To win any games in the Stanley Cup playoffs, a team has to overcome another team just as hungry if not hungrier than their own. So it's a particularly telling thing to get words from a GM, a leader of a team, that spell out medium strength goals.
Reporters like to ask loaded questions. The one to Peter Chiarelli couldn't have been more loaded than:
"How far do you think the Bruins have to go in the playoffs for this season to be deemed a success?"
Round 3, in a roundabout way, was his answer.
Round 3? Where does one come up with such a response?
All fans of conference finalists know that going out in Round 3 is just as painful (no, more painful) than going out in Round 1 or 2. Everyone knows that the other team in Round 3 won't have those meek ambitions, and will have a nice time disposing of the team that is roundly patting themselves on the back for their successful season.
In one sense, Peter Chiarelli undercut the ambition of the Boston Bruins, which like any playoff team before a game has been played should harbour only one ambition - to win and win and win again.
To the outsider, Peter Chiarelli also managed to look like a fool. His team may have won the Eastern Conference two years ago, but last season they narrowly made the playoffs and then had the worst collapse in modern history in the second round. IN other words, coming into the season, they were well in the pack. And then a season in a division with Ottawa and Toronto and a Conference with plenty of weak teams, they put up a respectable, but not terrifying 103 points. This put them 4th in the East (not in the top 2), and with a legitimate case that Tampa is better, they don't make all lists as favourites for progression.
So his comments also managed to overestimate his team and in so doing put undue pressure on the group. Yes it would be disappointing to lose to a lower seed, but it would not be a surprise - Montreal has won the season and ages-long series. The second round would likely present a sterner challenge.
Chiarelli made a right mess with his comments. The quote that was made from his response was quite possibly the worst thing that could be attributed to the leader of a team on the eve of a playoffs. Over-evaluation and too little ambition all at once.
I'm not sure that what we saw from the Bruins was a response to this, but as those words loom over a team exhibiting their classic tendencies already, it may only be a matter of time anyway.
All successful playoff teams hope to get inside their opponents heads early, the head of the opposition coach to instill fear and doubt. Carey Price and Tomas Plekanec owe Peter Chiarelli a big thank you for starting that part of their task early.
Showing posts with label expectations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label expectations. Show all posts
Friday, April 15, 2011
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
Canadiens Expectations Abound
Expectations are a funny thing.
This time of year is a time of little other than expectation for hockey fans. We expect some news finally. We expect a rookie or two to impress. We expect our team to meet our most optimistic projections from the months we worked ourselves into total believers again.
There was a very good piece about expectations today from JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs. JT this time is fretting about Cammalleri's comments to the press, in which he came out like a Daniel Alfredsson and stated his very positive aspirations.
JT suggests that nothing good can come fo comments like these, and that young Mikey should have kept his comments to the generally accepted script. I very much agree with JT that expectations from the media and fans are very important in how the eventual seasons of players on the Canadiens turn out. I agree about Cammalleri. I agree with the head down approach she suggests, complete with a cliche-only approach to interviews can guarantee some respite.
Despite my agreement here, I don't think it ultimately it will protect the players from the media (and blogging) hounds. Yes, a quote from September about 40 goals can be brought out during that prolonged January slump, but it's only colour to the criticism. I'd suggest that Higgins would have been criticised for another 22 goal effort even if he'd said he could score 27 that season.
There are of course precedents here. Brian Savage, Mr. October himself, never once said he was a potential thirty goalscorer, yet seasons of 25+ made him that in our minds. In reality, Savage was a 23-26 goal man – but since no such tag exists in our lingo we expected more rather than accepted less.
Expectations for this season
Based on progress
A classic case of expectations based on the assumption of continual linear progress is Maxim Lapierre.
Poor Max did nothing other than play his heart out, chip in a few timely goals and generally look best when things were going badly for just about everyone else in February. He didn't speak out of turn. He didn't state his astronomical goals of becoming a 30-goal man. Yet those expectations are certainly there.
A week or two ago, Tobalev (or Tobedetermined if you prefer) mused on the topic of Canadiens all around goal scoring for the upcoming season. Quite sensibly, I thought, he used recent history to make a projection of total team goals. He then went through the roster allocating goals out with scientific care. That day and the following days, many comments came back from you readers, and if I had to pick the predominant theme, it was that Maxim Lapierre would certainly score more than 7 goals.
When we got down to it, it was pretty clear that expectations were for Max to match his season totals from last year, even to surpass them.
Now I don't want to weigh in on Max at this point (don't worry our season previews will put our prediction neck's on the line for that), I just wanted to reference the expectations that clearly exist.
In reality, history shows us that it is folly to expect progress to be linear. Though we grudgingly do accept the premise of a sophomore slump, the idea that a 4th year player could improve his game while his totals decline seems otherworldly to some. But that is, in fact, what does happen in many cases. A season of explosive progress is not often succeeded by another – I'd say a stabilisation after that would be victory enough, actually.
I think it may be important to keep this in mind so that we can rein in some of the expectations we have set for players like Max, Josh Gorges, even Andrei Markov.
Based on salary
Another big one for us this year is the expectation that players on big salaries will be big players.
It's easy to see why people leap to this conclusion, after all salary is roughly linked to performance. Unfortunately for those of us who support teams that boast Brian Gionta and Roman Hamrlik we must remember the performance it correlates most closely with is that of the past.
Paying a player $7 million, $5 million or even $3 million says nothing about how that player might perform. In fact, as a fan whose hopes rest with a single trophy handed out on the ice, not in Las Vegas, then I would suggest it doesn't even matter.
Salary, as I see it, is a means to an end. If I want to build a contender as a GM, I have $50 odd million with which to do it. So long as I get the pieces I need to do it under the budget, should anyone care less about where the money goes on payday? What I mean is, if we can get our goaltending for $3 million all told, it shouldn't matter that we have to slightly over pay to get Brian Gionta, who is only a slightly better player than Alex Tanguay. A slightly better player might get that winning goal in Boston. $2.5 million in the Molsons' account, no matter how much they wish it could, will never buy a Cup for this city.
Based on blind hope
The final expectation is one I've been a bit quiet about recently. However, it has to be said that a lot of the expectation for our team this year is not so solidly founded on a healthy dose of positive thinking.
The players I'm referring to here, of course, are the goalies. Carey Price, in particular. No reminder is needed about our finish to the season last year, with the two young goalies taking a place at centre stage. Yet this summer, all is rosy again. Many predictions I see say things like Carey Price will be better. The Canadiens goaltending will improve.
I hope that those guys are right. But let's admit there's not much basis to what they're saying beyond – they'll be better because I don't think they could be worse.
I think this expectation is the worst type. And it's worse when it's shared by our general manager. It's akin to the gambler who lurks behind the in-use slot machines watching to see if they'll pay out. Selecting those machines that haven't paid out in ages seems like a plan, but we all know it just comes down to utter chance in the end.
My expectations
When it comes to my expectations, I try to steer as much away from the methods mentioned above as possible. Through a combination of stats-gazing, impressions and what I hope is good sense, I try to form an expectation of the season that is reasonable.
This season, I've gone on record with the score about the Canadiens being in the playoff picture, and I even suggested a jump in points from last season to somewhere in the 100 range. After that, I haven't gone any further. Will Carey Price be getting those 40 wins? I don't know. Will Gomez be setting up the most goals? No idea.
Give me 100 points, and despite the complaints, the rants, the fretting, you should know that come April, I'll have enjoyed the ride.
This time of year is a time of little other than expectation for hockey fans. We expect some news finally. We expect a rookie or two to impress. We expect our team to meet our most optimistic projections from the months we worked ourselves into total believers again.
There was a very good piece about expectations today from JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs. JT this time is fretting about Cammalleri's comments to the press, in which he came out like a Daniel Alfredsson and stated his very positive aspirations.
JT suggests that nothing good can come fo comments like these, and that young Mikey should have kept his comments to the generally accepted script. I very much agree with JT that expectations from the media and fans are very important in how the eventual seasons of players on the Canadiens turn out. I agree about Cammalleri. I agree with the head down approach she suggests, complete with a cliche-only approach to interviews can guarantee some respite.
Despite my agreement here, I don't think it ultimately it will protect the players from the media (and blogging) hounds. Yes, a quote from September about 40 goals can be brought out during that prolonged January slump, but it's only colour to the criticism. I'd suggest that Higgins would have been criticised for another 22 goal effort even if he'd said he could score 27 that season.
There are of course precedents here. Brian Savage, Mr. October himself, never once said he was a potential thirty goalscorer, yet seasons of 25+ made him that in our minds. In reality, Savage was a 23-26 goal man – but since no such tag exists in our lingo we expected more rather than accepted less.
Expectations for this season
Based on progress
A classic case of expectations based on the assumption of continual linear progress is Maxim Lapierre.
Poor Max did nothing other than play his heart out, chip in a few timely goals and generally look best when things were going badly for just about everyone else in February. He didn't speak out of turn. He didn't state his astronomical goals of becoming a 30-goal man. Yet those expectations are certainly there.
A week or two ago, Tobalev (or Tobedetermined if you prefer) mused on the topic of Canadiens all around goal scoring for the upcoming season. Quite sensibly, I thought, he used recent history to make a projection of total team goals. He then went through the roster allocating goals out with scientific care. That day and the following days, many comments came back from you readers, and if I had to pick the predominant theme, it was that Maxim Lapierre would certainly score more than 7 goals.
When we got down to it, it was pretty clear that expectations were for Max to match his season totals from last year, even to surpass them.
Now I don't want to weigh in on Max at this point (don't worry our season previews will put our prediction neck's on the line for that), I just wanted to reference the expectations that clearly exist.
In reality, history shows us that it is folly to expect progress to be linear. Though we grudgingly do accept the premise of a sophomore slump, the idea that a 4th year player could improve his game while his totals decline seems otherworldly to some. But that is, in fact, what does happen in many cases. A season of explosive progress is not often succeeded by another – I'd say a stabilisation after that would be victory enough, actually.
I think it may be important to keep this in mind so that we can rein in some of the expectations we have set for players like Max, Josh Gorges, even Andrei Markov.
Based on salary
Another big one for us this year is the expectation that players on big salaries will be big players.
It's easy to see why people leap to this conclusion, after all salary is roughly linked to performance. Unfortunately for those of us who support teams that boast Brian Gionta and Roman Hamrlik we must remember the performance it correlates most closely with is that of the past.
Paying a player $7 million, $5 million or even $3 million says nothing about how that player might perform. In fact, as a fan whose hopes rest with a single trophy handed out on the ice, not in Las Vegas, then I would suggest it doesn't even matter.
Salary, as I see it, is a means to an end. If I want to build a contender as a GM, I have $50 odd million with which to do it. So long as I get the pieces I need to do it under the budget, should anyone care less about where the money goes on payday? What I mean is, if we can get our goaltending for $3 million all told, it shouldn't matter that we have to slightly over pay to get Brian Gionta, who is only a slightly better player than Alex Tanguay. A slightly better player might get that winning goal in Boston. $2.5 million in the Molsons' account, no matter how much they wish it could, will never buy a Cup for this city.
Based on blind hope
The final expectation is one I've been a bit quiet about recently. However, it has to be said that a lot of the expectation for our team this year is not so solidly founded on a healthy dose of positive thinking.
The players I'm referring to here, of course, are the goalies. Carey Price, in particular. No reminder is needed about our finish to the season last year, with the two young goalies taking a place at centre stage. Yet this summer, all is rosy again. Many predictions I see say things like Carey Price will be better. The Canadiens goaltending will improve.
I hope that those guys are right. But let's admit there's not much basis to what they're saying beyond – they'll be better because I don't think they could be worse.
I think this expectation is the worst type. And it's worse when it's shared by our general manager. It's akin to the gambler who lurks behind the in-use slot machines watching to see if they'll pay out. Selecting those machines that haven't paid out in ages seems like a plan, but we all know it just comes down to utter chance in the end.
My expectations
When it comes to my expectations, I try to steer as much away from the methods mentioned above as possible. Through a combination of stats-gazing, impressions and what I hope is good sense, I try to form an expectation of the season that is reasonable.
This season, I've gone on record with the score about the Canadiens being in the playoff picture, and I even suggested a jump in points from last season to somewhere in the 100 range. After that, I haven't gone any further. Will Carey Price be getting those 40 wins? I don't know. Will Gomez be setting up the most goals? No idea.
Give me 100 points, and despite the complaints, the rants, the fretting, you should know that come April, I'll have enjoyed the ride.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
No Respect
Sergei Kostitsyn Evaluated Unfairly, Considering
Last game was Sergei Kostitsyn's 87th in the NHL, 2 years ago at this time, he was lining up beside Sam Gagner and Patrick Kane on the London Knights.
It seems that these two little pieces of information may have gotten lost in the brief prepared for RDS commentators Benoit Brunet and Pierre Houde, not to mention Joel Bouchard and Jacques Demers. They were particularly harsh on him two games ago, and then gave him little credit following a plus 4, 2 assist night on the de facto best line of the night.
It is especially interesting when you juxtapose Sergei's "plight" against the "return to dominance" of teammate Guillaume Latendresse. Guillaume for his part had a very good game a couple of night ago (his 184th in the NHL). In fact, he has had a good string of games. But all in all, his season has been no better or no worse really than Sergei Kostitsyn's.
A look at their stats will show you that both players are in the same neighbourhood:
Kostitsyn 35GP 6G 9A +4
Latendresse 31 GP 5G 9A +3
Last game, we were told that along with Molson Cup winner Lapierre, Latendresse was a stand-out for December. A look again shows that Sergei kept pace here too:
Kostitsyn 10GP 3G 2A E
Latendresse 9GP 3G 1A E
If I look to subjective records, such as 3 stars, I find that Sergei had a first and a second star game, whereas Guillaume only had one mention – a third star (in the non-Bell Centre rankings that is*)
The two players, in a nutshell, have both had dry spells and boons, benchings and streaks. Yet one is left wanting for praise and the other has his name singing from the pressbox.
What's up?
My take is that it all comes down to expectations and a certain flexibility and generosity in the setting of them. Expectations for Sergei are set rather high, given the way he took to the NHL last season and the way he led the team in playoff scoring. Guillaume, in contrast, has commentators lauding his capable checking and occasional goals from the third line.
Personally, I think this is a bit unfair. While I do agree Guillaume is turning a corner and we must acknowledge his actual potential and adjust our expectations, I feel Sergei is not being given the same lee-way. I would think that it's time to accept certain things about Sergei in order that we judge him in a fair light:
1) He is being thrust into uncomfortable situations at a very young stage of his career. While, it's natural for us fans to holler at the TV for greater PP success. It is hardly reasonable to expect a 21-year-old forward barely a year into a career to man the open point and turn the PP around, certainly not without a bit of a grace period to learn the position.
2) He tries things on. By this I mean he tries to be creative to take the defenders by surprise. Sometimes this means he makes a move and his pass hits a shin pad for a clearance. Given time to develop, it could mean great things.
3) He's still learning NHL defence. As we said, two years ago he was in junior, on the highest scoring team, on the highest scoring line. He didn't come in with a feel for NHL defensive play, and a season is an awfully short opportunity t perfect the task. That said, he still earns the coaches' trust on the PK, which is more than you could say for some of his peers.
So, if you're reading this Ben or Joel (ha), the next time Sergei lines up on the number one offensive unit, on the ice for 4 goals for and none against, perhaps you two could offer him a bit of slack, and hey, maybe even praise (not of the backhanded nature, like that montage of him last game). And Joel, if you insist on naming him every time a player goes down with injury as THE PLAYER who must step up, it might be nice if you recognised his 100-game older teammate as well.
Finally, for the love of everything sacred, we don't call you guys Benjamin, Peter, Jack and Joe; do you think you could extend yourselves to the point you might at least show his name some respect and stop calling him Serge?
* Does anyone know where one can get hold of the three stars that are announced after the Canadiens games at the Bell Centre. In my calculations from the "official" NHL archival rankings for December, Lapierre comes out tied third with 8 points, behind both Andrei Kostitsyn and D'Agostini on 10 each.
It seems that these two little pieces of information may have gotten lost in the brief prepared for RDS commentators Benoit Brunet and Pierre Houde, not to mention Joel Bouchard and Jacques Demers. They were particularly harsh on him two games ago, and then gave him little credit following a plus 4, 2 assist night on the de facto best line of the night.
It is especially interesting when you juxtapose Sergei's "plight" against the "return to dominance" of teammate Guillaume Latendresse. Guillaume for his part had a very good game a couple of night ago (his 184th in the NHL). In fact, he has had a good string of games. But all in all, his season has been no better or no worse really than Sergei Kostitsyn's.
A look at their stats will show you that both players are in the same neighbourhood:
Kostitsyn 35GP 6G 9A +4
Latendresse 31 GP 5G 9A +3
Last game, we were told that along with Molson Cup winner Lapierre, Latendresse was a stand-out for December. A look again shows that Sergei kept pace here too:
Kostitsyn 10GP 3G 2A E
Latendresse 9GP 3G 1A E
If I look to subjective records, such as 3 stars, I find that Sergei had a first and a second star game, whereas Guillaume only had one mention – a third star (in the non-Bell Centre rankings that is*)
The two players, in a nutshell, have both had dry spells and boons, benchings and streaks. Yet one is left wanting for praise and the other has his name singing from the pressbox.
What's up?
My take is that it all comes down to expectations and a certain flexibility and generosity in the setting of them. Expectations for Sergei are set rather high, given the way he took to the NHL last season and the way he led the team in playoff scoring. Guillaume, in contrast, has commentators lauding his capable checking and occasional goals from the third line.
Personally, I think this is a bit unfair. While I do agree Guillaume is turning a corner and we must acknowledge his actual potential and adjust our expectations, I feel Sergei is not being given the same lee-way. I would think that it's time to accept certain things about Sergei in order that we judge him in a fair light:
1) He is being thrust into uncomfortable situations at a very young stage of his career. While, it's natural for us fans to holler at the TV for greater PP success. It is hardly reasonable to expect a 21-year-old forward barely a year into a career to man the open point and turn the PP around, certainly not without a bit of a grace period to learn the position.
2) He tries things on. By this I mean he tries to be creative to take the defenders by surprise. Sometimes this means he makes a move and his pass hits a shin pad for a clearance. Given time to develop, it could mean great things.
3) He's still learning NHL defence. As we said, two years ago he was in junior, on the highest scoring team, on the highest scoring line. He didn't come in with a feel for NHL defensive play, and a season is an awfully short opportunity t perfect the task. That said, he still earns the coaches' trust on the PK, which is more than you could say for some of his peers.
So, if you're reading this Ben or Joel (ha), the next time Sergei lines up on the number one offensive unit, on the ice for 4 goals for and none against, perhaps you two could offer him a bit of slack, and hey, maybe even praise (not of the backhanded nature, like that montage of him last game). And Joel, if you insist on naming him every time a player goes down with injury as THE PLAYER who must step up, it might be nice if you recognised his 100-game older teammate as well.
Finally, for the love of everything sacred, we don't call you guys Benjamin, Peter, Jack and Joe; do you think you could extend yourselves to the point you might at least show his name some respect and stop calling him Serge?
* Does anyone know where one can get hold of the three stars that are announced after the Canadiens games at the Bell Centre. In my calculations from the "official" NHL archival rankings for December, Lapierre comes out tied third with 8 points, behind both Andrei Kostitsyn and D'Agostini on 10 each.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)