppula or Holmstrom from within is optimistic, Zetterberg and Datsyuk - improbable.
Our cycle of success
Our time at the top seems to be well orchestrated, probably because it happened just when Gainey said it should. But I'll remember that though we won the conference, we only made the playoffs by 12 points and owe that first place to Ray Emery as much as anyone. This year is a truer test actually, because the players groomed to take us to the top are actually coming of age now (Andrei K, Plekanec, Markov, Higgins, Komisarek, and Price to an extent). This year is really the beginning of what should be our peaking and time in the top tier. It makes the best of administrators very optimistic indeed.
Montreal owes a lot of its current flexibility to sensible signings and players looking like bargains at the end of the year. The bargain group is topped by Plekanec and Higgins, but also includes Andrei Kostitsyn, Komisarek and even Kovalev. Having these players locked in at reasonable numbers has allowed the flexibility to retool with Hamrlik, Lang and Tanguay. But as we all know the honeymoon only lasts so long, and some of these guys will want to be paid.
I believe that Montreal will do their best to make hay this year. But I hope the team can see beyond Boivin's hype because who really knows how long the sun will be shining on Montreal.
Thursday, June 05, 2008
Lidstrom Opens The Door
Niklas Lidstrom, the first European captain to win a Stanley Cup (congratulations), opened a door last night...
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.
Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.
I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.
Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.
Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.
Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.
Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:
"Clearly, times have changed. North American players are not the only ones who are leaders - evidenced by Lidstrom's historic moment Wednesday night."
No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:
"I don't know who thinks they're not … that's ridiculous," Red Wings coach Mike Babcock said of European players. "You're living in the past if you believe that."
Living not in fairyland, but in the past?
Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:
"... (he) uses Nicklas Lidstrom's captaincy to question why Europeans have been in the NHL for 21 years, and there were 13 European captains this year, but Lidstrom was only the first European captain to lift the Cup."
Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.
To the winners
Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).
The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Hart Trophy Follow-up: Offense vs. Defense
It seems like fans have spoken - some on this site, some elsewhere. If the Habs were to have a legitimate shot at the Hart trophy, our best chance would fall to Kovalev.
Despite mine and Tobalev's arguments for Andrei Markov, it seems that history, at least, would be on their side not ours.
If you put aside Bobby Orr who was outscoring all the forwards anyway, it seems giving this trophy to a defenseman went out of style before the end of World War II, about 65 years ago. Other than "Number 4", Chris Pronger is the only defenseman to win the trophy over that period. Interestingly, if you look back to 1999-2000, the scoring was down and the top scorers were either on teams having a mediocre seasons (Jagr, Selanne, Kariya) or probably a little further than the league would want to go (Pavel Bure, Mark Recchi).
I think one thing is relatively clear: Hart trophy voters in general love scorers.
This is probably because it fits better with the image the league wants to put out: a high-flying, fast-paced game with exciting goalscoring galore. This is all well and good, but most hockey fans at least recognise, if not endorse, the idea that a good defenseman is not only valuable, but invaluable for a team to move forward and succeed.
In fact, no one other than Dominik Hasek (who was a human highlight reel and league advertisement on his own) has been able to beat a forward who has more than 100 points. With Ovechkin very close already and blowing the league away with goalscoring, he looks to be a trophy frontrunner. Malkin is there too, with close to 100 points himself, but on a team that threatens to play past April.
Considering defensemen log the most minutes, often direct the PP and the PK, start the majority of plays and (the best ones) score relatively well, it is puzzling to see them get so little recognition.
Take only the example of Niklas Lidstrom. He now has first right of refusal to the Norris trophy, it seems. Detroit, a perennial regular season giant would always seem to be a place to look to find a Hart trophy winner. Alas, Lidstrom has no Hart trophies. Perhaps this is the year to finally honour the man many would put forward as the MVP of the past decade. In retrospect, it looks like the league missed its golden opportunity when a flight of fancy gave the trophy to a goaltender who dragged his team into the playoffs while Lidstrom led his team to top of the table, 15 points clear of any other team, 28 points clear of Theodore's bunch, and ultimately to a Stanley Cup.
In keeping with my thinking on Markov, I think Lidstrom must win the trophy. He leads all D in scoring (again) and leads the league in +/- with an incredible +39 (not rare for him either). What's more, his team is once again the class of the league, as in 2002.
Would you Kovalev supporters get behind a Lidstrom for Hart push, or are you Ovechkin or Malkin folk, through and through?
Around the league this story repeats itself over and over. Look at a successful team and most of the time you will find a successful forward and a successful D or G. For me, I look at the sucess and many defenseman led teams:
Anaheim: Niedermayr more so than Getzlaf
Dallas: Zubov more so than Ribeiro
Detroit: Lidstrom more so than Datsyuk
Montreal: Markov more so than Kovalev
And a number of goalie led ones:
New Jersey: Brodeur more so than Parise
San Jose: Nabokov more so than Thornton
Boston: Thomas more so than Savard
New York: Lundqvist more so than Jagr
There are of course many "team" teams and those led by superstar forwards like Pittsburgh and Ottawa, but I don't look much further than Detroit, Dallas, Anaheim and think we would be in the right company...
Up the defensemen! Go Habs Go.
Despite mine and Tobalev's arguments for Andrei Markov, it seems that history, at least, would be on their side not ours.
If you put aside Bobby Orr who was outscoring all the forwards anyway, it seems giving this trophy to a defenseman went out of style before the end of World War II, about 65 years ago. Other than "Number 4", Chris Pronger is the only defenseman to win the trophy over that period. Interestingly, if you look back to 1999-2000, the scoring was down and the top scorers were either on teams having a mediocre seasons (Jagr, Selanne, Kariya) or probably a little further than the league would want to go (Pavel Bure, Mark Recchi).
I think one thing is relatively clear: Hart trophy voters in general love scorers.
This is probably because it fits better with the image the league wants to put out: a high-flying, fast-paced game with exciting goalscoring galore. This is all well and good, but most hockey fans at least recognise, if not endorse, the idea that a good defenseman is not only valuable, but invaluable for a team to move forward and succeed.
In fact, no one other than Dominik Hasek (who was a human highlight reel and league advertisement on his own) has been able to beat a forward who has more than 100 points. With Ovechkin very close already and blowing the league away with goalscoring, he looks to be a trophy frontrunner. Malkin is there too, with close to 100 points himself, but on a team that threatens to play past April.
Considering defensemen log the most minutes, often direct the PP and the PK, start the majority of plays and (the best ones) score relatively well, it is puzzling to see them get so little recognition.
Take only the example of Niklas Lidstrom. He now has first right of refusal to the Norris trophy, it seems. Detroit, a perennial regular season giant would always seem to be a place to look to find a Hart trophy winner. Alas, Lidstrom has no Hart trophies. Perhaps this is the year to finally honour the man many would put forward as the MVP of the past decade. In retrospect, it looks like the league missed its golden opportunity when a flight of fancy gave the trophy to a goaltender who dragged his team into the playoffs while Lidstrom led his team to top of the table, 15 points clear of any other team, 28 points clear of Theodore's bunch, and ultimately to a Stanley Cup.
In keeping with my thinking on Markov, I think Lidstrom must win the trophy. He leads all D in scoring (again) and leads the league in +/- with an incredible +39 (not rare for him either). What's more, his team is once again the class of the league, as in 2002.
Would you Kovalev supporters get behind a Lidstrom for Hart push, or are you Ovechkin or Malkin folk, through and through?
Around the league this story repeats itself over and over. Look at a successful team and most of the time you will find a successful forward and a successful D or G. For me, I look at the sucess and many defenseman led teams:
Anaheim: Niedermayr more so than Getzlaf
Dallas: Zubov more so than Ribeiro
Detroit: Lidstrom more so than Datsyuk
Montreal: Markov more so than Kovalev
And a number of goalie led ones:
New Jersey: Brodeur more so than Parise
San Jose: Nabokov more so than Thornton
Boston: Thomas more so than Savard
New York: Lundqvist more so than Jagr
There are of course many "team" teams and those led by superstar forwards like Pittsburgh and Ottawa, but I don't look much further than Detroit, Dallas, Anaheim and think we would be in the right company...
Up the defensemen! Go Habs Go.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Force of Nature Kovalev for Hart Consideration – Gretzky
Last week, the peerless Wayne Gretzky took the opportunity of a "once-in-a-lifetime" match up against the Canadiens to heap praise on the team and some of its key players. The player whose virtues he seemed to be extolling the most was one-time teammate Alexei Kovalev (now called Alex).
What Gretzky actually said via translation into French in La Presse and the back into English on Eyes on the Prize:
As for completeness, Gretzky is only saying what Habs fans have been saying all season, and what some astute hockey observers have been saying for longer than that.
But the Hart trophy?
Now, i think Robert L. was clear in his post, and I will reiterate, Gretzky only said he would get votes, not that he would win. However, all this talk about Kovalev for MVP got me thinking about how good his chances really were:
1) How does Kovalev stack up against the league in this regard?
I think in general he stacks up quite well. But there are many elements to consider in the decision for the Hart trophy. The way I like to think of it is how would that team be if the player in question is removed from the lineup.
In that regard, we can only speculate. We know from the past that when we lose Markov we are worse, when Brisebois is gone we are better and if we lose Koivu in the playoffs, we are done for. Some would argue that we missed Kovalev for most of last season. But I don't agree with that.
Looking around the league though, there are certain players who seem to carry their teams even more than Alex Kovalev does. One could name Alexander Ovechkin and Martin Brodeur as the obvious candidates. Other candidates based on this year's play might include Iginla, Lidstrom, Niedermayr (based on the turnaround he caused, though he should be counted out for sitting so long), Nabokov, Sundin, Thomas and even Malkin (this year). You could even make arguments for Lecavalier and Kovalchuk, but their teams couldn't be too much worse than they are right now.
Hart trophy voters also take the positioning of the team into account when they vote, hence Wayne Gretzky's reasoning for Kovalev. If the Devils, Penguins or Sens squeak past the Habs, their Hart candidates would earn just as many votes.
If the Habs do top the division say, would that make a Canadiens player a serious contender for the Hart trophy? Would Kovalev even be the number one choice from the Habs?
Habs MVP
All this MVP talk led me naturally to thoughts about our own team's most valuable element. I should mention, that, once again, Eyes on the Prize spurred my thoughts on matters with an article on the Habs most indispensable element.
Robert's article was well thought out and as comprehensive as ever, but disappointingly (for me at least) was written as an extended question with no conclusion on the part of the author. On prompting, Robert even then seemed reluctant to commit, but opted for Bob Gainey as his choice.
A good choice to be sure. It would be hard to argue against Gainey at this point, as he assembled this team and many of the players are his draft picks and wards.
How about players then? Who is the MVP from amongst the ones who are actually responsible for fighting for and holding onto the points that are making everyone so positive about Gainey and his team right now?
Well, to be honest I only see two realistic candidates for most valuable player for 2007-2008: Mr. Kovalev and his countryman Andrei Markov.
The readers of the same blog believe that Kovalev is the one, garnering 76 votes. Next among players comes Johnny-come-lately Carey Price, the choice of 46 fans (possibly with short attention span). Markov comes next, but only in combination with Mike Komisarek (45 votes).
You can see where I'm going here, I think the populous is a bit off here. The race is close, but Andrei Markov is my choice for Habs MVP by a nose. Here's my thinking:
1) Kovalev has made Plekanec into a first-rate point producer, but Andrei Markov has made Mike Komisarek into an award nominee and top tier defenseman (this year he's been passing on the final lessons which have been in session for a couple of years).
2) While Kovalev is the shooter and the foil of the league's number one PP, Markov's steady play at the back and sharp vision and passing is the lynch pin that holds the unit together.
3) Kovalev has been on fire lately, but Markov was on fire for just as long early in the season, even when the Habs goalscoring was being called into question. Prior to Xmas, he was heralded in the same way Kovalev is now – top vote getter among East Dmen,
4) Markov plays the most minutes on the team and does more dirty work than Alex in general. he still found time to rack up a gaudy 54 points already.
5) The Habs goalies have looked great most times this year, seemingly no matter who it is. What's consistent about them? How about the defenders in front of them. Sure we let up a lot of shots, but many times Markov has been one of the tandem making sure those shots come from the oppositions lesser lights.
6) If you look at wins following losses or losing streaks, Andrei Markov is by far the most prominently featured Habs name. I would call these games crunch games, must-wins or "statement games" as Mike Boone put it for last night. They are important.
While Kovalev has been consistently great in the offensive end win or lose, Markov has been good and also able to find extra in the crunch games. In 21 of these types of wins, Markov has been player of the game 3 times and among the top performers of the night 16 times.
Kovalev is no slouch with 3 player of the game honours himself, but took a back seat in slightly more of those games too, making the top performers an only slightly less impressive 11 times.
At the end of the day, both players have played enormous parts in helping this team take the steps it has this year, both as players and mentors. The point of choosing here is an academic issue. So since you won't be held to account for any of this:
Who is your MVP so far?
Are any of you the Carey Price crew? Would Huet get some residual votes as well?
As always, look to 96 points and the playoffs where that would lead. Go Habs Go.
What Gretzky actually said via translation into French in La Presse and the back into English on Eyes on the Prize:
"Kovalev is one of the most complete players I've ever seen. He's having an exceptional season and should be considered for the Hart because of the success he's had."
As for completeness, Gretzky is only saying what Habs fans have been saying all season, and what some astute hockey observers have been saying for longer than that.
But the Hart trophy?
Now, i think Robert L. was clear in his post, and I will reiterate, Gretzky only said he would get votes, not that he would win. However, all this talk about Kovalev for MVP got me thinking about how good his chances really were:
1) How does Kovalev stack up against the league in this regard?
I think in general he stacks up quite well. But there are many elements to consider in the decision for the Hart trophy. The way I like to think of it is how would that team be if the player in question is removed from the lineup.
In that regard, we can only speculate. We know from the past that when we lose Markov we are worse, when Brisebois is gone we are better and if we lose Koivu in the playoffs, we are done for. Some would argue that we missed Kovalev for most of last season. But I don't agree with that.
Looking around the league though, there are certain players who seem to carry their teams even more than Alex Kovalev does. One could name Alexander Ovechkin and Martin Brodeur as the obvious candidates. Other candidates based on this year's play might include Iginla, Lidstrom, Niedermayr (based on the turnaround he caused, though he should be counted out for sitting so long), Nabokov, Sundin, Thomas and even Malkin (this year). You could even make arguments for Lecavalier and Kovalchuk, but their teams couldn't be too much worse than they are right now.
Hart trophy voters also take the positioning of the team into account when they vote, hence Wayne Gretzky's reasoning for Kovalev. If the Devils, Penguins or Sens squeak past the Habs, their Hart candidates would earn just as many votes.
If the Habs do top the division say, would that make a Canadiens player a serious contender for the Hart trophy? Would Kovalev even be the number one choice from the Habs?
Habs MVP
All this MVP talk led me naturally to thoughts about our own team's most valuable element. I should mention, that, once again, Eyes on the Prize spurred my thoughts on matters with an article on the Habs most indispensable element.
Robert's article was well thought out and as comprehensive as ever, but disappointingly (for me at least) was written as an extended question with no conclusion on the part of the author. On prompting, Robert even then seemed reluctant to commit, but opted for Bob Gainey as his choice.
A good choice to be sure. It would be hard to argue against Gainey at this point, as he assembled this team and many of the players are his draft picks and wards.
How about players then? Who is the MVP from amongst the ones who are actually responsible for fighting for and holding onto the points that are making everyone so positive about Gainey and his team right now?
Well, to be honest I only see two realistic candidates for most valuable player for 2007-2008: Mr. Kovalev and his countryman Andrei Markov.
The readers of the same blog believe that Kovalev is the one, garnering 76 votes. Next among players comes Johnny-come-lately Carey Price, the choice of 46 fans (possibly with short attention span). Markov comes next, but only in combination with Mike Komisarek (45 votes).
You can see where I'm going here, I think the populous is a bit off here. The race is close, but Andrei Markov is my choice for Habs MVP by a nose. Here's my thinking:
1) Kovalev has made Plekanec into a first-rate point producer, but Andrei Markov has made Mike Komisarek into an award nominee and top tier defenseman (this year he's been passing on the final lessons which have been in session for a couple of years).
2) While Kovalev is the shooter and the foil of the league's number one PP, Markov's steady play at the back and sharp vision and passing is the lynch pin that holds the unit together.
3) Kovalev has been on fire lately, but Markov was on fire for just as long early in the season, even when the Habs goalscoring was being called into question. Prior to Xmas, he was heralded in the same way Kovalev is now – top vote getter among East Dmen,
4) Markov plays the most minutes on the team and does more dirty work than Alex in general. he still found time to rack up a gaudy 54 points already.
5) The Habs goalies have looked great most times this year, seemingly no matter who it is. What's consistent about them? How about the defenders in front of them. Sure we let up a lot of shots, but many times Markov has been one of the tandem making sure those shots come from the oppositions lesser lights.
6) If you look at wins following losses or losing streaks, Andrei Markov is by far the most prominently featured Habs name. I would call these games crunch games, must-wins or "statement games" as Mike Boone put it for last night. They are important.
While Kovalev has been consistently great in the offensive end win or lose, Markov has been good and also able to find extra in the crunch games. In 21 of these types of wins, Markov has been player of the game 3 times and among the top performers of the night 16 times.
Kovalev is no slouch with 3 player of the game honours himself, but took a back seat in slightly more of those games too, making the top performers an only slightly less impressive 11 times.
At the end of the day, both players have played enormous parts in helping this team take the steps it has this year, both as players and mentors. The point of choosing here is an academic issue. So since you won't be held to account for any of this:
Who is your MVP so far?
Are any of you the Carey Price crew? Would Huet get some residual votes as well?
As always, look to 96 points and the playoffs where that would lead. Go Habs Go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)