Week 13 is when the real season begins.
By now we've already seen who the pretenders, the winners, the dark horses and the losers are in the NFL. This is when the real competion begins for the few spots left in the NFL playoff race - and when teams have to give it all to get in.
Who's in - NFC Edition:
Division Winners:
NFC Central + Bye Week: Chicago Bears
Even with Rex "third string on anybody else" Grossman as their QB, dah Bears have locked up their division again. The real question now is if their defence can keep it up. Either way, it's a given (since they already clinched the spot) that they'll make the postseason.
NFC East: Dallas Cowboys
I never thought I'd say this - but how many people thought they would, right? - but Tony Romo is one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL this year. He'll carry the Cowboys into the playoffs for sure; they'll play a slumping Atlanta team, a subpar Philadelphia Eagles and the terrible Detroit Lions - and one game against a good New Orleans Saints. All things considered, I expect the Cowboys to win their division with a 11-5 record.
NFC South: New Orleans Saints
The Saints offence is great this year - Reggie Bush has been on fire the last few games (including a great 4 TD showing on December 3rd) and Drew Brees is on pace for being the QB of the year, not to mention how good Duece McAllister, Marques Colston and Joe Horn have been. Their main problem is that they're facing a bit of a tough schedule towards the playoffs (Dallas, Washington, New York and Carolina), so they won’t go in on any kind of a roll. Expect them to finish 10-6.
NFC West + Bye Week: Seattle Seahawks
Even without their two best players (Matt Hasselbeck and Sean Alexander) the Seahawks are still a force to be reckoned with, especially when they have as easy a second half as they do: they play Arizona, San Francisco, San Diego and Tampa Bay – and they should easily win three, if not all four, of those games. Look for them to enter the postseason on a positive four-game winning streak, with a record of 12-4.
Wild Card: New York Giants
Yes, the team appears to be on a skid – but they’ve lost their last two games by a total of six points (all year they haven’t been able to win close games: they either win by a touchdown or they lose by a field goal, generally). And while having them run the table would be nice – it won’t happen, but it’d be nice – they’ll pull out wins against Philadelphia and Washington and squeak into the playoffs. Final record: 8-8
Wild Card: Carolina Panthers
They’re good, but their schedule (Giants, Pittsburgh, New Orleans) and conference record (4-4) aren’t. But their divison record is (3-1). They’ll finish 8-8 and just make the cut.
Who’s out (and why):
Atlanta Falcons – Vick’s better then ever, but his receivers aren’t. They’ll finish 8-8 and just miss the cut.
Minnesota Vikings: They looked good for a bit, but won’t have enough to finish. They’ll finish 7-9 with wins against St. Louis and Detroit.
St. Louis: The early underdog favorites looked good early on, but have faded fast (does anybody even count them anymore?). They’ll finish strong, beating Oakland and maybe Washington (maybe) but it won’t be enough (look for them to give St. Louis a good game, though): 7-9 overall.
AFC editon will be up by the end of the week.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
The (worst) trade of year
It's a textbook case of getting dimes on the dollar. It's the worst trade in Toronto since Vincer Carter was traded for, well, a sack of nothing. Worse then the Roger Clemens trade. It's even worse then trading for Doug Gilmour a couple years back.
As a Leafs fan, it's pretty much a final straw for me this season.
And, hopefully, the last move made by John Furguson Jr (We'll get to that later).
By trading Mikael Tellqvist to Phoenix for Tyson Nash, the Leafs have made maybe the most confusing move I've seen all year. Gone is a solid, if expensive, #3 goalie for an enforcer, a guy who'll be hard pressed to make the fourth line, if he even cracks the lineup at all (He hasn't even played an NHL game all year).
I don't get it. The Leafs need better scoring - I hate to say it, but if they can get a solid forward for Steen, I'd be okay with it - not some guy who can't score (despite his only youtube clip : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0VFIU8fW_Y ) and won't even play.
Have I said that enough times? This guy is going right to the Marlies. They just traded a solid backup, although one that's hard pressed to be a #2 on Toronto's stuffed goalie squad, for a guy who won't even be playing for them. Forget the Vince Carter trade - at least the Raptors ended up with something.
So, what does this do for the Leafs? I don't know - their cap is barely any different (Tellqvist was only getting $525,000 a year) and they have a guy who TSN calls "extremely injury-prone" and only has the potential to be a "fourth line agitator". It doesn't make any sense to me. None. If the Leafs had traded for a draft pick, that would make sense - I guess. If they had traded for - okay, Phoenix doesn't have a heck of a lot - something other then a washed up enforcer, I would get it.
The Leafs were getting rid of a goalie they didn't need to a team that really needed one - they should have been the sellers, they should have been able to land a prospect for him - and they really didn't get anything for him.
Yes, this is a minor move - but it's what seperates good General Managers from the great GMs - John Furgusion went with what he could get, not what he needed (better defence, maybe a scorer).
And by doing that, trading dimes on the dollar, he's left me angry enough to not care about the Leafs for now. When Rob Babcock pulled this kind of stunt he was escorted out of town. The Blue Jays let Gord Ash go after a series of trades crippled them in the late 1990s.
I think it's time for JFJ to join them.
As a Leafs fan, it's pretty much a final straw for me this season.
And, hopefully, the last move made by John Furguson Jr (We'll get to that later).
By trading Mikael Tellqvist to Phoenix for Tyson Nash, the Leafs have made maybe the most confusing move I've seen all year. Gone is a solid, if expensive, #3 goalie for an enforcer, a guy who'll be hard pressed to make the fourth line, if he even cracks the lineup at all (He hasn't even played an NHL game all year).
I don't get it. The Leafs need better scoring - I hate to say it, but if they can get a solid forward for Steen, I'd be okay with it - not some guy who can't score (despite his only youtube clip : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0VFIU8fW_Y ) and won't even play.
Have I said that enough times? This guy is going right to the Marlies. They just traded a solid backup, although one that's hard pressed to be a #2 on Toronto's stuffed goalie squad, for a guy who won't even be playing for them. Forget the Vince Carter trade - at least the Raptors ended up with something.
So, what does this do for the Leafs? I don't know - their cap is barely any different (Tellqvist was only getting $525,000 a year) and they have a guy who TSN calls "extremely injury-prone" and only has the potential to be a "fourth line agitator". It doesn't make any sense to me. None. If the Leafs had traded for a draft pick, that would make sense - I guess. If they had traded for - okay, Phoenix doesn't have a heck of a lot - something other then a washed up enforcer, I would get it.
The Leafs were getting rid of a goalie they didn't need to a team that really needed one - they should have been the sellers, they should have been able to land a prospect for him - and they really didn't get anything for him.
Yes, this is a minor move - but it's what seperates good General Managers from the great GMs - John Furgusion went with what he could get, not what he needed (better defence, maybe a scorer).
And by doing that, trading dimes on the dollar, he's left me angry enough to not care about the Leafs for now. When Rob Babcock pulled this kind of stunt he was escorted out of town. The Blue Jays let Gord Ash go after a series of trades crippled them in the late 1990s.
I think it's time for JFJ to join them.
Monday, October 23, 2006
After the Heidi game
CBS, you’re making me very angry.
Why? Well, for those of us who try and watch football games – and only have one CBS feed – watching NFL games can become a real pain. Due to what I imagine was rule that only some madman would think up, you cannot watch overtime games – unless you are in the local market.
And that stinks.
This isn’t the first time I’ve fallen prey to this rule. Last year, when I was watching the Giants play the Vikings in some regular season game the same thing happened – due to that very rule, FOX had to cut away to some other game and I was left waiting for The FOX Game Break (brought to you by McDonald’s) to see who won (As I recall, I’m pretty sure that the Giants won on a field goal).
See, after the Heidi game (When CBS infamously cut away from a Raiders/Jets game to show the movie Heidi – and viewers missed a huge comeback by the Raiders), I thought stuff like this wasn’t supposed to happen. But it does – it’s stipulated in the TV contracts for the NFL. Technically, CBS was supposed to say they were sorry and cut to the next game.
And that’d have been fine – if there was a game to cut to. Unlike the viewers who have DirecTV, my CBS feed (WIVB Buffalo) only had one game today so I got to see … Er, Shannon Sharpe, Dan Marino, James Brown and Boomer Esiason watching the Steelers game, with the occasional clip of game play. Of course they didn’t show the game-winning field goal or any of the overtime (I got to see the first attempted field goal towards the end of regulation, but missed the other two).
So this has got me thinking – what’s the point of a rule like this? Yes, I understand the rule as it stands toward Doubleheaders, but why couldn’t CBS show the game in its entirety for stations that only have one game? How different is it then having bonus coverage, like last week when I got to see the end for a total of four different games? What market are we violating? The Bills game had already ended – so there goes the home market theory. There was no other game to cut to – there goes the contractual obligations.
So why cut away? Didn’t we learn anything from the Heidi incident? Didn’t we learn anything from the days that the CBC would cut to news at 11pm, regardless of overtime? Didn’t we learn that people, such as myself, like to watch the whole game?
I suppose not. See you at the game-break-quick-score-update-highlight.
Why? Well, for those of us who try and watch football games – and only have one CBS feed – watching NFL games can become a real pain. Due to what I imagine was rule that only some madman would think up, you cannot watch overtime games – unless you are in the local market.
And that stinks.
This isn’t the first time I’ve fallen prey to this rule. Last year, when I was watching the Giants play the Vikings in some regular season game the same thing happened – due to that very rule, FOX had to cut away to some other game and I was left waiting for The FOX Game Break (brought to you by McDonald’s) to see who won (As I recall, I’m pretty sure that the Giants won on a field goal).
See, after the Heidi game (When CBS infamously cut away from a Raiders/Jets game to show the movie Heidi – and viewers missed a huge comeback by the Raiders), I thought stuff like this wasn’t supposed to happen. But it does – it’s stipulated in the TV contracts for the NFL. Technically, CBS was supposed to say they were sorry and cut to the next game.
And that’d have been fine – if there was a game to cut to. Unlike the viewers who have DirecTV, my CBS feed (WIVB Buffalo) only had one game today so I got to see … Er, Shannon Sharpe, Dan Marino, James Brown and Boomer Esiason watching the Steelers game, with the occasional clip of game play. Of course they didn’t show the game-winning field goal or any of the overtime (I got to see the first attempted field goal towards the end of regulation, but missed the other two).
So this has got me thinking – what’s the point of a rule like this? Yes, I understand the rule as it stands toward Doubleheaders, but why couldn’t CBS show the game in its entirety for stations that only have one game? How different is it then having bonus coverage, like last week when I got to see the end for a total of four different games? What market are we violating? The Bills game had already ended – so there goes the home market theory. There was no other game to cut to – there goes the contractual obligations.
So why cut away? Didn’t we learn anything from the Heidi incident? Didn’t we learn anything from the days that the CBC would cut to news at 11pm, regardless of overtime? Didn’t we learn that people, such as myself, like to watch the whole game?
I suppose not. See you at the game-break-quick-score-update-highlight.
Friday, October 20, 2006
Opening thoughts on the 2006 World Series
I guess the last week of the season means nothing. Seriously, does it? The New York Mets and the New York Yankees – the two teams I assumed would meet in the World Series – have both been eliminated in the playoffs.
And teams that seemingly fell apart at the end of the season beat them both.
For the Tigers, it was a huge skid – they lost the AL Central title to a Twins team that ripped off something like 45-3 towards the end of the season (Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but still) to a red hot Twins team. A team that was on such a roll they lost to the A’s in four games. Right. The Tigers have been, well, rather powerful. They embarrassed the Yankees in the opening round and soundly defeated the A’s in ALCS. They deserve to be in the World Series – there’s no doubt about that – but still, this is the same team that blew a huge lead in the AL Central at the end of the season.
The other team – the St. Louis Cardinals – pulled the same stunt, on a much larger scale. They dropped something like 12 games in a row before the playoffs, almost losing their spot to the Houston Astros. And they had a worse record then the two teams they beat – the San Diego Padres and the New York Mets – to boot. Granted, they limped through the playoffs – they only won game seven on the ninth – but still. We now have the World Series for 2006 all set.
And both teams skidded into the playoffs.
I’m not even going to go into what the last week of the season means. Some guy at Baseball Prospectus can do that – he’s about a million times more qualified, actually – and hell, it’s an article I’d read. Right now… Well, I’m going to try and let the idea sink in…
The two teams that I least thought would make it – including one that I didn’t even think would make the playoffs in September – are in the World Series.
Jeez, what’ll happen next? Will the Texan’s whip out a string of victories and win the Super Bowl? Will the Columbus Blue Jackets win a Stanley Cup? Will the Knicks win the Finals? Hopefully not - I'd like to keep my sanity, if I could, please.
And teams that seemingly fell apart at the end of the season beat them both.
For the Tigers, it was a huge skid – they lost the AL Central title to a Twins team that ripped off something like 45-3 towards the end of the season (Okay, that’s an exaggeration, but still) to a red hot Twins team. A team that was on such a roll they lost to the A’s in four games. Right. The Tigers have been, well, rather powerful. They embarrassed the Yankees in the opening round and soundly defeated the A’s in ALCS. They deserve to be in the World Series – there’s no doubt about that – but still, this is the same team that blew a huge lead in the AL Central at the end of the season.
The other team – the St. Louis Cardinals – pulled the same stunt, on a much larger scale. They dropped something like 12 games in a row before the playoffs, almost losing their spot to the Houston Astros. And they had a worse record then the two teams they beat – the San Diego Padres and the New York Mets – to boot. Granted, they limped through the playoffs – they only won game seven on the ninth – but still. We now have the World Series for 2006 all set.
And both teams skidded into the playoffs.
I’m not even going to go into what the last week of the season means. Some guy at Baseball Prospectus can do that – he’s about a million times more qualified, actually – and hell, it’s an article I’d read. Right now… Well, I’m going to try and let the idea sink in…
The two teams that I least thought would make it – including one that I didn’t even think would make the playoffs in September – are in the World Series.
Jeez, what’ll happen next? Will the Texan’s whip out a string of victories and win the Super Bowl? Will the Columbus Blue Jackets win a Stanley Cup? Will the Knicks win the Finals? Hopefully not - I'd like to keep my sanity, if I could, please.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
The MVP Race - AL Edition
The American League Most Valuable Player award race has been narrowed down to three players: Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees, David Ortiz of the Boston Red Sox and Justin Morneau of the Minnesota Twins. One is having a great at the plate, one is having a great season on the field and another has led his team into a fantastic run into the postseason. But only one can win the award - who's it going to be?
Derek Jeter
As far as statistics go, Derek Jeter is having a decent year. He's ranked #5 overall in on-base percentage (.414), 31st in slugging (.481) and his batting average is #3 overall (.340). But Derek's one of the reasons that the Yankees - who, as I recall, have never been lower then second in the AL East this season - stayed competitive throughout the season, even when they were decimated by injuries to key players like Matsui or Sheffield.
Unlike David Ortiz or Justin Morneau, Derek Jeter has shown that he's a catalyst for a great team - a team that came from three games back and decimated the Red Sox in Boston, then went and took a commanding 11 game lead of the AL East. And even though he's posting some not-so-great numbers in fun stats like Home Runs (14) or RBI (96), Jeter has shown that he's still a threat during his at-bats with his on-base being higher then those of both Ortiz and Morneau. If the Yankees win the World Series this year, you can be sure that Derek Jeter will have been a huge part of it.
David Ortiz
Despite falling apart during the second half of the season, Ortiz has been absolutely fantastic at the plate this year - but then again, as the Designated Hitter, he has to be. He's set the record for Home Runs hit by a Red Sox player (52 and counting), he's posted a completely unbelievable slugging percentage (.631) a great on-base (.404) and a Walk/Strikeout ratio of 0.95 - meaning he's just as likely to walk as he is to strike out (always a good thing).
But is batting simply enough? Maybe so - he kept winning games all season long for the Red Sox. Something like 11 times this year alone Ortiz had a game-winning walk-off hit. When the Red Sox were leading the AL East earlier this year, Ortiz had a big, big role. But will voters be able to overlook his team's failure in August? Does Ortiz deserve to suffer due to the collapse of players like Papelbon or Schilling? The answer is simple - no. Is he, however, more deserving then Jeter is?
No. When you take everything into effect - batting, fielding and success of their team - over this season, what David Ortiz does is cool and fun to watch... But he's not as valuable to his team as much as Jeter is to his.
Justin Morneau
The Twins are a great story this year - they roared from third place and fading up to, and on the last day of the season, they clinched the Al Central as the Tigers fell apart, blowing a seven game lead.
Justin Morneau was a big, big part of their success. He's had one of his best years to date in 2006, batting in 130 runs, having a solid on-base (.375) and having a great slugging percentage (.559 ). When the Twins came roaring back into the race (first for the AL Wild Card and finally for the AL Central pennant) Morneau was there. It started in July, when he hit for a .700+ slugging percentage and he never looked back - and neither did the Twins. The Twins first overtook the 2005 World Series champion Chicago White Sox, then Boston Red Sox, who had led the AL east for most of the season, and finally won the AL Central, getting past the Detroit Tigers, on the last game of the season.
But, once again, is he better then Jeter? Kinda-sorta-not-really. Where Morneau's managed to out-hit Jeter in home runs, Jeter just missed the AL batting title, and had a combined OPS (on base + slugging) of .900 this year; Morneau had an OPS that was just higher, with .934. Jeter led his team through injuries to key players whereas Morneau led the Twins to a second-half surge.
Although they're pretty close, I'’m going to go with my gut here: which player would you like to play against the least? As good as Morneau is, I'’d much rather see him during a crucial at-bat then I'’d like to see Jeter. Why? I dunno, I can'’t really explain it. I know they are pretty similar in quality - but for Jeter, we know he's a good player. For Morneau... … Well, I'’m just not as sold on him - yet.
We'’ll see in 2007.
Derek Jeter
As far as statistics go, Derek Jeter is having a decent year. He's ranked #5 overall in on-base percentage (.414), 31st in slugging (.481) and his batting average is #3 overall (.340). But Derek's one of the reasons that the Yankees - who, as I recall, have never been lower then second in the AL East this season - stayed competitive throughout the season, even when they were decimated by injuries to key players like Matsui or Sheffield.
Unlike David Ortiz or Justin Morneau, Derek Jeter has shown that he's a catalyst for a great team - a team that came from three games back and decimated the Red Sox in Boston, then went and took a commanding 11 game lead of the AL East. And even though he's posting some not-so-great numbers in fun stats like Home Runs (14) or RBI (96), Jeter has shown that he's still a threat during his at-bats with his on-base being higher then those of both Ortiz and Morneau. If the Yankees win the World Series this year, you can be sure that Derek Jeter will have been a huge part of it.
David Ortiz
Despite falling apart during the second half of the season, Ortiz has been absolutely fantastic at the plate this year - but then again, as the Designated Hitter, he has to be. He's set the record for Home Runs hit by a Red Sox player (52 and counting), he's posted a completely unbelievable slugging percentage (.631) a great on-base (.404) and a Walk/Strikeout ratio of 0.95 - meaning he's just as likely to walk as he is to strike out (always a good thing).
But is batting simply enough? Maybe so - he kept winning games all season long for the Red Sox. Something like 11 times this year alone Ortiz had a game-winning walk-off hit. When the Red Sox were leading the AL East earlier this year, Ortiz had a big, big role. But will voters be able to overlook his team's failure in August? Does Ortiz deserve to suffer due to the collapse of players like Papelbon or Schilling? The answer is simple - no. Is he, however, more deserving then Jeter is?
No. When you take everything into effect - batting, fielding and success of their team - over this season, what David Ortiz does is cool and fun to watch... But he's not as valuable to his team as much as Jeter is to his.
Justin Morneau
The Twins are a great story this year - they roared from third place and fading up to, and on the last day of the season, they clinched the Al Central as the Tigers fell apart, blowing a seven game lead.
Justin Morneau was a big, big part of their success. He's had one of his best years to date in 2006, batting in 130 runs, having a solid on-base (.375) and having a great slugging percentage (.559 ). When the Twins came roaring back into the race (first for the AL Wild Card and finally for the AL Central pennant) Morneau was there. It started in July, when he hit for a .700+ slugging percentage and he never looked back - and neither did the Twins. The Twins first overtook the 2005 World Series champion Chicago White Sox, then Boston Red Sox, who had led the AL east for most of the season, and finally won the AL Central, getting past the Detroit Tigers, on the last game of the season.
But, once again, is he better then Jeter? Kinda-sorta-not-really. Where Morneau's managed to out-hit Jeter in home runs, Jeter just missed the AL batting title, and had a combined OPS (on base + slugging) of .900 this year; Morneau had an OPS that was just higher, with .934. Jeter led his team through injuries to key players whereas Morneau led the Twins to a second-half surge.
Although they're pretty close, I'’m going to go with my gut here: which player would you like to play against the least? As good as Morneau is, I'’d much rather see him during a crucial at-bat then I'’d like to see Jeter. Why? I dunno, I can'’t really explain it. I know they are pretty similar in quality - but for Jeter, we know he's a good player. For Morneau... … Well, I'’m just not as sold on him - yet.
We'’ll see in 2007.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
The NFL prediction
Meh.
That's pretty much all I can really say this year - I've been reading way too much; I bought two magazines - two more then I usually do - and I've worked on this for much too long, something like two weeks.
And still, I don't think I'm anymore sure about any of these then I was in August. Or in May. Hell, I don't think I'm any more sure then I was the minute after Super Bowl XL ended.
But here it all is - typed lovingly by division by a college student with less time free then he has to sleep.
AFC
AFC East: The Patriots
This division was the one that was the toughest of them all for me to choose: I like the Dolphins this year - more on that later - but I can't help but to choose the Pats, once again. They haven't lost any key players other then their kicker and a linebacker... And if that was all it takes to kill this team it's a bad sign for Brady's Hall of Fame chances.
The Dolphins improved by signing a QB and it'll be a good race - although I'm not quite sold on the Dolphins defense. The Bills will tank fast while the Jets will pull a Barbaro and break a leg out of the gate.
I'm going to say the order will be like this:
AFC North: Pittsburgh Steelers
The Steelers haven't done much other then cutting the fat in the offseason: they lost Tommy Maddox and Randel El - which means that their WR passing stats will go in the toilet. And hurt or not, Big Ben keeps getting better and better. If this team wins less then 11 games it's time for a new coach.
Otherwise, the Bengals are still good - but, thanks to the new rules on touchdown celebrations, a lot less fun to watch. Baltimore's gotten worse during the offseason (Brain St. Pierre? Mike Anderson?) and Cleveland is, well, bad. Really bad.
ARC South: Indianapolis Colts
Er, when you have ha;f your games against teams like Houston, Tennessee and Jacksonville and you're one of the best teams in the NFL's recent history, you're going to win the division, no matter who your running back is.
Other then them, Jacksonville is a decent team who hasn't convinced me that they're better then either Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Denver or Miami; Tennessee made a few changes but I don't see them getting ahead of either of the previous teams in the standings and Houston... Well, if nothing else, there's always next year's draft - maybe then the Texans can draft a running back.
AFC West: Denver Broncos
Why not? They have a revolutionary two-tier running back system (trust me, this is like when they introduced the Relief Pitcher), a solid QB in Plummer, a good defense and they added a few good parts (Javon Walker, Mike Bell) to replace what they lost (Mike Anderson). They're a lock to win their division.
And, again, why not? Kansas City still doesn't play defense; Oakland's still a coach away from being a contender and San Deigo's QB situation looks worse then it did last year. It's not going to be a breeze, but it's not too much to ask for the Broncos.
NFC:
NFC East: New York Giants
Sure, the Giants fell apart in the playoffs last year - but they added bulk to their defense with LaVar Harrington and kept some of their big playmakers with Plaxico Burress and Eli Manning. And sure, Tiki Barber is getting old - but he's still doing a lot better then most running backs that are his age. It'll be close, but I think the Giants have what it takes to win this division this year.
Philadelphia's Eagles look good - last year they were marred by injury and locker-room disputes - but I'm not sold on their offence; will McNabb rebound? Did TO truly carry the team like he thought he did? It's too many questions for me. Dallas will self-implode over TO, Parcells and Bledsoe before week five (I would be surprised as hell if both TO and Bledsoe can successfully work together over the course of the season; it'd be like Larry the Cable guy successfully co-hosting The Daily Show for half a year) and Washington will have a tough go at it - they have a great running back with Clinton Portis, two solid receiving backs... But their offense is still led by Mark "Bledsoe Jr." Brunell.
NFC North : Chicago Bears
Remember the Bears of the mid 1980s? They had a killer running back in Walter Payton, sure, but who else? Jim McMahon? Willie Gault? No - they won because of their defense, which is exactly what the 06 Bears are planning - and will - do. Thanks to their powerful defense, the Bears can get away with just having a couple weapons - they have a solid running game - in a seriously weak division.
Otherwise, the Packers should continue their general decline down towards irrelevance - you can thank their aging QB for that - while Minnesota enters a rebuilding stage, thanks to the recent losses of their major offensive stars (Culpepper, Moss, et al). And Detroit... Well, the Tigers are doing pretty well this year.
NFC South: Carolina Panthers
The Panthers are a real threat this year - nobody seemed to notice that they had a great defense and that there was more to the team then just Steve Smith. Not that it really matters; Smith is fantastic and, if healthy, carry almost any team. The Panthers will make easy work of everybody.
On the other side of the NFC South coin, the Atlanta Falcons will have a decent season - nothing special, I'm afraid - while the New Orleans Saints and Tampa Bay Buccaneers will have fun at the bottom. Sure, both of them have some great running backs - but neither of them have what it takes to get past Carolina.
NFC West: Seattle Seahawks
I hate myself for this - no Super Bowl loser has repeated in ages and the Seahawks have a tough schedule and Sean Alexander is a ACL Tear waiting to happen. But still - they play in a division against the St. Louis Rams, the San Francisco 49ers and the Arizona Cardinals. You can pretty much chalk up 6, maybe 7 wins right there.
Speaking of the Cards, I'm not buying this "They're a sleeper" nonsense. They have Kurt Warner, a QB who's too green to be a starter right now and a great running back who I suspect will be bad with the Cards line in front of him. St. Louis will surprise people, but to do that they'd need to do what, win six games? And the 49ers... Well, they're rebuilding. Still.
Playoffs:
First a lesson: I've always enjoyed playing games on both computers and on consoles - but my experience is pretty much limited to sports games or RTS games. So tonight, when I got invited to a Halo party, I assumed that I could just switch from one to the other. After all, how different can it be?
Turns out it's a lot different.
The point here is that some things don't transfer over too well - and sometimes what cuts it in one place doesn't in another. That said, here's the playoffs (But first, a quick recap):
That's pretty much all I can really say this year - I've been reading way too much; I bought two magazines - two more then I usually do - and I've worked on this for much too long, something like two weeks.
And still, I don't think I'm anymore sure about any of these then I was in August. Or in May. Hell, I don't think I'm any more sure then I was the minute after Super Bowl XL ended.
But here it all is - typed lovingly by division by a college student with less time free then he has to sleep.
AFC
AFC East: The Patriots
This division was the one that was the toughest of them all for me to choose: I like the Dolphins this year - more on that later - but I can't help but to choose the Pats, once again. They haven't lost any key players other then their kicker and a linebacker... And if that was all it takes to kill this team it's a bad sign for Brady's Hall of Fame chances.
The Dolphins improved by signing a QB and it'll be a good race - although I'm not quite sold on the Dolphins defense. The Bills will tank fast while the Jets will pull a Barbaro and break a leg out of the gate.
I'm going to say the order will be like this:
- New England Patriots
- Miami Dolphins
- Buffalo Bills
- New York Jets
AFC North: Pittsburgh Steelers
The Steelers haven't done much other then cutting the fat in the offseason: they lost Tommy Maddox and Randel El - which means that their WR passing stats will go in the toilet. And hurt or not, Big Ben keeps getting better and better. If this team wins less then 11 games it's time for a new coach.
Otherwise, the Bengals are still good - but, thanks to the new rules on touchdown celebrations, a lot less fun to watch. Baltimore's gotten worse during the offseason (Brain St. Pierre? Mike Anderson?) and Cleveland is, well, bad. Really bad.
- Pittsburgh
- Cincinnati
- Baltimore
- Cleveland
ARC South: Indianapolis Colts
Er, when you have ha;f your games against teams like Houston, Tennessee and Jacksonville and you're one of the best teams in the NFL's recent history, you're going to win the division, no matter who your running back is.
Other then them, Jacksonville is a decent team who hasn't convinced me that they're better then either Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Denver or Miami; Tennessee made a few changes but I don't see them getting ahead of either of the previous teams in the standings and Houston... Well, if nothing else, there's always next year's draft - maybe then the Texans can draft a running back.
- Indianapolis
- Jacksonville
- Tennessee
- Houston
AFC West: Denver Broncos
Why not? They have a revolutionary two-tier running back system (trust me, this is like when they introduced the Relief Pitcher), a solid QB in Plummer, a good defense and they added a few good parts (Javon Walker, Mike Bell) to replace what they lost (Mike Anderson). They're a lock to win their division.
And, again, why not? Kansas City still doesn't play defense; Oakland's still a coach away from being a contender and San Deigo's QB situation looks worse then it did last year. It's not going to be a breeze, but it's not too much to ask for the Broncos.
- Denver
- San Diego
- Kansas City
- Oakland
NFC:
NFC East: New York Giants
Sure, the Giants fell apart in the playoffs last year - but they added bulk to their defense with LaVar Harrington and kept some of their big playmakers with Plaxico Burress and Eli Manning. And sure, Tiki Barber is getting old - but he's still doing a lot better then most running backs that are his age. It'll be close, but I think the Giants have what it takes to win this division this year.
Philadelphia's Eagles look good - last year they were marred by injury and locker-room disputes - but I'm not sold on their offence; will McNabb rebound? Did TO truly carry the team like he thought he did? It's too many questions for me. Dallas will self-implode over TO, Parcells and Bledsoe before week five (I would be surprised as hell if both TO and Bledsoe can successfully work together over the course of the season; it'd be like Larry the Cable guy successfully co-hosting The Daily Show for half a year) and Washington will have a tough go at it - they have a great running back with Clinton Portis, two solid receiving backs... But their offense is still led by Mark "Bledsoe Jr." Brunell.
- New York Giants
- Philadelphia Eagles
- Washington Redskins
- Dallas
NFC North : Chicago Bears
Remember the Bears of the mid 1980s? They had a killer running back in Walter Payton, sure, but who else? Jim McMahon? Willie Gault? No - they won because of their defense, which is exactly what the 06 Bears are planning - and will - do. Thanks to their powerful defense, the Bears can get away with just having a couple weapons - they have a solid running game - in a seriously weak division.
Otherwise, the Packers should continue their general decline down towards irrelevance - you can thank their aging QB for that - while Minnesota enters a rebuilding stage, thanks to the recent losses of their major offensive stars (Culpepper, Moss, et al). And Detroit... Well, the Tigers are doing pretty well this year.
NFC South: Carolina Panthers
The Panthers are a real threat this year - nobody seemed to notice that they had a great defense and that there was more to the team then just Steve Smith. Not that it really matters; Smith is fantastic and, if healthy, carry almost any team. The Panthers will make easy work of everybody.
On the other side of the NFC South coin, the Atlanta Falcons will have a decent season - nothing special, I'm afraid - while the New Orleans Saints and Tampa Bay Buccaneers will have fun at the bottom. Sure, both of them have some great running backs - but neither of them have what it takes to get past Carolina.
NFC West: Seattle Seahawks
I hate myself for this - no Super Bowl loser has repeated in ages and the Seahawks have a tough schedule and Sean Alexander is a ACL Tear waiting to happen. But still - they play in a division against the St. Louis Rams, the San Francisco 49ers and the Arizona Cardinals. You can pretty much chalk up 6, maybe 7 wins right there.
Speaking of the Cards, I'm not buying this "They're a sleeper" nonsense. They have Kurt Warner, a QB who's too green to be a starter right now and a great running back who I suspect will be bad with the Cards line in front of him. St. Louis will surprise people, but to do that they'd need to do what, win six games? And the 49ers... Well, they're rebuilding. Still.
Playoffs:
First a lesson: I've always enjoyed playing games on both computers and on consoles - but my experience is pretty much limited to sports games or RTS games. So tonight, when I got invited to a Halo party, I assumed that I could just switch from one to the other. After all, how different can it be?
Turns out it's a lot different.
The point here is that some things don't transfer over too well - and sometimes what cuts it in one place doesn't in another. That said, here's the playoffs (But first, a quick recap):
NFC
East: New York
North: Chicago
South: Carolina
West: Seattle
Wild Cards: Philadelphia, Atlanta
AFC
East: New England
North: Pittsburgh
South: Indianapolis
West: Denver
Wild Cards: Cincinnati, Miami
Championship games: New England over Indy; Carolina over Chicago
Super Bowl XLI: Chicago over New England
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
They must love him in Dallas
Football season comes but once a year - and in some places, it triumphs everything else on the sports map; and in Texas, the Cowboys border on religion.
And so when Terrell Owens signed with the Cowboys during the offseason, an entire collective group was happy, really happy. His behavior be damned, TO is a damn fine receiver, maybe the best in the league. And by adding him to any team, from the Dallas Cowboys to the Houston Texans, you suddenly make the leap to contender - based almost solely on his potential talent.
But he needs to play for that to work out - just ask any Eagles fan.
But it looks like TO is up to his old tricks once again in Dallas. The season hasn't even started and he's already skipping meetings and rehab assignments - and he's already being fined by his team.
Sure, TO is a great player - but he's also a walking time bomb in the dressing room. Every city he's ever played in (San Francisco, Philadelphia) is a city where he's burned every bridge, alienated every fan and split every team into rival fractions. When he left the 49ers, the team was in such bad shape that they still have yet to fully recover. When he left the Eagles, he did so under the dark clouds of the most public team breakdown in recent memory - in the eyes of almost every single Eagles fan it was TO who ruined the season, not Akers or McNabb or Reid.
But for all the troubles he causes, he sure can put up the numbers - last year he had six touchdowns in seven games and averaged over 100 yards a game. ESPN has him projected to have 12 touchdowns and over 1200 yards this season (As per the ESPN Insider Fantasy Football Preview, anyway). He's dangerous to defenses. If there's one single player out there that could turn a team into a contender... Well, he's either the one or he's really, really close.
But once again - he has to play.
Cowboys coach Bill Parcells hasn't once used TO in a preseason game this year - and TO hasn't been practicing. He's missed 20 different practices from a variety of aliments - he's hurt his hamstring and he's overslept. He's unlikely to start the season on the field - he's most likely going to be a backup for the short term.
Does he like it? No, at least as far as I know.
Does he deserve it? Yes, at least as far as I know.
He's been injured already - and you gotta protect his health. He's had attitude problems - and you gotta show him that he's not the boss. He hasn't shown himself to be a starter yet - and if you wanna contend, you need people who have proven that they can contend.
That's the big one - TO hasn't played a NFL game in close to three-quarters of a year (his last game was in Week 8 of the 2005 season, October 30th). Sure, he's been working out since he was signed - but you, me and everybody who camps out at the Cowboys practice field knows that he's going to have some rust. He has yet to prove that he deserves to be the starter this time.
So, then - will TO and Dallas mesh together? Maybe - after all, TO did dance on the star a few years back - but it's going to take some time. By week 3, maybe 4, TO should be in the starting lineups. But until then? Who knows.
And so when Terrell Owens signed with the Cowboys during the offseason, an entire collective group was happy, really happy. His behavior be damned, TO is a damn fine receiver, maybe the best in the league. And by adding him to any team, from the Dallas Cowboys to the Houston Texans, you suddenly make the leap to contender - based almost solely on his potential talent.
But he needs to play for that to work out - just ask any Eagles fan.
But it looks like TO is up to his old tricks once again in Dallas. The season hasn't even started and he's already skipping meetings and rehab assignments - and he's already being fined by his team.
Sure, TO is a great player - but he's also a walking time bomb in the dressing room. Every city he's ever played in (San Francisco, Philadelphia) is a city where he's burned every bridge, alienated every fan and split every team into rival fractions. When he left the 49ers, the team was in such bad shape that they still have yet to fully recover. When he left the Eagles, he did so under the dark clouds of the most public team breakdown in recent memory - in the eyes of almost every single Eagles fan it was TO who ruined the season, not Akers or McNabb or Reid.
But for all the troubles he causes, he sure can put up the numbers - last year he had six touchdowns in seven games and averaged over 100 yards a game. ESPN has him projected to have 12 touchdowns and over 1200 yards this season (As per the ESPN Insider Fantasy Football Preview, anyway). He's dangerous to defenses. If there's one single player out there that could turn a team into a contender... Well, he's either the one or he's really, really close.
But once again - he has to play.
Cowboys coach Bill Parcells hasn't once used TO in a preseason game this year - and TO hasn't been practicing. He's missed 20 different practices from a variety of aliments - he's hurt his hamstring and he's overslept. He's unlikely to start the season on the field - he's most likely going to be a backup for the short term.
Does he like it? No, at least as far as I know.
Does he deserve it? Yes, at least as far as I know.
He's been injured already - and you gotta protect his health. He's had attitude problems - and you gotta show him that he's not the boss. He hasn't shown himself to be a starter yet - and if you wanna contend, you need people who have proven that they can contend.
That's the big one - TO hasn't played a NFL game in close to three-quarters of a year (his last game was in Week 8 of the 2005 season, October 30th). Sure, he's been working out since he was signed - but you, me and everybody who camps out at the Cowboys practice field knows that he's going to have some rust. He has yet to prove that he deserves to be the starter this time.
So, then - will TO and Dallas mesh together? Maybe - after all, TO did dance on the star a few years back - but it's going to take some time. By week 3, maybe 4, TO should be in the starting lineups. But until then? Who knows.
Tuesday, August 22, 2006
A Completely unacceptable situation
It was the same story all over again - but hopefully with a different resolution.
When Shea Hillenbrand exploded in the Jays clubhouse, it signaled the end of his tenure on the club. After all, calling the team a "sinking ship" and almost coming to blows with your manager would end your employment almost anywhere.
So when Ted Lilly got angry on the mound during the third inning of tonight's game against the A's, almost everybody had the same thought on their mind - "Not again!".
(Although, there was a loud, bald man sitting right behind me whose thoughts were elsewhere - like how he felt it was necessary to explain to his kids that the Jays don't matter because they're "Never in the race"... Or to the 20-something guy next to me, who felt the need to talk to his girlfriend about everything - his at-bat music (Golddigger by Kanye West), what the K means on the scoresheet, what's behind that wall with the 200 painted on it... )
But it didn't look too bad - while I could see that Lilly wasn't about to go down without a fight (okay, so maybe he pouted like a kid in house league - it's still a fight, by baseball standards anyway) I never in my wildest dreams could have imagined what would happen next:
John Gibbons came out of the clubhouse with (allegedly) a bloody nose.
That's right - Ted Lilly may have hit his manager - or at least that's the angle that the media's already jumped onto.
I refused to blow a fuse /
They even had it on the news /
Don't believe the hype...
Public Enemy - Don't believe the hype
For both his and John Gibbons part, Lilly has said that his behavior was completely unacceptable - and Gibbons has said that the fight never took place... But if indeed John had a bloody nose (from my spot on the foul line, on the A's side of the field, I never saw anything that made me think Lilly was going to hit Gibbons, or even do anything more then sass him) then this is indeed a completely unacceptable situation.
For a team that went into this season with such high hopes - the Jays signed new pitchers, got some big bats and were finally looking like they could contend with the big boys of the AL East - this season has been less then spectacular. We've seen big names go away (Hillenbrand, Hinske). Major players have been gone with injuries (Chacin, Burnett). And some people have just been busts (Towers) or, at best, just hot-and-cold (Janssen). With all the fighting that's been going on, it's no wonder that Vernon Wells wants to leave - if it's this bad in public, imagine how chaotic the clubhouse must get.
So yes, it's not too soon to say the this season is pretty much wrapped up - the Jays are 10 games back of the Yankees as I write this for the AL East lead and are 7.5 (and behind LA, Minnesota and the Red Sox) games back of the Wild Card White Sox. And while it's entirely possible that the Red Sox could go on a 14 game losing streak, the Twins could get stranded on a mountain and the Angels could vanish in Area 51 - the Jays still wouldn't win the Wild Card - and the AL East... Well, let's just say that it's way beyond reach and leave it there since I can't say positive things about the Yankees unless I've had a few drinks first.
It's not as if the season has been a waste though - the Yankees and the Red Sox have had to whip out really good seasons just to be in the top two spots. Hell, with a little luck the Jays could very well go above the Red Sox in the standings (they're only back by something like 3.5 games). Toronto has finally proven that they can compete with the big boys - and if they can get the clubhouse settled down, Toronto would seem to be a good place for a free agent to land: it's not a media-centre like Boston, where even the smallest details get discussed to death by obsessive fans in the media... And it's not New York, where you're always in the spotlight (for better or worse).
And if Wells wants out - then maybe the Jays should make a move for a pitcher (I've said it before and I'm going to say it again: get Javier Vasquez. Sure, it's not as if the White Sox want (or need) Vernon Wells, but at least put it out there. Try and get Wily Mo Pena as the "Player to be named later" in the Hinske trade. Bring back the Boomer - David Wells. He doesn't have to pitch... But bring him back anyway. He can toss BP, drive the bullpen car or just be a spokesman - just bring him back, please.
When Shea Hillenbrand exploded in the Jays clubhouse, it signaled the end of his tenure on the club. After all, calling the team a "sinking ship" and almost coming to blows with your manager would end your employment almost anywhere.
So when Ted Lilly got angry on the mound during the third inning of tonight's game against the A's, almost everybody had the same thought on their mind - "Not again!".
(Although, there was a loud, bald man sitting right behind me whose thoughts were elsewhere - like how he felt it was necessary to explain to his kids that the Jays don't matter because they're "Never in the race"... Or to the 20-something guy next to me, who felt the need to talk to his girlfriend about everything - his at-bat music (Golddigger by Kanye West), what the K means on the scoresheet, what's behind that wall with the 200 painted on it... )
But it didn't look too bad - while I could see that Lilly wasn't about to go down without a fight (okay, so maybe he pouted like a kid in house league - it's still a fight, by baseball standards anyway) I never in my wildest dreams could have imagined what would happen next:
John Gibbons came out of the clubhouse with (allegedly) a bloody nose.
That's right - Ted Lilly may have hit his manager - or at least that's the angle that the media's already jumped onto.
I refused to blow a fuse /
They even had it on the news /
Don't believe the hype...
Public Enemy - Don't believe the hype
For both his and John Gibbons part, Lilly has said that his behavior was completely unacceptable - and Gibbons has said that the fight never took place... But if indeed John had a bloody nose (from my spot on the foul line, on the A's side of the field, I never saw anything that made me think Lilly was going to hit Gibbons, or even do anything more then sass him) then this is indeed a completely unacceptable situation.
For a team that went into this season with such high hopes - the Jays signed new pitchers, got some big bats and were finally looking like they could contend with the big boys of the AL East - this season has been less then spectacular. We've seen big names go away (Hillenbrand, Hinske). Major players have been gone with injuries (Chacin, Burnett). And some people have just been busts (Towers) or, at best, just hot-and-cold (Janssen). With all the fighting that's been going on, it's no wonder that Vernon Wells wants to leave - if it's this bad in public, imagine how chaotic the clubhouse must get.
So yes, it's not too soon to say the this season is pretty much wrapped up - the Jays are 10 games back of the Yankees as I write this for the AL East lead and are 7.5 (and behind LA, Minnesota and the Red Sox) games back of the Wild Card White Sox. And while it's entirely possible that the Red Sox could go on a 14 game losing streak, the Twins could get stranded on a mountain and the Angels could vanish in Area 51 - the Jays still wouldn't win the Wild Card - and the AL East... Well, let's just say that it's way beyond reach and leave it there since I can't say positive things about the Yankees unless I've had a few drinks first.
It's not as if the season has been a waste though - the Yankees and the Red Sox have had to whip out really good seasons just to be in the top two spots. Hell, with a little luck the Jays could very well go above the Red Sox in the standings (they're only back by something like 3.5 games). Toronto has finally proven that they can compete with the big boys - and if they can get the clubhouse settled down, Toronto would seem to be a good place for a free agent to land: it's not a media-centre like Boston, where even the smallest details get discussed to death by obsessive fans in the media... And it's not New York, where you're always in the spotlight (for better or worse).
And if Wells wants out - then maybe the Jays should make a move for a pitcher (I've said it before and I'm going to say it again: get Javier Vasquez. Sure, it's not as if the White Sox want (or need) Vernon Wells, but at least put it out there. Try and get Wily Mo Pena as the "Player to be named later" in the Hinske trade. Bring back the Boomer - David Wells. He doesn't have to pitch... But bring him back anyway. He can toss BP, drive the bullpen car or just be a spokesman - just bring him back, please.
Sunday, August 13, 2006
Goodbye Sindin - it's been a "fun" ride
When Harry Sindin stepped down as the President of the Boston Bruins last week, it signaled the end of an era in Boston - granted, it was a dark era, full of the Bruins never having just enough... But it was an era nonetheless.
If nothing else, Sindin will be remembered as the GM who never got the Bruins quite what they needed - and not as the man who coached them to their last Stanley Cup victory. It was during his tenure as GM that the Bruins, who were one of the best teams in hockey in the early 1970s, slowly began to decay: they had some good teams, yes - but the teams were never good enough and the Bruins slowly got further and further away from winning the Cup.
He was the guy who hired Don Cherry - and then fired him when he couldn't get along with him, even though Cherry coached the team to two Cup Finals (and was a bench penalty away from a third in 1979) and three division titles. He was there for the mid 1980s, when he had a budding superstar in Ray Bourque and traded for Cam Neely - but also traded off Bill Ranford, the goalie who would be there to beat them in 1988 and 1990. He hired stop-gap coaches that never worked out - despite great finishes in the regular season, the Bruins were always creamed in the playoffs, either to Edmonton, to Montreal or to the Islanders.
When the Bruins traded Joe Thornton - who then rattled off a MVP season for the Sharks - it was the final straw for the Bruins. Since then, almost everybody involved - the coach, the GM and now Sindin - have either retired or been fired. To put it simply - the Bruins aren't just a sinking ship, they're one that is resting comfortably on the bottom.
The Northeastern division is one of the most competitive in the NHL right now: three teams from it (Buffalo, Montreal and Ottawa) made the playoffs in 2006 and one more (Toronto) was two points back of the #8 seed - but Boston was well down at the bottom at 26th overall in the league. Simply put, it's a long road back to respectability - but with them both opening the vault and getting rid of Sindin, it may not take as long as it could have...
If nothing else, Sindin will be remembered as the GM who never got the Bruins quite what they needed - and not as the man who coached them to their last Stanley Cup victory. It was during his tenure as GM that the Bruins, who were one of the best teams in hockey in the early 1970s, slowly began to decay: they had some good teams, yes - but the teams were never good enough and the Bruins slowly got further and further away from winning the Cup.
He was the guy who hired Don Cherry - and then fired him when he couldn't get along with him, even though Cherry coached the team to two Cup Finals (and was a bench penalty away from a third in 1979) and three division titles. He was there for the mid 1980s, when he had a budding superstar in Ray Bourque and traded for Cam Neely - but also traded off Bill Ranford, the goalie who would be there to beat them in 1988 and 1990. He hired stop-gap coaches that never worked out - despite great finishes in the regular season, the Bruins were always creamed in the playoffs, either to Edmonton, to Montreal or to the Islanders.
When the Bruins traded Joe Thornton - who then rattled off a MVP season for the Sharks - it was the final straw for the Bruins. Since then, almost everybody involved - the coach, the GM and now Sindin - have either retired or been fired. To put it simply - the Bruins aren't just a sinking ship, they're one that is resting comfortably on the bottom.
The Northeastern division is one of the most competitive in the NHL right now: three teams from it (Buffalo, Montreal and Ottawa) made the playoffs in 2006 and one more (Toronto) was two points back of the #8 seed - but Boston was well down at the bottom at 26th overall in the league. Simply put, it's a long road back to respectability - but with them both opening the vault and getting rid of Sindin, it may not take as long as it could have...
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Ship is sinking, the redux
Last July, when TO Junior (I have decided never to refer to him as anything else) flipped out in the clubhouse and called the Jays a sinking ship... Well, it was irritating, but seemed to come out of nowhere - it was just one of the many insults that he was throwing at the Jays in his temper tantrum.
But since then the Jays dropped seven games in a row, won a couple and are generally out of the playoff picture (short of a huge run, where they rip off something like 20 wins in a row, anyway). The rotation has changed; Jassen, Towers and Chacin are not waiting to get their turn to pitch. The bats, strong all season, are suddenly seeming to be as quiet as ever.
And now I'm wondering if he has his own 1-900 number.
Granted, it's going to be a tough haul for the Jays if they want to make it all the way to the postseason. And as much as I'd love to see it happen... Well, I'm not too sure that it will. If I had to pick my odds, I'd say something like 45-1. Sure, it's possible - but it's not as likely as it is for the Twins (25-1), the White Sox (15-1), Yankees (7-2), Red Sox (5-1) or Tigers (3-2).
(The A's? They're at the same level as the Jays - 45 - 1. Genius or not, Billy Beane doesn't win in the postseason.)
So - what to say about the Jays? Is it any one persons fault? I doubt it - a slump (which is what the Jays are trying to get past) is all in your head: your failures suddenly become huge and unforgivable and you can't understand why you struck out against Vazquez, ripped a shot right at Jeter or threw Ortiz a changeup on a 3-2 count.
You just need to get your head back in the game - which, thanks to a 2 out of 3 series against the O's, the Jays just might have done.
But since then the Jays dropped seven games in a row, won a couple and are generally out of the playoff picture (short of a huge run, where they rip off something like 20 wins in a row, anyway). The rotation has changed; Jassen, Towers and Chacin are not waiting to get their turn to pitch. The bats, strong all season, are suddenly seeming to be as quiet as ever.
And now I'm wondering if he has his own 1-900 number.
Granted, it's going to be a tough haul for the Jays if they want to make it all the way to the postseason. And as much as I'd love to see it happen... Well, I'm not too sure that it will. If I had to pick my odds, I'd say something like 45-1. Sure, it's possible - but it's not as likely as it is for the Twins (25-1), the White Sox (15-1), Yankees (7-2), Red Sox (5-1) or Tigers (3-2).
(The A's? They're at the same level as the Jays - 45 - 1. Genius or not, Billy Beane doesn't win in the postseason.)
So - what to say about the Jays? Is it any one persons fault? I doubt it - a slump (which is what the Jays are trying to get past) is all in your head: your failures suddenly become huge and unforgivable and you can't understand why you struck out against Vazquez, ripped a shot right at Jeter or threw Ortiz a changeup on a 3-2 count.
You just need to get your head back in the game - which, thanks to a 2 out of 3 series against the O's, the Jays just might have done.
Monday, July 31, 2006
When age does matter
On Monday, Detroit officially signed Dominick Hasek to their team - making the average age of their goaltender 37 years old.
Trust me, that's not a good thing.
Detroit finished on the top of their divison, conference and the league in the standings last year - but flopped out of the first round against the surging Edmonton Oilers. Perhaps they were an overrated team that played in a weak division or maybe they had a bad break or two - it's moot.
The last time that Hasek laced up for the Red Wings (in 2002), he backstopped them to a Stanley Cup - which is what I'm sure that the Wings were hoping for when they signed him this time. But it won't be enough - it wouldn't be enough even if they signed Roberto Luongo (okay, maybe that would be enough - maybe).
The Red Wings mainly used three goalies last season - their former #1 (and the first player dropped from their roster) Manny Legace, who posted 37 wins, a 2.19 GAA and a save % of 915, Chris Osgood, who had 20 wins, a GAA of 2.76 and .897 save % and Jimmy Howard who played in all of four games (and isn't even listed on their roster anymore).
But after their almost epic first-round collapse against the Oilers, the Red Wings have had an overhaul - gone are their star goalie (Manny wasn't resigned), their captain (Steve Yzerman retired in July) and their goals-scored leader left via free agency (Brendan Shanahan signed with the Rangers in July). Adding to that, it's only a matter of time before age renders their emotional leader, Chris Chelios, unable to play at the level he must.
The Red Wings are an old team getting older in a league where speed is suddenly the key. Last season their success could more of less be attributed to a combination of stellar goaltending from Legace and the general lack of success in their division (three of the five teams in their divison finished in the cellar last year: St. Louis, Chicago and Columbus) - but with the loss of Legace and the improvement of Columbus - after all, a healthy Rick Nash may well be the difference between the cellar and a good playoff run for the Blue Jackets - even bringing in Hasek may mot work.
Hasek hasn't played a full season in years - he hasn't started more then 44 games since the 2001-02 season - and is coming off of a season-ending injury that he sustained during the Turino Olympics. And while his stats are good - He's had a GAA under 2.50 since 1995-96 and had more then 20 wins in three of his last four seasons - it would be an absolute surprise if he can dominate like he did with the Senators one more time.
So - what's to expect from the Red Wings? Don't write them off quite yet - they're still a good team in a bad division - but don't expect them to win with Hasek in net.
Trust me, that's not a good thing.
Detroit finished on the top of their divison, conference and the league in the standings last year - but flopped out of the first round against the surging Edmonton Oilers. Perhaps they were an overrated team that played in a weak division or maybe they had a bad break or two - it's moot.
The last time that Hasek laced up for the Red Wings (in 2002), he backstopped them to a Stanley Cup - which is what I'm sure that the Wings were hoping for when they signed him this time. But it won't be enough - it wouldn't be enough even if they signed Roberto Luongo (okay, maybe that would be enough - maybe).
The Red Wings mainly used three goalies last season - their former #1 (and the first player dropped from their roster) Manny Legace, who posted 37 wins, a 2.19 GAA and a save % of 915, Chris Osgood, who had 20 wins, a GAA of 2.76 and .897 save % and Jimmy Howard who played in all of four games (and isn't even listed on their roster anymore).
But after their almost epic first-round collapse against the Oilers, the Red Wings have had an overhaul - gone are their star goalie (Manny wasn't resigned), their captain (Steve Yzerman retired in July) and their goals-scored leader left via free agency (Brendan Shanahan signed with the Rangers in July). Adding to that, it's only a matter of time before age renders their emotional leader, Chris Chelios, unable to play at the level he must.
The Red Wings are an old team getting older in a league where speed is suddenly the key. Last season their success could more of less be attributed to a combination of stellar goaltending from Legace and the general lack of success in their division (three of the five teams in their divison finished in the cellar last year: St. Louis, Chicago and Columbus) - but with the loss of Legace and the improvement of Columbus - after all, a healthy Rick Nash may well be the difference between the cellar and a good playoff run for the Blue Jackets - even bringing in Hasek may mot work.
Hasek hasn't played a full season in years - he hasn't started more then 44 games since the 2001-02 season - and is coming off of a season-ending injury that he sustained during the Turino Olympics. And while his stats are good - He's had a GAA under 2.50 since 1995-96 and had more then 20 wins in three of his last four seasons - it would be an absolute surprise if he can dominate like he did with the Senators one more time.
So - what's to expect from the Red Wings? Don't write them off quite yet - they're still a good team in a bad division - but don't expect them to win with Hasek in net.
Friday, July 21, 2006
This ship is sinking, right?
I have a question for you: I'm an all-star third baseman, I had a three home run game in July 2003, I recently adopted a child and I've burned my bridges in another AL city... Who am I?
Shea Hillenbrand, who infamously called Theo Epstien a faggot back in 2003, is back up to his old tricks. After having recently adopted a child he left the team for a number of days (so he could fill out paperwork)- and when he got back he was angry, howlingly mad, that the team wasn't happy to see him and give him untold riches (or at least a basket of fruit).
Sure, the Jays were a bit of a swoon - they had won three of their last six games (against the sub-par Seattle Mariners and Rangers) and were hurting: they had been playing extra inning games a fair amount recently. BJ Ryan - who had been fantastic all season - had blown two saves since the All-star break. Two players went down with Staph infections. Their rotation was in shambles, with Chacin gone until August and only Doc Halladay posting a plus .500 record. And they play in the most competitive division in baseball - and maybe in all of sports.
But this apparently didn't matter to Shea - or maybe it did, way too much. He was the one who wrote that the Jays were a "Sinking Ship" on the clubhouse blackboard. He almost got in a fight with his manager, John Gibbons. He was the one who communicated with the team through an agent. He was the one who was mad that the Jays seemingly didn't care that he adopted a child. And he was the one who through a fit.
Last year, Terrell Owens was doing the same kind of thing - he was mad that the Eagles wouldn't celebrate his 100th touchdown with the kind of vigor and bravado that T.O accompanies each and every touchdown with. He slammed everybody, from his coach to Donovan McNabb, in the press - such as his beauty suggestion that he would have won the Superbowl with Brett Farve. And he, almost singlehandedly, took the team that made it to the Superbowl and shoved them down into the gutter, where they still remain.
This is what Shea could - and, if he remained on the team, would - do to the Blue Jays. They're a good team that's only getting batter (Imagine a rotation of Halladay, Burnett, Chacin, Jassen and Lilly with BJ Ryan anchoring the bullpen... Fantastic, eh?) but with Shea blowing fits of a TO caliber, he'll bring the team down - almost like how Raphael Palmeiro brought down Baltimore.
The difference, though, between T.O. and Shea is that T.O. can back up his words - he came back from a horrid injury way too soon, so he could play in the Superbowl... And he had a good game, even by his standards. That's talent. Shea is good (he's hitting .301 with an OPS of .822) but he's most certainly not as good at his position as T.O. is.
So, what now? The Jays can trade Shea, dump him down to AAA or just dump him on the corner of Bay and Bloor. If they trade him, though, they might not get a lot for him - but getting something is better then nothing and the Jays need another arm in the rotation. Maybe Florida will take him - and a lot of prospects, plus maybe Jassen - for the D-Train (or maybe I'm a hopeless dreamer). Either way, he's not one to be missed.
Just ask any Boston fan.
Shea Hillenbrand, who infamously called Theo Epstien a faggot back in 2003, is back up to his old tricks. After having recently adopted a child he left the team for a number of days (so he could fill out paperwork)- and when he got back he was angry, howlingly mad, that the team wasn't happy to see him and give him untold riches (or at least a basket of fruit).
Sure, the Jays were a bit of a swoon - they had won three of their last six games (against the sub-par Seattle Mariners and Rangers) and were hurting: they had been playing extra inning games a fair amount recently. BJ Ryan - who had been fantastic all season - had blown two saves since the All-star break. Two players went down with Staph infections. Their rotation was in shambles, with Chacin gone until August and only Doc Halladay posting a plus .500 record. And they play in the most competitive division in baseball - and maybe in all of sports.
But this apparently didn't matter to Shea - or maybe it did, way too much. He was the one who wrote that the Jays were a "Sinking Ship" on the clubhouse blackboard. He almost got in a fight with his manager, John Gibbons. He was the one who communicated with the team through an agent. He was the one who was mad that the Jays seemingly didn't care that he adopted a child. And he was the one who through a fit.
Last year, Terrell Owens was doing the same kind of thing - he was mad that the Eagles wouldn't celebrate his 100th touchdown with the kind of vigor and bravado that T.O accompanies each and every touchdown with. He slammed everybody, from his coach to Donovan McNabb, in the press - such as his beauty suggestion that he would have won the Superbowl with Brett Farve. And he, almost singlehandedly, took the team that made it to the Superbowl and shoved them down into the gutter, where they still remain.
This is what Shea could - and, if he remained on the team, would - do to the Blue Jays. They're a good team that's only getting batter (Imagine a rotation of Halladay, Burnett, Chacin, Jassen and Lilly with BJ Ryan anchoring the bullpen... Fantastic, eh?) but with Shea blowing fits of a TO caliber, he'll bring the team down - almost like how Raphael Palmeiro brought down Baltimore.
The difference, though, between T.O. and Shea is that T.O. can back up his words - he came back from a horrid injury way too soon, so he could play in the Superbowl... And he had a good game, even by his standards. That's talent. Shea is good (he's hitting .301 with an OPS of .822) but he's most certainly not as good at his position as T.O. is.
So, what now? The Jays can trade Shea, dump him down to AAA or just dump him on the corner of Bay and Bloor. If they trade him, though, they might not get a lot for him - but getting something is better then nothing and the Jays need another arm in the rotation. Maybe Florida will take him - and a lot of prospects, plus maybe Jassen - for the D-Train (or maybe I'm a hopeless dreamer). Either way, he's not one to be missed.
Just ask any Boston fan.
Sunday, July 16, 2006
When it rains...
Barry Bonds - one of the best and most controversial athletes this side of Ty Cobb - is in trouble with the law... Again.
First it was the BALCO scandal and the infamous MLB senate hearings - but this time it's much more serious: this time it's on charges alleging that he as involved in money laundering, perjury and tax evasion. No longer are the charges fairly tame - these carry not just heavy fines but possible jail time for the slugger.
So what does this mean for baseballs most abrasive superstar? In what will surely be his final season, Barry seems almost destined to go down in flames. Everything he's done this year and everything he has ever done is already being overshadowed by these charges.
Yes, Barry is loved by his fans - almost all of which reside in the greater San Francesco area. As soon as you get 20 miles outside of town - Oakland, for example - Bond's is treated with hatred and loathing - he has a worse reputation that almost any other athlete I can remember: it's worse then Donald Brashear, worse then Albert Belle, worse then T.O... And these latest charges aren't going to help him improve his image any time soon.
These latest charges mostly bring up the debate about his alleged use of steroids - charges levelled in books and by investigators in the BALCO inquiry. And if - this is a huge if, though - Bonds did commit perjury in 2003, then did he use steriods? And if he did , what does that mean to you and me? What should baseball do about it?
Pete Rose was banned for conduct that was detrimental to baseball ("...Allegations that Peter Edward Rose engaged in conduct not in the best interests of baseball..."(1)) when it was found that be bet on major league games as manager of the Reds - including on his own team (but only to win, he says, and never against them)... Which doing so is one of the worst things that he could have done, since it challenges the integrity of the game: it has a direct effect on the outcome of the game (Does he refrain from betting when he knows that he can't win? Will he try as hard on those games?).
So, tell me: how is using external substances to give you an unfair advantage - to make you better suited to hit the ball then the other team (and your teammates)- any better or worse then betting on the game? By using steroids - even if they were legal at the time - you are effectively giving yourself an advantage that the other team doesn't - or at least shouldn't, anyway - have. By doing so, he's fostering in bad elements to the game - users and makers of drugs, people whose entire lifestyle is catered to people who cheat. How is that any better or any worse then letting in people who bet on baseball?
Steroids have been banned because they create an unlevel playing field - if one guy uses anabolic steroids, then you have to use animal growth hormones to compete at his level - and then he uses Human Growth Hormone so he can compete and so forth and so on. It's a vicious cycle that fosters cheating and trying to outdo your opponent, often with extremely serious risks to your - and by extension, those of your fans - health. Sure, everybody in baseball has cheated once or twice - from peeking at the catcher's signs, from doctoring the ball to corking the bat to whatever. That's one thing - it gives you an unfair advantage, yes - but it's also easily countered by the other team: they can bean you with the ball or the umpire can change the ball being used and etc. But by using steroids, you're not only putting yourself at serious health risks, but when everybody else has to do the same - just to keep it fair - you're putting their health at risk too.
Pete Rose was banned for betting on baseball - but as bad as that was, it never put the health of the players at risk. But if indeed Barry Bonds did use steroids, helping to foster in the "Steroid Era", he also helped to challenge the health of (and to shorten the careers of) many players. If he did cheat by using steroids, then he challenged the integrity of the game by he giving himself an unfair advantage at the expense of everybody else. How is that any better then betting on baseball?
Yes - Barry Bonds, if he is found guilty of steroid use, was far from being the only player to use them. But at the same time, baseball needs to make an example to show that they are serious about expelling steroids, Human Growth Hormone and all the other chemical additives that create an unfair game - and if they remove anybody, they should remove someone who would have benefited the most from them - and with more then 715 home runs, 70 home runs in a season and more, who could have benefited more then Barry from the use of them - but that's all if Barry did use them.
First it was the BALCO scandal and the infamous MLB senate hearings - but this time it's much more serious: this time it's on charges alleging that he as involved in money laundering, perjury and tax evasion. No longer are the charges fairly tame - these carry not just heavy fines but possible jail time for the slugger.
So what does this mean for baseballs most abrasive superstar? In what will surely be his final season, Barry seems almost destined to go down in flames. Everything he's done this year and everything he has ever done is already being overshadowed by these charges.
Yes, Barry is loved by his fans - almost all of which reside in the greater San Francesco area. As soon as you get 20 miles outside of town - Oakland, for example - Bond's is treated with hatred and loathing - he has a worse reputation that almost any other athlete I can remember: it's worse then Donald Brashear, worse then Albert Belle, worse then T.O... And these latest charges aren't going to help him improve his image any time soon.
These latest charges mostly bring up the debate about his alleged use of steroids - charges levelled in books and by investigators in the BALCO inquiry. And if - this is a huge if, though - Bonds did commit perjury in 2003, then did he use steriods? And if he did , what does that mean to you and me? What should baseball do about it?
Pete Rose was banned for conduct that was detrimental to baseball ("...Allegations that Peter Edward Rose engaged in conduct not in the best interests of baseball..."(1)) when it was found that be bet on major league games as manager of the Reds - including on his own team (but only to win, he says, and never against them)... Which doing so is one of the worst things that he could have done, since it challenges the integrity of the game: it has a direct effect on the outcome of the game (Does he refrain from betting when he knows that he can't win? Will he try as hard on those games?).
So, tell me: how is using external substances to give you an unfair advantage - to make you better suited to hit the ball then the other team (and your teammates)- any better or worse then betting on the game? By using steroids - even if they were legal at the time - you are effectively giving yourself an advantage that the other team doesn't - or at least shouldn't, anyway - have. By doing so, he's fostering in bad elements to the game - users and makers of drugs, people whose entire lifestyle is catered to people who cheat. How is that any better or any worse then letting in people who bet on baseball?
Steroids have been banned because they create an unlevel playing field - if one guy uses anabolic steroids, then you have to use animal growth hormones to compete at his level - and then he uses Human Growth Hormone so he can compete and so forth and so on. It's a vicious cycle that fosters cheating and trying to outdo your opponent, often with extremely serious risks to your - and by extension, those of your fans - health. Sure, everybody in baseball has cheated once or twice - from peeking at the catcher's signs, from doctoring the ball to corking the bat to whatever. That's one thing - it gives you an unfair advantage, yes - but it's also easily countered by the other team: they can bean you with the ball or the umpire can change the ball being used and etc. But by using steroids, you're not only putting yourself at serious health risks, but when everybody else has to do the same - just to keep it fair - you're putting their health at risk too.
Pete Rose was banned for betting on baseball - but as bad as that was, it never put the health of the players at risk. But if indeed Barry Bonds did use steroids, helping to foster in the "Steroid Era", he also helped to challenge the health of (and to shorten the careers of) many players. If he did cheat by using steroids, then he challenged the integrity of the game by he giving himself an unfair advantage at the expense of everybody else. How is that any better then betting on baseball?
Yes - Barry Bonds, if he is found guilty of steroid use, was far from being the only player to use them. But at the same time, baseball needs to make an example to show that they are serious about expelling steroids, Human Growth Hormone and all the other chemical additives that create an unfair game - and if they remove anybody, they should remove someone who would have benefited the most from them - and with more then 715 home runs, 70 home runs in a season and more, who could have benefited more then Barry from the use of them - but that's all if Barry did use them.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
50/50 and sinking fast
It keeps getting worse and worse for Barbaro. For the horse that had such a bright future ahead of it - from it decimating the crowd at the Kentucky Derby to having a memorable spot on PTI's "Role Play" - it's came downhill faster then it can run.
It started with him shattering his ankle during the Preakness - which caused so much damage and needed so much repair that he would never race again. In a flash, his career was over... And his life was in jeopardy. Even the most optimistic doctors were saying that his chances of survival were 50/50. It wasn't really a natural tragedy, but we all took hold, anyway. People were sending in flowers, apples and even cards - all for a horse that can't even communicate with people, let alone read.
But still, nobody likes to see a winner go down like Barbaro did in the Preakness. Granted, it wasn't as bad to watch as Joe Theismann snapping his leg or Clint Malarchuk catching a skate to the throat... But it was still a horrid sight to watch. Here was a powerhouse of a horse getting cut down in his prime - all because of a misstep.
And now the news keeps getting worse and worse. Barbaro's leg has healed, yes, but at the expense of his other hind leg - which has developed laminitis, an incurable ailment. His career as anything - a stud horse, a racing horse or just as something that some rich girl would get from her rich dad - is over beyond a doubt. Barbaro's race is almost completely run now. Granted, it's almost impossible to look after an injured horse, especially one as injured as Barbaro has been, without having some aftereffects. It's only a matter of time before he's put down by the same doctors that were working on him not two weeks ago.
But what can you do? The horse is going to suffer from this for the rest of it's life and it surely would not even still be here if it wasn't the famous horse it is. So maybe it's time for Barbaro. Yes, having him put down is a depressing move - but it's the only humane one there really is.
It started with him shattering his ankle during the Preakness - which caused so much damage and needed so much repair that he would never race again. In a flash, his career was over... And his life was in jeopardy. Even the most optimistic doctors were saying that his chances of survival were 50/50. It wasn't really a natural tragedy, but we all took hold, anyway. People were sending in flowers, apples and even cards - all for a horse that can't even communicate with people, let alone read.
But still, nobody likes to see a winner go down like Barbaro did in the Preakness. Granted, it wasn't as bad to watch as Joe Theismann snapping his leg or Clint Malarchuk catching a skate to the throat... But it was still a horrid sight to watch. Here was a powerhouse of a horse getting cut down in his prime - all because of a misstep.
And now the news keeps getting worse and worse. Barbaro's leg has healed, yes, but at the expense of his other hind leg - which has developed laminitis, an incurable ailment. His career as anything - a stud horse, a racing horse or just as something that some rich girl would get from her rich dad - is over beyond a doubt. Barbaro's race is almost completely run now. Granted, it's almost impossible to look after an injured horse, especially one as injured as Barbaro has been, without having some aftereffects. It's only a matter of time before he's put down by the same doctors that were working on him not two weeks ago.
But what can you do? The horse is going to suffer from this for the rest of it's life and it surely would not even still be here if it wasn't the famous horse it is. So maybe it's time for Barbaro. Yes, having him put down is a depressing move - but it's the only humane one there really is.
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
Thoughts on the Derby '06
Another July, another home run derby - and yet again, my picks are spectacularly off base. Since my track record is so impossibly bad - I'm talking like "Lions will win Superbowl XLI" bad - I didn't even bother posting them. Hell, I'm actually almost as embarrassed as I was last year.
That was something else, though - choosing Jason Bay. Jeez, he wasn't even able to get one home run. And my pick this year - er, Troy Glaus - only managed to get one more this time then Jason did this time (and Jason didn't even take part).
Sure, I also liked Ortiz, but even he didn't make it past the second round. And, actually, neither did I. I only know who won thanks to ESPN Radio, which managed to tell me something like 12 times last night, when I was trying to get some sleep.
So, then - why does anybody care about the home run derby?
The biggest home run names (Barry Bonds, Manny Ramirez, Ken Griffey Jr, Albert Pujols) don't take part in it. Watching someone who you barely know hit home runs after the other - and watching them take something like 40 passed balls while they're at it - isn't exciting. The announcers don't even call half of the home runs. It's like watching Batting Practice on the YES network.
I think half of the thrill is that the players are so into it - where else, with maybe the exception of the slam-dunk contest, do you see all the all-stars sitting around, watching (and in a few cases, taping) the contest? It's almost like a showcase of their human side - sure, Ortiz is a powerful guy at the plate, but how often do we see him hanging around, joking with friends? I actually found that watching the players generally be themselves was more of an attraction then the derby itself.
Another is the fans. Remember that guy who caught the NFL game ball after a field goal a few years back? The one who jumped off a ledge to get to it? Now multiply that by 30. And with 20 different people.
Take last night, for example. Whenever a ball - and it was more then a few - was knocked outside the stadium and into the river, crowds of people in boats would all make a wild dash to the ball - which, more often then not, involved groups of people almost fighting in water. And it happened every time, too - it didn't matter who hit the ball, really - as soon as it got in the water, everybody was going after it. And it was funny, in it's own way.
Does the derby need to be improved? Sure - you could have to vote with one person from each position, maybe (and who wouldn't want to see a pitcher in a derby?) or you could work in a pitch count (to cut down on the passed balls). But either way, the home runs themselves aren't the attraction anymore - at least to me.
That was something else, though - choosing Jason Bay. Jeez, he wasn't even able to get one home run. And my pick this year - er, Troy Glaus - only managed to get one more this time then Jason did this time (and Jason didn't even take part).
Sure, I also liked Ortiz, but even he didn't make it past the second round. And, actually, neither did I. I only know who won thanks to ESPN Radio, which managed to tell me something like 12 times last night, when I was trying to get some sleep.
So, then - why does anybody care about the home run derby?
The biggest home run names (Barry Bonds, Manny Ramirez, Ken Griffey Jr, Albert Pujols) don't take part in it. Watching someone who you barely know hit home runs after the other - and watching them take something like 40 passed balls while they're at it - isn't exciting. The announcers don't even call half of the home runs. It's like watching Batting Practice on the YES network.
I think half of the thrill is that the players are so into it - where else, with maybe the exception of the slam-dunk contest, do you see all the all-stars sitting around, watching (and in a few cases, taping) the contest? It's almost like a showcase of their human side - sure, Ortiz is a powerful guy at the plate, but how often do we see him hanging around, joking with friends? I actually found that watching the players generally be themselves was more of an attraction then the derby itself.
Another is the fans. Remember that guy who caught the NFL game ball after a field goal a few years back? The one who jumped off a ledge to get to it? Now multiply that by 30. And with 20 different people.
Take last night, for example. Whenever a ball - and it was more then a few - was knocked outside the stadium and into the river, crowds of people in boats would all make a wild dash to the ball - which, more often then not, involved groups of people almost fighting in water. And it happened every time, too - it didn't matter who hit the ball, really - as soon as it got in the water, everybody was going after it. And it was funny, in it's own way.
Does the derby need to be improved? Sure - you could have to vote with one person from each position, maybe (and who wouldn't want to see a pitcher in a derby?) or you could work in a pitch count (to cut down on the passed balls). But either way, the home runs themselves aren't the attraction anymore - at least to me.
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
The Killer
When I was writing a piece for the Educated Sports Community on why Doug Gilmour was not a hall of famer, I started thinking about him - and by extension the rest of the 1993 Maple Leafs, a team which had a polarizing effect on my childhood. It pretty much changed the way I looked at things, really, which is pretty big when you're seven years old. I never again rooted for the same teams my dad did (hence my becoming a Steelers fan when they played the Colts in the 95 AFC Championship) and I never really got over my blame, justly there or not, towards the Killer.
I was talking to a co-worker about him the other day and we both admitted to hating him - she hated him for the infamous milk commercials, I hated him for what I always felt was his me-first kind of play, the kind where he would use all the flash and sizzle he could, but never to enough success.
This was evident with the 1993 Leafs playoff run - I remember his wrap-around goal behind Cujo in the second overtime to win and I remember that he kept trying, at least in my opinion, to outdo it, or at least to duplicate it's success. I remember taking huge shifts and taking it in the Kings zone by himself, I remember him making a lazy pass to Dave Elliot that was picked off and taken in for the first Kings goal and I remember him lying on the ice after getting high-sticked by Gretzky.
Maybe I've always unfairly blamed him for the Leafs collapse, like how Bill Buckner was unfairly blamed for Game Six. I don't know - but I know that he made a mistake that led to a Kings lead that the Leafs never came back from and I know that it was Wendel Clark who scored in the clutch and made it the game it was. I remember people standing up, so much so that CBC had to go to a different camera - people all hoping for a Leafs rally to tie and go to overtime.
I remember feeling like I had been crushed like a bug when they didn't.
But I also remember the Leafs going the distance against the Red Wings when Borschevsky scored in OT. I remember Glenn Anderson scoring in game five. I remember the CBC music stings, the intermissions and the graphics. I don't remember it all, for sure, but I remember almost enough. And I remember it being the most painful playoffs I have ever experienced - every series was a battle that the Leafs just made it out of.
So maybe they ran out of gas - they played 21 playoff games that year, after all, and they were all started by a young goalie named Felix whose career was pretty much all downhill after 93. But they never got closer then they did in 93. They made it back to the Conference finals in '94, '99 and again in 2002, sure, but they never were as close as they got in 93, when they were two goals away from facing the Canadiens.
It's been many years since the Leafs last won the Cup - it'll be 40 at the start of next season - and it's almost looking like it'll be at least a few more before the Leafs ever get as close as they did 13 years ago now - and it's hard to believe that it happened so long ago, too. After all, I was just a kid who was following what everybody else was doing. Having my team win like that would have been something, sure, but it was, well, something else. It was like Game Six. It was like The Band Is On The Field. It was like every other time when your team - it doesn't matter if it was the Red Sox, the Bruins or Duke - fell apart before your very eyes and lost the big one. It's very sobering for a kid - and, in my juvenile mindset, I blamed the fan favorite.
It may not have been his fault - indeed, a better idea might have been on Dave Elliot, who was out of position and had Gretzky bank the game-winner off of him. It could have been the management, who got rid of Wendel Clark (who, it should be worth nothing, always seemed to try and be Messier, taking the team on his back in the clutch) for Mats Sundin. It could have been Potvin, who started every game in the playoffs that year. It could have been anybody - but I blamed Gilmour.
****
I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here - that I still hate Dougie, that I unfairly blame him or if I'm just trying to get rid of those bad feelings from 93 that reading about Dougie and watching the Leafs fall apart at the Gardens on Classic gave me. Maybe it's all of the above; maybe it's none. Maybe there is no point, that this is just some lame gibberish lashed together. I don't know. And I guess that I should end this before I really get into something embarrassing.
I was talking to a co-worker about him the other day and we both admitted to hating him - she hated him for the infamous milk commercials, I hated him for what I always felt was his me-first kind of play, the kind where he would use all the flash and sizzle he could, but never to enough success.
This was evident with the 1993 Leafs playoff run - I remember his wrap-around goal behind Cujo in the second overtime to win and I remember that he kept trying, at least in my opinion, to outdo it, or at least to duplicate it's success. I remember taking huge shifts and taking it in the Kings zone by himself, I remember him making a lazy pass to Dave Elliot that was picked off and taken in for the first Kings goal and I remember him lying on the ice after getting high-sticked by Gretzky.
Maybe I've always unfairly blamed him for the Leafs collapse, like how Bill Buckner was unfairly blamed for Game Six. I don't know - but I know that he made a mistake that led to a Kings lead that the Leafs never came back from and I know that it was Wendel Clark who scored in the clutch and made it the game it was. I remember people standing up, so much so that CBC had to go to a different camera - people all hoping for a Leafs rally to tie and go to overtime.
I remember feeling like I had been crushed like a bug when they didn't.
But I also remember the Leafs going the distance against the Red Wings when Borschevsky scored in OT. I remember Glenn Anderson scoring in game five. I remember the CBC music stings, the intermissions and the graphics. I don't remember it all, for sure, but I remember almost enough. And I remember it being the most painful playoffs I have ever experienced - every series was a battle that the Leafs just made it out of.
So maybe they ran out of gas - they played 21 playoff games that year, after all, and they were all started by a young goalie named Felix whose career was pretty much all downhill after 93. But they never got closer then they did in 93. They made it back to the Conference finals in '94, '99 and again in 2002, sure, but they never were as close as they got in 93, when they were two goals away from facing the Canadiens.
It's been many years since the Leafs last won the Cup - it'll be 40 at the start of next season - and it's almost looking like it'll be at least a few more before the Leafs ever get as close as they did 13 years ago now - and it's hard to believe that it happened so long ago, too. After all, I was just a kid who was following what everybody else was doing. Having my team win like that would have been something, sure, but it was, well, something else. It was like Game Six. It was like The Band Is On The Field. It was like every other time when your team - it doesn't matter if it was the Red Sox, the Bruins or Duke - fell apart before your very eyes and lost the big one. It's very sobering for a kid - and, in my juvenile mindset, I blamed the fan favorite.
It may not have been his fault - indeed, a better idea might have been on Dave Elliot, who was out of position and had Gretzky bank the game-winner off of him. It could have been the management, who got rid of Wendel Clark (who, it should be worth nothing, always seemed to try and be Messier, taking the team on his back in the clutch) for Mats Sundin. It could have been Potvin, who started every game in the playoffs that year. It could have been anybody - but I blamed Gilmour.
****
I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here - that I still hate Dougie, that I unfairly blame him or if I'm just trying to get rid of those bad feelings from 93 that reading about Dougie and watching the Leafs fall apart at the Gardens on Classic gave me. Maybe it's all of the above; maybe it's none. Maybe there is no point, that this is just some lame gibberish lashed together. I don't know. And I guess that I should end this before I really get into something embarrassing.
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Why should we want Roberts back?
He left of his own accord, you realize - and now he wants to come back. And, frankly, I don't want him.
Who is this of whom I speak? Gary Roberts: one of the biggest fan favorites up here in Toronto since the days of Dougie Gilmour, Wendel Clark and Felix "The Cat" Potvin. We all loved him, his gritty play, the fact that he was dependable and was someone that was all over the radio and the TV - and he just left one day, deciding to decline the Leafs offer, as he headed down south with Joe Nieuwendyk to sunny Florida, home of the Panthers - and a new 9 million dollar contract.
Sure, we kinda missed him (and his ads are still on the radio, sometimes, late at night) - but we got over it. We ended up with players like Jeff O'Neill, Eric Lindros and Jason Allison, who pretty much filled the same role that he did - fan favorite who doesn't get more then 50 points a season and will inevitably miss something like 20 games - and last season I didn't miss old Gary in the slightest.
But now he wants to come back - his ex-wife has moved back to Chicago (or whatever) and his daughter is still in boarding school in Toronto, so he wants to go back to where his family is - but the Leafs don't need him anymore. They have no need for a player who is:
It would be stupid to take him back at this point - the guy will not only not help the team this year, but by taking away ice time from the youth movement (as well as cap room) he'll hurt the Leafs in the future. There is no reason, not even sentimentally, for him to be on the Maple Leafs roster. And no matter how much he wants to be a Leaf again, he shouldn't be. It's as simple as that.
Who is this of whom I speak? Gary Roberts: one of the biggest fan favorites up here in Toronto since the days of Dougie Gilmour, Wendel Clark and Felix "The Cat" Potvin. We all loved him, his gritty play, the fact that he was dependable and was someone that was all over the radio and the TV - and he just left one day, deciding to decline the Leafs offer, as he headed down south with Joe Nieuwendyk to sunny Florida, home of the Panthers - and a new 9 million dollar contract.
Sure, we kinda missed him (and his ads are still on the radio, sometimes, late at night) - but we got over it. We ended up with players like Jeff O'Neill, Eric Lindros and Jason Allison, who pretty much filled the same role that he did - fan favorite who doesn't get more then 50 points a season and will inevitably miss something like 20 games - and last season I didn't miss old Gary in the slightest.
But now he wants to come back - his ex-wife has moved back to Chicago (or whatever) and his daughter is still in boarding school in Toronto, so he wants to go back to where his family is - but the Leafs don't need him anymore. They have no need for a player who is:
a) 40 years old
b) misses a good number of games a year (He only played 56 games last year)
c) Can't score, doesn't throw the body around and hogs up ice time
d) Will take up valuable cap room
It would be stupid to take him back at this point - the guy will not only not help the team this year, but by taking away ice time from the youth movement (as well as cap room) he'll hurt the Leafs in the future. There is no reason, not even sentimentally, for him to be on the Maple Leafs roster. And no matter how much he wants to be a Leaf again, he shouldn't be. It's as simple as that.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Guess who's after the Penguins?
Q: What do Mark Cuban, Dan Marino, the city of Winnipeg and the Isle of Capri have in common?
A: They're all after the Pittsburgh Penguins
For a team that's at the bottom of the league, both in standings and revenue, that's a lot of potential buyers - and that's just the ones who have stated it openly (Frank D'Angelo, for example, have been suprisingly quiet - but nobody would be surprised if tried to buy the team).
So, then... Who will end up with the team? Mario Lemieux has said that he will not sell to anybody who will move the team out of Pittsburgh, but at the same time, the Penguins don't have a new arena on the horizon and are among the least profitable teams in the league - would you blame anyone for wanting to move them?
Either way, I've taken the load to myself and crunched some non-existent numbers to bring you chances that each person/ownership group/city/etc will end up with the Penguins:
Mark Cuban - One would assume that Mark Cuban would like to move the Pens to Texas (Houston, perhaps) where there is better potential for profit. One also assumes that Cuban would prefer to have more control then any other owner would like to have - and that Cuban's odds on charging onto the ice are about 50/50 for any fight at all. But that's not what will happen: At heart, Mark is still a Pittsburgh homer and he wants to keep the team in the P-town and since his running of the Mavericks is a day-to-day thing, I would be surprised if he attends more then a handful of Pens games. Either way, he and his investment group have more then enough assets to keep the team afloat in the short term. I'll say 66%, 75% if he temps Mario with a cashier's check.
Winnipeg, Manitoba - They have the history, a new arena (the MTS Centre) and a devoted fanbase. Plus, under the new CBA Agreements (Salary Cap, Revenue Sharing) they would be able to compete with larger cities again. The one thing they don't have is, er, an ownership group. Other then the GM of the Moose once making an off-hand comment about giving Mario a call, nobody from Winnipeg has proposed moving the team there. So it's about 27% (and that's me being unconditionally generous) until someone steps up.
Quebec City, Quebec - No stadium, no ownership, not much of a fanbase in the first place (even back in the 1980s they had trouble selling tickets) means no chance at all; barely even 0%.
Isle of Capri - One of the more serious bidders, the Isle of Capri (which is not, as you may think, the island that sells pants to Raphael Nadal, but is actually a casino) has not only make repeated offers to buy the team, but to also build a new arena - if the city also allows them to put in slot machines. Will the NHL allow gambling in it's arenas? Thus far, Gary Bettman has been quiet - but I would suspect that after the recent "Operation Slap Shot" by the New Jersey Police Department scandal, the NHL will not be especially keen on the Isle getting full ownership. I'm going to say that if the city of Pittsburgh goes ahead with the Slots, then there's a 75% chance. If they don't, it's not even 0%.
So, then, who will end up with the "Team with the brightest future in hockey"?
Two words: Isiah Thomas.
When he blows his chance with the Knicks (you know this will happen) he'll be looking for the first thing that comes across - and when he hears that the Pens are for sale, he'll immediately enact this three step plan:
- Trade Sidney Crosby and a first round pick for Vincent Lecavalier, Sean Burke and Martin St. Louis
- trade a second round pick and Mark-Andre Fleury for Jean-Sabastien Aubin and the rights to Anson Carter
- Sign free agents Alexandre Daigle, Luke Richardson and Eric Lindros
A: They're all after the Pittsburgh Penguins
For a team that's at the bottom of the league, both in standings and revenue, that's a lot of potential buyers - and that's just the ones who have stated it openly (Frank D'Angelo, for example, have been suprisingly quiet - but nobody would be surprised if tried to buy the team).
So, then... Who will end up with the team? Mario Lemieux has said that he will not sell to anybody who will move the team out of Pittsburgh, but at the same time, the Penguins don't have a new arena on the horizon and are among the least profitable teams in the league - would you blame anyone for wanting to move them?
Either way, I've taken the load to myself and crunched some non-existent numbers to bring you chances that each person/ownership group/city/etc will end up with the Penguins:
Mark Cuban - One would assume that Mark Cuban would like to move the Pens to Texas (Houston, perhaps) where there is better potential for profit. One also assumes that Cuban would prefer to have more control then any other owner would like to have - and that Cuban's odds on charging onto the ice are about 50/50 for any fight at all. But that's not what will happen: At heart, Mark is still a Pittsburgh homer and he wants to keep the team in the P-town and since his running of the Mavericks is a day-to-day thing, I would be surprised if he attends more then a handful of Pens games. Either way, he and his investment group have more then enough assets to keep the team afloat in the short term. I'll say 66%, 75% if he temps Mario with a cashier's check.
Winnipeg, Manitoba - They have the history, a new arena (the MTS Centre) and a devoted fanbase. Plus, under the new CBA Agreements (Salary Cap, Revenue Sharing) they would be able to compete with larger cities again. The one thing they don't have is, er, an ownership group. Other then the GM of the Moose once making an off-hand comment about giving Mario a call, nobody from Winnipeg has proposed moving the team there. So it's about 27% (and that's me being unconditionally generous) until someone steps up.
Quebec City, Quebec - No stadium, no ownership, not much of a fanbase in the first place (even back in the 1980s they had trouble selling tickets) means no chance at all; barely even 0%.
Isle of Capri - One of the more serious bidders, the Isle of Capri (which is not, as you may think, the island that sells pants to Raphael Nadal, but is actually a casino) has not only make repeated offers to buy the team, but to also build a new arena - if the city also allows them to put in slot machines. Will the NHL allow gambling in it's arenas? Thus far, Gary Bettman has been quiet - but I would suspect that after the recent "Operation Slap Shot" by the New Jersey Police Department scandal, the NHL will not be especially keen on the Isle getting full ownership. I'm going to say that if the city of Pittsburgh goes ahead with the Slots, then there's a 75% chance. If they don't, it's not even 0%.
So, then, who will end up with the "Team with the brightest future in hockey"?
Two words: Isiah Thomas.
When he blows his chance with the Knicks (you know this will happen) he'll be looking for the first thing that comes across - and when he hears that the Pens are for sale, he'll immediately enact this three step plan:
- Trade Sidney Crosby and a first round pick for Vincent Lecavalier, Sean Burke and Martin St. Louis
- trade a second round pick and Mark-Andre Fleury for Jean-Sabastien Aubin and the rights to Anson Carter
- Sign free agents Alexandre Daigle, Luke Richardson and Eric Lindros
Sunday, June 25, 2006
The Beautiful Game, Part two: English Gretzky
David Beckham - what is there to say that hasn't been said to absurdity already? The guy is known all over the world, from places where football gods have names like Pele, Ronaldinho or George Best and in places where football gods have names like Montana, Sayers or Manning. He doesn't just kick footballs into nets, he bends them past a goalkeeper and a line of players like Pedro Martinez hitting the lower corner with a sinking fastball, only on a scale that Pedro could never do. He runs more then Bo Jackson did, he scores with a better touch then Mario Lemieux and he more dominant then Michael Jordan ever was.
He's pretty much an English Wayne Gretzky.
No other player has dominated his sport on the same level (and for as long) with maybe, maybe, the exception of Jordan. No other player scores like these two do: If they don't deke past you and tuck it in the net, then they just blow it by you before you even notice it heading past you. They're driven, talented to the nth degree and fuelled by a desire to win it all.
Granted, Beckham may not be the greatest single player ever - or even the best player in this year's World Cup. That's fine; after 1986, Gretzky was never the single best player in the playoffs - not after people like Patrick Roy, Mario Lemieux or Pavel Bure came along. But that's fine; Gretzky's job was to win, not to be the best - and he did that in spades. Which is what Beckham has done. After dominating in England, he went off to Spain - where's he's dominated once again.
They're both eponymous with their sport: Just as how Gretzky was the Oilers or the Kings, David Beckham is the face of England's soccer team. He's tied, perhaps moreso then Pele ever was, to soccer - almost to the point where his #7 is at the same level that Gretzky's #99 is to hockey.
It even goes to winning on the World Stage - Gretzky never won a Gold Medal as a player (though he won the Canada Cup in '87, which is sort of counts) just as how Beckham has never won a World Cup. As talented as these two are, they're almost on a different stage then anyone else is - and as a result, they can't play the same game that the rest of the team is.
This could be the year, though, where Beckham passes Gretzky - if he wins England the World Cup, he'll find himself on a stage where very few from any sport are...
He's pretty much an English Wayne Gretzky.
No other player has dominated his sport on the same level (and for as long) with maybe, maybe, the exception of Jordan. No other player scores like these two do: If they don't deke past you and tuck it in the net, then they just blow it by you before you even notice it heading past you. They're driven, talented to the nth degree and fuelled by a desire to win it all.
Granted, Beckham may not be the greatest single player ever - or even the best player in this year's World Cup. That's fine; after 1986, Gretzky was never the single best player in the playoffs - not after people like Patrick Roy, Mario Lemieux or Pavel Bure came along. But that's fine; Gretzky's job was to win, not to be the best - and he did that in spades. Which is what Beckham has done. After dominating in England, he went off to Spain - where's he's dominated once again.
They're both eponymous with their sport: Just as how Gretzky was the Oilers or the Kings, David Beckham is the face of England's soccer team. He's tied, perhaps moreso then Pele ever was, to soccer - almost to the point where his #7 is at the same level that Gretzky's #99 is to hockey.
It even goes to winning on the World Stage - Gretzky never won a Gold Medal as a player (though he won the Canada Cup in '87, which is sort of counts) just as how Beckham has never won a World Cup. As talented as these two are, they're almost on a different stage then anyone else is - and as a result, they can't play the same game that the rest of the team is.
This could be the year, though, where Beckham passes Gretzky - if he wins England the World Cup, he'll find himself on a stage where very few from any sport are...
The Ballard Impression
I was actually in the shower when I heard the news and I immediately refused to believe it; it was surely just some crazy draft-day rumor. But it was shortly confirmed by Gary Bettman and I quickly let loose a string of words that would make Ozzie Guillen blush. Then I became to foam at the mouth, lose all of my motor skills and passed out, smashing my head on the toilet bowl.
Okay, that last sentence never happened, but it very well could have - and the rest of that paragraph actually did. After all, the Maple Leafs just traded away Tuukka Rask, their first round draft choice from last year, the top goalie in the '05 World Juniors and the first really good goalie prospect the Leafs have had in years (since Felix Potvin, as I see it) for Andrew Raycroft? The guy who was replaced by Tim Thomas? Who, according to Hockeygoalies.org, was replaced 5 times and was involved in 21 losses? Who had a 3.71 GAA, a .879 save percentage and let in 100 goals?
That's worse then Ed Belfour's numbers last year. That's worse then Mikael Tellqvist's. That's much worse then Jean-Sebastien Aubin's. And this guy was worth trading away one of the top prospects in the league?
Really, there's two ways to look at this: One is that the Leafs didn't need Tuukka Rask; they already have a possible starter in Aubin and Justin Pogge is still a few years off, so they need a #2 goalie (and maybe someone that they can platoon with Aubin) now, so they can get Tellqvist some experience in the NHL (It worked for Aubin).
The other is that John Ferguson Junior is doing his best Harold Ballard impression, trading away a valuable young player for a has-been (Remember the Russ Courtnall trade? Or the Vincent Damphousse trade?) who'll stink up the joint - and that's not a direction I want to see the Leafs headed in.
Either way, I think that there's both some good and some bad to this: Perhaps this means that there is some truth to the rumors about Ed Belfour's contract being bought out by the Leafs (Indeed, he is no longer listed on ESPN's depth chart for the Leafs). Perhaps Raycroft will be able to bounce back to his former, pre-lockout form with sparing use as a backup. We won't have to rush Justin Pogge to the NHL before he's ready, even if a starter gets hurt - we now have one goalie (yet to be determined, however) ahead of him. And with the goalie situation now (sort of) resolved, the Leafs can now focus on the more pressing problems on the defensive squad.
Still, at the end of the day, trading away a hot prospect like Rask isn't winning Ferguson any fans. It already seems like the latest questionable move of his (Let's not forget his re-signing of Ed Belfour and Tie Domi, hiring a coach with a sub .500 record in the NHL or signing free agents like Eric Lindros or Jeff O'Neill).
Now that the trade is done and there's nothing really left to be said, I'm left with a bad taste in my mouth: for the first time in ages the Leafs had a hot goalie under 25 waiting in the wings (three hot goalies, actually, if you count Pogge and Aubin, which I'm not sure the Leafs have ever had) and he was traded away for a goalie who isn't living up to his potential. But hey, at least a move away from Boston worked for Joe Thornton, right?
Okay, that last sentence never happened, but it very well could have - and the rest of that paragraph actually did. After all, the Maple Leafs just traded away Tuukka Rask, their first round draft choice from last year, the top goalie in the '05 World Juniors and the first really good goalie prospect the Leafs have had in years (since Felix Potvin, as I see it) for Andrew Raycroft? The guy who was replaced by Tim Thomas? Who, according to Hockeygoalies.org, was replaced 5 times and was involved in 21 losses? Who had a 3.71 GAA, a .879 save percentage and let in 100 goals?
That's worse then Ed Belfour's numbers last year. That's worse then Mikael Tellqvist's. That's much worse then Jean-Sebastien Aubin's. And this guy was worth trading away one of the top prospects in the league?
Really, there's two ways to look at this: One is that the Leafs didn't need Tuukka Rask; they already have a possible starter in Aubin and Justin Pogge is still a few years off, so they need a #2 goalie (and maybe someone that they can platoon with Aubin) now, so they can get Tellqvist some experience in the NHL (It worked for Aubin).
The other is that John Ferguson Junior is doing his best Harold Ballard impression, trading away a valuable young player for a has-been (Remember the Russ Courtnall trade? Or the Vincent Damphousse trade?) who'll stink up the joint - and that's not a direction I want to see the Leafs headed in.
Either way, I think that there's both some good and some bad to this: Perhaps this means that there is some truth to the rumors about Ed Belfour's contract being bought out by the Leafs (Indeed, he is no longer listed on ESPN's depth chart for the Leafs). Perhaps Raycroft will be able to bounce back to his former, pre-lockout form with sparing use as a backup. We won't have to rush Justin Pogge to the NHL before he's ready, even if a starter gets hurt - we now have one goalie (yet to be determined, however) ahead of him. And with the goalie situation now (sort of) resolved, the Leafs can now focus on the more pressing problems on the defensive squad.
Still, at the end of the day, trading away a hot prospect like Rask isn't winning Ferguson any fans. It already seems like the latest questionable move of his (Let's not forget his re-signing of Ed Belfour and Tie Domi, hiring a coach with a sub .500 record in the NHL or signing free agents like Eric Lindros or Jeff O'Neill).
Now that the trade is done and there's nothing really left to be said, I'm left with a bad taste in my mouth: for the first time in ages the Leafs had a hot goalie under 25 waiting in the wings (three hot goalies, actually, if you count Pogge and Aubin, which I'm not sure the Leafs have ever had) and he was traded away for a goalie who isn't living up to his potential. But hey, at least a move away from Boston worked for Joe Thornton, right?
Thursday, June 22, 2006
A change for the better?
It seems that for the Knicks, the more things change, the way they stay the same. On Thursday, the New York Knicks fired head coach Larry Brown who had coached the team to a 23 - 59 record last season - and they replaced him with, er, Isiah Thomas.
That's right - the same guy who coached the Pacers to three straight first-round eliminations in the playoffs. The guy who, as GM of the Knicks, had the highest paid roster in the league and finished in the cellar for a few years now. He's the one who hired Larry last summer (not even a year ago, actually) and now he's the one who's supposed to bring the team back into contention.
Sometimes teams need to make a change at the helm to shake things up - no coach, not even Vince Lombardi or Scotty Bowman, can keep a team winning for years - but that doesn't really seem to be the case with Brown. His relationship with Thomas (and the Knicks ownership) was troubled at best. But he is a great coach, although one saddled with a team that under performs at a consistent level. If he had time, perhaps he could have turned the Knicks into a winner, like he did with the Pistons or the 76ers. Maybe not.
Either way, that's all moot now. The Knicks have not only retained one of the worst General Managers they have ever had, but they also made him coach too (or maybe he hired himself as coach. Would he have to fax himself his own resume?) of a team that's been in a pretty steady decline - and he won't be successful.
George Will once wrote that the best coaches (well, the best baseball managers - but the points the same) were the ones that lacked talent and only stuck around for a few years - unlike the Greztky's, the Bird's or the Pete Rose's of the sporting world, they had to learn the game and play it smartly to get to the majors, and as such they already have a bit of the knowledge for coaching (Hence why marginal players like Larry Brown, Billy Beane or Mike Ditka made good coaches). And I think it's the same here: Thomas was a great player, one worthy of the Hall of Fame - but he was not a great coach for the Pacers and he was not a great member of management with the Knicks. And I suspect that he will not be a great coach for the Knicks.
It could have been worse, though; He could have let Rob Babcock take over as GM.
That's right - the same guy who coached the Pacers to three straight first-round eliminations in the playoffs. The guy who, as GM of the Knicks, had the highest paid roster in the league and finished in the cellar for a few years now. He's the one who hired Larry last summer (not even a year ago, actually) and now he's the one who's supposed to bring the team back into contention.
Sometimes teams need to make a change at the helm to shake things up - no coach, not even Vince Lombardi or Scotty Bowman, can keep a team winning for years - but that doesn't really seem to be the case with Brown. His relationship with Thomas (and the Knicks ownership) was troubled at best. But he is a great coach, although one saddled with a team that under performs at a consistent level. If he had time, perhaps he could have turned the Knicks into a winner, like he did with the Pistons or the 76ers. Maybe not.
Either way, that's all moot now. The Knicks have not only retained one of the worst General Managers they have ever had, but they also made him coach too (or maybe he hired himself as coach. Would he have to fax himself his own resume?) of a team that's been in a pretty steady decline - and he won't be successful.
George Will once wrote that the best coaches (well, the best baseball managers - but the points the same) were the ones that lacked talent and only stuck around for a few years - unlike the Greztky's, the Bird's or the Pete Rose's of the sporting world, they had to learn the game and play it smartly to get to the majors, and as such they already have a bit of the knowledge for coaching (Hence why marginal players like Larry Brown, Billy Beane or Mike Ditka made good coaches). And I think it's the same here: Thomas was a great player, one worthy of the Hall of Fame - but he was not a great coach for the Pacers and he was not a great member of management with the Knicks. And I suspect that he will not be a great coach for the Knicks.
It could have been worse, though; He could have let Rob Babcock take over as GM.
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Not going quietly
The season ended not with a bang for the Dallas Mavericks, but with almost no sound at all - Jason Terry missed a 25-foot shot that would have tied the game and that was it. No loud cheering (or at least anymoreso then usual) - just the ball almost falling into the hands of the MVP Dwyane Wade, who promptly tries to throw it into the roof.
But hey - can you blame Jason for trying? What would Larry Bird have done? Or Jordan? Or you? Would you go for the 2 and hope to God you get fouled? Or would you go for the three, the shot that would make you the hero if you win (like Raja Bell against the Clippers) - but makes you look almost like a selfish scapegoat if you lose. He's not the reason the Mavericks lost.
And it doesn't really matter anyway - He could have sank that shot to tie and they still would have lost in overtime. Sure, they managed to score 92 points and come within three - but they blew a huge lead early, shot less then 40% and were never really as close as the score said they were. Sure, they had it close and they were determined to go down fighting.
And that's just what happened - they lost the fight, were never close enough and ended up going down - just not all that quietly. And maybe Mark Cuban had a point the other day when he blew a gasket and yelled at the referees - Dwyane Wade and Alonzo Mourning were able to get away with fouls late in the game that could have changed the outcome of the game.
I'm not a basketball professor; I've been really paying attention to the NBA for something like a year now - but if I can tell that someone is getting fouled and the referee isn't... Well, there's something dreadfully wrong there. But that's enough on that ugly tangent...
One thing was for certain at the end of the game tonight, though: that Dwyane Wade deserved that MVP title. He was dominant when he needed to be, he was huge in the clutch and showed composure beyond his years. Nobody - not Dirk, not Shaq, nobody else - deserved that trophy more then he did this year. And his huge free throws at the end (which could have lost the game for the Heat) only re-enforced that fact. I can't wait for his showdown against Lebron in the playoffs next year (you know it's inevitable).
But hey - can you blame Jason for trying? What would Larry Bird have done? Or Jordan? Or you? Would you go for the 2 and hope to God you get fouled? Or would you go for the three, the shot that would make you the hero if you win (like Raja Bell against the Clippers) - but makes you look almost like a selfish scapegoat if you lose. He's not the reason the Mavericks lost.
And it doesn't really matter anyway - He could have sank that shot to tie and they still would have lost in overtime. Sure, they managed to score 92 points and come within three - but they blew a huge lead early, shot less then 40% and were never really as close as the score said they were. Sure, they had it close and they were determined to go down fighting.
And that's just what happened - they lost the fight, were never close enough and ended up going down - just not all that quietly. And maybe Mark Cuban had a point the other day when he blew a gasket and yelled at the referees - Dwyane Wade and Alonzo Mourning were able to get away with fouls late in the game that could have changed the outcome of the game.
I'm not a basketball professor; I've been really paying attention to the NBA for something like a year now - but if I can tell that someone is getting fouled and the referee isn't... Well, there's something dreadfully wrong there. But that's enough on that ugly tangent...
One thing was for certain at the end of the game tonight, though: that Dwyane Wade deserved that MVP title. He was dominant when he needed to be, he was huge in the clutch and showed composure beyond his years. Nobody - not Dirk, not Shaq, nobody else - deserved that trophy more then he did this year. And his huge free throws at the end (which could have lost the game for the Heat) only re-enforced that fact. I can't wait for his showdown against Lebron in the playoffs next year (you know it's inevitable).
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Everybody's watching game seven
Okay, before I get this thing rolling, I want to make one thing clear: I have not actually watched game seven on Monday night.
But it seemed that everybody else was. After all, it was one of the biggest games all year - and I had to work. So I set my VCR to record the thing.
At about game time (8PM where I live) the supermarket I was at slowed right down. We went from fairly busy to no customers at all. Everybody stopped buying chips, apples, pop or roasted chickens almost right on the dot. You could tell it was game time and everybody was going to be watching.
At about 9pm, I finished my shift and started heading down to City Hall to help out some friends of mine - and on the way I checked my watch. One to nothing, Carolina leading after one period. I called my dad to ask what was going on. "I'd love to stay and chat," he said, "But coach's corner is on."
So I walked down by myself, the only person out on the streets and was passed by just a few cars. When I glanced in the occasional window on my way past a house - or even if I just walked past one that happened to have a window open - I could vaguely follow the score since everyone, it seemed, was watching game seven.
By the time I got to City Hall, the second period was over and Carolina was leading 2 to nothing.
Fast forward a little bit - I've finished helping my friends out and we're heading back to return the truck we're all riding in. We're all quiet and sitting pretty much in the dark listening to the radio feed of the game as it winds down when Jussi Markkanen leaves his net.
(What? Isn't it too early?)
"And Eric Stall picks up the puck..."
(No)
"Up along the boards and he passes up to Williams"
(NO)
"And... Williams scores! An empty net goal and Carolina now leads three goals to one!"
(...)
When I got back I ended up watching the 1990 Stanley Cup (Petr Klima in 3OT) on ESPN Classic. I wasn't up to watching that tape just yet.
******
Give Edmonton what they deserve - they made a damn good series out of what could - and arguably should - have been a blowout. Jussi really picked up the slack and Edmonton learned from it's mistakes in the first few games and they really started moving forward by the end of the series. They pushed a great team right to the very edge and even though they lost, they did so in seven games and by just two goals. They were able to come back from a 3-1 series deficit and beat Carolina on both at home and away and they threatened to take the series.
And yet they just didn't have enough. Maybe they burned out at home on Saturday night, running up the score on Cam Ward. Maybe they just angered Ward enough that he was going to pull out his Dryden impression and make impossible looking saves when they were needed the most. Maybe Edmonton just couldn't stand the weather. Who knows.
But make no mistake - it was Carolina's series to lose, especially after game six, and they came in shining when they needed to the most. Cam Ward deserves that Conn Smythe more then any other player does - on either team. All through the playoffs, whether against Buffalo, Montreal or Edmonton, Ward was making huge saves that kept Carolina going. He was the one who beat the Oilers on Monday night. Hell, if these playoffs deserve to be remembered for any one reason, it should be for the coming out party of Cam Ward - hopefully the start of a hall of fame career.
*****
For the new-look NHL these finals were the best thing they could have wanted. A Classic seven game series with two small market teams playing wide-open hockey. It was fast, fun to watch and never once seemed like a marathon (mostly due to the lack of a 3OT game). If they want to attract viewers, this is the way they're going to do it.
And at the end of another NHL season, I can fully say that the New NHL has been a success. Maybe not on the TV ratings (and with the games on OLN, that's not about to change), but when you finally have hockey that's fun to watch, budding superstars like Ovechkin, Crosby or Staal and the Shootout (so much better then I thought it would be) it finally seems that the NHL is back to where it should be: Making us can't wait for next year.
But it seemed that everybody else was. After all, it was one of the biggest games all year - and I had to work. So I set my VCR to record the thing.
At about game time (8PM where I live) the supermarket I was at slowed right down. We went from fairly busy to no customers at all. Everybody stopped buying chips, apples, pop or roasted chickens almost right on the dot. You could tell it was game time and everybody was going to be watching.
At about 9pm, I finished my shift and started heading down to City Hall to help out some friends of mine - and on the way I checked my watch. One to nothing, Carolina leading after one period. I called my dad to ask what was going on. "I'd love to stay and chat," he said, "But coach's corner is on."
So I walked down by myself, the only person out on the streets and was passed by just a few cars. When I glanced in the occasional window on my way past a house - or even if I just walked past one that happened to have a window open - I could vaguely follow the score since everyone, it seemed, was watching game seven.
By the time I got to City Hall, the second period was over and Carolina was leading 2 to nothing.
Fast forward a little bit - I've finished helping my friends out and we're heading back to return the truck we're all riding in. We're all quiet and sitting pretty much in the dark listening to the radio feed of the game as it winds down when Jussi Markkanen leaves his net.
(What? Isn't it too early?)
"And Eric Stall picks up the puck..."
(No)
"Up along the boards and he passes up to Williams"
(NO)
"And... Williams scores! An empty net goal and Carolina now leads three goals to one!"
(...)
When I got back I ended up watching the 1990 Stanley Cup (Petr Klima in 3OT) on ESPN Classic. I wasn't up to watching that tape just yet.
******
Give Edmonton what they deserve - they made a damn good series out of what could - and arguably should - have been a blowout. Jussi really picked up the slack and Edmonton learned from it's mistakes in the first few games and they really started moving forward by the end of the series. They pushed a great team right to the very edge and even though they lost, they did so in seven games and by just two goals. They were able to come back from a 3-1 series deficit and beat Carolina on both at home and away and they threatened to take the series.
And yet they just didn't have enough. Maybe they burned out at home on Saturday night, running up the score on Cam Ward. Maybe they just angered Ward enough that he was going to pull out his Dryden impression and make impossible looking saves when they were needed the most. Maybe Edmonton just couldn't stand the weather. Who knows.
But make no mistake - it was Carolina's series to lose, especially after game six, and they came in shining when they needed to the most. Cam Ward deserves that Conn Smythe more then any other player does - on either team. All through the playoffs, whether against Buffalo, Montreal or Edmonton, Ward was making huge saves that kept Carolina going. He was the one who beat the Oilers on Monday night. Hell, if these playoffs deserve to be remembered for any one reason, it should be for the coming out party of Cam Ward - hopefully the start of a hall of fame career.
*****
For the new-look NHL these finals were the best thing they could have wanted. A Classic seven game series with two small market teams playing wide-open hockey. It was fast, fun to watch and never once seemed like a marathon (mostly due to the lack of a 3OT game). If they want to attract viewers, this is the way they're going to do it.
And at the end of another NHL season, I can fully say that the New NHL has been a success. Maybe not on the TV ratings (and with the games on OLN, that's not about to change), but when you finally have hockey that's fun to watch, budding superstars like Ovechkin, Crosby or Staal and the Shootout (so much better then I thought it would be) it finally seems that the NHL is back to where it should be: Making us can't wait for next year.
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Roles Reversed
Going into game five, the Carolina Hurricanes were on top of the world: they had just taken a 3-1 series lead against the Edmonton Oilers on foreign ice and were headed back to the RBC Center to wrap up the series.
Going into overtime in game five they must have felt the same way - Eric Staal, who had already scored two goals, was sure to score the winner and write his way into history.
But Fernando Pisani changed all that - and sent the Oilers back to the Rextall Place for game six, where he did it again, scoring the eventual game winner in a 4-0 blowout.
Suddenly the Hurricanes aren't even in control of the series anymore, let alone riding high. Suddenly Cam Ward, who shut out the Oilers in game two, was beaten four time by Edmonton in game six - and has let in eight in the last two Oiler wins. Suddenly they're posed to be the first team since 1971 to lose the Cup on their home ice in a game seven (It was the Montreal Canadiens who won it that year - and it marked the beginning of their lodging there during the 1970s). And suddenly it looks like the Cup is Carolina's to lose. Suddenly - as we head into game seven - it looks like the roles have been reversed.
Edmonton has finally got the momentum here: they're the team that's shooting the puck and scoring, whereas Jussi Markkanen has come out as a fabulous goaltender in the last few games - even when they lost game four (2-1 final score) it was Jussi that kept it close. And now that Pisani has the scoring touch, Raffi Torres is slamming around like a pinball and the rest of the team is starting to gel, I'm starting to think that just maybe Edmonton can do it.
After all - Cam Ward is not looking quite as Ken Dryden-ish as he has been all throughout the playoffs, Eric Staal seems to be the only Hurricane that is still scoring and the Hurricanes are chaotic - they're getting sloppy penalties (Too many men on the ice) at bad times. Sure, they're heading to home ice - but question is no longer when will they win the Cup, but if they can.
Maybe they can - if Cam Ward starts playing at the same level he was before game five; if Rod Brind'Amour and the rest of the offence start scoring to supplement Eric Staal and if Mike Commodore and the rest of the defense go back to confusing the Oilers powerplay and keep the shots to a minimum for Ward. And even if they do all that, it may not be quite enough - Edmonton is looking like the latest winner in what's quickly becoming the year of the upset.
Going into overtime in game five they must have felt the same way - Eric Staal, who had already scored two goals, was sure to score the winner and write his way into history.
But Fernando Pisani changed all that - and sent the Oilers back to the Rextall Place for game six, where he did it again, scoring the eventual game winner in a 4-0 blowout.
Suddenly the Hurricanes aren't even in control of the series anymore, let alone riding high. Suddenly Cam Ward, who shut out the Oilers in game two, was beaten four time by Edmonton in game six - and has let in eight in the last two Oiler wins. Suddenly they're posed to be the first team since 1971 to lose the Cup on their home ice in a game seven (It was the Montreal Canadiens who won it that year - and it marked the beginning of their lodging there during the 1970s). And suddenly it looks like the Cup is Carolina's to lose. Suddenly - as we head into game seven - it looks like the roles have been reversed.
Edmonton has finally got the momentum here: they're the team that's shooting the puck and scoring, whereas Jussi Markkanen has come out as a fabulous goaltender in the last few games - even when they lost game four (2-1 final score) it was Jussi that kept it close. And now that Pisani has the scoring touch, Raffi Torres is slamming around like a pinball and the rest of the team is starting to gel, I'm starting to think that just maybe Edmonton can do it.
After all - Cam Ward is not looking quite as Ken Dryden-ish as he has been all throughout the playoffs, Eric Staal seems to be the only Hurricane that is still scoring and the Hurricanes are chaotic - they're getting sloppy penalties (Too many men on the ice) at bad times. Sure, they're heading to home ice - but question is no longer when will they win the Cup, but if they can.
Maybe they can - if Cam Ward starts playing at the same level he was before game five; if Rod Brind'Amour and the rest of the offence start scoring to supplement Eric Staal and if Mike Commodore and the rest of the defense go back to confusing the Oilers powerplay and keep the shots to a minimum for Ward. And even if they do all that, it may not be quite enough - Edmonton is looking like the latest winner in what's quickly becoming the year of the upset.
Friday, June 16, 2006
Greatest Game Sixes
In preparation for game six of the Stanley Cup finals, I've compiled what I feel are some of the greatest game sixes in NHL history. They're in no real order and are by no means THE list - I'm sure I missed some games, espically from before 1980. Enjoy!
2004 Stanley Cup Finals - Tampa Bay @ Calgary
In a double Overtime thriller, Martin St. Louis scores the game winning goal against the same team that let him go in 2000. Tampa easily won game seven at home to win their first Stanley Cup
1993 Western Finals - Toronto @ Los Angeles
The classic "no-hit" game, where Doug Gilmour is high-sticked by Wayne Gretzky shortly before Gretzky scores the OT winner - and the hit was missed by Kerry Fraiser and the series moves back to Toronto for game seven (where Gretzky pulls out one of his best games ever to send the Kings to the Finals for their first time)
1980 Stanley Cup Finals - Philadelphia @ New York Islanders
In 1978 the Islander were upset by Toronto in a classic seven-game series; in 1979 they were upset by the Rangers in just six. But in 1980 Bob Nystrom scores in Overtime to give the Islanders their first Stanley Cup win - the first of four in a row.
1987 Stanley Cup Finals - Edmonton @ Philadelphia
In the 1980s the Oilers were the powerhouse scoring team: Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, et al. And in game six, Ron Hextall put on the show of a lifetime (cruelly forgotten in favor of his wild slash on Nielson in game four) to send the series to seven games - But the rest of the team was unable to keep pace in the seventh game and the Oilers won their third cup in four years
1991 Smyth Finals - Calgary @ Edmonton
In the latest - and arguably best - chapter of the Battle of Alberta, Theo Fluery scores the overtime winner to send the series back to Edmonton for game seven, then slides across the ice on his knees in the celebration that every Canadian has seen something like 20 million times.
1999 Stanley Cup Finals - Dallas @ Buffalo
The infamous "No-goal" game, where Brett Hull scores over a sprawling Dominik Hasek - with his foot in the crease, which at the time would have made the goal illegal - in the third overtime, thus giving the Stars their first Stanley Cup.
1964 Stanley Cup Finals - Toronto @ Detroit
Bob Baun scores the Cup winning overtime goal from the blue line - while skating around on a broken leg (he had 'frozen' it with a bucket of ice just minutes before). Need I say more?
2004 Stanley Cup Finals - Tampa Bay @ Calgary
In a double Overtime thriller, Martin St. Louis scores the game winning goal against the same team that let him go in 2000. Tampa easily won game seven at home to win their first Stanley Cup
1993 Western Finals - Toronto @ Los Angeles
The classic "no-hit" game, where Doug Gilmour is high-sticked by Wayne Gretzky shortly before Gretzky scores the OT winner - and the hit was missed by Kerry Fraiser and the series moves back to Toronto for game seven (where Gretzky pulls out one of his best games ever to send the Kings to the Finals for their first time)
1980 Stanley Cup Finals - Philadelphia @ New York Islanders
In 1978 the Islander were upset by Toronto in a classic seven-game series; in 1979 they were upset by the Rangers in just six. But in 1980 Bob Nystrom scores in Overtime to give the Islanders their first Stanley Cup win - the first of four in a row.
1987 Stanley Cup Finals - Edmonton @ Philadelphia
In the 1980s the Oilers were the powerhouse scoring team: Gretzky, Messier, Kurri, et al. And in game six, Ron Hextall put on the show of a lifetime (cruelly forgotten in favor of his wild slash on Nielson in game four) to send the series to seven games - But the rest of the team was unable to keep pace in the seventh game and the Oilers won their third cup in four years
1991 Smyth Finals - Calgary @ Edmonton
In the latest - and arguably best - chapter of the Battle of Alberta, Theo Fluery scores the overtime winner to send the series back to Edmonton for game seven, then slides across the ice on his knees in the celebration that every Canadian has seen something like 20 million times.
1999 Stanley Cup Finals - Dallas @ Buffalo
The infamous "No-goal" game, where Brett Hull scores over a sprawling Dominik Hasek - with his foot in the crease, which at the time would have made the goal illegal - in the third overtime, thus giving the Stars their first Stanley Cup.
1964 Stanley Cup Finals - Toronto @ Detroit
Bob Baun scores the Cup winning overtime goal from the blue line - while skating around on a broken leg (he had 'frozen' it with a bucket of ice just minutes before). Need I say more?
Thursday, June 15, 2006
Surprise Ending
Last night it seemed that the perfect ending was just about to happen and we'd witness the birth of a new legend in hockey - Eric Staal, who had played superbly all throughout the playoffs, had already scored two goals on Wednesday night when the game went to overtime.
It really seemed like a great story - young kid has a hat trick in the Cup Finals, including the Stanley Cup winning OT goal. It's something that will go down in history and become a staple on ESPN Classic, at the very least.
But someone snuck in a surprise ending.
A few minutes into the extra frame, Fernando Pisani picked off a lazy pass by Cory Stillman and drove into Carolina's zone (and right by Eric Staal, too) all alone and buried a shot into the netting behind Cam Ward - and the very second that Pisani had the puck, almost everybody who was watching knew what was going to happen. This was a bigger twist then the President getting killed on 24 and it came just as far out of left field. The storybook ending that we all thought was going to happen, Staal getting the Conn Smyth; Carolina erupting and the fight over the goaltending duties in Edmonton didn't happen. And now we all have to go through this again on Saturday and maybe one final time on Monday.
Can the Oilers do it once more? Maybe - Cam Ward was showing cracks for the first time last night, letting four Edmonton goals (the most thus far this series) get past him and with the injuries to forward Doug Weight and defenceman Aaron Ward leave considerable holes for Carolina to fill.
Still, Jussi Markkanen is a bit of a wild card for the Oilers. He's been great - and is still getting better - throughout the finals, but this is the same goalie who had just 15 wins this season. And although he's improved (he's gone from letting in five goals in game two to letting in just four in the next two games. But one wonders if he can keep up this level of play against the surging Carolina offence - much like how one wonders if Cam Ward is finally starting to play his age - he let in as many goals on Wednesday as he had in the last three games combined. Granted, both goalies are good, but both also seem to be playing well above their heads and these finals could just go to whatever team has the goalie that doesn't break down first.
Still, Edmonton now has the momentum and is headed to their home arena - and I wouldn't be surprised if this series goes to a game seven.
It really seemed like a great story - young kid has a hat trick in the Cup Finals, including the Stanley Cup winning OT goal. It's something that will go down in history and become a staple on ESPN Classic, at the very least.
But someone snuck in a surprise ending.
A few minutes into the extra frame, Fernando Pisani picked off a lazy pass by Cory Stillman and drove into Carolina's zone (and right by Eric Staal, too) all alone and buried a shot into the netting behind Cam Ward - and the very second that Pisani had the puck, almost everybody who was watching knew what was going to happen. This was a bigger twist then the President getting killed on 24 and it came just as far out of left field. The storybook ending that we all thought was going to happen, Staal getting the Conn Smyth; Carolina erupting and the fight over the goaltending duties in Edmonton didn't happen. And now we all have to go through this again on Saturday and maybe one final time on Monday.
Can the Oilers do it once more? Maybe - Cam Ward was showing cracks for the first time last night, letting four Edmonton goals (the most thus far this series) get past him and with the injuries to forward Doug Weight and defenceman Aaron Ward leave considerable holes for Carolina to fill.
Still, Jussi Markkanen is a bit of a wild card for the Oilers. He's been great - and is still getting better - throughout the finals, but this is the same goalie who had just 15 wins this season. And although he's improved (he's gone from letting in five goals in game two to letting in just four in the next two games. But one wonders if he can keep up this level of play against the surging Carolina offence - much like how one wonders if Cam Ward is finally starting to play his age - he let in as many goals on Wednesday as he had in the last three games combined. Granted, both goalies are good, but both also seem to be playing well above their heads and these finals could just go to whatever team has the goalie that doesn't break down first.
Still, Edmonton now has the momentum and is headed to their home arena - and I wouldn't be surprised if this series goes to a game seven.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
The New Dominator
He wasn't supposed to dominate the series like he has - not in this, the new NHL. When they changed the rules (everything from the new equipment sizes to the new goalie crease to the elimination of the red line) it was supposed to make the goalie's life all that much more difficult. It was the NHL's equivalent of baseball moving the mound back and taking it down a few inches or football relenting and allowing the forward pass. Suddenly you expect that the offence will take over and run up the score.
But Cam Ward is dominating.
Sure, the Oilers have their problems: they don't shoot on the Powerplay, they're defensive-minded at times; their star goalie's season is done.
But Cam Ward has been dominating all throughout the postseason.
He came in as the a replacement for Martin Gerber in game 2 of the opening round against Montreal and since then he has barely left. He led the Canes back to beat the Canadiens in six, then backstopped them past a stingy New Jersey Devils (he started all five games) and past the surging Buffalo Sabres (where he started all but one of the seven games) - now he's dominating another series, as the Carolina Hurricanes have taken a stranglehold 3-1 series lead against the Edmonton Oilers.
Even in the 'old NHL' he wouldn't have been expected to do this much. He's a rookie that is playing (at worst) far, far above his head. He is, quite simply, The New Dominator.
Even in game four, when the Oilers had pulled their goalie and where pressing, shooting at every chance (even from bad angles) and playing at the Rextall Centre - the mystical venue where Gretzky, Messier, Coffey and Fuhr led the Oilers to five cups in seven years) he was the dominant player on the ice. He bounced back from letting in four goals in game one (still a win for the Canes) to letting in just three over the next three games.
Sure, it's nothing that's going to rewrite the record book: Brodeur had seven shutouts in 2003; Fuhr won 18 games in 1988 and Kipprusoff played over 1600 minutes in 2004 - but for a rookie to be playing at the level that Cam is... well, it's almost unheard of.
Sure, there have been good rookie goaltenders in the playoffs before: Ron Hextall won the Conn Smythe in 1987, for example. But there hasn't been a goalie that has constantly shut down their opponents for as long - and as completely - in over 20 years, since the 1986 playoffs: Patrick Roy.
Is Cam Ward the new Roy, or just a flash in the pan like Hextall was? Only time will tell - but if I had to choose, I'd say that Cam will be around for a long, long time.
But Cam Ward is dominating.
Sure, the Oilers have their problems: they don't shoot on the Powerplay, they're defensive-minded at times; their star goalie's season is done.
But Cam Ward has been dominating all throughout the postseason.
He came in as the a replacement for Martin Gerber in game 2 of the opening round against Montreal and since then he has barely left. He led the Canes back to beat the Canadiens in six, then backstopped them past a stingy New Jersey Devils (he started all five games) and past the surging Buffalo Sabres (where he started all but one of the seven games) - now he's dominating another series, as the Carolina Hurricanes have taken a stranglehold 3-1 series lead against the Edmonton Oilers.
Even in the 'old NHL' he wouldn't have been expected to do this much. He's a rookie that is playing (at worst) far, far above his head. He is, quite simply, The New Dominator.
Even in game four, when the Oilers had pulled their goalie and where pressing, shooting at every chance (even from bad angles) and playing at the Rextall Centre - the mystical venue where Gretzky, Messier, Coffey and Fuhr led the Oilers to five cups in seven years) he was the dominant player on the ice. He bounced back from letting in four goals in game one (still a win for the Canes) to letting in just three over the next three games.
Sure, it's nothing that's going to rewrite the record book: Brodeur had seven shutouts in 2003; Fuhr won 18 games in 1988 and Kipprusoff played over 1600 minutes in 2004 - but for a rookie to be playing at the level that Cam is... well, it's almost unheard of.
Sure, there have been good rookie goaltenders in the playoffs before: Ron Hextall won the Conn Smythe in 1987, for example. But there hasn't been a goalie that has constantly shut down their opponents for as long - and as completely - in over 20 years, since the 1986 playoffs: Patrick Roy.
Is Cam Ward the new Roy, or just a flash in the pan like Hextall was? Only time will tell - but if I had to choose, I'd say that Cam will be around for a long, long time.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Hate to see it end like this
On Monday night, I managed to just miss Dwayne Roloson blow apart his leg and have to leave the series - which is pretty much two seperate senerioes:
But after tonights game (A 5-0 shellacking by the Hurricanes) it's pretty appearent that there will be no Bill Ranford on this Oiler team, a goalie that can stand up and win the series for them.
But perhaps it's for the best - these playoffs have been the coming out party for Cam Ward, who has shown himself to be the best playoff rookie since Patrick Roy or Ken Dryden. He's not just making key saves anymore - he's making fantastic saves that are leaving everybody (myself, Ryan Smyth and Harry Neale) stunned... Just where did that glove come from?
Still, I would hate to see the playoffs end like they are: with the Oilers basically blowing an axle en route to their loss. After what's been a good (not great, but still good) postseason, I'd feel just a little ripped off if Carolina takes this series like they took game two.
- Bob Essensa, 1990: The Winnipeg Jets blow a 3-1 series lead after he is knocked out in game 4 of their quarterfinals against Edmonton
or
- Grant Fuhr, 1990: The Edmonton Oilers win their first cup after Fuhr is suspended for 40 games (and the playoffs) for substance abuse
But after tonights game (A 5-0 shellacking by the Hurricanes) it's pretty appearent that there will be no Bill Ranford on this Oiler team, a goalie that can stand up and win the series for them.
But perhaps it's for the best - these playoffs have been the coming out party for Cam Ward, who has shown himself to be the best playoff rookie since Patrick Roy or Ken Dryden. He's not just making key saves anymore - he's making fantastic saves that are leaving everybody (myself, Ryan Smyth and Harry Neale) stunned... Just where did that glove come from?
Still, I would hate to see the playoffs end like they are: with the Oilers basically blowing an axle en route to their loss. After what's been a good (not great, but still good) postseason, I'd feel just a little ripped off if Carolina takes this series like they took game two.
Friday, June 02, 2006
The Beautiful Game - part one
In just about a week - and the day after the start of the NBA Finals - it begins: The World Cup.
Every four years - the same years as the United States Mid-term elections, now that I think about it - 32 countries send their best athletes to compete in the only truly global tournament out there. Think I'm joking? Try finding a hockey team in Togo, a baseball team in Greece or an American Football team in Japan. You - as far as I care to know, anyway - won't find one, or least one that can compete with their North American counterparts, but you'll all find soccer teams that can play with the best of 'em.
Going into this 2006 World Cup, I'm not even going to try and predict anything at all: I barely know anything at all about soccer and the stuff I do know would not help me out a single bit... In fact, the only times I watch soccer are on occasional Saturday mornings, when I have nothing to watch on TV and don't feel like popping in a DVD... And although I make no claim to being a fan of the sport (Indeed, I'm about as un-fan as you get without being a Jim Rome fan) I'm still going to watch the World Cup.
And why not? It's like the Olympics - I don't now, nor have I ever, watched competitive skiing, bobsled or swimming but I watch 'em all every four years come Olympic time. It doesn't matter if you like the indivdual sports or not, at least to me, since the Olympics almost rises above mere sports: It's people who are under more pressure then most of us will ever be, trying to do their country proud.
The World Cup is the same thing: although it's more akin to March Madness then it is to the Olympics. And if watching these people working themselves almost to the bone (Remember Korea in the 2002 World Cup?) for little other then pride and glory doesn't interest you... Well, the NBA and the NHL both have their finals at about the same time - and there's always PBA Tournaments and the Arena Football championships, too.
But I know what tournament I'm going to be watching...
Every four years - the same years as the United States Mid-term elections, now that I think about it - 32 countries send their best athletes to compete in the only truly global tournament out there. Think I'm joking? Try finding a hockey team in Togo, a baseball team in Greece or an American Football team in Japan. You - as far as I care to know, anyway - won't find one, or least one that can compete with their North American counterparts, but you'll all find soccer teams that can play with the best of 'em.
Going into this 2006 World Cup, I'm not even going to try and predict anything at all: I barely know anything at all about soccer and the stuff I do know would not help me out a single bit... In fact, the only times I watch soccer are on occasional Saturday mornings, when I have nothing to watch on TV and don't feel like popping in a DVD... And although I make no claim to being a fan of the sport (Indeed, I'm about as un-fan as you get without being a Jim Rome fan) I'm still going to watch the World Cup.
And why not? It's like the Olympics - I don't now, nor have I ever, watched competitive skiing, bobsled or swimming but I watch 'em all every four years come Olympic time. It doesn't matter if you like the indivdual sports or not, at least to me, since the Olympics almost rises above mere sports: It's people who are under more pressure then most of us will ever be, trying to do their country proud.
The World Cup is the same thing: although it's more akin to March Madness then it is to the Olympics. And if watching these people working themselves almost to the bone (Remember Korea in the 2002 World Cup?) for little other then pride and glory doesn't interest you... Well, the NBA and the NHL both have their finals at about the same time - and there's always PBA Tournaments and the Arena Football championships, too.
But I know what tournament I'm going to be watching...
Thursday, June 01, 2006
"Redneck Hockey" - sign seen at Game Seven
As far as Game 7's go, it was nothing special. It didn't have huge amounts of drama attached to it (1985 Smythe Finals: Edmonton vs Calgary), it wasn't especially exciting (1985 Adams Final: Quebec vs Montreal) and it didn't have even have anything that will endure it to showings on ESPN Classic (1993 Western Semi-Finals: Toronto vs LA Kings)... But it was a good game, by modern day NHL Standards, which I guess counts for something.
And it sets up the first WHA-team NHL finals - the former Hartford Whalers (now the Carolina Hurricanes) vs the only team still playing in it's WHA home, the Edmonton Oilers. It's a series that pits two of the smallest NHL markets against each other, and will surely be the most profitable Stanley Cup to date - right?
Why couldn't the NHL have rigged the playoffs? They - if you believe the ugly rumors, anyway - rigged the Western Finals, when Kerry Fraser (under orders from the NHL brass not to have an all-Canadian Finals) overlooked a horrific Wayne Gretzky high stick; or when the Smoking Man manned the Video Replay booth in 1999 and let a goal count despite the fact that Brett Hull was clearly violating a rule that was both pointless and revoked the nest year.
Right - so why not rig it this year? They want people to get into the NHL, so why not have a team that has a following in? Do you know a Carolina fan (who isn't a bandwagon jumper)? Or someone who says "Yes, I cheer for the Edmonton Oilers and I have every year, including the ones where we sucked really bad or managed to blow playoff series' to Calgary, New York or Dallas!"
I don't. And I'm not so sure I'll watch this final series either. (Okay, that's a lie - I'll watch game four on; but if there's a NBA Finals game on, it's getting preferred treatment).
My prediction: Carolina, just because I refuse to type the words "Mike Peca, Stanley Cup MVP candidate" at any point ever again.
And it sets up the first WHA-team NHL finals - the former Hartford Whalers (now the Carolina Hurricanes) vs the only team still playing in it's WHA home, the Edmonton Oilers. It's a series that pits two of the smallest NHL markets against each other, and will surely be the most profitable Stanley Cup to date - right?
Why couldn't the NHL have rigged the playoffs? They - if you believe the ugly rumors, anyway - rigged the Western Finals, when Kerry Fraser (under orders from the NHL brass not to have an all-Canadian Finals) overlooked a horrific Wayne Gretzky high stick; or when the Smoking Man manned the Video Replay booth in 1999 and let a goal count despite the fact that Brett Hull was clearly violating a rule that was both pointless and revoked the nest year.
Right - so why not rig it this year? They want people to get into the NHL, so why not have a team that has a following in? Do you know a Carolina fan (who isn't a bandwagon jumper)? Or someone who says "Yes, I cheer for the Edmonton Oilers and I have every year, including the ones where we sucked really bad or managed to blow playoff series' to Calgary, New York or Dallas!"
I don't. And I'm not so sure I'll watch this final series either. (Okay, that's a lie - I'll watch game four on; but if there's a NBA Finals game on, it's getting preferred treatment).
My prediction: Carolina, just because I refuse to type the words "Mike Peca, Stanley Cup MVP candidate" at any point ever again.
Sunday, May 28, 2006
Welcome to Toronto
I was watching the NBA Playoffs on The Score when I found out the news that everybody has been expecting but was not really sure about: Ricky Williams has offically signed with the Argos.
On a day where Carolina won a OT thriller, where Barry Bonds hit his 715th home run and the Mavericks defence shut down the best offence in the NBA, it was signing of a running back that I'll remember the most.
Last season the Argos posted a great - 11 wins, 7 losses - record but lost to their rivals from Quebec, the Montreal Alouettes, in an epic 2nd half collapse that I witnessed first hand. It was almost sickening, really - although it's hard to feel that way when you have free tickets way up in the 500 section, with people drinking copious amounts of liquor, waving around camcorders and lit cigarettes and acting crazy, yelling at a lone Quebecber, who is all too keen to yell right back, like some 21st century Rocket Richard... Right, where was I?
Oh yes, the Ricky Williams signing.
This will be good for the Argos - they don't really need a running back as much as they do a Quarterback or a wide reciever that can catch a ball in the 4th quarter... but Ricky isn't just a running back. He's a player that instantly makes his entire defence better - from drawing extra coverage away from other players, from an explosive abilty to run with the ball and a decent - not that it'll be used much in the CFL - ability to recieve passes. He could be - okay, is - the cog that could win the Argos a Grey Cup (but the same could be said for any team, really. He could help the Hamburg Blitz win a NFL Europe championship, whatever that's called, had he signed over there).
And he's a draw. A name player. Someone who even my grandmother makes jokes about - and will pay to see. And I suspect she's not alone, either. The Argos haven't had a name like this since the days of Pinball and Flutie and the Rocket in the 90s.
******
He came; he saw; he, er, got seven yards of rushing.
So who cares? It's the Preseason, baby... if the Argo sdecided to run him like they will later in September, they risk getting him hurt - a major no-no for them and their relationship with the Miami Dolphins.
So stop caring that Ricky was barely there - let's focus on the real issue at hand; Joe "Glass Leg" Theismann's sudden love of the Argos, the team he ran away from once the Redskins made him an offer and never once looked back.
On a day where Carolina won a OT thriller, where Barry Bonds hit his 715th home run and the Mavericks defence shut down the best offence in the NBA, it was signing of a running back that I'll remember the most.
Last season the Argos posted a great - 11 wins, 7 losses - record but lost to their rivals from Quebec, the Montreal Alouettes, in an epic 2nd half collapse that I witnessed first hand. It was almost sickening, really - although it's hard to feel that way when you have free tickets way up in the 500 section, with people drinking copious amounts of liquor, waving around camcorders and lit cigarettes and acting crazy, yelling at a lone Quebecber, who is all too keen to yell right back, like some 21st century Rocket Richard... Right, where was I?
Oh yes, the Ricky Williams signing.
This will be good for the Argos - they don't really need a running back as much as they do a Quarterback or a wide reciever that can catch a ball in the 4th quarter... but Ricky isn't just a running back. He's a player that instantly makes his entire defence better - from drawing extra coverage away from other players, from an explosive abilty to run with the ball and a decent - not that it'll be used much in the CFL - ability to recieve passes. He could be - okay, is - the cog that could win the Argos a Grey Cup (but the same could be said for any team, really. He could help the Hamburg Blitz win a NFL Europe championship, whatever that's called, had he signed over there).
And he's a draw. A name player. Someone who even my grandmother makes jokes about - and will pay to see. And I suspect she's not alone, either. The Argos haven't had a name like this since the days of Pinball and Flutie and the Rocket in the 90s.
******
He came; he saw; he, er, got seven yards of rushing.
So who cares? It's the Preseason, baby... if the Argo sdecided to run him like they will later in September, they risk getting him hurt - a major no-no for them and their relationship with the Miami Dolphins.
So stop caring that Ricky was barely there - let's focus on the real issue at hand; Joe "Glass Leg" Theismann's sudden love of the Argos, the team he ran away from once the Redskins made him an offer and never once looked back.
A Game Of Inches
Golf is usually referred to as "A game of inches" - which is true, but that term could very well be applied to any sport; Football has the 4th and Inches, the strikezone in baseball is supposed to be about 18 inches wide and last night in Anaheim, it was proven that hockey is too...
Both the Mighty Ducks and the Oilers came within inches of goals - hitting posts, pads and the glass behind the net. Edmonton hit three posts by the mid-point of the third period and the Ducks winged one off the post with just under 30 seconds left to play. If either one of those had gone just one - maybe two - inches towards the net, the game would have been completely different. If the Ducks had forced overtime, perhaps they could have won the Cup... if the Oilers had gone ahead by two goals in the third period, the Ducks would have fallen flat.
But it didn't happen... Selanne, Peca, Lupil and Smyth all missed shots that would have changed the flow of the game... And we ended up with what we got: a game with excellent penalty killing (the Ducks went 1/11 on the power play) a nerveracking final five minutes and some questionable calls (no call on the hit on Giguere at the end of the first? Or when he was shoved into his net?) that really didn't ruin the game - but won't be forgotten by Ducks fans anytime soon.
The Ducks lost because of themselves. They lost three games at home this series; they couldn't produce on the powerplay and they had nobody to blame but themselves. In game four (their only win of the series) they proved that Roli can be scored on in numbers greater then four - and that the Oilers can be beaten. But they were unable to post that same momentum at all in game five, not even with six skaters in Edmonton's zone on a 6 on 3 at the end of a close game on home ice when they had the momentum in the game. They proved that hockey is a game of offence - even if you have two great goalies you can platoon, you still need to score goals, especially on the powerplay. And in the end they came close - within inches - but never close enough.
Both the Mighty Ducks and the Oilers came within inches of goals - hitting posts, pads and the glass behind the net. Edmonton hit three posts by the mid-point of the third period and the Ducks winged one off the post with just under 30 seconds left to play. If either one of those had gone just one - maybe two - inches towards the net, the game would have been completely different. If the Ducks had forced overtime, perhaps they could have won the Cup... if the Oilers had gone ahead by two goals in the third period, the Ducks would have fallen flat.
But it didn't happen... Selanne, Peca, Lupil and Smyth all missed shots that would have changed the flow of the game... And we ended up with what we got: a game with excellent penalty killing (the Ducks went 1/11 on the power play) a nerveracking final five minutes and some questionable calls (no call on the hit on Giguere at the end of the first? Or when he was shoved into his net?) that really didn't ruin the game - but won't be forgotten by Ducks fans anytime soon.
The Ducks lost because of themselves. They lost three games at home this series; they couldn't produce on the powerplay and they had nobody to blame but themselves. In game four (their only win of the series) they proved that Roli can be scored on in numbers greater then four - and that the Oilers can be beaten. But they were unable to post that same momentum at all in game five, not even with six skaters in Edmonton's zone on a 6 on 3 at the end of a close game on home ice when they had the momentum in the game. They proved that hockey is a game of offence - even if you have two great goalies you can platoon, you still need to score goals, especially on the powerplay. And in the end they came close - within inches - but never close enough.
Friday, May 26, 2006
Why should I bother?
I was arguing with a friend of mine about the Ducks/Oilers series (he claims that the referees are biased towards the Oilers, I say that maybe the Ducks should stop emulating the Flyers of 1975) when he dropped a bombshell: "But you haven't even been watching the series, have you?"
It came out of the blue, hit me between the eyes and was - worst of all - completely, 100% true. I haven't been that keen on the playoffs this season, even though I had been looking forward to it.
So this morning I asked myself why I haven't been interested - and I was able to come up with four big reasons that a NHL fan like myself just hasn't been watching the playoffs this year...
1) The presentation
First off, OLN is not doing an especially good job - I keep hearing my friend (the same one from above) complaining about how they mis-pronounce players names left, right and center -,they're simply not big enough to get anybody interested and from my (somewhat limited) exposure, I still think that maybe OLN is learning as they go along (they already dropped their old bug for the bar, for example).
And it's not just them, either: NBC, CBC and TSN's broadcasts are not much better. Bob Cole and Harry Neale are fast approaching time to consider joining Mickey Redmond and Dick Irvin in semi-retirement, whereas Pierre McGuire needs to restrain himself at times - he commonly keeps talking through breaks in play and often doesn't stop when play resumes. Yes, he knows what he's talking about, but one of these days, he's going to talk over a significant play. John Davision, Don Wittman and Chris Cuthbert are maybe the only people who are doing a good job in hockey broadcasting these days.
2) Wait, who's playing?
For Edmonton, this is the first time since 1990 that they've been in position to make it to the Cup Finals; for Anaheim it's 2003; for Carolina it's 2002; for Buffalo it's 1999. Three of these teams have never won a Cup and the one that has (Edmonton) hasn't done so in 16 years.
And they all play in small-market areas - and only Edmonton could be argued to have any kind of fanbase outside of their market.
It really seems like the Rams/Titans Superbowl a few years back: Yes, it may be a good - but who cares? When you don't have teams that people all across the continent have opinions about (Detroit Red Wings, Dallas Stars, Toronto Maple Leafs, New Jersey Devils, etc) nobody's going to care. That's why TV ratings are dropping (for the first time ever, the viewership has dropped to less then 1 million in Canada) and that's why interest is waning.
3) The Competition
Right now, speaking in terms of classic games, there has been little of note in the NHL playoffs - at most, there are maybe four or five games that will ever re-air on ESPN Classic.
But in the NBA Playoffs, we are just getting off of what has been called the "Best first two rounds of playoff basketball ever" by ESPN's Skip Bayless; for even the person who had almost no interest in basketball (such as myself), it's been completely fantastic, and I have found myself completely hooked on the NBA. In terms of quality, it's not even close: the NBA playoffs have shown to be just as, and in most cases more, exciting and fun to watch then the NHL playoffs.
4) Post-Lockout Blues
Last spring, we all found out that there is indeed life without the NHL playoffs... Yes, maybe TSN and ESPN Classic rebroadcasting old games helped, but it just seems to me that the playoffs just don't have the same "pull" that they used to - and I may just have reached the point last spring where I realized that the NHL doesn't care about me, the typical fan (after all, Toronto was the first team to remove the "Thank you fans" slogan from it's ice surface), so why should I care about it? Thanks to the Jays starting to compete with The Big Two, the NBA having a fantastic postseason, the CFL just getting ready to start (and with the Argos pursuing Ricky Williams) and the World Cup starting soon I have to make room for the NHL now - and if I can't, I'm not sure that I'll miss it.
5) Phoenix Suns / Dallas Mavericks and Detroit Pistons / Miami Heat
It's been one of, if not the, best NBA playoffs ever - and we haven't even gotten to The Finals yet, or even finished the conference championships. Why should I stop watching now?
It came out of the blue, hit me between the eyes and was - worst of all - completely, 100% true. I haven't been that keen on the playoffs this season, even though I had been looking forward to it.
So this morning I asked myself why I haven't been interested - and I was able to come up with four big reasons that a NHL fan like myself just hasn't been watching the playoffs this year...
1) The presentation
First off, OLN is not doing an especially good job - I keep hearing my friend (the same one from above) complaining about how they mis-pronounce players names left, right and center -,they're simply not big enough to get anybody interested and from my (somewhat limited) exposure, I still think that maybe OLN is learning as they go along (they already dropped their old bug for the bar, for example).
And it's not just them, either: NBC, CBC and TSN's broadcasts are not much better. Bob Cole and Harry Neale are fast approaching time to consider joining Mickey Redmond and Dick Irvin in semi-retirement, whereas Pierre McGuire needs to restrain himself at times - he commonly keeps talking through breaks in play and often doesn't stop when play resumes. Yes, he knows what he's talking about, but one of these days, he's going to talk over a significant play. John Davision, Don Wittman and Chris Cuthbert are maybe the only people who are doing a good job in hockey broadcasting these days.
2) Wait, who's playing?
For Edmonton, this is the first time since 1990 that they've been in position to make it to the Cup Finals; for Anaheim it's 2003; for Carolina it's 2002; for Buffalo it's 1999. Three of these teams have never won a Cup and the one that has (Edmonton) hasn't done so in 16 years.
And they all play in small-market areas - and only Edmonton could be argued to have any kind of fanbase outside of their market.
It really seems like the Rams/Titans Superbowl a few years back: Yes, it may be a good - but who cares? When you don't have teams that people all across the continent have opinions about (Detroit Red Wings, Dallas Stars, Toronto Maple Leafs, New Jersey Devils, etc) nobody's going to care. That's why TV ratings are dropping (for the first time ever, the viewership has dropped to less then 1 million in Canada) and that's why interest is waning.
3) The Competition
Right now, speaking in terms of classic games, there has been little of note in the NHL playoffs - at most, there are maybe four or five games that will ever re-air on ESPN Classic.
But in the NBA Playoffs, we are just getting off of what has been called the "Best first two rounds of playoff basketball ever" by ESPN's Skip Bayless; for even the person who had almost no interest in basketball (such as myself), it's been completely fantastic, and I have found myself completely hooked on the NBA. In terms of quality, it's not even close: the NBA playoffs have shown to be just as, and in most cases more, exciting and fun to watch then the NHL playoffs.
4) Post-Lockout Blues
Last spring, we all found out that there is indeed life without the NHL playoffs... Yes, maybe TSN and ESPN Classic rebroadcasting old games helped, but it just seems to me that the playoffs just don't have the same "pull" that they used to - and I may just have reached the point last spring where I realized that the NHL doesn't care about me, the typical fan (after all, Toronto was the first team to remove the "Thank you fans" slogan from it's ice surface), so why should I care about it? Thanks to the Jays starting to compete with The Big Two, the NBA having a fantastic postseason, the CFL just getting ready to start (and with the Argos pursuing Ricky Williams) and the World Cup starting soon I have to make room for the NHL now - and if I can't, I'm not sure that I'll miss it.
5) Phoenix Suns / Dallas Mavericks and Detroit Pistons / Miami Heat
It's been one of, if not the, best NBA playoffs ever - and we haven't even gotten to The Finals yet, or even finished the conference championships. Why should I stop watching now?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)