Seeing Nabokov yet again fall short in an important game brought back memories for me. Imagine what the directors of the San Jose Sharks must be thinking.
Coming up to the trade deadline, the Sharks are yet again flirting with the NHL lead, but yet again carry team members who prefer the December walks to the May slugfests. Between Joe Thronton, Patrick Marleau and Dany Heatley the Sharks have a lot wrapped up in their current edition, and in a salary cap world, one can't expect that to continue forever.
Do you think that Doug Wilson shrugs off a Nabokov loss in a critical test, or will he now be hoping to bolster his back line of defence as he sets for a run with this set of big contracts before they walk?
I tend to think he'll stick – more out of necessity than choice. However, there's no telling how scarred he is from seeing Nabokov underperform (or simply never overperform) when the time is asking.
Roenick thinks Chicago has a dilemma, I wonder what he thinks of his former mates in SJ.
Showing posts with label Nabokov. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nabokov. Show all posts
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Magnetogorsk Millions: The Rise of a Rival League
Funny thing timing. As we wrap up the Canadiens reviews this week, we are coming to a very important trio of Russian/Belarussian players at the core of the Canadiens recent and future success. Simultaneously, the very real possibility of a significant drop in Russian talent is growing.
Back in May, we spoke about the lack of transfer agreement and how it could harm the NHL in terms of reduced influx of Russian talent. Now, we are seeing real competition for established NHL talent, Russian or not.
This has been coming for some time.
The Russian league, in its old guise as the Super League, was the one league that was poised and ready for the last NHL work stoppage. Players by the busload went to play throughout Russia in 2004-05. AK Bars Kazan from that year iced Lecavalier, Richards, Kovalchuk, Heatley, Kozlov and Kovalev in what (barring a reversal in the salary cap) will likely be the best top two lines ever to be seen again. The European Champions of that year, Avangard Omsk, got it done with star Russians and one Jaromir Jagr. While the Russian champions were thankful to have Datsyuk and Afinogeniv back in the fold to help Ovechkin win the title.
A lot has happened in the NHL since that season.
For one thing, there is a salary cap, which limits the buying power of the biggest teams so outfits in non-traditional (to be polite) hockey markets can bear the weight of competition. For another, the NHL has grown wealthier and, as a result, more arrogant. The arrogance can be witnessed in the league's dealings with and declarations about rival leagues like the new KHL (Continental Hockey League) and national associations in Europe, and in quote like this:
But, it's a dangerous line the NHL is walking. While it probably garners many laughs and guffaws to mock the KHL and the players who make their way there, the truth is the KHL is poaching real talent now. Jagr, for one, was still a scoring star in the league, which is still largely starved of players of his skill and stature. Ray Emery, for all his problems and jokes about him, would be the best goaltending talent on more than a dozen NHL teams (Mike Smith?). And, Alexander Radulov was one of the only half decent things going on in Nashville (an otherwise flailing operation), as far as the NHL was concerned. Add to this list the players that will never come to the NHL (because of the new aversion to drafting Russians), but would outplay the vast majority of second-line talent in the league in a Moscow minute, and the argument builds.
Something else a lot of North Americans need to understand when it comes to the threat of the KHL is that we are not looking at league vs. league here. Of course it is true that the NHL is still the biggest and most powerful hockey league in the world, and will probably remain that way for the forseeable future. However, the biggest 30 hockey clubs in the world are not those in NHL cities alone. Avangard Omsk, owned by Chelsea billionaire Roman Abramovich, could only be dwarfed in buying power by Detroit, Toronto, NYR and the very biggest NHL clubs. Omsk, along with AK Bars Kazan, Moscow Dynamo and a few others are far bigger clubs than Nashville, Atlanta, Florida and the like. In addition, consider that the power structure of the leagues will also be altered, inevitably, by the players which they are able to draw in. The Russian powerhouses are big players and deserve the respect of the NHL.
Ultimately, its my feeling that if the NHL lets the Omsks and Kazans to "wedge" their proverbial feet in the door, the league could be facing wide open movement in the not too distant future. This article from the Sporting News provides an excellent thesis on why this could be the case.
What for the future with Russia?
Unless the NHL comes out from behind its arrogance and makes sincere efforts to negotiate with the KHL as a peer, the losses of players like Jagr could conceivably continue.
Even if the only problem to come from a lack of treaty is the loss of fresh Russian talent to the league, the NHL would suffer. It only takes a glance at the NHL award winners and nominees from this season to understand the important role that Russia has played in changing the face of the North American league:
– Ovechkin walked away with the Maurice Richard trophy, and was only challenged for the Art Ross, Pearson and the Hart trophy by his fellow Russian, Evgeni Malkin
– Pavel Datsyuk won the Selke trophy and the Lady Byng, not to mention the Stanley Cup
– Nabokov didn't win the Vezina, but could have (he was on the first all-star team)
– Kovalev joined Ovechkin, Malkin, Nabokov as the Russians on the first or second all-star teams
– No Russian defenceman garnered Norris nominations or All-Star nods, but we know Markov is better than Brian Campbell, and I imagine people in Dallas know Zubov is too
– 3 of the top 5 scorers were Russians, 5 of the top 11
– 3 of the top 4 goalscorers were Russians
Is it an anomaly that so many Russians are leading the way in scoring in the NHL? Perhaps, but since they have been coming into the league, we have already witnessed players like Pavel Bure, Sergei Fedorov and Alexander Mogilny. I think this new crop is a continuation from those traditions. And, with a flourishing league of their own, there is no good reason to believe that the tradition of Russian hockey talent won't continue
I believe the NHL should make efforts to come to some agreement with the KHL and the Russian Association, primarily because I don't relish a future NHL without Russians. I can't imagine going backwards to a time without exciting (and sometimes enigmatic) Russians. Even this year, if you took Russians out of the mix, a league trying to reinvent itself as a scoring bonanza would be left with Brad Boyes and his 43 goals as the number 3 attraction. It seems the North American skaters are simply not as creative at beating the North American goalies and defencemen (who consequently are the best). What's more, if the NHL stood by its 30-team model in the absence of Russian talent, the days of free-flowing scoring hockey will be over sooner than they began.
And for Europe?
The Russian league and Russian gulf also provide problems for the NHL as a precedent for other European leagues to follow. I've heard on pretty good authority that the next strongest league and association (Sweden) is watching this Russian situation the closest, and will be making their plan of attack for the NHL based on that experience. The Czechs are already disgruntled. And, the Swiss have the money and the momentum to make waves too.
Whereas the efflux of Russians from the league would be a major step backwards, the loss of Europeans of all nationalities would be catastrophic.
Leadership
In times of flux, it helps ton have good leaders to take the helm. It remains to be seen as to whether Bettman can handle this crisis. But, frankly, why should it be his responsibility. If there were a leader among the NHL owners with an ounce of foresight, this moment could have been headed off ages ago. It remains their interests under threat (albeit their employee Bettman is the point-man), and it is their leadership and creativity that needs to be tapped to find a solution.
I have proposed on a number of occasions that one team could realistically set transfer conditions in a treaty-free market independently of all the others, and I see no reason why this could not be pursued. I have also made no secret that I would like this team to be the Canadiens. But, for the ultimate success of the league and the quality of NHL hockey, it wouldn't matter who stepped up. Once one did, the others may follow.
For all the conjecture and ranting, the situation is still within the control of the NHL. All it will take is a little bit of modesty and sincere effort. If not, this won't be the last article written on this topic. They don't call it the thin end of a wedge for nothing...
Back in May, we spoke about the lack of transfer agreement and how it could harm the NHL in terms of reduced influx of Russian talent. Now, we are seeing real competition for established NHL talent, Russian or not.
This has been coming for some time.
The Russian league, in its old guise as the Super League, was the one league that was poised and ready for the last NHL work stoppage. Players by the busload went to play throughout Russia in 2004-05. AK Bars Kazan from that year iced Lecavalier, Richards, Kovalchuk, Heatley, Kozlov and Kovalev in what (barring a reversal in the salary cap) will likely be the best top two lines ever to be seen again. The European Champions of that year, Avangard Omsk, got it done with star Russians and one Jaromir Jagr. While the Russian champions were thankful to have Datsyuk and Afinogeniv back in the fold to help Ovechkin win the title.
A lot has happened in the NHL since that season.
For one thing, there is a salary cap, which limits the buying power of the biggest teams so outfits in non-traditional (to be polite) hockey markets can bear the weight of competition. For another, the NHL has grown wealthier and, as a result, more arrogant. The arrogance can be witnessed in the league's dealings with and declarations about rival leagues like the new KHL (Continental Hockey League) and national associations in Europe, and in quote like this:
"We don't view them as a threat," (Bill Daly) said. "We still believe the best hockey players in the world will continue to want to play in the NHL."
But, it's a dangerous line the NHL is walking. While it probably garners many laughs and guffaws to mock the KHL and the players who make their way there, the truth is the KHL is poaching real talent now. Jagr, for one, was still a scoring star in the league, which is still largely starved of players of his skill and stature. Ray Emery, for all his problems and jokes about him, would be the best goaltending talent on more than a dozen NHL teams (Mike Smith?). And, Alexander Radulov was one of the only half decent things going on in Nashville (an otherwise flailing operation), as far as the NHL was concerned. Add to this list the players that will never come to the NHL (because of the new aversion to drafting Russians), but would outplay the vast majority of second-line talent in the league in a Moscow minute, and the argument builds.
Something else a lot of North Americans need to understand when it comes to the threat of the KHL is that we are not looking at league vs. league here. Of course it is true that the NHL is still the biggest and most powerful hockey league in the world, and will probably remain that way for the forseeable future. However, the biggest 30 hockey clubs in the world are not those in NHL cities alone. Avangard Omsk, owned by Chelsea billionaire Roman Abramovich, could only be dwarfed in buying power by Detroit, Toronto, NYR and the very biggest NHL clubs. Omsk, along with AK Bars Kazan, Moscow Dynamo and a few others are far bigger clubs than Nashville, Atlanta, Florida and the like. In addition, consider that the power structure of the leagues will also be altered, inevitably, by the players which they are able to draw in. The Russian powerhouses are big players and deserve the respect of the NHL.
Ultimately, its my feeling that if the NHL lets the Omsks and Kazans to "wedge" their proverbial feet in the door, the league could be facing wide open movement in the not too distant future. This article from the Sporting News provides an excellent thesis on why this could be the case.
What for the future with Russia?
Unless the NHL comes out from behind its arrogance and makes sincere efforts to negotiate with the KHL as a peer, the losses of players like Jagr could conceivably continue.
Even if the only problem to come from a lack of treaty is the loss of fresh Russian talent to the league, the NHL would suffer. It only takes a glance at the NHL award winners and nominees from this season to understand the important role that Russia has played in changing the face of the North American league:
– Ovechkin walked away with the Maurice Richard trophy, and was only challenged for the Art Ross, Pearson and the Hart trophy by his fellow Russian, Evgeni Malkin
– Pavel Datsyuk won the Selke trophy and the Lady Byng, not to mention the Stanley Cup
– Nabokov didn't win the Vezina, but could have (he was on the first all-star team)
– Kovalev joined Ovechkin, Malkin, Nabokov as the Russians on the first or second all-star teams
– No Russian defenceman garnered Norris nominations or All-Star nods, but we know Markov is better than Brian Campbell, and I imagine people in Dallas know Zubov is too
– 3 of the top 5 scorers were Russians, 5 of the top 11
– 3 of the top 4 goalscorers were Russians
Is it an anomaly that so many Russians are leading the way in scoring in the NHL? Perhaps, but since they have been coming into the league, we have already witnessed players like Pavel Bure, Sergei Fedorov and Alexander Mogilny. I think this new crop is a continuation from those traditions. And, with a flourishing league of their own, there is no good reason to believe that the tradition of Russian hockey talent won't continue
I believe the NHL should make efforts to come to some agreement with the KHL and the Russian Association, primarily because I don't relish a future NHL without Russians. I can't imagine going backwards to a time without exciting (and sometimes enigmatic) Russians. Even this year, if you took Russians out of the mix, a league trying to reinvent itself as a scoring bonanza would be left with Brad Boyes and his 43 goals as the number 3 attraction. It seems the North American skaters are simply not as creative at beating the North American goalies and defencemen (who consequently are the best). What's more, if the NHL stood by its 30-team model in the absence of Russian talent, the days of free-flowing scoring hockey will be over sooner than they began.
And for Europe?
The Russian league and Russian gulf also provide problems for the NHL as a precedent for other European leagues to follow. I've heard on pretty good authority that the next strongest league and association (Sweden) is watching this Russian situation the closest, and will be making their plan of attack for the NHL based on that experience. The Czechs are already disgruntled. And, the Swiss have the money and the momentum to make waves too.
Whereas the efflux of Russians from the league would be a major step backwards, the loss of Europeans of all nationalities would be catastrophic.
Leadership
In times of flux, it helps ton have good leaders to take the helm. It remains to be seen as to whether Bettman can handle this crisis. But, frankly, why should it be his responsibility. If there were a leader among the NHL owners with an ounce of foresight, this moment could have been headed off ages ago. It remains their interests under threat (albeit their employee Bettman is the point-man), and it is their leadership and creativity that needs to be tapped to find a solution.
I have proposed on a number of occasions that one team could realistically set transfer conditions in a treaty-free market independently of all the others, and I see no reason why this could not be pursued. I have also made no secret that I would like this team to be the Canadiens. But, for the ultimate success of the league and the quality of NHL hockey, it wouldn't matter who stepped up. Once one did, the others may follow.
For all the conjecture and ranting, the situation is still within the control of the NHL. All it will take is a little bit of modesty and sincere effort. If not, this won't be the last article written on this topic. They don't call it the thin end of a wedge for nothing...
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)