In the wake of announcements made by Gary Bettman about the seriousness that the NHL is going to start ascribing to head hits, this week the NHL Wheel of Justice assessed Dany Heatley 2 games for a deliberate (if not very injurious) elbow to the head of Steve Ott, Lecavalier was handed a game misconduct for a deliberate high-stick to PK Subban’s head, and even Bruin Brad Marchand is getting a suspension for an unpenalized play. Given that the GMs have just finished a meeting specifically addressing concussions and head hits (among other things), it’s worth asking whether the league has done enough to address what a lot of hockey minds seem to think is a key issue facing the game today?
Ken Dryden, Habs legend and one of the more intelligent players to ever grace the game, had a very smart piece in the Globe and Mail last Friday where he compares today’s perceptions of head hits to yesteryear’s perceptions of the health risks of smoking (i.e. none) and asks the question: "How could we be so stupid?" This is a valid point, and 20 or 30 years from now I think many doctors and family members will be asking the same question. It is all too easy to think of our players as gladiators and heroes, and that head trauma is just part of earning their stripes; part of the the job.
This certainly seems to be the outlook of the NHL executive committee, with very little about head hits and concussions coming of this week’s GM meeting. What we got was a very public 5-point "action plan" from Gary Bettman after the first day, which seemingly calmed sponsors by making it sound like the league is really going to do something. My feelings are obviously a little mixed on the subject. I certainly hate their data on the source of concussions – especially the category labelled "accidental hits." According to their classifications, the Chara hit would have been "accidental" simply because it wasn’t ruled as intentional (i.e. suspension-worthy) by the executive, and I don’t think this provides a very meaningful representation of the data.
One point I was very happy with, and that was the new protocol for determining what constituted a potential concussion threat and how the teams are expected to react. Clear rules are set for what scenario requires an intervention by the team doctor, and the player is removed to “a quiet place free from distraction” for examination with a validated acute concussion assessment tool. These are good steps, most of all because they are clear, logical, and will probably improve the prognosis for players with concussions dramatically. In fact, the only way that this could be better is if doctors had an obligation to share data from tests (maybe at season’s end) for use in evaluating how various rule or equipment changes affect concussion rates.
The rest of the list I’m less excited about. The first item is for Brendan Shanahan to lead an investigation into whether equipment size can be reduced without compromising safety. I think that the answer is a resounding “yes.” Equipment size has grown rather dramatically over the past three decades, mostly in the name of player safety. However, I wonder whether this has backfired somewhat; protection against higher forces seems to have encouraged harder hits, and likely leads to less forgiving impacts between players. It is important to remember that no equipment can protect a player completely from injury, however, and that changes made at a cultural level might be more effective in reducing concussions.
The second, related, item is the naming of Joe Nieuwendyk, Rob Blake, Steve Yzerman and Brendan Shanahan to a committee investigating concussions and concussion-related issues. I have tremendous respect for all of these men as hockey players, but have less faith their ability to ask smart, testable questions about why concussions have been on the rise, and supervise the data collection and analysis required for this job. I’m biased, being a scientist, but I’d like to see people who do this kind of analysis for a living doing this work.
Which brings me to the next point, which is the hiring of an independent safety consulting team to tour the 30 NHL arenas to ensure they conform to the highest safety standards. My question is: how is this not a routine procedure for the league? The same could be said for the last point, which is penalizing teams as a whole for repeated offences by multiple players, though I can’t find anything saying 1) how many offences it takes to become a “repeat offender, or 2) how many “repeated offenders” would qualify as enough for a fine or other punishment.
What I hate most about this is that, unlike the new head injury protocol, it doesn’t seem to be clear, logical, or structured. It requires on-the-fly judgement calls that will lead to inconsistent rulings from referees and the disciplinary committee, which is why so many of us refer to them as the "Wheel of Justice." Inconsistency and judgement calls are ruining the punitive structure of the league both on the ice and in suspensions (although our friend Down Goes Brown seems to have the suspensions figured out). Decades of psychology research have shown that if punishment is not consistent, it doesn’t change behaviour, and that’s what we’re seeing on the ice.
My dad and I were talking about this last night, and came up with a good example: in the old days (for me this means the 1980s), 3 steps and leaving your feet meant a whistle and 2 minutes for charging. Now, charging is a rather abstract concept because, as Colin Campbell freely admits in his emails (remember those?), referees are more or less expected to be inconsistent by making calls based on the score, the number of previous penalties and the flow of the game. Bad judgement by the referee on some stickplay between Subban and Lacavalier in front of the net last night led to frustration and the eventual 2-handed blow to Subban’s face that saw Vinny ejected. It never should have gone that far, even if it meant 2 minutes for PK and none for Lacavalier.
I think overall the league has taken some steps in the right direction by introducing independent safety consultants, clear criteria for high-risk hits, and protocols for how deal with these hits. However, we’ve been taking a lot of steps in the wrong direction over the last couple years in terms of man-games lost to injury. Until the punitive structures are made more severe and consistent, I think we’ll continue to watch that stat rise.
Showing posts with label Yzerman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yzerman. Show all posts
Friday, March 18, 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...
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Adieu Guy Boucher
This past week, the Montreal Canadiens lost their young dauphin, the rising star that is Guy Boucher. A French Canadian student of the game who has succeeded at every level so far due to his diligence and the creative new development of tactics.
He’s the coach that any team would want. Eventually.
Habs fan reaction has been predictably sour on this departure. Boucher was seen as a star signing last season, even before he went to work for the organization. Following a season of success in the AHL and of player development the likes of which we have seldom seen in three decades in Montreal, his star only seemed brighter.
My personal take on this is that the Habs did the right thing here.
First, they did the right thing for the man. Boucher now leaves the Canadiens family with nothing but cherished memories. This will always be the team that gave him his break, and now too the team that didn’t begrudge him his next one.
Second, they honour their commitment to Jacques Martin, who like his calm demeanor or not, must be given loads of credit for his revamp of the team that can suddenly compete with the big boys.
Finally, they didn’t panic. Panic would have been hiring Boucher on as head coach for fear that he may be great. Such hirings are unwise, as they take us further from the well laid plan that was so painful to instigate one short year ago. A veteran coach was needed, and probably still is, while veterans are forged from the young generation of leaders coming through.
Still reasons to denounce this move do exist. In the vein of a Leclair trade that still haunts many a fan’s dreams, there’s the what if? What if Boucher wins the Cup elsewhere? What if he wins the Jack Adams?
It’s easy to get caught up in all these what ifs, but often forgot is the other side of the coin: What if Guy Boucher takes time to adjust to the league like the vast majority of coaches who come through?
Among the reasons to take confident comfort in this move, the story of one William Scott Bowman is foremost.
Scotty Bowman entered the Canadiens organization as a star more than 50 years before Guy Boucher ever did. At his hiring in the early 1950s, Bowman was a former junior Canadien who had impressed his mentors. Early in his post-player days, Scotty was made assistant of the Junior Canadiens under the mercurial Sam Pollock. Memorial Cup finals and championships followed as he made his name within the Forum’s halls.
After stints coaching in Ottawa and Peterborough, Scotty was moved internally to the position of chief scout of amateur talent (a latter-day Trevor Timmins). In any case, the Canadiens weren’t going to let his feet get cold. When he was ready, he took full duties as coach of the Montreal Junior Canadiens ¬ the main feeder to the star-laden team in the NHL.
Then, in 1967-68, the NHL expanded its operations to include 6 more cities. Opportunities that had been sewn up by playing and coaching talent alike until then were suddenly doubled. For the Canadiens, this presented a choice. Would Scotty Bowman be shoehorned into the pro ranks alongside Toe Blake, would they put their organizational foot down and try to bar his way, or would they let the star they had nurtured fly the coop.
They chose the latter and Scotty was allowed to depart in order to become an assistant to Lynn Patrick in St. Louis. As Scotty recalls it, he decided to take a chance then too:
"Montreal was a very strong team at the time. Toe Blake was coaching. I got a chance to go to the NHL when they expanded. It's hard to turn down a chance to get into the NHL. I was coaching the Junior Canadiens who had moved back to Montreal. I got the opportunity to go to St. Louis from Lynn Patrick. He was going to be the general manager, and I coached his son Craig in junior hockey in Montreal. When he got the job with the Blues, he hired me as his assistant. I decided I really should take a chance. I was fortunate the league expanded and I got an opportunity to get to one of the expansion franchises."His time in St. Louis was a success, after becoming head coach after mere weeks into the season, Scotty’s teams went on to reach the finals in each of his first three seasons in the NHL. No doubt Scotty learned much.
Apprenticeship completed, his old head coach and friend Sam Pollock convinced Scotty to rejoin his hometown club in 1971. The rest is history.
Guy Boucher may never match Scotty Bowman’s achievements, but his path to the NHL coaching ranks is at least somewhat similar. In both cases, the coaches had keen eyes for talent, a commitment to winning and the determination to outstretch their rival coaches. Both were also known stars of the Canadiens organizations they were part of.
In following Bowman’s path out of the Canadiens family to stretch his legs, we hope that the similarities continue ¬ there’s really nothing else to be done. In the new world of the NHL, where teams from one season rarely resemble the one three years down the line, there’s no real reason to fret over Boucher. We simply hope he can learn and thrive while keeping the candle he has for the Canadiens organization flickering until the opportunity for his return may come.
Suivant, next.
On a related note, one would think that the hiring of Guy Boucher last year will have taught the Canadiens management team a valuable lesson about installing quality personnel under the main team. I hope that in addition to holding early camps, firing scouts, signing Americans and negotiating with Plekanec that Gauthier is dedicating a substantial slab of time to scouting the next Bulldogs coach.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Some Thoughts on Loyalty
The NHL trade deadline is approaching and talk of waiving no-trade clauses is popping up all over the league again. The situation with Mats Sundin, in particular, got me thinking about the value of (as well as general lack of) loyalty to NHL teams from players around the league.
More and more, players at the end of their careers waive no-trade clauses or request trades to teams they view as Stanley Cup contenders. It is a strange thing. I'm sure the tradition goes back a long way, but for me all this one last throw of the dice for the Cup came to a head after Ray Bourque was traded to the Colorado Avalanche in 2000. It was Ray Bourque, the heart and soul of the Boston franchise for 20 years, who requested the trade. And it wasn't just to get out, it was to a limited number of teams who he thought had a chance of winning.
This has led to a boatload of trades every year to teams like Detroit and Colorado (formerly). The teams that players will gladly waive their no-trade clauses for.
Aside from the trend of asking for trades, there has also been an annoying trend in the media to pick a player who is thought to be so deserving of the Cup, that all others should roll over and clear the way.
The press loved the Bourque win. They ate it up. It was a Cup for Ray Bourque, though it took a year, courtesy of a team who probably would have won it anyway as they had the best 2 centres in the league and the best goalie. Since 2001, there have been a number of players with long to intermediate length careers who became the feel-good heroes of the playoffs. Players who should win the Cup, just by virtue of being in the league so long:
2002: Dominik Hasek and Luc Robitaille, who found ways to miss by a couple of years in NYR and Pittsbrugh
2003: Adam Oates, who still hasn't won...
2004: Dave Andreychuk, who strangely was traded to make way for the "more deserving" Ray Bourque
2006: Rod Brind'amour
2007: Teemu Selanne
Looking at this list, there's no question that all the players had great careers (well you could question Brind'amour there...), but since when does that equate with a Cup.
So many players toiled in the league without the reward of a Cup for many years before Brind'amour came along. Many many more deserving than he. I'm picking on Rod, but really I would say that no one is outright deserving of a Cup, and it gets my back up when the media turn it into a story like that.
Apart from Selanne (who I identify with the Ducks and the Jets), the last time I was truly happy for an aging, tireless star to win a Cup was Steve Yzerman. Both players did thing the right way and won with the teams they were associated, even synonymous, with. Ray Bourque on the other hand may as well have just bought the Cup for all I'm concernned. he should have been trying to win with Boston for those last years of his career and not jumping ship.
Players like Todd Bertuzzi last year who make special requests to be on "Cup contenders" should be banished to first round upsets as far as I am concerned...
This brings me to the current Mats Sundin scenario.
I guess, first things first. No one owes Mats Sundin a Cup.
He has had a good career. he is the best player the Leafs have probably ever had. He has had some playoff success. But all that equates to nothing. the only thing that makes you deserving of the Cup is an unquenchable desire to win it. And, the only person who can give a player that is the player himself.
But you have to give the guy loads of credit. He knows that. He is still 100% focused on making the playoffs, on winning the Cup. But, he wants to win for his fans, his friends, his neighbours of more than a decade.
When you talk about a captain, isn't that exactly what you want? This kind of loyalty has to be recognised and applauded, I think. Fans of teams around the league should envy players like Sundin and his commitment to the cause.
If you're a Habs fan you don't have to look any further than Saku Koivu to see the same type of class. I'd hazard a guess that Daniel Alfredsson is the same with Ottawa. To win a Stanley Cup you need Mats Sundins and Saku Koivus. Players who play for pride in the sweater they wear.
Sure you can carry a Ray Bourque or two, but too many and you threaten to make that sweater meaningless, and take away the very fuel that fires those long Cup runs. Look to Joe Sakic in Colorado, Steve Yzerman in Detroit, Martin Brodeur in New Jersey to play big when Cups are on the line. These are one franchise players – with very good reason.
I hope the Maple Leafs can find a way to honour Mats Sundin's wishes and hold onto him. As a Habs fan, I certainly hope they don't win the Cup, but will be sure to applaud Mats if he manages to retire with the team he loves.
As for the Habs, I hope we can find ways to hang to players who want to play and win in Montreal. Ultimately, that will be where success will come from. And success will be so much the sweeter if it does come.
More and more, players at the end of their careers waive no-trade clauses or request trades to teams they view as Stanley Cup contenders. It is a strange thing. I'm sure the tradition goes back a long way, but for me all this one last throw of the dice for the Cup came to a head after Ray Bourque was traded to the Colorado Avalanche in 2000. It was Ray Bourque, the heart and soul of the Boston franchise for 20 years, who requested the trade. And it wasn't just to get out, it was to a limited number of teams who he thought had a chance of winning.
This has led to a boatload of trades every year to teams like Detroit and Colorado (formerly). The teams that players will gladly waive their no-trade clauses for.
Aside from the trend of asking for trades, there has also been an annoying trend in the media to pick a player who is thought to be so deserving of the Cup, that all others should roll over and clear the way.
The press loved the Bourque win. They ate it up. It was a Cup for Ray Bourque, though it took a year, courtesy of a team who probably would have won it anyway as they had the best 2 centres in the league and the best goalie. Since 2001, there have been a number of players with long to intermediate length careers who became the feel-good heroes of the playoffs. Players who should win the Cup, just by virtue of being in the league so long:
2002: Dominik Hasek and Luc Robitaille, who found ways to miss by a couple of years in NYR and Pittsbrugh
2003: Adam Oates, who still hasn't won...
2004: Dave Andreychuk, who strangely was traded to make way for the "more deserving" Ray Bourque
2006: Rod Brind'amour
2007: Teemu Selanne
Looking at this list, there's no question that all the players had great careers (well you could question Brind'amour there...), but since when does that equate with a Cup.
So many players toiled in the league without the reward of a Cup for many years before Brind'amour came along. Many many more deserving than he. I'm picking on Rod, but really I would say that no one is outright deserving of a Cup, and it gets my back up when the media turn it into a story like that.
Apart from Selanne (who I identify with the Ducks and the Jets), the last time I was truly happy for an aging, tireless star to win a Cup was Steve Yzerman. Both players did thing the right way and won with the teams they were associated, even synonymous, with. Ray Bourque on the other hand may as well have just bought the Cup for all I'm concernned. he should have been trying to win with Boston for those last years of his career and not jumping ship.
Players like Todd Bertuzzi last year who make special requests to be on "Cup contenders" should be banished to first round upsets as far as I am concerned...
This brings me to the current Mats Sundin scenario.
I guess, first things first. No one owes Mats Sundin a Cup.
He has had a good career. he is the best player the Leafs have probably ever had. He has had some playoff success. But all that equates to nothing. the only thing that makes you deserving of the Cup is an unquenchable desire to win it. And, the only person who can give a player that is the player himself.
But you have to give the guy loads of credit. He knows that. He is still 100% focused on making the playoffs, on winning the Cup. But, he wants to win for his fans, his friends, his neighbours of more than a decade.
When you talk about a captain, isn't that exactly what you want? This kind of loyalty has to be recognised and applauded, I think. Fans of teams around the league should envy players like Sundin and his commitment to the cause.
If you're a Habs fan you don't have to look any further than Saku Koivu to see the same type of class. I'd hazard a guess that Daniel Alfredsson is the same with Ottawa. To win a Stanley Cup you need Mats Sundins and Saku Koivus. Players who play for pride in the sweater they wear.
Sure you can carry a Ray Bourque or two, but too many and you threaten to make that sweater meaningless, and take away the very fuel that fires those long Cup runs. Look to Joe Sakic in Colorado, Steve Yzerman in Detroit, Martin Brodeur in New Jersey to play big when Cups are on the line. These are one franchise players – with very good reason.
I hope the Maple Leafs can find a way to honour Mats Sundin's wishes and hold onto him. As a Habs fan, I certainly hope they don't win the Cup, but will be sure to applaud Mats if he manages to retire with the team he loves.
As for the Habs, I hope we can find ways to hang to players who want to play and win in Montreal. Ultimately, that will be where success will come from. And success will be so much the sweeter if it does come.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Changing the ethic
After reading up a bit on the Canadiens last draft, I can see where the latest picks fit in the scheme of things.
I'll be up front about it, I would have picked Esposito if I had the chance, but that was when I was overlooking the overarching theme going through the current Canadiens team.
What I believe Gainey and Timmins have been moving to do since they arrived is to build a more mature group of players. A group who have wide experiences and are adaptable thanks to both their experience and maturity. This is where drafting the Americans comes into it – in my opinion. I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but American hockey players give the best interviews. They can articulate, and thank heavens, think of original things to say. Higgins, a Yale man, is our current embodiment of a mature youngster, some of the recent picks may come and show the same qualities.
I don't think Americans have a monopoly on these qualities, not by any means. I think Chipchura for example has those qualities among our prospects. Also, players like "Gretzky, Niedermayr, Yzerman, Lemieux, Brodeur and Iginla all have (had) these same qualities. The thing with the Americans is that when you are taking a bet on them (as in the draft), their route to the NHL lends itself to building more mature players. For one thing they have to stay in school – balancing studies with hockey. Many junior players finish at high school, if they get that far.
Why maturity counts in championships is leadership. Everyone touts the big leaders, the overt and outspoken guys. This was Souray last year from what I hear. But there are also deputies. These guys are critical, they lead by example. theymay voice an opinion in a disagreement, but will be mature enough to focus their energy in the right direction (helping the team win) at game time. This would be Saku Koivu in his younger days (he's gone furthere than that now), and Higgins and Plekanec now. These guys earn respect from their play and can get through to the ones who have lost touch with the leader or coach. They help hold the team together – something vital to a championship (unless the Habs plan on winning all their games and everyone stays happy all the time...)
I also think a lot of emphasis is placed on the interview. We can all see how Esposito, Cherepanov and McDonagh play on the ice, but how they answer questions in that important interview is not information us armchair enthusiasts are privy to. I liken it to the interviews I have done in hiring. CVs can look good, even tests, but an interview can change the whole impression of a person. In a draft, the team is looking for someone that could potentially be in the fold for the long haul, so personality and perceived work ethic, etc are very important. For the Canadiens, I think they also want players to represent them well, while playing well of course.
McDonagh, Mr. Hockey Minnesota, may or may not be that mature now. I have no idea. But the Canadiens minders seem to like the maturing process that can be gained from a few years at a decent hockey playing university like Wisconsin. Same goes for Pacioretty at Michigan. Esposito would either be entrusted to the Habs, Hamilton or Patrick Roy again in Quebec. I get the feeling the Habs would like the maturing to be someone else's responsibility.
I believe the maturity of the top prospects is a big reason why the Habs seem to have soured a bit on the QMJHL. It is no longer producing the classy forwards it once did in Beliveau, Lafleur, Lafontaine and Savard. Nowadays it seems a lot of the bigger stars are brats, at least for a few years. Ribeiro was, Theodore to some extent (especially in Ribeiro's company), Lecavalier was for a long time. Even Sid the Kid has his moments, though on most nights he puts in an honourable effort to be very mature. Gems like Simon Gagne, who seems very mature, come few and far between. Hopefully Latendresse can follow that path. he already seems mature.
I do, however, believe that the Canadiens would be well served (and indeed very eager themselves) to add a French Canadian star with the maturity and qualities they are trying to encourage. Lecavalier seems to have grown up now, and would be a fine addition. I mentioned Gagne, and he would be quite an acquisition too. Briere would be fine, but as long as Koivu is here just does not fit the need. The list isn't endless, but is long enough that they might be able to grab a player who fits both the new ethic of the team and the local star ticket.
Wouldn't it be nice to just buy the league with the Quebec Aces and bring in Beliveau? The perfect fit and with Art Ross talent too. Those were the days. As we're stuck with the draft, at least it seems our guys have a plan.
I'll be up front about it, I would have picked Esposito if I had the chance, but that was when I was overlooking the overarching theme going through the current Canadiens team.
What I believe Gainey and Timmins have been moving to do since they arrived is to build a more mature group of players. A group who have wide experiences and are adaptable thanks to both their experience and maturity. This is where drafting the Americans comes into it – in my opinion. I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but American hockey players give the best interviews. They can articulate, and thank heavens, think of original things to say. Higgins, a Yale man, is our current embodiment of a mature youngster, some of the recent picks may come and show the same qualities.
I don't think Americans have a monopoly on these qualities, not by any means. I think Chipchura for example has those qualities among our prospects. Also, players like "Gretzky, Niedermayr, Yzerman, Lemieux, Brodeur and Iginla all have (had) these same qualities. The thing with the Americans is that when you are taking a bet on them (as in the draft), their route to the NHL lends itself to building more mature players. For one thing they have to stay in school – balancing studies with hockey. Many junior players finish at high school, if they get that far.
Why maturity counts in championships is leadership. Everyone touts the big leaders, the overt and outspoken guys. This was Souray last year from what I hear. But there are also deputies. These guys are critical, they lead by example. theymay voice an opinion in a disagreement, but will be mature enough to focus their energy in the right direction (helping the team win) at game time. This would be Saku Koivu in his younger days (he's gone furthere than that now), and Higgins and Plekanec now. These guys earn respect from their play and can get through to the ones who have lost touch with the leader or coach. They help hold the team together – something vital to a championship (unless the Habs plan on winning all their games and everyone stays happy all the time...)
I also think a lot of emphasis is placed on the interview. We can all see how Esposito, Cherepanov and McDonagh play on the ice, but how they answer questions in that important interview is not information us armchair enthusiasts are privy to. I liken it to the interviews I have done in hiring. CVs can look good, even tests, but an interview can change the whole impression of a person. In a draft, the team is looking for someone that could potentially be in the fold for the long haul, so personality and perceived work ethic, etc are very important. For the Canadiens, I think they also want players to represent them well, while playing well of course.
McDonagh, Mr. Hockey Minnesota, may or may not be that mature now. I have no idea. But the Canadiens minders seem to like the maturing process that can be gained from a few years at a decent hockey playing university like Wisconsin. Same goes for Pacioretty at Michigan. Esposito would either be entrusted to the Habs, Hamilton or Patrick Roy again in Quebec. I get the feeling the Habs would like the maturing to be someone else's responsibility.
I believe the maturity of the top prospects is a big reason why the Habs seem to have soured a bit on the QMJHL. It is no longer producing the classy forwards it once did in Beliveau, Lafleur, Lafontaine and Savard. Nowadays it seems a lot of the bigger stars are brats, at least for a few years. Ribeiro was, Theodore to some extent (especially in Ribeiro's company), Lecavalier was for a long time. Even Sid the Kid has his moments, though on most nights he puts in an honourable effort to be very mature. Gems like Simon Gagne, who seems very mature, come few and far between. Hopefully Latendresse can follow that path. he already seems mature.
I do, however, believe that the Canadiens would be well served (and indeed very eager themselves) to add a French Canadian star with the maturity and qualities they are trying to encourage. Lecavalier seems to have grown up now, and would be a fine addition. I mentioned Gagne, and he would be quite an acquisition too. Briere would be fine, but as long as Koivu is here just does not fit the need. The list isn't endless, but is long enough that they might be able to grab a player who fits both the new ethic of the team and the local star ticket.
Wouldn't it be nice to just buy the league with the Quebec Aces and bring in Beliveau? The perfect fit and with Art Ross talent too. Those were the days. As we're stuck with the draft, at least it seems our guys have a plan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)