I see a lot of irrational ideas when it comes to the Bruins and there is nothing like a poorly performing team married with the trade deadline to bring them to fever pitch. One particular theory keeps coming back again and again that really irks me. After having a fantastic season a team comes back the next year and plays poorly. The bizarre explanation by some is that the team never really was that good in the first place; they somehow "overachieved." The previous year was a fluke. In fact, the team has little or no talent. If you buy into this idea then the solution to the problem is to go out and get more talent.
A team can be more than the sum of its parts. A team can come together in such a way as to reach its full potential. This intangible unity is what makes a championship team. But it is nonsense that a team can somehow reach beyond their full potential, particularly for an extended period of time such as an entire season. Logically, your best is your best; there is nothing better. This idea of "overachieving" is a myth.
Yet I have seen and read again and again the view that the Bruins overachieved last season. In this view the entire season was a fluke. The "real" Bruins is the team we see now. The B's don't have enough talent, so the obvious solution is to bring on more talent at the trade deadline. Or at least it seems obvious to the people I see commenting, such as in this article by the Hockey Genius Eric Wilbur.
Yet on its face the argument makes no sense. The Bruins are essentially the same. Their skill level remains close to what it was last year, even without Kessel. What has happened is that they are no longer playing up to their potential. In a word, they are underachieving. Sure, getting the right guy into the locker room might inspire the rest of the team to get out of their funk, but that's a gamble at best. No, we usually blame someone else when a team consistently underachieves. I'll go ahead and come right out and say it: if the underachieving continues the rational solution is to replace the coaching staff, not the players.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Friday, February 12, 2010
Why People Who Should Know Better are Complaining about Tim Thomas
Why? Because they don't know any better. I just watched this video and it would be funny if it weren't so wrong headed:
Was Tim Thomas's Contract a Mistake?
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a fan of Tim Thomas, and some people will no doubt assume that I'm biased by that. But that's not it. What I can't stand is when people are biased against Thomas, unfairly pointing out every soft goal yet only grudgingly giving him credit when he does well. You see that in the video when the guy on the left claims that Thomas is no Brodeur. That's what he thinks and nothing Timmy can do--even winning the Vezina--will change his opinion. The Vezina? That was merely Julien's defense-first approach at work. I mean, last year that guy could have suited up and won the Vezina! Yet of course this year the poor play of the team has absolutely nothing to do with it. Yeah, right. I have never seen a successful player so unreasonably maligned by the so-called "experts" in any sport (more on that in another post).
To put the idea to rest that I'm just as biased let me state unequivocally that Tim Thomas has not played well enough since the January 14th game against the Sharks. That's eight games that they lost--eight games that he was not able to steal. This was a period where the Bruins gave up 22 goals (2.75 goals per game). During that same period the Bruins managed only nine goals (1.13 goals per game). There should be no doubt that the low scoring was the real problem, but it is just as true that a Vezina-winning goalie should have been able to stand on his head and steal a few of them. Unlike earlier this year that didn't happen.
In the last five starts Rask has had one great game and four mediocre-to-good ones. He has allowed 12 goals (2.4 goals per game). In that same period the Bruins have scored 15 goals (3.0 goals per game). It's true that Rask had a terrific game against Montreal on February 2. But the same could be said about Thomas having helped steal the game against the Sharks. The main reason the Bruins are winning now is that they are scoring again. Had they scored 3 goals per game during Thomas's losing streak they would have won most of them.
So why are people claiming that Thomas is finished? It's simple. They don't actually watch the games. They just see some highlights from time to time and primarily look at the stats. Right now Thomas is 13-15-7 with a 2.52 GAA and a save percentage* of 0.915. Rask is 13-7-4 with a 2.09 GAA and a whopping 0.928 save percentage. Clearly Rask is by far the better of the two, right? By-the-way, in the 2005/2006 season Brodeur's GAA was 2.57 and his save percentage was 0.911. Does that mean he was no longer Martin Brodeur? Should the Devils have dumped him and his big contract?
But here's the thing: stats can lie. Take the last game against Tampa Bay--statistically Rask had a poor night, allowing 4 goals on 35 shots (a horrible 0.886 save percentage). So he stank right? No! In fact, watching the game we know that he was very sharp and didn't allow any soft goals. In a game where one team runs away with it early it is typical for the team to let down and allow some goals. But they did get the win and that's what counts. So here is a perfect example of how the stats alone lie. You have to watch the games. Those "sports guys" in the video have many other sports to be watching. There is just no way they watch every game. Having watched all but three games this season I can say that Tim Thomas has in fact played very well, often under extremely difficult circumstances. The stats alone don't begin to tell the story.
Look--all goaltenders have difficult periods. All of them. But it happens to Thomas and some small-minded fickle people are willing to give up on a good thing to satisfy their preconceived notions. Hey, if I'm just biased in favor of Thomas, then why have I won this same argument about how good Timmy is every single time since 2006? The fact is he has never let me down. As always, Timmy will be back and his detractors will shut their mouths, biding their time until they can once again show their unfounded disdain.
As for Timmy's contract, see my comments from the last post. Here are a few additional points to consider:
*Sports people are awful at math! A percentage, by definition, is where 100 is the maximum. The so-called "save percentage" isn't a percentage at all. It's a simple ratio. To make it a percentage you would need to multiply the number by 100. E.g. 0.915 becomes 91.5%. So for God's sake people, either multiply by 100 or stop calling it a percentage.
Was Tim Thomas's Contract a Mistake?
I make no secret of the fact that I'm a fan of Tim Thomas, and some people will no doubt assume that I'm biased by that. But that's not it. What I can't stand is when people are biased against Thomas, unfairly pointing out every soft goal yet only grudgingly giving him credit when he does well. You see that in the video when the guy on the left claims that Thomas is no Brodeur. That's what he thinks and nothing Timmy can do--even winning the Vezina--will change his opinion. The Vezina? That was merely Julien's defense-first approach at work. I mean, last year that guy could have suited up and won the Vezina! Yet of course this year the poor play of the team has absolutely nothing to do with it. Yeah, right. I have never seen a successful player so unreasonably maligned by the so-called "experts" in any sport (more on that in another post).
To put the idea to rest that I'm just as biased let me state unequivocally that Tim Thomas has not played well enough since the January 14th game against the Sharks. That's eight games that they lost--eight games that he was not able to steal. This was a period where the Bruins gave up 22 goals (2.75 goals per game). During that same period the Bruins managed only nine goals (1.13 goals per game). There should be no doubt that the low scoring was the real problem, but it is just as true that a Vezina-winning goalie should have been able to stand on his head and steal a few of them. Unlike earlier this year that didn't happen.
In the last five starts Rask has had one great game and four mediocre-to-good ones. He has allowed 12 goals (2.4 goals per game). In that same period the Bruins have scored 15 goals (3.0 goals per game). It's true that Rask had a terrific game against Montreal on February 2. But the same could be said about Thomas having helped steal the game against the Sharks. The main reason the Bruins are winning now is that they are scoring again. Had they scored 3 goals per game during Thomas's losing streak they would have won most of them.
So why are people claiming that Thomas is finished? It's simple. They don't actually watch the games. They just see some highlights from time to time and primarily look at the stats. Right now Thomas is 13-15-7 with a 2.52 GAA and a save percentage* of 0.915. Rask is 13-7-4 with a 2.09 GAA and a whopping 0.928 save percentage. Clearly Rask is by far the better of the two, right? By-the-way, in the 2005/2006 season Brodeur's GAA was 2.57 and his save percentage was 0.911. Does that mean he was no longer Martin Brodeur? Should the Devils have dumped him and his big contract?
But here's the thing: stats can lie. Take the last game against Tampa Bay--statistically Rask had a poor night, allowing 4 goals on 35 shots (a horrible 0.886 save percentage). So he stank right? No! In fact, watching the game we know that he was very sharp and didn't allow any soft goals. In a game where one team runs away with it early it is typical for the team to let down and allow some goals. But they did get the win and that's what counts. So here is a perfect example of how the stats alone lie. You have to watch the games. Those "sports guys" in the video have many other sports to be watching. There is just no way they watch every game. Having watched all but three games this season I can say that Tim Thomas has in fact played very well, often under extremely difficult circumstances. The stats alone don't begin to tell the story.
Look--all goaltenders have difficult periods. All of them. But it happens to Thomas and some small-minded fickle people are willing to give up on a good thing to satisfy their preconceived notions. Hey, if I'm just biased in favor of Thomas, then why have I won this same argument about how good Timmy is every single time since 2006? The fact is he has never let me down. As always, Timmy will be back and his detractors will shut their mouths, biding their time until they can once again show their unfounded disdain.
As for Timmy's contract, see my comments from the last post. Here are a few additional points to consider:
- Goaltenders have longer careers than players at other positions
- Not everyone hates Thomas--he could have signed for much more money as a free agent last summer. Some fans seem to have forgotten that goaltending is the foundation of a team.
- Thomas took a discount because he wanted to play for the B's and because they offered him the long-term contract.
- Thomas's cap-hit in his fifth year is very small.
- Five million per year for solid goaltending is a steal for a Vezina winning goaltender.
*Sports people are awful at math! A percentage, by definition, is where 100 is the maximum. The so-called "save percentage" isn't a percentage at all. It's a simple ratio. To make it a percentage you would need to multiply the number by 100. E.g. 0.915 becomes 91.5%. So for God's sake people, either multiply by 100 or stop calling it a percentage.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Trading Tim Thomas
The Bruins finally won a game. I don't have to tell Bruins fans how painful and upsetting the last few weeks have been as the Bruins went on a ten game "not winning" streak. It turns out that they did pick up four points in OT losses (regulation ties) so it isn't exactly correct to claim it was a losing streak. But it sure felt like a losing streak so it might as well be called one.
I have been saying all along that what they needed was to score three goals. It's ironic that when they finally scored three their goaltender also got a shutout. Turns out all they needed was one goal. But nevertheless three bodes well for the future. If they score three in just about any of the recent games they likely win.
Oddly, despite all this the Bruins are still in the thick of the playoffs. The question now isn't if they can make the playoffs so much as if they can be expected to win a series if they did. They certainly have the talent to go far, of that I am certain. This idea you see in the press that the Bs played over their potential last year is idiotic. A team can be more than the sum of its parts but it can never be better than its potential. Last year was no fluke. We know how good this team can be.
Rumors are swirling about Tim Thomas being shopped around. Even if true I doubt it means more than the GM taking stock of market value. After all, Thomas has a no trade clause. It seems unlikely he'd suddenly decide he didn't like the weather in New England. But more importantly, the Bruins have a sweet deal in their goaltending, arguably the best in the league. The tandem of the veteran Thomas and the up and coming Rask is a GMs dream--particularly when you consider their cap hit taken together is only $6.5 million, which is good through the 2011/2012 season. For comparison, Khabibulin alone has the same figure, as does Luongo. Giguere has a hit of $6 million, Kiprusoff $5.8 million. And those teams have to pay for a backup as well, because no goalie can play every game. Which would you rather have? Luongo or the Thomas/Rask tandem? Rask is unproven (Raycroft anyone) but with great potential and despite the Thomas doubters Timmy has always overcome any adversity sent his way, which has been considerable. If one needs to come up for air, the other can always take over. This is as close as it gets to a sure thing in the playoffs. All they need is a team that can play in front of them.
The bottom line is that no GM in his right mind would trade either of them right now. That is, unless he is forced to--and that's the great worry. There are only a few reasonable places to look for enough cap room to bring in a difference maker up front, and Thomas is the prime one. It may be tempting to move him to clear the space, but that would be staking the future of the team on a kid goaltender, which would be a big gamble. As I said before, he'd be crazy to do it.
Unless he was forced to.
I have been saying all along that what they needed was to score three goals. It's ironic that when they finally scored three their goaltender also got a shutout. Turns out all they needed was one goal. But nevertheless three bodes well for the future. If they score three in just about any of the recent games they likely win.
Oddly, despite all this the Bruins are still in the thick of the playoffs. The question now isn't if they can make the playoffs so much as if they can be expected to win a series if they did. They certainly have the talent to go far, of that I am certain. This idea you see in the press that the Bs played over their potential last year is idiotic. A team can be more than the sum of its parts but it can never be better than its potential. Last year was no fluke. We know how good this team can be.
Rumors are swirling about Tim Thomas being shopped around. Even if true I doubt it means more than the GM taking stock of market value. After all, Thomas has a no trade clause. It seems unlikely he'd suddenly decide he didn't like the weather in New England. But more importantly, the Bruins have a sweet deal in their goaltending, arguably the best in the league. The tandem of the veteran Thomas and the up and coming Rask is a GMs dream--particularly when you consider their cap hit taken together is only $6.5 million, which is good through the 2011/2012 season. For comparison, Khabibulin alone has the same figure, as does Luongo. Giguere has a hit of $6 million, Kiprusoff $5.8 million. And those teams have to pay for a backup as well, because no goalie can play every game. Which would you rather have? Luongo or the Thomas/Rask tandem? Rask is unproven (Raycroft anyone) but with great potential and despite the Thomas doubters Timmy has always overcome any adversity sent his way, which has been considerable. If one needs to come up for air, the other can always take over. This is as close as it gets to a sure thing in the playoffs. All they need is a team that can play in front of them.
The bottom line is that no GM in his right mind would trade either of them right now. That is, unless he is forced to--and that's the great worry. There are only a few reasonable places to look for enough cap room to bring in a difference maker up front, and Thomas is the prime one. It may be tempting to move him to clear the space, but that would be staking the future of the team on a kid goaltender, which would be a big gamble. As I said before, he'd be crazy to do it.
Unless he was forced to.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Is This How it Ends?
What can you say about the 8 losses in the last 9 games? The Bruins actually played pretty well until very recently. They adopted a scrappier, faster game that created a lot more space and scoring chances. But most the time the puck still refused to go into the net--and lately every good scoring chance at the other end of the ice seems to result in a rush the other way and a goal. The fact is that if you can't consistently score more than two goals per game you aren't going to win a lot of them, particularly when your defense is stepping up in an effort to help. The last game against Carolina (on January 24th) was the final straw. Jack Edwards wanted to see some passion--and so did I-- but it didn't happen. They could have at least gone down fighting!
I had believed that after the Winter Classic the Bruins would go .500 until the Olympics. They have played like a team that was just getting by until the playoffs all year and I expected that to continue until all of the distractions were over. But this latest slide... it is starting to look like the end of this team as we know it.
So who's to blame? The GM for trading Kessel? The coaching staff? Too much success last season too soon? Is there someone poisoning the room?
The Thomas haters haven't wasted any time showing their hate again, claiming irrationally that the coach hasn't played Rask enough. What's wrong with those people anyhow? What ugly broken excuses for human beings they are. Anybody who isn't blinded by hate can see that Rask hasn't fared any better. One thing about Tim Thomas--if the team gives up in front of him he'll hang in there with the big saves in a game for only so long. After a while he gets "uninspired" by the play of the rest of the team and quits too. Some may fault him for that, but I say, "So what?" He's not the root cause of the problem.
We've got nine games to go before the Olympic break. They face the Caps, Canucks, Kings, Lightning and Panthers. They play the Sabers and Canadiens twice. The simple fact is that if they don't get a winning streak going before the break the season will be over. If that happens it's going to get really ugly. Julien may have to go, which would be a shame. And if you are thinking trade then think again--the only players who are truly trade able are the ones who are still playing their hearts out or have spent most the season injured, like Bergeron, Thomas, Rask, Chara, Stuart, Ference, or Savard. In other words, good luck trading Wideman (-12) or Wheeler (-8) for a good return!
I have watched nearly every game starting from the 2005/2006 season. That's almost 400 games. I have seen this team struggle. I have seen the rookies make mistakes and slowly come into their own. I have watched this team break out, and seen it run off the tracks in last year's playoffs. Throughout they have always improved. But now this season comes. Is this how it ends?
The next few weeks are going to determine if the Boston Bruins as we know them will survive intact.
I had believed that after the Winter Classic the Bruins would go .500 until the Olympics. They have played like a team that was just getting by until the playoffs all year and I expected that to continue until all of the distractions were over. But this latest slide... it is starting to look like the end of this team as we know it.
So who's to blame? The GM for trading Kessel? The coaching staff? Too much success last season too soon? Is there someone poisoning the room?
The Thomas haters haven't wasted any time showing their hate again, claiming irrationally that the coach hasn't played Rask enough. What's wrong with those people anyhow? What ugly broken excuses for human beings they are. Anybody who isn't blinded by hate can see that Rask hasn't fared any better. One thing about Tim Thomas--if the team gives up in front of him he'll hang in there with the big saves in a game for only so long. After a while he gets "uninspired" by the play of the rest of the team and quits too. Some may fault him for that, but I say, "So what?" He's not the root cause of the problem.
We've got nine games to go before the Olympic break. They face the Caps, Canucks, Kings, Lightning and Panthers. They play the Sabers and Canadiens twice. The simple fact is that if they don't get a winning streak going before the break the season will be over. If that happens it's going to get really ugly. Julien may have to go, which would be a shame. And if you are thinking trade then think again--the only players who are truly trade able are the ones who are still playing their hearts out or have spent most the season injured, like Bergeron, Thomas, Rask, Chara, Stuart, Ference, or Savard. In other words, good luck trading Wideman (-12) or Wheeler (-8) for a good return!
I have watched nearly every game starting from the 2005/2006 season. That's almost 400 games. I have seen this team struggle. I have seen the rookies make mistakes and slowly come into their own. I have watched this team break out, and seen it run off the tracks in last year's playoffs. Throughout they have always improved. But now this season comes. Is this how it ends?
The next few weeks are going to determine if the Boston Bruins as we know them will survive intact.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
The Stick Salute
For several years now some NHL teams have borrowed a tradition from European Hockey: the stick salute. After a win the team skates out onto the ice and salutes the crowd by raising their sticks. I'm not sure how many teams have adopted this, but the Anaheim Ducks do it and so do the New York Rangers.I think this is a classy thing to do. It shows a degree of humility and recognizes how the fans can make a difference in the game as they cheer their team on. I have wondered for some time if the stick salute would spread eventually even to the Bruins. After the overtime win in the Winter Classic I was struck by what I believe to be the very first Bruins stick salute. I wonder: was it planned ahead of time? Or did it happen spontaneously? Will it happen again?
Even though I like the salute, I do have to wonder if a team with so much tradition--one that has been around since 1924--needs to be adopting it, like some trendy new fad. Should the Bruins follow the lead of the New York Rangers? No! That leaves me somewhat on the fence.
I'd be interested in hearing what others think about the stick salute.
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Magical Winter Classic
On New Year's day I spent the morning playing hockey outdoors with my kids. How cool is that? Afterward we settled in to watch the Bruins play in the Winter Classic. It was a fantastic, wonderful, and memorable day. As most people know the Bruins came from behind to tie in the final minutes and win in overtime. Seeing Tim Thomas selected to the US Olympic team afterward was very special to us. I only wish we could be in Boston for all of the festivities, but even so it was a very special and memorable day.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Shame on NESN
Call me old fashioned (or worse) if you must, but for me nothing sets up the anticipation for the drop of the puck more than the national anthem. The anthem establishes a connection between me on my couch and the arena filled with people. When the last note rings and the crowd roars I am pumped up and ready to go. To be honest, I also just plain enjoy the performances.
Last year NESN decided to drop the anthem for away games, substituting the commentary by Milbury from the studio instead. Rather than seeing the crowd and a performance we got, "What do the Bruins need to do to win tonight, Mike?" "Well, they need to play hard in the first period and get the lead quickly." B O R I N G.
Now it seems that NESN has stopped showing the anthems for the home games as well. I think this is shameless. They are bringing us an event and the anthem is part of it. The anthem gives us that connection between our distant locale and the arena, something that seems more and more lacking in NESN coverage. I know they pay people like Milbury a lot of money to talk but they get plenty of time to do so, including a pre-game show, for God's sake.
If you too want to see NESN broadcast the anthems please take a moment and send them a comment at sports@nesn.com.
Postscript Friday January 8: I am very pleased that the anthem appears to be back on NESN. I doubt this little blog had anything to do with it... perhaps enough people complained, or maybe NESN never intended to stop showing the anthem for rest of the season. Regardless, I am happy!
Last year NESN decided to drop the anthem for away games, substituting the commentary by Milbury from the studio instead. Rather than seeing the crowd and a performance we got, "What do the Bruins need to do to win tonight, Mike?" "Well, they need to play hard in the first period and get the lead quickly." B O R I N G.
Now it seems that NESN has stopped showing the anthems for the home games as well. I think this is shameless. They are bringing us an event and the anthem is part of it. The anthem gives us that connection between our distant locale and the arena, something that seems more and more lacking in NESN coverage. I know they pay people like Milbury a lot of money to talk but they get plenty of time to do so, including a pre-game show, for God's sake.
If you too want to see NESN broadcast the anthems please take a moment and send them a comment at sports@nesn.com.
Postscript Friday January 8: I am very pleased that the anthem appears to be back on NESN. I doubt this little blog had anything to do with it... perhaps enough people complained, or maybe NESN never intended to stop showing the anthem for rest of the season. Regardless, I am happy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
