People have been asking me what I thought of the Gill for Geoffrion trade. Being busy, I didn't have time to post. But with a free minute, thought I'd save future questions by providing my answer here.
What to think?
I liked the trade.
What the Canadiens gave up in Hal Gill was little. And, let's be clear, Gill was no longer of great use the team. When he arrived, Gill was a new leader who could be used for a team in pressure games and pressure situations to deliver some impressive defensive minutes.
With his contract expiring, and the Canadiens unlikely to face a game of the magnitude of those from Gill's first season for quite some time, the team gave up a solid penalty killer.
And the timing was good. Because Gill can still be that valuable specialist that he was for the Canadiens for someone else, for a team where one PK makes the difference between winning and losing something important.
The return
I also liked the trade because of the return. I think prior to the trade it would have been sensible to suggest that Gill might land a second round pick plus something else. He did, but then somehow the Canadiens also pried Blake Geoffrion from the Nashville organization.
I think all of us who recently watched the year of ceremonies probably felt a moment or two of nostalgic romance when we heard this trade. Son of a player, grandson and namesake of an all-time hero, great-grandson of one of the first superstars of the game.
Of course, Blake Gefrrion is a player in his own right too. A Hobey Baker award as captain of the Badgers attests to that. It is foolhardy to think he's here to put the Morenz-Geoffrion treatment on the current Habs, yet his play suggest that he could easily make the lineup of the current team.
That's something. And quite something for Hal Gill to return in a trade.
Yes, overall, a good trade. Not the trade that spells massive overhaul, but one of those nice incremental moves that when accumulated show a move in the right direction.
I came across this piece yesetrday on Geoffrion. Many of you will probably enjoy giving it a quick read.
Showing posts with label second round. Show all posts
Showing posts with label second round. Show all posts
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Friday, June 17, 2011
Hard-Learned Lessons For Draft Day
Things that I hope the Canadiens have learned about drafting over the past decade:
1) Being more mature 18 isn’t an advantage at age 23
2) Being a defensive forward in junior means a guy doesn’t have the skill to score on junior goalies. Chances you want this guy on your pro team … he’d better play some kinda special defence
3) Defensive defenders come from everywhere. No need to try and find on in the first round.
4) As much as you’d like to trade for St. Louis, Staal, Perry, Ovechkin, Crosby, Sedins, you can’t. Constantly passing on scorers likely means you could end up without any.
5) While the NCAA is nice to bury a player outside the budget, one only needs to take a look at Komisarek’s regular National team duty to know that USA isn’t pumping out the cream of the defensive crop.
6) Better to get 2 players in the top 60 than one after the first 10 pass.
7) Russia hasn’t forgotten how to play hockey just because they’ve forgotten how to sign on to IIHF transfer agreements.
8) If the NHL can’t even reconcile how to mix North American and European players from the same positions together into one list, how do you expect to judge a player’s NHL value against high school opponents in Massachusetts?
9) Organizational needs on the day won’t be organizational needs when the player ripens.
10) OHL is not a dirty word.
11) BCHL stands for Below CHL.
1) Being more mature 18 isn’t an advantage at age 23
2) Being a defensive forward in junior means a guy doesn’t have the skill to score on junior goalies. Chances you want this guy on your pro team … he’d better play some kinda special defence
3) Defensive defenders come from everywhere. No need to try and find on in the first round.
4) As much as you’d like to trade for St. Louis, Staal, Perry, Ovechkin, Crosby, Sedins, you can’t. Constantly passing on scorers likely means you could end up without any.
5) While the NCAA is nice to bury a player outside the budget, one only needs to take a look at Komisarek’s regular National team duty to know that USA isn’t pumping out the cream of the defensive crop.
6) Better to get 2 players in the top 60 than one after the first 10 pass.
7) Russia hasn’t forgotten how to play hockey just because they’ve forgotten how to sign on to IIHF transfer agreements.
8) If the NHL can’t even reconcile how to mix North American and European players from the same positions together into one list, how do you expect to judge a player’s NHL value against high school opponents in Massachusetts?
9) Organizational needs on the day won’t be organizational needs when the player ripens.
10) OHL is not a dirty word.
11) BCHL stands for Below CHL.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
The Canadiens Model
Look around the headlines this time of year. The search for heroes is on. A good story has a hero right? One man who overcomes all adversity to vanquish his counterpart, the evil villain.
Montreal played Washington, the story going in was Ovechkin the hero vs. the pretenders. The story on completion was Halak conquering Ovie.
Similarly, the Pittsburgh series. Crosby vs. Halak.
For the media, it’s a winning formula. People have gobbled up tales of heroes since long before the Ancient Greeks committed their tales to paper. Hero stories capture minds and hearts and in this day and age, sell papers, turn on TV sets and drive web traffic.
It’s a model that amateur media like us bloggers often follow as well. Game after game, we try to pinpoint a moment, try to select a single most heroic player. We try to write a Greek myth. Last game, I wrote on the returning hero that was Jaroslav Spacek, his a tale of adversity and unlikely success. But as I prepare for tonight’s game I have decided rather than to single any one player out to revert to what I know in my heart – that these Montreal Canadiens don’t rely on a single hero, that they do what they do now as 20 men, as a team.
I think that that’s an important thing to remember as we wait out the hours until puck drop. That Pouliot has played in 7 playoff wins, just the same as Lapierre, that Kostitsyn is on a rampant scoring line, just like Cammalleri.
The trigger for me came at the end of Game 6. All series, all playoffs really, I had been waiting on Plekanec. All season, he had been the one player I knew I could rely on to deliver performance night after night. He could set up 4 goals one night to return the next as penalty killer extraordinaire, then solid support player. In the playoffs, I sought his scoring self, his dominant forecheck and his visionary passing. I was left wanting.
The other night, Sidney Crosby was driven to distraction at the end of the game, assessed a penalty that most will have missed during the euphoria. “Ah, it was just Plekanec” Sid said after the game. Just Plekanec, getting under his skin, making his life miserable.
Hearing this quote opened my eyes. Plekanec has been playing well. Intent that if he’s to play like a little girls, he’ll be that one who kicks your ankles and spits on your face in the playground. This series, Plekanec may not be a scoring machine, but he’s been doing his job, called to be a shadow each and every home game, bringing out the whine. In a series with 3 wins, he's been vital.
The same goes for Gomez, of course, who’s been given uphill assignments as well. Something that's easy to forget sometimes when we see that single goal on the score sheet.
But why stop there?
Heroes unsung abound. We know about the praise for Gill, Gorges, Subban and Spacek. The other Ds have been integral too. Markov contributed hugely when he was around. O’Byrne and Hamrlik have been valuable components in wins. Bergeron has played quite a role too. Consider for a minute he’s playing longer than 80% of NHLers who were signed before he was last summer.
The forwards? Gionta and Cammalleri are scoring. Plekanec's contributions have been uncovered some more. Kostitsyn has been on more than off, especially in wins. Gomez has been the rallyer on the bench and the calming force on the ice. Pouliot is coming up blank, but is essentially a rookie in his first playoffs, he's been less than his January self, but still trustworthy. Pyatt is a rookie too, stunning his June 29th overlookers (namely Sather). Moore, Metropolit and Moen are pulling more than their weight. Lapierre has turned his season around. Darche does whatever is asked.
Halak has been great, of course. But don’t overlook what Price has been able to achieve. Apart from a questionable slip (his comment to Sergei), he has been the consummate cheerleader and a much more mature Carey Price from the bench.
If saying hockey is a team game is a cliché, it is only because it is a simple fact. Hockey is a team game. Slumping scorers, alternate defencemen and back-up goalies may not get all the headlines, but when it comes to beating a team like Pittsburgh, one with relative balance and quick strike power, it takes a whole team. A team can't afford massively weak links. That includes those guys.
I await tonight’s game with much anticipation knowing that our team, our Canadiens, seem to have learned these lessons well, and that in the learning they have gained what makes them a contender no matter what any fancy stats say.
Montreal played Washington, the story going in was Ovechkin the hero vs. the pretenders. The story on completion was Halak conquering Ovie.
Similarly, the Pittsburgh series. Crosby vs. Halak.
For the media, it’s a winning formula. People have gobbled up tales of heroes since long before the Ancient Greeks committed their tales to paper. Hero stories capture minds and hearts and in this day and age, sell papers, turn on TV sets and drive web traffic.
It’s a model that amateur media like us bloggers often follow as well. Game after game, we try to pinpoint a moment, try to select a single most heroic player. We try to write a Greek myth. Last game, I wrote on the returning hero that was Jaroslav Spacek, his a tale of adversity and unlikely success. But as I prepare for tonight’s game I have decided rather than to single any one player out to revert to what I know in my heart – that these Montreal Canadiens don’t rely on a single hero, that they do what they do now as 20 men, as a team.
I think that that’s an important thing to remember as we wait out the hours until puck drop. That Pouliot has played in 7 playoff wins, just the same as Lapierre, that Kostitsyn is on a rampant scoring line, just like Cammalleri.
The trigger for me came at the end of Game 6. All series, all playoffs really, I had been waiting on Plekanec. All season, he had been the one player I knew I could rely on to deliver performance night after night. He could set up 4 goals one night to return the next as penalty killer extraordinaire, then solid support player. In the playoffs, I sought his scoring self, his dominant forecheck and his visionary passing. I was left wanting.
The other night, Sidney Crosby was driven to distraction at the end of the game, assessed a penalty that most will have missed during the euphoria. “Ah, it was just Plekanec” Sid said after the game. Just Plekanec, getting under his skin, making his life miserable.
Hearing this quote opened my eyes. Plekanec has been playing well. Intent that if he’s to play like a little girls, he’ll be that one who kicks your ankles and spits on your face in the playground. This series, Plekanec may not be a scoring machine, but he’s been doing his job, called to be a shadow each and every home game, bringing out the whine. In a series with 3 wins, he's been vital.
The same goes for Gomez, of course, who’s been given uphill assignments as well. Something that's easy to forget sometimes when we see that single goal on the score sheet.
But why stop there?
Heroes unsung abound. We know about the praise for Gill, Gorges, Subban and Spacek. The other Ds have been integral too. Markov contributed hugely when he was around. O’Byrne and Hamrlik have been valuable components in wins. Bergeron has played quite a role too. Consider for a minute he’s playing longer than 80% of NHLers who were signed before he was last summer.
The forwards? Gionta and Cammalleri are scoring. Plekanec's contributions have been uncovered some more. Kostitsyn has been on more than off, especially in wins. Gomez has been the rallyer on the bench and the calming force on the ice. Pouliot is coming up blank, but is essentially a rookie in his first playoffs, he's been less than his January self, but still trustworthy. Pyatt is a rookie too, stunning his June 29th overlookers (namely Sather). Moore, Metropolit and Moen are pulling more than their weight. Lapierre has turned his season around. Darche does whatever is asked.
Halak has been great, of course. But don’t overlook what Price has been able to achieve. Apart from a questionable slip (his comment to Sergei), he has been the consummate cheerleader and a much more mature Carey Price from the bench.
If saying hockey is a team game is a cliché, it is only because it is a simple fact. Hockey is a team game. Slumping scorers, alternate defencemen and back-up goalies may not get all the headlines, but when it comes to beating a team like Pittsburgh, one with relative balance and quick strike power, it takes a whole team. A team can't afford massively weak links. That includes those guys.
I await tonight’s game with much anticipation knowing that our team, our Canadiens, seem to have learned these lessons well, and that in the learning they have gained what makes them a contender no matter what any fancy stats say.
Thursday, May 06, 2010
Habs Vs. Pens
Time To Give Byslma Something To Think About
The playoffs is a unique portion of the NHL seson.
At other times, it may suffice to devise one's own strategy and take it to each and every opposing arena. Not so in the playoffs. Because the opponent is the same every game and the stakes so high, all strategies are sussed out and countered by any coach worth his weight.
Thankfully for the Canadiens, Bruce Boudreau had no counter. All that talk of AHL success perhaps more pertinent now than ever in assessing his true ceiling.
The difference for Jacques Martin is that from here he will be facing people with mettle. Bylsma has won a Cup and recovered the Pens from the mess that was Therrien's reign. Claude Julien is showing he's so good at convincing players that trapping is winning that he's redeeming his reputation again. In the West, there are finalists at every corner, bar Vigneault.
But never mind any of them. The immediate task is to vanquish the Penguins and hoodwink Bylsma. Last game, Bylsma somehow convinced the free-flowing Penguins to stop shooting and adopt a congestive defensive zone. It was the perfect adaptation to Montreal's reliance on counter attack. It was possible because Martin's plan has been the same since the Washington series. it was read, understood and countered.
The risk then is that the Habs over-rely on this same system, sans tweaks from here on. It could work, it's a workable system. However, there's no need to be so entrenched. Martin has options.
My humble suggestion
Assuming there is no sudden surge in confidence in the abilities of Metropolit, Darche and others, I think Martin will continue to employ 3 lines with mixes.
Fair enough, I see his point. Play the guys of higher caliber more often. Pre-empt outlandish Crosby matchups if possible.
If I buy that, I don't buy the guys on the bench. Why have Darche, Metropolit, Maxwell (non-threats) sit there when you could dress Sergei the Terrible? Why trot Andrei Kostitsyn out with offensive donkeys when he could thrive with a mere 4 minutes of fraternal passing?
Come on Jacques. Bury the hatchet and give Bylsma something to really think about. Your new fourth line:
AK46 - Metropolit - SK74
At other times, it may suffice to devise one's own strategy and take it to each and every opposing arena. Not so in the playoffs. Because the opponent is the same every game and the stakes so high, all strategies are sussed out and countered by any coach worth his weight.
Thankfully for the Canadiens, Bruce Boudreau had no counter. All that talk of AHL success perhaps more pertinent now than ever in assessing his true ceiling.
The difference for Jacques Martin is that from here he will be facing people with mettle. Bylsma has won a Cup and recovered the Pens from the mess that was Therrien's reign. Claude Julien is showing he's so good at convincing players that trapping is winning that he's redeeming his reputation again. In the West, there are finalists at every corner, bar Vigneault.
But never mind any of them. The immediate task is to vanquish the Penguins and hoodwink Bylsma. Last game, Bylsma somehow convinced the free-flowing Penguins to stop shooting and adopt a congestive defensive zone. It was the perfect adaptation to Montreal's reliance on counter attack. It was possible because Martin's plan has been the same since the Washington series. it was read, understood and countered.
The risk then is that the Habs over-rely on this same system, sans tweaks from here on. It could work, it's a workable system. However, there's no need to be so entrenched. Martin has options.
My humble suggestion
Assuming there is no sudden surge in confidence in the abilities of Metropolit, Darche and others, I think Martin will continue to employ 3 lines with mixes.
Fair enough, I see his point. Play the guys of higher caliber more often. Pre-empt outlandish Crosby matchups if possible.
If I buy that, I don't buy the guys on the bench. Why have Darche, Metropolit, Maxwell (non-threats) sit there when you could dress Sergei the Terrible? Why trot Andrei Kostitsyn out with offensive donkeys when he could thrive with a mere 4 minutes of fraternal passing?
Come on Jacques. Bury the hatchet and give Bylsma something to really think about. Your new fourth line:
AK46 - Metropolit - SK74
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Putting Corsi In Its Place
The playoff version of the 2010 Canadiens are an affront to well-trained hockey stats gurus everywhere. The team is testing the limits of shots and chances allowed vs shots and chances generated and coming out way behind. Yet, they somehow manage to find a positive balance in goals and wins up to now.
Those who've staked the biggest claim in these stats ventures are digging in their heels now. The Canadiens, they say will fall if they continue with the strategy they used to beat the best team in the NHL.
The problem I have with this argument is that it often relies too heavily on one single parameter (shots), and often isn't accompanied by observation.
Once, I was browsing a popular stats site, and there were questions being asked about how the Canadiens could possibly be winning the games they were.
In a frank and simple response, I suggested the stats man should watch the games.
Naturally, in his own backyard, he took offense. I stand by my advice, though. I don't think it's wrong. Although one can indeed prove that shots directed at the net correlates to more shots and shots in turn correlate to more goals and they in turn to more wins. One also shouldn't forget the exceptions at every step. There will always be teams one needs to watch to understand.
Whenever one takes this argument to the number crunchers, one gets accused of cock-eyed bias, of blind fandom. It's certainly true that fans of a team can ignore the bits they don't like and focus on the positive. Interesting as well, however, is the point to which these some-time name-callers invest the same amount of energy and passion as you and I do into a sports team we like to watch into the very numbers they claim to be objective defenders of. I think at some point the hardest fans of shots directed at goal and Corsi numbers have to realize the cracks in the thing they choose to support with blinders.
The problem with Corsi
I like the Corsi number (or the total shots directed on net plus minus, if you prefer). I think it does give something to think about. But it only gives something extra, not something new and complete for us to ignore everything else, such as actual goals, actual play.
One reason I think it is at times and imperfect stat is that it doesn't often account for what the smart thing to do is. For example, a high Corsi number is easily achieved by bombarding the opposition net with shots (even off net or into defenders) when in the opposition zone. I think we and some of Alexander Ovechkin's Washington teammates from the last round might agree that sometimes taking wild shots from everywhere is actually a bad idea. I think even the staunchest Gomez fans might advise him to stop padding his Corsi and concentrate on what he's great at (passing) a little more often.
The same goes at the other end. A team can allow fewer shots by leaving men in prime position open so that passes are attempted. Even though it's probably better to force players outside and clean that first rebound, Corsi numbers sometimes say that a team would be better off on average by tempting a pass into the net.
If you watch the game, this is less of a problem. One watching understands that a breakdown that results in a 2 on 0 with a post (no shot) is more dangerous than a shot from beside the net (even from 4 feet away). It is a problem for those who don't watch, however, as that missed shot (post) doesn't outstrip the close range exercise in futility.
The quality of shot
Today I read that there is no way that Montreal can continue with their strategy of allowing shots from outside or that Cammalleri can continue to shoot at 26%. While I agree, I also take issue with the complete dismissal of the idea.
What shot counts, blocked shots and missed shots don't record is the quality of the shot. Attempts have been made to approximate the shot quality, but they rely thus far entirely on very shaky ground (the distance of shot release, estimated by an NHL recorder). They do not interpret context (i.e., a shot from 50' when the goalie has fallen and the net uncovered is actually a high percentage chance) and without concerted effort to record these efforts live (like Olivier is doing for the Habs) it cannot really be done very completely at all.
Mike Cammalleri could shoot 26% from now if he only took high success rate shots, for example. A team can let up 35 shots 5% success shots from the perimeter if they score enough on counter attack. It's not a strategy I enjoy watching, particularly, but neither is it completely invalid.
If one doesn't know the quality of shot (i.e., watch the game) then one shouldn't really be making catch-all pronouncements on what happened in that game, or series, or season. Ron MacLean take note.
Fatigue
The real chances in hockey come from breakdowns. Breakdowns can be manufactured in the opposition through skill, or they can start happening on their own when players can't keep up.
I've already said that the Stanley Cup playoffs are probably the most grueling test in sports when it comes to a single trophy. So many games over so little time. Recovery time is short and energy systems are tested.
When looking at the prospects of winning this tournament, fatigue has to come in to consideration. Here the question of game strategy and our friend Mr. Corsi come in yet again. As Jacques Martin has designed his tactics for these two series, he seems to me to have had the fitness of his players at least somewhat in mind. I think that's where the strategy of collapsing and allowing certain shots comes in. A player like Gill running around trying to prevent the puck carrier from passing or shooting, or actually trying to strip the puck at every possession will tire him, much more so that waiting for the low percentage shot and the player to turn it over of his free will.
The same theory has been applied in the offensive zone. The reason we are all fretting that the Canadiens aren't sustaining possession is because they aren't really putting any effort into that game at all.
I am a massive proponent of the possession game. I think that holding the puck is better than chasing it, both from a game and a fatigue standpoint. I am, however, also a realist. If Martin thinks his team is incapable of keeping up with our skill match, then I don't find many arguments for that. I think Cammalleri probably would get burned out if he spent all his energy on the boards fighting it out, I think Gill' energies would be mis-spent pursuing with his skating.
While Corsi says a game plan must seek massive shots for, with few against as the ideal, it doesn't really account for contexts where Tom Pyatt is playing Sidney Crosby or Hal Gill is defending Malkin.
I think that while shot management is important, it is not the whole picture. As stats interpreters must consider lots of numbers, so coaches can't get so streamlined in thinking.
Last game, the Canadiens seemed to conserve energy early on with a pay-off of a tie in the first. Going in, maybe not a good strategy, but coming into the second, it's hard to say that it was a loser. From there, they actually visibly wore on the Penguins. A PP goal turned the Pens into more desperate and less thoughtful shooters and the 3rd goal was available because star players were worn out by the tenacity of the Montreal zone defence.
You can say they lost the shot game, the Corsi game. But they won the game in my opinion because they won in other areas of play undetected by stats. One was energy management.
Those who've staked the biggest claim in these stats ventures are digging in their heels now. The Canadiens, they say will fall if they continue with the strategy they used to beat the best team in the NHL.
The problem I have with this argument is that it often relies too heavily on one single parameter (shots), and often isn't accompanied by observation.
Once, I was browsing a popular stats site, and there were questions being asked about how the Canadiens could possibly be winning the games they were.
In a frank and simple response, I suggested the stats man should watch the games.
Naturally, in his own backyard, he took offense. I stand by my advice, though. I don't think it's wrong. Although one can indeed prove that shots directed at the net correlates to more shots and shots in turn correlate to more goals and they in turn to more wins. One also shouldn't forget the exceptions at every step. There will always be teams one needs to watch to understand.
Whenever one takes this argument to the number crunchers, one gets accused of cock-eyed bias, of blind fandom. It's certainly true that fans of a team can ignore the bits they don't like and focus on the positive. Interesting as well, however, is the point to which these some-time name-callers invest the same amount of energy and passion as you and I do into a sports team we like to watch into the very numbers they claim to be objective defenders of. I think at some point the hardest fans of shots directed at goal and Corsi numbers have to realize the cracks in the thing they choose to support with blinders.
The problem with Corsi
I like the Corsi number (or the total shots directed on net plus minus, if you prefer). I think it does give something to think about. But it only gives something extra, not something new and complete for us to ignore everything else, such as actual goals, actual play.
One reason I think it is at times and imperfect stat is that it doesn't often account for what the smart thing to do is. For example, a high Corsi number is easily achieved by bombarding the opposition net with shots (even off net or into defenders) when in the opposition zone. I think we and some of Alexander Ovechkin's Washington teammates from the last round might agree that sometimes taking wild shots from everywhere is actually a bad idea. I think even the staunchest Gomez fans might advise him to stop padding his Corsi and concentrate on what he's great at (passing) a little more often.
The same goes at the other end. A team can allow fewer shots by leaving men in prime position open so that passes are attempted. Even though it's probably better to force players outside and clean that first rebound, Corsi numbers sometimes say that a team would be better off on average by tempting a pass into the net.
If you watch the game, this is less of a problem. One watching understands that a breakdown that results in a 2 on 0 with a post (no shot) is more dangerous than a shot from beside the net (even from 4 feet away). It is a problem for those who don't watch, however, as that missed shot (post) doesn't outstrip the close range exercise in futility.
The quality of shot
Today I read that there is no way that Montreal can continue with their strategy of allowing shots from outside or that Cammalleri can continue to shoot at 26%. While I agree, I also take issue with the complete dismissal of the idea.
What shot counts, blocked shots and missed shots don't record is the quality of the shot. Attempts have been made to approximate the shot quality, but they rely thus far entirely on very shaky ground (the distance of shot release, estimated by an NHL recorder). They do not interpret context (i.e., a shot from 50' when the goalie has fallen and the net uncovered is actually a high percentage chance) and without concerted effort to record these efforts live (like Olivier is doing for the Habs) it cannot really be done very completely at all.
Mike Cammalleri could shoot 26% from now if he only took high success rate shots, for example. A team can let up 35 shots 5% success shots from the perimeter if they score enough on counter attack. It's not a strategy I enjoy watching, particularly, but neither is it completely invalid.
If one doesn't know the quality of shot (i.e., watch the game) then one shouldn't really be making catch-all pronouncements on what happened in that game, or series, or season. Ron MacLean take note.
Fatigue
The real chances in hockey come from breakdowns. Breakdowns can be manufactured in the opposition through skill, or they can start happening on their own when players can't keep up.
I've already said that the Stanley Cup playoffs are probably the most grueling test in sports when it comes to a single trophy. So many games over so little time. Recovery time is short and energy systems are tested.
When looking at the prospects of winning this tournament, fatigue has to come in to consideration. Here the question of game strategy and our friend Mr. Corsi come in yet again. As Jacques Martin has designed his tactics for these two series, he seems to me to have had the fitness of his players at least somewhat in mind. I think that's where the strategy of collapsing and allowing certain shots comes in. A player like Gill running around trying to prevent the puck carrier from passing or shooting, or actually trying to strip the puck at every possession will tire him, much more so that waiting for the low percentage shot and the player to turn it over of his free will.
The same theory has been applied in the offensive zone. The reason we are all fretting that the Canadiens aren't sustaining possession is because they aren't really putting any effort into that game at all.
I am a massive proponent of the possession game. I think that holding the puck is better than chasing it, both from a game and a fatigue standpoint. I am, however, also a realist. If Martin thinks his team is incapable of keeping up with our skill match, then I don't find many arguments for that. I think Cammalleri probably would get burned out if he spent all his energy on the boards fighting it out, I think Gill' energies would be mis-spent pursuing with his skating.
While Corsi says a game plan must seek massive shots for, with few against as the ideal, it doesn't really account for contexts where Tom Pyatt is playing Sidney Crosby or Hal Gill is defending Malkin.
I think that while shot management is important, it is not the whole picture. As stats interpreters must consider lots of numbers, so coaches can't get so streamlined in thinking.
Last game, the Canadiens seemed to conserve energy early on with a pay-off of a tie in the first. Going in, maybe not a good strategy, but coming into the second, it's hard to say that it was a loser. From there, they actually visibly wore on the Penguins. A PP goal turned the Pens into more desperate and less thoughtful shooters and the 3rd goal was available because star players were worn out by the tenacity of the Montreal zone defence.
You can say they lost the shot game, the Corsi game. But they won the game in my opinion because they won in other areas of play undetected by stats. One was energy management.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Draft Week
Later Round Names To Watch
A new phrase I've adopted from Down Goes Brown among others about the draft last night: Ctrl+V.
Most picks looked like they were taken straight from TSN's website. All that is, except Brian Burke who selected someone who's odds on to be the bust of the top 10 at the moment - someone has to be.
Last night was so boring to witness on TV, I can only thank my stars I didn't win the fight with the wife to actually attend. Strangely, I think today would be a better affair. For one thing, the Canadiens have six picks and are not hamstrung to take a native anymore. What's more, without the mass media spying on all the scouts, and Brian Burke unplugged might actually be conducive to trading.
We'll see. I'm not going to follow live, but will be happy to make do with the old fashioned report after the event. Before it all starts though, i thought I'd give a few thoughts on names and picks I'd like the Habs to consider (in case you get a chance to sneak a read Trevor, Bob).
Names that have dropped
Inevitably some names expected to be called in the first round have dropped into the second round. Now the Canadiens don't yet have a second round pick, but nothing stops them from trading if they think a player has dropped much further than they expected and they'd like to get in on the action. So, I thought I'd recap some of those names just in case.
The most important names haven't changed for me and they are Jeremy Morin, Landon Ferraro, Richard Panik and Toni Rajala. I previewed them all here for the 18th pick, so, obviously I think they'd be great pick-ups from this point.
3rd round and beyond
Now you'll remember that I'm a believer in the best asset available model of draft selection (a term I telepathically borrowed from Timmins or vice versa). As it comes to the late rounds of the draft, sticking to that policy is just as important as the first round.
As far as the Canadiens go, I think there are a few places they need to look for assets. All the names I chose were based on these characteristics:
1) A player or two from Quebec
Unique to the Canadiens. Due to their particular circumstances, it seems to me that it will be worth more to them to draft in these players to a) avoid a decade-long media sulk and b) to avoid having to overpay for these players later (see Dandenault). The Canadiens will probably always look to start 6-7 players from Quebec at a minimum, so it is certainly an asset to be able to have choice from within. We've already added Masse and Leblanc, so one more may suffice.
2) A goaltender
This draft pick will not himself be the asset. But it's as clear as mud that Halak is one of our most valuable trading pieces. At the moment we are not free to trade him because our depth is so shallow in goal. The Canadiens must and will pick a goalie so that organizationally they can make a trading chip. The goalie might as well be good, no?
3) Scoring forwards
This is back to the rarest commodity, pure and simple. Swing for the fence on every spare pick on a scoring forward, as far as I'm concerned. You'll never get a star like Datsyuk or Zetterberg in the late rounds if you keep picking USHL defenders in those spots. We're due a steal. We need a steal to jump to contender level.
On that note, here are the names:
Eric Gelinas, D, QMJHL -- my pick among the QMJHL defenders. At worst a giant Bouillon. At best another Desjardins. We started Brisebois in more than 50 games...
Charles Olivier Roussel, D, QMJHL -- doesn't sound like he'll drop far. The Hockey Writers say Shea Weber II. I doubt he'll be around, but if he is...
Benjamin Casavant, F, QMJHL -- Guillaume Latendresse with feeling behind the hits? 39 goals and 80 points in the Q was a very good show.
Mike Hoffman, F, QMJHL -- a little more Drummondville magic couldn't hurt, especially if we nab their coach (played with Masse some of the time). Late bloomer, but that doesn't matter to us anymore.
Ben Hanowski, F, Minn HS -- set all kinds of records for scoring in Minny, and apparently has character. If we miss Morin, I'd look here.
Alex Hutchings, F, OHL -- 34 goals and 34 assists in the OHL. Tavares had 58 and he's some kind of generational talent. Might be worth checking this Barrie Colt out.
Alexander Avtsyn, F, Russia -- 56 goals in Russia's second league. The scouts say intriguing -- really guys? Those stats are rare and should garner a look. Sure he might prefer the sunny climes of the Caucasus, but what's the harm in trying for the big Slava Kozlov option?
Andrej Stastny, F, Slovakia -- Like Avtsyn it was crazy numbers in a lower league. But I still like that better than knowing, something like 10 goals in the OHL, for example. Not many late steals to come from overmined Canada and Sweden this year, that's why underappreciated Eastern Europe is the odds on producer.
Alexander Fallstrom, F, Minn HS -- Great season at Sidney's old haunt, and is committed to play at Harvard (w Louis?). If you want in on the Swedish, he's the hidden gem.
Mikko Koskinen, G, Finland -- mature, crazy stats (albeit one season), worth a chance if he's around on that second third rounder.
Olivier Roy, G, QMJHL -- shouldn't be available, but two birds with one stone is a good move if within reach.
Taylor Doherty, D, WHL -- 6'6" and growing. Chara is the rarest of assets. to get a guy of that size who might play in a later round would be a coup. That's why I went out of my asset boxes here. Under 6'5" though, forget that.
Most picks looked like they were taken straight from TSN's website. All that is, except Brian Burke who selected someone who's odds on to be the bust of the top 10 at the moment - someone has to be.
Last night was so boring to witness on TV, I can only thank my stars I didn't win the fight with the wife to actually attend. Strangely, I think today would be a better affair. For one thing, the Canadiens have six picks and are not hamstrung to take a native anymore. What's more, without the mass media spying on all the scouts, and Brian Burke unplugged might actually be conducive to trading.
We'll see. I'm not going to follow live, but will be happy to make do with the old fashioned report after the event. Before it all starts though, i thought I'd give a few thoughts on names and picks I'd like the Habs to consider (in case you get a chance to sneak a read Trevor, Bob).
Names that have dropped
Inevitably some names expected to be called in the first round have dropped into the second round. Now the Canadiens don't yet have a second round pick, but nothing stops them from trading if they think a player has dropped much further than they expected and they'd like to get in on the action. So, I thought I'd recap some of those names just in case.
The most important names haven't changed for me and they are Jeremy Morin, Landon Ferraro, Richard Panik and Toni Rajala. I previewed them all here for the 18th pick, so, obviously I think they'd be great pick-ups from this point.
3rd round and beyond
Now you'll remember that I'm a believer in the best asset available model of draft selection (a term I telepathically borrowed from Timmins or vice versa). As it comes to the late rounds of the draft, sticking to that policy is just as important as the first round.
As far as the Canadiens go, I think there are a few places they need to look for assets. All the names I chose were based on these characteristics:
1) A player or two from Quebec
Unique to the Canadiens. Due to their particular circumstances, it seems to me that it will be worth more to them to draft in these players to a) avoid a decade-long media sulk and b) to avoid having to overpay for these players later (see Dandenault). The Canadiens will probably always look to start 6-7 players from Quebec at a minimum, so it is certainly an asset to be able to have choice from within. We've already added Masse and Leblanc, so one more may suffice.
2) A goaltender
This draft pick will not himself be the asset. But it's as clear as mud that Halak is one of our most valuable trading pieces. At the moment we are not free to trade him because our depth is so shallow in goal. The Canadiens must and will pick a goalie so that organizationally they can make a trading chip. The goalie might as well be good, no?
3) Scoring forwards
This is back to the rarest commodity, pure and simple. Swing for the fence on every spare pick on a scoring forward, as far as I'm concerned. You'll never get a star like Datsyuk or Zetterberg in the late rounds if you keep picking USHL defenders in those spots. We're due a steal. We need a steal to jump to contender level.
On that note, here are the names:
Eric Gelinas, D, QMJHL -- my pick among the QMJHL defenders. At worst a giant Bouillon. At best another Desjardins. We started Brisebois in more than 50 games...
Charles Olivier Roussel, D, QMJHL -- doesn't sound like he'll drop far. The Hockey Writers say Shea Weber II. I doubt he'll be around, but if he is...
Benjamin Casavant, F, QMJHL -- Guillaume Latendresse with feeling behind the hits? 39 goals and 80 points in the Q was a very good show.
Mike Hoffman, F, QMJHL -- a little more Drummondville magic couldn't hurt, especially if we nab their coach (played with Masse some of the time). Late bloomer, but that doesn't matter to us anymore.
Ben Hanowski, F, Minn HS -- set all kinds of records for scoring in Minny, and apparently has character. If we miss Morin, I'd look here.
Alex Hutchings, F, OHL -- 34 goals and 34 assists in the OHL. Tavares had 58 and he's some kind of generational talent. Might be worth checking this Barrie Colt out.
Alexander Avtsyn, F, Russia -- 56 goals in Russia's second league. The scouts say intriguing -- really guys? Those stats are rare and should garner a look. Sure he might prefer the sunny climes of the Caucasus, but what's the harm in trying for the big Slava Kozlov option?
Andrej Stastny, F, Slovakia -- Like Avtsyn it was crazy numbers in a lower league. But I still like that better than knowing, something like 10 goals in the OHL, for example. Not many late steals to come from overmined Canada and Sweden this year, that's why underappreciated Eastern Europe is the odds on producer.
Alexander Fallstrom, F, Minn HS -- Great season at Sidney's old haunt, and is committed to play at Harvard (w Louis?). If you want in on the Swedish, he's the hidden gem.
Mikko Koskinen, G, Finland -- mature, crazy stats (albeit one season), worth a chance if he's around on that second third rounder.
Olivier Roy, G, QMJHL -- shouldn't be available, but two birds with one stone is a good move if within reach.
Taylor Doherty, D, WHL -- 6'6" and growing. Chara is the rarest of assets. to get a guy of that size who might play in a later round would be a coup. That's why I went out of my asset boxes here. Under 6'5" though, forget that.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Draft Week
Montreal Canadiens' Woeful Draft Record A Complete Myth
Imagine you're sat at home on a cold winter's evening in Montreal chatting on the phone with your friend down in Barbados. You sit and listen patiently through all the grumblings about the weather (rain on Monday, too hot on Thursday) before signing off until next time.
That's what it must be like for fans in some NHL cities to read year after year about the Montreal Canadiens organization's horrible record when it comes to draft day.
Yes, it's all relative. And Montrealers live in a dream world where the draft should be a time for your GM to take his 4 first round picks (stockpiled from eager, yet unready, expansion GMs) and bring home a superstar by the year.
But really, we've all had time to adjust – 16 years if not more – and the idea that 3 NHLers is a good draft should start to sink in, I think. On the eve of this year's annual amateur amalgamation, I thought it was time to set things straight for fans of the bleu, blanc, rouge – to show just how good our managers have been over the last decades.
My system for this analysis was simple (possibly simplistic) – I looked at every player who played an NHL game or more this year and I looked at where that player came from. Here's what I found:
1) Montreal has drafted the highest number of 2008-09 NHLers
Montreal had 41 players from all rounds to Buffalo's 39 for first in absolute numbers of players. What's more the Canadiens were second in GP with 2096 vs. Buffalo's 2158 and second in points scored by those players with 841, only trailing New Jersey's 848 by 7 points.
These numbers are even more impressive when you consider Detroit only had 27 players drafted by them playing an NHL contest this year and some teams like Carolina, Vancouver and Minnesota (though on only 9 drafts) were at 19, 19 and 18 respectively.
2) Montreal second rounders and beyond outclass rivals picks by a long way
The media (and fans) in Montreal like to lambaste the general manager and the team for being pitiful on draft day, and some media bring up the same old chestnuts to discuss every single year. The story of first round draft picks gone missing (a tale from almost every team, by the way) is used to imply that Montreal isn't performing optimally on draft day.
Maybe so. But beyond that first round, no one team has really performed better. Everyone is really propagating a myth.
Montreal's management managed to select 32 players (more than an entire roster-worth) to play in the 2008-09 season. The next closest rivals were all in the twenties. Montreal also led in games played by non-first round picks and only trailed Detroit (courtesy Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen and Lidstrom) in points scored by those players.
3) Montreal isn't that bad in the first round either
Considering the furor, you'd think Montreal were the absolute worst at picking an NHLer from the first round. never mind their success in other rounds.
In actual fact, the Habs sit tied at 15th with Toronto and Carolina with 9 first round picks skating in the league today.
The leaders (believe it or not) are Phoenix/Winnipeg with 14 NHLers (a lot of good that has done them) followed by New Jersey, the Isles and Washington at 13 apiece.
When you consider the Habs have only had the benefit of 4 top 10 picks in the past 20 years (and made all but Terry Ryan stick), then it's not such a bad record.
Take top 10 picks away and the Canadiens are 11th best (tied with Toronto, San Jose and LA with 6 picks playing).
Non-top 10 picks overall, and the Habs once again lead. 38 players vs. 37 for Buffalo, 34 for Colorado/Quebec and 31 for NJ (the rest under 30).
4) The Habs have been consistent over time
Of the 41 Canadiens draft picks who suited up this year, 21 were drafted before the millennium and 20 were drafted 2000 or later.
Though not first when looking from 2000 on, the Canadiens do still boast the third highest harvest of NHL able draftees since the last expansion. Their 20 puts them in a draw with Edmonton and Buffalo and just behind Columbus and Pittsburgh. Vancouver (Hi Burkie!) and Carolina continue to plumb the depths with 8 and 11, respectively.
5) The Habs have been most successful at the defensive end of the ice
As to be expected given their recent (and long-time) strategy of picking defenders, the Canadiens have been at their most excellent when not picking forwards in the draft.
When it comes to goalies the Canadiens are right near the apex. 5 of the goalies they selected over the past 15 years played this season. All five, including Price, Vokoun, Halak, Garon and Theodore were at times the starter of their respective teams. Only Colorado/Quebec, also with 5 (Thomas, Fernandez, Budaj, Johnson and Denis) can surpass them.
On D the Canadiens draft picks also stood out with a whopping 14 playing at least one NHL game this season. Most were regulars with only Matt Carkner, Ryan O'Byrne, Patrice Brisebois and Yannick Weber playing on the margins. The one team to outdo the Canadiens was the Buffalo Sabres who drafted 3 sets of NHL defense line-ups with 17 draftees in all. Standouts from the Sabres draft classes included Dennis Wideman, Brian Campbell and Keith Ballard. No Markov, though.
So, it seems Montreal is quite good at drafting after all.
If Montreal has not succeeded it is not for an abject failure in the scouting system, but perhaps a distaste for risk. After all, when you can go into rounds 2 to 9 of a draft and say - "we'll come out with 3 players who'll be suiting up in the next 5 years if we go with sound strategy" - who would go with less?
The problem is, as Jack Todd rightly pointed out this morning in the Charlottetown Guardian:
So blame it on cautiousness, bad luck or getting outworked in free agency. Our woes don't come from a failure at the draft...
That's what it must be like for fans in some NHL cities to read year after year about the Montreal Canadiens organization's horrible record when it comes to draft day.
Yes, it's all relative. And Montrealers live in a dream world where the draft should be a time for your GM to take his 4 first round picks (stockpiled from eager, yet unready, expansion GMs) and bring home a superstar by the year.
But really, we've all had time to adjust – 16 years if not more – and the idea that 3 NHLers is a good draft should start to sink in, I think. On the eve of this year's annual amateur amalgamation, I thought it was time to set things straight for fans of the bleu, blanc, rouge – to show just how good our managers have been over the last decades.
My system for this analysis was simple (possibly simplistic) – I looked at every player who played an NHL game or more this year and I looked at where that player came from. Here's what I found:
1) Montreal has drafted the highest number of 2008-09 NHLers
| Team | Drafted players | GP | Avg GP | Pts | Avg Pts |
| Montreal | 41 | 2096 | 51.1 | 841 | 20.5 |
| Buffalo | 39 | 2158 | 55.3 | 759 | 19.5 |
| Colorado/Quebec | 36 | 1638 | 45.5 | 579 | 16.1 |
| San Jose | 35 | 1444 | 53.5 | 553 | 20.5 |
| New Jersey | 34 | 1868 | 54.9 | 848 | 24.9 |
Montreal had 41 players from all rounds to Buffalo's 39 for first in absolute numbers of players. What's more the Canadiens were second in GP with 2096 vs. Buffalo's 2158 and second in points scored by those players with 841, only trailing New Jersey's 848 by 7 points.
These numbers are even more impressive when you consider Detroit only had 27 players drafted by them playing an NHL contest this year and some teams like Carolina, Vancouver and Minnesota (though on only 9 drafts) were at 19, 19 and 18 respectively.
2) Montreal second rounders and beyond outclass rivals picks by a long way
The media (and fans) in Montreal like to lambaste the general manager and the team for being pitiful on draft day, and some media bring up the same old chestnuts to discuss every single year. The story of first round draft picks gone missing (a tale from almost every team, by the way) is used to imply that Montreal isn't performing optimally on draft day.
Maybe so. But beyond that first round, no one team has really performed better. Everyone is really propagating a myth.
| Team | Drafted players | GP | Avg GP | Pts | Avg Pts |
| Montreal | 32 | 1653 | 51.6 | 662 | 20.7 |
| Buffalo | 27 | 1420 | 52.6 | 514 | 19.0 |
| Colorado/Quebec | 26 | 1131 | 43.5 | 366 | 14.1 |
| New York Rangers | 26 | 1143 | 44.0 | 457 | 17.6 |
| Detroit | 25 | 1196 | 47.8 | 702 | 28.1 |
Montreal's management managed to select 32 players (more than an entire roster-worth) to play in the 2008-09 season. The next closest rivals were all in the twenties. Montreal also led in games played by non-first round picks and only trailed Detroit (courtesy Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen and Lidstrom) in points scored by those players.
3) Montreal isn't that bad in the first round either
Considering the furor, you'd think Montreal were the absolute worst at picking an NHLer from the first round. never mind their success in other rounds.
In actual fact, the Habs sit tied at 15th with Toronto and Carolina with 9 first round picks skating in the league today.
The leaders (believe it or not) are Phoenix/Winnipeg with 14 NHLers (a lot of good that has done them) followed by New Jersey, the Isles and Washington at 13 apiece.
When you consider the Habs have only had the benefit of 4 top 10 picks in the past 20 years (and made all but Terry Ryan stick), then it's not such a bad record.
Take top 10 picks away and the Canadiens are 11th best (tied with Toronto, San Jose and LA with 6 picks playing).
Non-top 10 picks overall, and the Habs once again lead. 38 players vs. 37 for Buffalo, 34 for Colorado/Quebec and 31 for NJ (the rest under 30).
4) The Habs have been consistent over time
Of the 41 Canadiens draft picks who suited up this year, 21 were drafted before the millennium and 20 were drafted 2000 or later.
Though not first when looking from 2000 on, the Canadiens do still boast the third highest harvest of NHL able draftees since the last expansion. Their 20 puts them in a draw with Edmonton and Buffalo and just behind Columbus and Pittsburgh. Vancouver (Hi Burkie!) and Carolina continue to plumb the depths with 8 and 11, respectively.
5) The Habs have been most successful at the defensive end of the ice
As to be expected given their recent (and long-time) strategy of picking defenders, the Canadiens have been at their most excellent when not picking forwards in the draft.
When it comes to goalies the Canadiens are right near the apex. 5 of the goalies they selected over the past 15 years played this season. All five, including Price, Vokoun, Halak, Garon and Theodore were at times the starter of their respective teams. Only Colorado/Quebec, also with 5 (Thomas, Fernandez, Budaj, Johnson and Denis) can surpass them.
On D the Canadiens draft picks also stood out with a whopping 14 playing at least one NHL game this season. Most were regulars with only Matt Carkner, Ryan O'Byrne, Patrice Brisebois and Yannick Weber playing on the margins. The one team to outdo the Canadiens was the Buffalo Sabres who drafted 3 sets of NHL defense line-ups with 17 draftees in all. Standouts from the Sabres draft classes included Dennis Wideman, Brian Campbell and Keith Ballard. No Markov, though.
So, it seems Montreal is quite good at drafting after all.
If Montreal has not succeeded it is not for an abject failure in the scouting system, but perhaps a distaste for risk. After all, when you can go into rounds 2 to 9 of a draft and say - "we'll come out with 3 players who'll be suiting up in the next 5 years if we go with sound strategy" - who would go with less?
The problem is, as Jack Todd rightly pointed out this morning in the Charlottetown Guardian:
Sooner or later, you have to hit a few gems like Carter, Getzlaf and Parise if you want to go from also-ran to the top of the heap. The Detroit Red Wings, everyone’s model of the perfectly run franchise, drafted Henrik Zetterberg with the 210th pick of the 1999 draft, Pavel Datsyuk with the 171st pick in 1998 and Nik Lidstrom 53rd in 1989 — that’s how you build a great team.
So blame it on cautiousness, bad luck or getting outworked in free agency. Our woes don't come from a failure at the draft...
Thursday, April 30, 2009
All But The Important One...
It seems when I pick with my head and not with my heart, I'm alright at this prediction thing (well this time, anyway). But though it's nice to be sitting ahead of the Al Strachan's of the world in the Score playoff pool, I'd give it all up for heart over head and a match-up against the Capitals...
This is what I had for Round 1:
Habs over Bruins in 7
I couldn't have picked the Bruins, Markov or not. I hate that I was wrong. Hate it.
Capitals over Rangers in 6
I didn't trust in Lundqvist, but he did OK, at first. Washington's a strong one.
Hurricanes over Devils in 7
I couldn't have predicted the way it would happen, with the drama and swings; but I've always liked the power of the Eric/ks
Penguins over Flyers in 6
This was a no-brainer. Just like the guy who entrusted another year in the playoffs to Martin Biron.
Anaheim over San Jose in 7
I didn't expect Anaheim to be so quick, but with Niedermayer (player of the decade with Lidstrom) and Pronger, the Ducks were much more dangerous than their totals suggested. they still are.
Detroit over Columbus in 6
Columbus were weaker than I thought. That's saying something.
Canucks over Blues in 5
All those who hyped the Blues should have learned that a late streak does nothing to overcome a good offense with a great goalie.
Flames over Hawks in 7
Oops. I thought the Hawks were earlier in the development than this. Gotta like teaming young team with reliable veteran goalie. I wonder if any other teams ever had success with that approach. Maybe last year? Can't think...
Enough gloating. Here's where I suffer the fall, as I have to make more predictions and will likely fall to the very predictable .500 level that suits 50:50 chance of success in prognostication (and faceoffs).
Carolina over Boston in 6
This isn't just my heart here, though it is involved. The Bruins were not tested at all, not at all, in their opening series. The Hurricanes beat the mighty Devils with a better goalie than Boston have and a better version of the same defensive system. Plus Staal is a stud vs. Savard. The weakness comes at the back for Carolina a with Montreal, but Boston would be blessed to get as many well-timed and easy goals as they eventually relied on to coast through round 1.
Pittsburgh over Washington in 7
Watch this series and you'll begin to understand why there should be some urgency about winning sooner rather than later in Montreal. Ovechkin, Semin, Malkin and Crosby could become conference final fixtures if they wanted to. They'll show us why with Pittsburgh's Stanley Cup creds giving them the final edge. This is OT in game 7 type stuff.
Detroit over Anaheim in 5
Whereas San Jose couldn't have looked at Anaheim with any relish, Detroit know they can counter. Hiller may be better than Osgood, but he is not as good as SJ made him look. He'd do well to come out of a match with Zetterberg, Datsyuk and company as unscathed as he is now. Lidstrom outplaying the big two will be key. I have faith in the best player of our time.
Vancouver over Chicago in 6
We must watch while Vancouver proves how waiting for Sundin was leagues better than trading for the consolation prize. It helps to have a good goalie who makes saves, too. I stand by my earlier statements as well – not Chicago's time yet.
There you have it. It will be mocked and ridiculed on The Score, so why not here. But as we've seen, even silly predictions like Anaheim over perfect franchise (exhibit A) happen; so you never know.
If I muster up the interest to watch after my sulk, there are match-ups here to like. Pittsburgh vs. Washington should be a great one, Carolina thumping Boston would be nice too.
Is it October yet?
This is what I had for Round 1:
Habs over Bruins in 7
I couldn't have picked the Bruins, Markov or not. I hate that I was wrong. Hate it.
Capitals over Rangers in 6
I didn't trust in Lundqvist, but he did OK, at first. Washington's a strong one.
Hurricanes over Devils in 7
I couldn't have predicted the way it would happen, with the drama and swings; but I've always liked the power of the Eric/ks
Penguins over Flyers in 6
This was a no-brainer. Just like the guy who entrusted another year in the playoffs to Martin Biron.
Anaheim over San Jose in 7
I didn't expect Anaheim to be so quick, but with Niedermayer (player of the decade with Lidstrom) and Pronger, the Ducks were much more dangerous than their totals suggested. they still are.
Detroit over Columbus in 6
Columbus were weaker than I thought. That's saying something.
Canucks over Blues in 5
All those who hyped the Blues should have learned that a late streak does nothing to overcome a good offense with a great goalie.
Flames over Hawks in 7
Oops. I thought the Hawks were earlier in the development than this. Gotta like teaming young team with reliable veteran goalie. I wonder if any other teams ever had success with that approach. Maybe last year? Can't think...
Enough gloating. Here's where I suffer the fall, as I have to make more predictions and will likely fall to the very predictable .500 level that suits 50:50 chance of success in prognostication (and faceoffs).
Carolina over Boston in 6
This isn't just my heart here, though it is involved. The Bruins were not tested at all, not at all, in their opening series. The Hurricanes beat the mighty Devils with a better goalie than Boston have and a better version of the same defensive system. Plus Staal is a stud vs. Savard. The weakness comes at the back for Carolina a with Montreal, but Boston would be blessed to get as many well-timed and easy goals as they eventually relied on to coast through round 1.
Pittsburgh over Washington in 7
Watch this series and you'll begin to understand why there should be some urgency about winning sooner rather than later in Montreal. Ovechkin, Semin, Malkin and Crosby could become conference final fixtures if they wanted to. They'll show us why with Pittsburgh's Stanley Cup creds giving them the final edge. This is OT in game 7 type stuff.
Detroit over Anaheim in 5
Whereas San Jose couldn't have looked at Anaheim with any relish, Detroit know they can counter. Hiller may be better than Osgood, but he is not as good as SJ made him look. He'd do well to come out of a match with Zetterberg, Datsyuk and company as unscathed as he is now. Lidstrom outplaying the big two will be key. I have faith in the best player of our time.
Vancouver over Chicago in 6
We must watch while Vancouver proves how waiting for Sundin was leagues better than trading for the consolation prize. It helps to have a good goalie who makes saves, too. I stand by my earlier statements as well – not Chicago's time yet.
There you have it. It will be mocked and ridiculed on The Score, so why not here. But as we've seen, even silly predictions like Anaheim over perfect franchise (exhibit A) happen; so you never know.
If I muster up the interest to watch after my sulk, there are match-ups here to like. Pittsburgh vs. Washington should be a great one, Carolina thumping Boston would be nice too.
Is it October yet?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)