It was only three weeks ago that the Chicago Black Hawks won the Stanley Cup. In the short time since they have traded away Dustin Byfuglien, Brent Sopel, Ben Eager and Kris Versteeg. All of them played important roles in their cup win. If I were a Hawks fan I'd be just a bit heartbroken.
Player movement is inevitable, particularly with a salary cap in place. But is all this turnover really good for the game? Sure, if the Bruins win a Cup the "sports fans" in the region will suddenly rediscover hockey and jump on the band wagon, buying merchandise and maybe even going to a game or two next season. The front office will be thrilled. But those guys don't fill the season seats. They don't follow the team when it has a losing season. Once the team stumbles they will all go back to their whining and complaining. In the end they aren't true hockey fans. They just want to puff out their chests and join the celebration when the team that happens to play in their city wins it all.
I look back over the last 40 years of Bruins hockey and what stands out are the great players. Whether it be Borque, Neely, Cheevers, Espo, Chief, or Bobby. The cups were great, but it is the unbroken line of Bruins players going all the way back to 1924 that makes Bruins hockey what it is. It's not just the league-wide stars like Orr, but the role players as well.
The pre-lockout B's were a mess. I used to wonder which of those guys would have their jersey raised to the rafters. Thornton seemed a lock. But who else? Muzz? Samsonov? No way. To me, those teams were the low point for the Bruins going back to when I was a kid.
A cup would be terrific and great teams need to prove their greatness by winning a championship. But in the end it is only a vehicle for the next generation of Bruins greats. It is those greats that true hockey fans celebrate. Who are we going to celebrate tomorrow? What number is going to sent to the rafters next? I know the Boston "sports fans" will scoff at this. But that just proves that we don't have the same interest in the team.
If in the end we win the Cup only to see our "rentals" move on, then what will we have to remember? Who will we celebrate in a decade? I look over the current roster and see a few potential candidates for the rafters. I really do. Chara. Savard. Lucic. Thomas. Maybe Bergeron. Yet I read the paper and two of those names are reportedly on the trade block. Yeah, I know that Tim Thomas is in a tough spot with a young (read inexpensive) kid apparently playing just as well. But Savard?
In my opinion this is where it all starts to fall apart. When the dust from the lockout had settled and Peter Chiarelli established himself as the architect of the team the cornerstones were Chara and Savard. In my opinion if he has backed himself into a corner that requires that he trade one of those two then it all unravels. It's not just a matter of another expendable center or a shrewd disposal of a player who may have his best years behind him. Savard is a cup final away from the rafters. That may be difficult for some to see when caught up in the moment, I know. Worse yet, it would be a sign of failure. In hindsight the last two seasons could be remembered as the "glory years" as the team rebuilds again. I've been following this team's ups and downs for almost 40 years now, and that's what I think. This is a pivotal moment. Does Savvy stay or does he go?
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Wideman Shipped to Florida
If history is any example, Dennis Wideman should be celebrating his trade to the Florida Panthers. Wideman is the latest in a string of Bruins defenseman who have been much maligned by fans during their time in Boston. Hal Gill (1997-2006) was considered slow and absolutely detested by many. So too was Nick Boynton (1999-2006). Boynton just won the Stanley Cup. Gill won it last year.
I'm just sayin'.
I'm just sayin'.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
The Stanley Cup Final is Ridiculous
Yeah--I said it. Why? Because having the cup final in June is idiotic. Schools are out. People are going on vacations. The overriding theme is warm summer fun, not anything to do with ice or hockey. Hockey means next to nothing in June! I've been a hockey fan long enough to recall when the cup final was in April. Then May. Now June. Where does it stop? August? Are we headed for a year-round season?
Something that's equally ridiculous is the 82-game schedule. It's bad enough that the regular season has become a sort of meaningless pre-season, but to have it drag on for 82 games is just too much. I know the franchises make money on every game, but I find it hard to believe that there is no downside to spreading the season so thin. There are exceptions, but most NHL arenas are not filled to capacity for every game. I'd bet that if they played fewer games most of the lost revenue would be made up by higher per-game attendance.
I think the cup final should be played no later than April. To accomplish this, I'd remove at least 10-12 games from the schedule and start the season earlier. Hockey in September makes way more sense than hockey in June. If nobody cares about hockey in September, fine. That's way better than nobody caring during the cup final.
Something that's equally ridiculous is the 82-game schedule. It's bad enough that the regular season has become a sort of meaningless pre-season, but to have it drag on for 82 games is just too much. I know the franchises make money on every game, but I find it hard to believe that there is no downside to spreading the season so thin. There are exceptions, but most NHL arenas are not filled to capacity for every game. I'd bet that if they played fewer games most of the lost revenue would be made up by higher per-game attendance.
I think the cup final should be played no later than April. To accomplish this, I'd remove at least 10-12 games from the schedule and start the season earlier. Hockey in September makes way more sense than hockey in June. If nobody cares about hockey in September, fine. That's way better than nobody caring during the cup final.
Saturday, May 15, 2010
No Deep Analysis Required
In the end the Bruins did play with heart in game 7 of their series with Philly. But like the series itself, they were unable to sustain it. Many will claim the team doesn't have enough talent. Some will make the excuse that Krejci, Sturm and Seidenberg were out with injuries. Others will suggest the Flyers were the better team. But I believe the bottom line is much like last year. The series against Carolina was really lost not in game 7, but when they failed to show up for game 1. This year the series was lost when the Bruins failed to put the Flyers away in games 4 or 5, as a great team would have done.
Like a cat toying with a mouse, if he doesn't kill his prey when he has the chance sooner or later it will escape.
Like a cat toying with a mouse, if he doesn't kill his prey when he has the chance sooner or later it will escape.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
It's All About Heart
I've read a lot about the Bruins/Flyers series but I haven't read much that matches my point of view, so here it is. In the first three games the Bruins totally dominated the Flyers. Now, I know a lot of people looked at the score and said otherwise (particularly Flyers fans) but it's true. This is one of those cases where the scoreboard and the stats don't really tell the whole story. In game 1 the B's came out and heavily dominated the play until they took a two-goal lead. Then, like a cat toying with a mouse, they sat back. When the Flyers responded with a goal the Bruins turned it up again until they got their lead back. This continued on through the second game. In game three the Bruins actually improved their game. This time once they got the lead they played much better defensively and for the most part avoided the cat-and-mouse . But the bottom line of the first three games was simple: when the Bruins needed the lead they were always able to turn up the heat to get it.
But that's when it all fell apart. With a 3-0 series lead I saw an interview with Looch and I knew from the grin he was trying to hide that the team was in trouble; he clearly thought they had already won the series. In game four they dropped the dominating offensive play and it didn't resurface until there was only 2 minutes left in game 6. Even though they scored, there wasn't enough time to overcome a two-goal Flyers lead.
Now we find ourselves going to game 7 and the big question on everyone's mind should be whether or not the Bruins are going to bring it like they did in game 1. If they don't this season is going to end like the last one.
But that's when it all fell apart. With a 3-0 series lead I saw an interview with Looch and I knew from the grin he was trying to hide that the team was in trouble; he clearly thought they had already won the series. In game four they dropped the dominating offensive play and it didn't resurface until there was only 2 minutes left in game 6. Even though they scored, there wasn't enough time to overcome a two-goal Flyers lead.
Now we find ourselves going to game 7 and the big question on everyone's mind should be whether or not the Bruins are going to bring it like they did in game 1. If they don't this season is going to end like the last one.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Some Thoughts Going Into the Second Round
What I have wanted to believe all season is that what the B's took away from the previous year is this: the regular season doesn't matter as long as you make it to the playoffs in the end. But that takes a lot of faith, doesn't it? I like to see some hard evidence. To me the B's strong play in the first round is just that. Suddenly things get changed up here and there and everything improves across the board, including their struggling power play. Coincidence? I think not. I think this team has been laying in wait all season. They have their sights on the Conference Final.
Why is everybody taking Rask being snubbed for the Calder lying down? I saw some guy on the NHL network say that Rask had to play "one, maybe two more games" to be considered. Seriously? Just what is the magic number of games a goaltender has to play to be considered for the Calder? Is it written down somewhere? This kid not only ended the season with the best stats in the NHL, but the only reason he didn't play more games is that he had to beat out the Vezina winner for the job. Shouldn't that count for something?
It seems to me that when it comes to goaltenders, how good they are believed to be is incredibly subjective. We have seen this with all the Thomas hate over the years. If they win its because the team plays good defense. If they lose it's because he stinks. Nobody keeps tracks of wins/losses for any other position. Goaltending is important, but is it really that important? What people seem to be left with is the perception they had going in about the guy. Just look at all the Ryan Miller hype. He played well in the Olympics for sure, but not that well. You'd think he single handedly won the gold they way the US media fawns over him. Weird. And it seems to me that a lot of people are assuming that the only reason the Sabres did well this year was Miller. Now that they have lost its because Miller just couldn't do it alone. Personally I think the Sabres are pretty talented all around. It seems that people either blame or ignore the rest of the team when it is convenient to their preconceptions.
One last thought. The way I understand it the B's will either play Pittsburgh or Philly in the second round. I think they can take either team, but would prefer they play Pittsburgh based on how they match up. The Bruins could be the Pens worst nightmare. A Bruins/Flyers series could be a nightmare for everybody, with the winner winding up too wounded to go any further.
Why is everybody taking Rask being snubbed for the Calder lying down? I saw some guy on the NHL network say that Rask had to play "one, maybe two more games" to be considered. Seriously? Just what is the magic number of games a goaltender has to play to be considered for the Calder? Is it written down somewhere? This kid not only ended the season with the best stats in the NHL, but the only reason he didn't play more games is that he had to beat out the Vezina winner for the job. Shouldn't that count for something?
It seems to me that when it comes to goaltenders, how good they are believed to be is incredibly subjective. We have seen this with all the Thomas hate over the years. If they win its because the team plays good defense. If they lose it's because he stinks. Nobody keeps tracks of wins/losses for any other position. Goaltending is important, but is it really that important? What people seem to be left with is the perception they had going in about the guy. Just look at all the Ryan Miller hype. He played well in the Olympics for sure, but not that well. You'd think he single handedly won the gold they way the US media fawns over him. Weird. And it seems to me that a lot of people are assuming that the only reason the Sabres did well this year was Miller. Now that they have lost its because Miller just couldn't do it alone. Personally I think the Sabres are pretty talented all around. It seems that people either blame or ignore the rest of the team when it is convenient to their preconceptions.
One last thought. The way I understand it the B's will either play Pittsburgh or Philly in the second round. I think they can take either team, but would prefer they play Pittsburgh based on how they match up. The Bruins could be the Pens worst nightmare. A Bruins/Flyers series could be a nightmare for everybody, with the winner winding up too wounded to go any further.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
It is what it is... but what is it?
Two years ago the Boston Bruins entered the playoffs with a "young" team that had bought into coach Claude Juliens's defensive scheme but had great difficulty scoring goals. Most every game was won or lost by a single point. I remember the first shift by Dennis Wideman against Montreal. He was shaky and tentative. To tell the truth the whole team was like that. They lost that first game and the series, but only after coming back and forcing game 7. In the end that team had heart. They knew how to stick in there to win a close one.
Over the summer that followed Julien stated that they were now going to turn their attention to offense. Many people wondered just how they were going to do that, myself included. There was the usual nonsense about signing that mythical high-scoring free agent that changes the whole team, but GM Peter Chiarelli thought the team already had that kind of talent. He was right. Somehow the team that couldn't buy a goal grew into a goal scoring monster the next season. They finished with the best record in the East and only one other team in the league had more goals. To tell you the truth I still don't understand how they did it, although I think it had to do with speed on the breakout. In that regard Phil Kessel was an important ingredient. But he was only out there on one line, so it is difficult to explain how every line last year was so successful on the breakout. Unfortunately, that team was almost too good. They peaked early in most games and cruised to easy wins. And they peaked early in the season and cruised to the playoffs. My big concern going into the playoffs last year was what would happen when they met a good defensive team that knew how to play playoff hockey. To make matters worse they cruised past a Montreal team in the first round that couldn't keep up with them. But they met their match in Carolina, a team that for the first time shut that fast-break offense down. Having forgotten their ability to win a close battle the Bruins stumbled and ended up losing in OT in game 7. I'm pretty sure today that had the Bruins won that series they would have gone on to win the cup because the remaining teams couldn't bring what Carlina had brought to the ice.
After their relative success Chiarelli worked to re-sign the core talent that had made it happen. Unfortunately the very act of keeping that talent may have been what hurt the team this year via complacency.
As the 2009/2010 season opened I made a wish: "In my mind the perfect season for the B's would have more struggle to it, perhaps even finishing 3rd or 4th in the conference. Or maybe fighting their way up through the pack at the end. I'd like to see fewer goals and closer games." Well, I got my wish. The Bruins finished the season near the top in defense and dead last in scoring.
All season long we waited for the Bruins to pick it up. But they seemed to be just getting by. I titled my last post here "The Bruins are Toast" out of frustration. I thought maybe they would pick it up after the Olympics. But no, they didn't. I thought as the season was nearing a close and all the attention was on them in that big game against Pittsburgh that they would finally show some heart. But they didn't. It was hard not to give up on them. Yet somehow, just as we thought it would never happen, as it came down to the final stretch the B's finally came alive. Their run to make the playoffs at the end of this season was nothing short of impressive, particularly as the injuries mounted. Not only did they hang on to make the playoffs as other teams fell by the side, but they ended up in the sixth seed.
So where does that leave us going into the playoffs? The good news is that, unlike last year's team, this one is made for playoff hockey. They know how to win a tough close game. They know how to keep grinding away when things don't go in their favor. And they look like a team again--like it doesn't matter who you put in the uniform, you know you are going to get the same type of play and the same effort. That could be important, because the bad news is that they are really banged up. The B's are going to really miss Marc Savard, particularly on the power play, which has proven to be terrible without him. And just when the defense has started to roll--punishing and frustrating opponents and getting into the scoring--key defenseman Marc Stuart, Andrew Ference, and Dennis Siedenberg are all hurt. Siedenberg likely will miss the entire playoffs.
So, again I ask, where does that leave us going into the playoffs? I don't really know. I believe this team has the talent to win a cup. But I worry that too much of that talent is watching from the stands. I guess this is why they play the games. At the very least I expect the B's to play the role that Carolina played against them last year, spoiling the playoffs for a high-rolling team that won't know what hit them.
Over the summer that followed Julien stated that they were now going to turn their attention to offense. Many people wondered just how they were going to do that, myself included. There was the usual nonsense about signing that mythical high-scoring free agent that changes the whole team, but GM Peter Chiarelli thought the team already had that kind of talent. He was right. Somehow the team that couldn't buy a goal grew into a goal scoring monster the next season. They finished with the best record in the East and only one other team in the league had more goals. To tell you the truth I still don't understand how they did it, although I think it had to do with speed on the breakout. In that regard Phil Kessel was an important ingredient. But he was only out there on one line, so it is difficult to explain how every line last year was so successful on the breakout. Unfortunately, that team was almost too good. They peaked early in most games and cruised to easy wins. And they peaked early in the season and cruised to the playoffs. My big concern going into the playoffs last year was what would happen when they met a good defensive team that knew how to play playoff hockey. To make matters worse they cruised past a Montreal team in the first round that couldn't keep up with them. But they met their match in Carolina, a team that for the first time shut that fast-break offense down. Having forgotten their ability to win a close battle the Bruins stumbled and ended up losing in OT in game 7. I'm pretty sure today that had the Bruins won that series they would have gone on to win the cup because the remaining teams couldn't bring what Carlina had brought to the ice.
After their relative success Chiarelli worked to re-sign the core talent that had made it happen. Unfortunately the very act of keeping that talent may have been what hurt the team this year via complacency.
As the 2009/2010 season opened I made a wish: "In my mind the perfect season for the B's would have more struggle to it, perhaps even finishing 3rd or 4th in the conference. Or maybe fighting their way up through the pack at the end. I'd like to see fewer goals and closer games." Well, I got my wish. The Bruins finished the season near the top in defense and dead last in scoring.
All season long we waited for the Bruins to pick it up. But they seemed to be just getting by. I titled my last post here "The Bruins are Toast" out of frustration. I thought maybe they would pick it up after the Olympics. But no, they didn't. I thought as the season was nearing a close and all the attention was on them in that big game against Pittsburgh that they would finally show some heart. But they didn't. It was hard not to give up on them. Yet somehow, just as we thought it would never happen, as it came down to the final stretch the B's finally came alive. Their run to make the playoffs at the end of this season was nothing short of impressive, particularly as the injuries mounted. Not only did they hang on to make the playoffs as other teams fell by the side, but they ended up in the sixth seed.
So where does that leave us going into the playoffs? The good news is that, unlike last year's team, this one is made for playoff hockey. They know how to win a tough close game. They know how to keep grinding away when things don't go in their favor. And they look like a team again--like it doesn't matter who you put in the uniform, you know you are going to get the same type of play and the same effort. That could be important, because the bad news is that they are really banged up. The B's are going to really miss Marc Savard, particularly on the power play, which has proven to be terrible without him. And just when the defense has started to roll--punishing and frustrating opponents and getting into the scoring--key defenseman Marc Stuart, Andrew Ference, and Dennis Siedenberg are all hurt. Siedenberg likely will miss the entire playoffs.
So, again I ask, where does that leave us going into the playoffs? I don't really know. I believe this team has the talent to win a cup. But I worry that too much of that talent is watching from the stands. I guess this is why they play the games. At the very least I expect the B's to play the role that Carolina played against them last year, spoiling the playoffs for a high-rolling team that won't know what hit them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
