You have reached a blog I no longer update!
HOWEVER! There is no need to fret. You can still get your Vegas Dave fix elsewhere:
For my regularly updated podcast site;
http://www.davesdime.com
For my weekly NFL newsletter published every Friday night;
http://socaltrojan31.livejournal.com/
And for my weekly college football picks broadcast on youtube!
http://www.youtube.com/kingsrule41
Thanks for the support everyone! You can email me at either;
vegasdavesdime@gmail.com
OR
Socaltrojan31@aol.com
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Thursday, August 9, 2007
Eli Manning - Unstoppable!
To quote the Geico caveman, "Yes, I have a response. Uh, what?"
Seriously. Lets play word association. Ready; go!
BED: Sleep
BIRD: Fly
RED: Apple
TOM BRADY: Super Bowl
ELI MANNING: Unstoppable?!?
Wrong. We would have excepted whiny, baby, cry, sucks, choke, interception, loser...
Honestly what was Citizen thinking? I'm sitting there watching tennis and the next thing I know there is a commercial on my screen saying "Citizen watches... unstoppable... just like the people who wear it." with a dimly lit Eli Manning posing with a football.
As much as I could make this a super-long Eli-bashing thread, I'm only pointing out how stupid Citizen's advertising department was on this one.
I don't think anyone (even Giants fans) think Eli Manning comes anywhere close to exuding an "unstoppable" image. I don't know if others will feel the same way as I do, but to me the commercial comes off as a satire/joke, which makes me take it - and the product - less seriously.
I'm not saying go out and get LT or Tom Brady, because I know they might very well turn it down or demand more money. But honestly... I can think of 50 guys (pretty much any decent/good running back, and about half of the QBs in the league) that would make a much better face for the unstoppable campaign.
At the very least, could you get a guy that isn't flat out STOPPABLE?
Monday, August 6, 2007
Historic Weekend in Baseball
This weekend was a pretty amazing one for baseball fans, and even more amazing for milestone buffs. Saturday brought us two historic home runs, while Sunday brought us one of pitching's greatest feats.
Tom Glavine, New York Mets, 300th win -
Tom Glavine became only the 23rd pitcher in major league baseball history to amass 300 wins over the course of his career. The exclusive 300-win club has introduced only 8 other pitchers since 1980, and only 3 others since 1990 (Ryan 90, Clemens 03, Maddux 04).
To be clear on what constitutes a win, a pitcher must go at least 5 innings and must either have the lead when he leaves the game OR be the most recent pitcher in a game before his team adds runs to take the lead. As such, if a starter leaves a game that is tied and another pitcher comes in, the starter is no longer eligible for a decision in the game and can not win, even if the team goes on to do so. Likewise, if a starting pitcher leaves the game with his team leading and the other team comes back to tie the game, even if the starter's team still ends up winning the game, he does NOT get the win.
In the good ol' days, there was no such thing as "pitch count", which today helps make sure pitchers don't throw too many pitches and hurt their arm. There was no 4 - 5 day rest between pitching. And there was very rarely any need for relief pitching. The starting pitcher pitched often, and threw however many pitches it took to get through 9 innings. And when his team won, he got the win.
This is why 14 of the 23 members of the 300 win club recorded their 300th win before 1965 (and 10 of those were before 1930).
The game didn't really start to use relief pitchers religiously until the mid to late 1980s. Once that trend got started, pitchers were pulled from games based on pitch counts, struggles, "signs of fatigue", and anything else in favor of a fresh arm in the bullpen.
That is what makes Tom Glavine's milestone mark so incredible. Glavine has pitched 19 full seasons (not including his rookie year which was only 50 innings, or this year) without injury, and has pitched deep enough into games to be the pitcher of decision in a relief-pitcher era. Of course credit is due to the teams he played on for getting him the run support he needed for these wins, but there have been many great pitchers in this league's history, and only 23 of them are on this list.
Congrats Tom!
Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees, 500 home runs
I can't help but think back to earlier this season when the Big Hurt, Frank Thomas, cracked his 500th home run off of Carlos Silva in Minnesota and received a standing ovation from the road crowd. He became only the 21st player to ever accomplish the feat. Fans have been watching the Big Hurt since he cracked into the league at the age of 22 in 1990. Injuries plagued him over the last decade or so, but last season he returned to form with an incredible 39 home runs. This season he put the exclamation point on a great offensive career.
Fast forward to Saturday, when Alex Rodriguez smacks a ball over the left field wall after a 10-day homer-less drought to join that very same elusive home run club, becoming only the 22nd ever to reach 500.
But the atmosphere was just a tad bit different.
For A-Rod, the home run wasn't even close to being a last great hoorah. On the contrary, as the youngest player to ever accomplish the feat, no one seems to be thinking 600 or even 700 HRs for this guy - it's Barry Bond's record that everyone is speculating whether or not A-Rod can catch.
From this writer's perspective, the answer is simple: YES, he can. And will.
Bonds is at 755 as I write this, and will surpass Aaron's record sometime in the near future. After that, there really isn't much left for Bonds to prove. He may stick around an extra season or two, but I think capping him off at 800 HRs is pretty reasonable. Not saying he CAN'T surpass that (or that it would matter), but its a fair assumption to say that he won't.
Back to A-Rod. As far as work ethic is concerned and athleticism, no one in baseball can do much better than A-Rod. He is nothing but muscle, and works hard to keep it that way. With his work ethic and body type, there is no doubt in my mind that he will be able to play the game for as long as he wants to. (Long enough to break the HR record, anyone?)
NOT including extra homers he will hit this year, A-Rod will have to average 30 HRs a season over the next 10 years to amass 800, which should be enough (or very close). Considering his last 9 year's HR totals are 42, 42, 41, 52, 57, 47, 36, 48, and 35 (36 so far this year), 30 a year shouldn't be a problem. With each 40 HR season he has, he will give himself the luxury of only needing a 20 HR season elsewhere.
By this logic, baring injury or early retirement, A-Rod should have no trouble hitting 800 HRs, and should go down as the greatest power hitter of all time.
Only time will tell for sure. However easy it was, congrats on the big homer A-Rod!
Barry Bonds, San Fransisco Giants, 755th home run
Well, since you've already read enough of me for one day, I'll just save all of my thoughts and analysis on B-Bonds for when he actually hits number 756 and becomes the new home run king.
For the record, I am very, very jealous of the announcers that get to be behind that call.
I believe mine would be something like...
Bonds gets a hold of this one... its high... its deep... and its OUT OF HERE! Love him or hate him, boo him or cheer him, BARRY BONDS is now the greatest home run hitter of all time!
Instead, I'm stuck in the blogosphere. Oh well.
Congrats on 755 Barry. You'll get my take on your career and all the controversy surrounding it next time!
Tom Glavine, New York Mets, 300th win -
Tom Glavine became only the 23rd pitcher in major league baseball history to amass 300 wins over the course of his career. The exclusive 300-win club has introduced only 8 other pitchers since 1980, and only 3 others since 1990 (Ryan 90, Clemens 03, Maddux 04).
To be clear on what constitutes a win, a pitcher must go at least 5 innings and must either have the lead when he leaves the game OR be the most recent pitcher in a game before his team adds runs to take the lead. As such, if a starter leaves a game that is tied and another pitcher comes in, the starter is no longer eligible for a decision in the game and can not win, even if the team goes on to do so. Likewise, if a starting pitcher leaves the game with his team leading and the other team comes back to tie the game, even if the starter's team still ends up winning the game, he does NOT get the win.
In the good ol' days, there was no such thing as "pitch count", which today helps make sure pitchers don't throw too many pitches and hurt their arm. There was no 4 - 5 day rest between pitching. And there was very rarely any need for relief pitching. The starting pitcher pitched often, and threw however many pitches it took to get through 9 innings. And when his team won, he got the win.
This is why 14 of the 23 members of the 300 win club recorded their 300th win before 1965 (and 10 of those were before 1930).
The game didn't really start to use relief pitchers religiously until the mid to late 1980s. Once that trend got started, pitchers were pulled from games based on pitch counts, struggles, "signs of fatigue", and anything else in favor of a fresh arm in the bullpen.
That is what makes Tom Glavine's milestone mark so incredible. Glavine has pitched 19 full seasons (not including his rookie year which was only 50 innings, or this year) without injury, and has pitched deep enough into games to be the pitcher of decision in a relief-pitcher era. Of course credit is due to the teams he played on for getting him the run support he needed for these wins, but there have been many great pitchers in this league's history, and only 23 of them are on this list.
Congrats Tom!
Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees, 500 home runs
I can't help but think back to earlier this season when the Big Hurt, Frank Thomas, cracked his 500th home run off of Carlos Silva in Minnesota and received a standing ovation from the road crowd. He became only the 21st player to ever accomplish the feat. Fans have been watching the Big Hurt since he cracked into the league at the age of 22 in 1990. Injuries plagued him over the last decade or so, but last season he returned to form with an incredible 39 home runs. This season he put the exclamation point on a great offensive career.
Fast forward to Saturday, when Alex Rodriguez smacks a ball over the left field wall after a 10-day homer-less drought to join that very same elusive home run club, becoming only the 22nd ever to reach 500.
But the atmosphere was just a tad bit different.
For A-Rod, the home run wasn't even close to being a last great hoorah. On the contrary, as the youngest player to ever accomplish the feat, no one seems to be thinking 600 or even 700 HRs for this guy - it's Barry Bond's record that everyone is speculating whether or not A-Rod can catch.
From this writer's perspective, the answer is simple: YES, he can. And will.
Bonds is at 755 as I write this, and will surpass Aaron's record sometime in the near future. After that, there really isn't much left for Bonds to prove. He may stick around an extra season or two, but I think capping him off at 800 HRs is pretty reasonable. Not saying he CAN'T surpass that (or that it would matter), but its a fair assumption to say that he won't.
Back to A-Rod. As far as work ethic is concerned and athleticism, no one in baseball can do much better than A-Rod. He is nothing but muscle, and works hard to keep it that way. With his work ethic and body type, there is no doubt in my mind that he will be able to play the game for as long as he wants to. (Long enough to break the HR record, anyone?)
NOT including extra homers he will hit this year, A-Rod will have to average 30 HRs a season over the next 10 years to amass 800, which should be enough (or very close). Considering his last 9 year's HR totals are 42, 42, 41, 52, 57, 47, 36, 48, and 35 (36 so far this year), 30 a year shouldn't be a problem. With each 40 HR season he has, he will give himself the luxury of only needing a 20 HR season elsewhere.
By this logic, baring injury or early retirement, A-Rod should have no trouble hitting 800 HRs, and should go down as the greatest power hitter of all time.
Only time will tell for sure. However easy it was, congrats on the big homer A-Rod!
Barry Bonds, San Fransisco Giants, 755th home run
Well, since you've already read enough of me for one day, I'll just save all of my thoughts and analysis on B-Bonds for when he actually hits number 756 and becomes the new home run king.
For the record, I am very, very jealous of the announcers that get to be behind that call.
I believe mine would be something like...
Instead, I'm stuck in the blogosphere. Oh well.
Congrats on 755 Barry. You'll get my take on your career and all the controversy surrounding it next time!
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Burke does the right thing and lets Dustin Penner walk
Brian Burke may be a crybaby, but he's certainly a great GM as well.
Developing young talent is pivotal to any team's success. Finding great players in the draft is a difficult and important process; finding great players outside the draft is even more tricky.
The Ducks signed undrafted then-22-year-old Dustin Penner in 2004 and let him develop for a few years until calling him up for a few games in 2005-06, where he had limited ice time. He definitely showed flashes of brilliance, and earned his spot in the starting rotation last season. In his first full season, Penner excelled, scoring 29 goals and 16 assists. While this translates to only 45 points, it was an excellent rookie season. There aren't too many Ovechkins and Crosbys that just come into the league and score 100 points right off the bat. Penner also had 3 goals and 5 assists during the Ducks' Stanley Cup run. The Ducks found a strong young prospect who has nowhere to go but up, and were looking forward to reaping the benefits.
And then they had him stolen by Kevin Lowe.
The way it was SUPPOSED to go was that the Ducks were supposed to sign Penner to what players this age with this potential usually get; a 2 - 4 year deal somewhere in the 1.5 - 3 mil per year range.
Instead, Kevin Lowe swooped in and offered Penner $21.25 million over 5 years; a staggering $4.25 million a year.
This may or may not be a terrible deal for the Oilers; Penner's play will decide that. It is, however, a terrible deal for the league. It completely screws up player values, and begins the whole "If Dustin Penner is worth 4.25 a year, I'm worth 5!" arguement. I defended Lowe's right to make this move in my last article on the matter; I am not, however, stating that this is a good thing. This deal tells young players that all they need to do is have one strong season and they will be paid a ton of money for it. This may cause inflation in the league... or, it may cause Kevin Lowe to lose his job. Maybe both. Time will tell.
But the point here is that Burke made the right move. Buffalo's GM Darcy Regier had a slightly more difficult choice on his hands when Lowe went after Thomas Vanek with a 7 year, $50 million offer sheet. The choice was to build a franchise around young Vanek (who's rookie season had produced 25 goals and 23 assists, and who's sophomore season last year produced an outstanding 43 goals and 41 assists), or to take the compensation Edmonton would have to pay; 4 first round picks!
Now considering Edmonton isn't a very good team on paper, these picks could definitely be to the tune of top 10 overall picks. With 4 1st rounders, one of them is bound to become a Vanek-like player, and if 2 of the other 3 even become decent NHLers, then letting Vanek walk was the right choice. However, it is understandable to take the franchise-tag route and sign Vanek up long term; Buffalo had already lost Briere and Drury this offseason, and losing Vanek - a bright young 40 goal scorer - would have been a pretty unpopular move among those that aren't prospect-junkies like myself.
The Ducks and Brian Burke, on the other hand, didn't have a 40 goal/80 point scorer on their hands. They had a young talent that may certainly become that; but by and large he is unproven. Burke put it better than I can;
"We don't believe these salaries make sense. If I believe these salaries don't make sense and I match, then I'm just as dumb as the team that extended the offer."
It is very, very difficult to let one of your bright young prospects walk away, at any price. Overpaying to keep them - as Buffalo did - is an understandable defensive tactic.
Understandable, but not always the right thing to do. Burke had a price/value in mind, and when it was stretched past a reasonable point, he didn't fold. It was a smart move, and he will get a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pick from Edmonton in return for it.
I must say one more time that there is no reason to blame Kevin Lowe for this; he is merely working inside the system in place to try and get the players he wants. If it wasn't him this year, it would have been someone else next year, or the year after that. As we are seeing in the other major sports, young unproven players are being paid now what proven veterans signed long-term to years ago. That's just the way it is; to end my article on a cliche note -
"Don't hate the player, hate the game."
Developing young talent is pivotal to any team's success. Finding great players in the draft is a difficult and important process; finding great players outside the draft is even more tricky.
The Ducks signed undrafted then-22-year-old Dustin Penner in 2004 and let him develop for a few years until calling him up for a few games in 2005-06, where he had limited ice time. He definitely showed flashes of brilliance, and earned his spot in the starting rotation last season. In his first full season, Penner excelled, scoring 29 goals and 16 assists. While this translates to only 45 points, it was an excellent rookie season. There aren't too many Ovechkins and Crosbys that just come into the league and score 100 points right off the bat. Penner also had 3 goals and 5 assists during the Ducks' Stanley Cup run. The Ducks found a strong young prospect who has nowhere to go but up, and were looking forward to reaping the benefits.
And then they had him stolen by Kevin Lowe.
The way it was SUPPOSED to go was that the Ducks were supposed to sign Penner to what players this age with this potential usually get; a 2 - 4 year deal somewhere in the 1.5 - 3 mil per year range.
Instead, Kevin Lowe swooped in and offered Penner $21.25 million over 5 years; a staggering $4.25 million a year.
This may or may not be a terrible deal for the Oilers; Penner's play will decide that. It is, however, a terrible deal for the league. It completely screws up player values, and begins the whole "If Dustin Penner is worth 4.25 a year, I'm worth 5!" arguement. I defended Lowe's right to make this move in my last article on the matter; I am not, however, stating that this is a good thing. This deal tells young players that all they need to do is have one strong season and they will be paid a ton of money for it. This may cause inflation in the league... or, it may cause Kevin Lowe to lose his job. Maybe both. Time will tell.
But the point here is that Burke made the right move. Buffalo's GM Darcy Regier had a slightly more difficult choice on his hands when Lowe went after Thomas Vanek with a 7 year, $50 million offer sheet. The choice was to build a franchise around young Vanek (who's rookie season had produced 25 goals and 23 assists, and who's sophomore season last year produced an outstanding 43 goals and 41 assists), or to take the compensation Edmonton would have to pay; 4 first round picks!
Now considering Edmonton isn't a very good team on paper, these picks could definitely be to the tune of top 10 overall picks. With 4 1st rounders, one of them is bound to become a Vanek-like player, and if 2 of the other 3 even become decent NHLers, then letting Vanek walk was the right choice. However, it is understandable to take the franchise-tag route and sign Vanek up long term; Buffalo had already lost Briere and Drury this offseason, and losing Vanek - a bright young 40 goal scorer - would have been a pretty unpopular move among those that aren't prospect-junkies like myself.
The Ducks and Brian Burke, on the other hand, didn't have a 40 goal/80 point scorer on their hands. They had a young talent that may certainly become that; but by and large he is unproven. Burke put it better than I can;
"We don't believe these salaries make sense. If I believe these salaries don't make sense and I match, then I'm just as dumb as the team that extended the offer."
It is very, very difficult to let one of your bright young prospects walk away, at any price. Overpaying to keep them - as Buffalo did - is an understandable defensive tactic.
Understandable, but not always the right thing to do. Burke had a price/value in mind, and when it was stretched past a reasonable point, he didn't fold. It was a smart move, and he will get a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd pick from Edmonton in return for it.
I must say one more time that there is no reason to blame Kevin Lowe for this; he is merely working inside the system in place to try and get the players he wants. If it wasn't him this year, it would have been someone else next year, or the year after that. As we are seeing in the other major sports, young unproven players are being paid now what proven veterans signed long-term to years ago. That's just the way it is; to end my article on a cliche note -
"Don't hate the player, hate the game."
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Daunte Culpepper signs with the Raiders!
Yes, thats an exclamation mark, because yes, I'm excited!
A few months ago when it was made clear that Culpepper was not going to be returning with the Miami Dolphins, I told anyone who would listen that I would love to see Daunte in a Raiders jersey, and I thought that it was an absolutely perfect fit.
To quote my buddy Jonathan Roberts, "Damn man, you must really be sick about that whole ducks winning the cup thing to think Daunte would be a good Raider"
True, I was pretty sick. But I haven't been this excited by a Raider move in a while.
I'm still not in panic mode over Jamarcus Russell not having signed. I'm assuming he'll be in a Raiders jersey come opening day. So lets see here...
Who would you rather have mentoring a quarterback the size of a house with a rocket arm and mobility?
A 6-4, 215 lb career back-up with an average arm, who has 3 career rushing TDs, 1 rush over 20 yards, and 25 rushing 1st downs...
OR...
A 6-4, 265 lb career starter with a powerful arm, who has 30 rushing TDs, 13 rushes over 20 yards, and 187 rushing 1st downs?
It isn't like this is rocket science. Go check out NFL.com's draft profile on Jamarcus Russell (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2007/russell_jamarcus). If you scroll down a bit...
"Compares To: Daunte Culpepper, Miami Dolphins … Russell has a defensive lineman's build with quick feet for a player his size … He has one of the strongest arms in the game and showed better patience waiting for his targets to get open … He did a better job with his reads to improve his overall accuracy as a junior … He is a perfect prospect for a vertical passing attack … Unlike most big quarterbacks, he doesn't have a windmill-type release and can throw the ball almost the length of the field."
The Raiders just signed the guy that our number one overall pick compares closest to as a mentor! Does it get any better than that?
Plus, theres just no way that Josh McCown lasts the full season as a starter. As soon as the Raiders got off to a bad start (and is there any question about that?), fans would be pressuring the team to start Russell and look for a Vince Young-like surge. Please. Most young QBs that get tossed in there too early take a huge hit to their development process. With a proven starter now aboard, there is no reason to force Jamarcus to take the ball - unless, of course, Culpepper gets injured. Which of course isn't all that unlikely, but all indications are that he is healthy after the long layout and good to go.
Looking past all of the positives involved around Jamarcus Russell, lets not forget that in his last healthy season in 2004; just 2 seasons removed; Culpepper led the league in passing yards with 4717, and finished second in TDs (39) and QB Rating (110.9), finishing only behind Peyton Manning's 49 and 121.1.
And in 2003, Culpepper had the league's 3rd best passer rating at 96.1. He finished 9th in yardage and 6th in TDs with 25... despite missing 2 games. Kitna, Hasselback, and Brad Johnson all finished ahead of him with 26 each, and all 3 played all 16 games. Culpepper would have easily finished 3rd in the league in TDs that year.
But in a "what have you done for me lately?" league like the NFL, it is easy to forget that Culpepper was once considered one of the top QBs in the game. Am I saying he is a lock to return to form? Of course not. Even at his finest I'm not saying he's necessarily a top 5 QB. But how many teams have the luxury of having one of those? (Well, 5 I guess). I am saying that if he is healthy, and in a 1 year deal where he is playing to prove himself, there is no reason to believe that he can't put together a solid season.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Raiders will be playoff bound or anything like that. But with a young crop of players, many of which have been around only for the bulk of the last 4 seasons going 15 - 47... you can't tell me that a 7 or 8 win season wouldn't be a HUGE confidence boost and a big step in the right direction.
Daunte Culpepper gives you a better chance of making that happen, while at the same time being a perfect match for Jamarcus Russell.
Was I the only one that saw this coming?
A few months ago when it was made clear that Culpepper was not going to be returning with the Miami Dolphins, I told anyone who would listen that I would love to see Daunte in a Raiders jersey, and I thought that it was an absolutely perfect fit.
To quote my buddy Jonathan Roberts, "Damn man, you must really be sick about that whole ducks winning the cup thing to think Daunte would be a good Raider"
True, I was pretty sick. But I haven't been this excited by a Raider move in a while.
I'm still not in panic mode over Jamarcus Russell not having signed. I'm assuming he'll be in a Raiders jersey come opening day. So lets see here...
Who would you rather have mentoring a quarterback the size of a house with a rocket arm and mobility?
A 6-4, 215 lb career back-up with an average arm, who has 3 career rushing TDs, 1 rush over 20 yards, and 25 rushing 1st downs...
OR...
A 6-4, 265 lb career starter with a powerful arm, who has 30 rushing TDs, 13 rushes over 20 yards, and 187 rushing 1st downs?
It isn't like this is rocket science. Go check out NFL.com's draft profile on Jamarcus Russell (http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/2007/russell_jamarcus). If you scroll down a bit...
"Compares To: Daunte Culpepper, Miami Dolphins … Russell has a defensive lineman's build with quick feet for a player his size … He has one of the strongest arms in the game and showed better patience waiting for his targets to get open … He did a better job with his reads to improve his overall accuracy as a junior … He is a perfect prospect for a vertical passing attack … Unlike most big quarterbacks, he doesn't have a windmill-type release and can throw the ball almost the length of the field."
The Raiders just signed the guy that our number one overall pick compares closest to as a mentor! Does it get any better than that?
Plus, theres just no way that Josh McCown lasts the full season as a starter. As soon as the Raiders got off to a bad start (and is there any question about that?), fans would be pressuring the team to start Russell and look for a Vince Young-like surge. Please. Most young QBs that get tossed in there too early take a huge hit to their development process. With a proven starter now aboard, there is no reason to force Jamarcus to take the ball - unless, of course, Culpepper gets injured. Which of course isn't all that unlikely, but all indications are that he is healthy after the long layout and good to go.
Looking past all of the positives involved around Jamarcus Russell, lets not forget that in his last healthy season in 2004; just 2 seasons removed; Culpepper led the league in passing yards with 4717, and finished second in TDs (39) and QB Rating (110.9), finishing only behind Peyton Manning's 49 and 121.1.
And in 2003, Culpepper had the league's 3rd best passer rating at 96.1. He finished 9th in yardage and 6th in TDs with 25... despite missing 2 games. Kitna, Hasselback, and Brad Johnson all finished ahead of him with 26 each, and all 3 played all 16 games. Culpepper would have easily finished 3rd in the league in TDs that year.
But in a "what have you done for me lately?" league like the NFL, it is easy to forget that Culpepper was once considered one of the top QBs in the game. Am I saying he is a lock to return to form? Of course not. Even at his finest I'm not saying he's necessarily a top 5 QB. But how many teams have the luxury of having one of those? (Well, 5 I guess). I am saying that if he is healthy, and in a 1 year deal where he is playing to prove himself, there is no reason to believe that he can't put together a solid season.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying the Raiders will be playoff bound or anything like that. But with a young crop of players, many of which have been around only for the bulk of the last 4 seasons going 15 - 47... you can't tell me that a 7 or 8 win season wouldn't be a HUGE confidence boost and a big step in the right direction.
Daunte Culpepper gives you a better chance of making that happen, while at the same time being a perfect match for Jamarcus Russell.
Was I the only one that saw this coming?
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Hello, my name is Brian Burke, and I'm a big baby (and hockey business 101)
Who is Brian Burke? The Anaheim Ducks General Manager.
- Uh oh... Vegas Dave is complaining and bashing the Ducks again...
Actually, believe it or not, this has nothing to do with my hatred for the team. If this same event happened the same way with any other team, I'd write the same article about it.
Lets bring you up to date.
The Edmonton Oilers GM Kevin Lowe offered Duck's young restricted free agent Dustin Penner a 5-year, $21.25 million offer sheet.
Hmm... since I presume most of my readers aren't experts on the NHL's salary cap and free agency status, I should probably start there before I continue.
----Hockey Business 101----
Pre-lockout, the NHL had no salary cap. As such, teams in major hockey towns (think Detroit, Colorado, New York) could spend as much money as they wanted on any players they wanted. Teams in smaller markets (or penny-pinching teams like the Kings) were left far behind in the talent department. Most importantly, when a team developed a young star, they could afford to sign him when he came of age without having to worry about a salary cap.
Free Agency is quite complicated, but the jist of it is this; When a player is under a certain age (used to be 28, is now 26) and his contract runs out, he is a RESTRICTED free agent. This means that any team can offer him a contract, but the team that he is currently on (we'll call them Team A) has the chance to match any and all offers. If Team A matches the offer, they keep the player. If they decide not to match the offer, the team that signs the player must compensate Team A with draft picks. If a player is over 26 years old, they are an UNRESTRICTED free agent, and can sign wherever they please.
This is a lot of explaining just to gripe about one guy, but hey, if I can provide sports business knowledge to my loyal readers, I'm happy to do so.
Post-lockout, a salary cap was instituted to try and level the playing field. Each team could only spend $39 million to start, but due to good ticket sales league wide, the cap raised to $44 million in 06-07 and has now been raised to $50.3 million for the 07-08 season. Having a salary cap this high seems like it could cause some new monitary problems for the NHL... but thats a whole different post.
To make sure teams stay competitive, there is also a salary floor. Each team MUST spend a certain amount; in 06-07 it was $28 million and for 07-08 it will be $34.3 million.
Daniel Briere, Chris Drury, and Scott Gomez were the top 3 free agents available this year. Drury and Gomez were both signed by the Rangers to 5 year, $35.25 million and 7 year, $51.5 million deals, respectively. Briere signed an 8 year, $52 million deal with a no-trade-clause! With $50 million of cap space to use as wiggle room, teams can now afford to overpay for players they want, which...
----Hockey Business 101 End----
Is exactly what Kevin Lowe chose to do.
Penner was the second restricted free agent Lowe has gone after this season. He offered Buffalo's Thomas Vanek a 7 year, $50 million offer sheet on July 6th. Buffalo chose to match the offer and keep Vanek.
So Lowe set his sights on Dustin Penner, offering him the deal mentioned at the top of this article. Penner was making the league minimum last year, and needless to say, the Ducks were likely going to sign him for a lot less than this.
Which, naturally, is going to frustrate any GM. If you are trying to iron out a deal with your player and someone else comes along and offers him 5 times more than what you were working out, wouldn't you be angry?
Sure.
But do you have to be a baby about it?
Brian Burke set up a media conference call. Were the Ducks matching or turning down the offer? Were they announcing the retirement or return of veterans Teemu Selanne and Scott Neidermayer?
No answers. Burke just wanted to whine.
"I certainly think [the offer] could have waited until Monday. I think it was a classless move, timing-wise. I was not notified of this until Dustin Penner’s agent faxed it in. I would have thought Kevin would have notified me. I thought that was gutless."
"I have no problem with offer sheets. They’re part of the CBA [Collective Bargaining Agreement]. But in my opinion, Edmonton has offered a mostly inflated salary for a player, and I think it’s an act of desperation for a general manager who is fighting to keep his job."
Classless? Gutless? Desperation?
This is the business. I understand that it sucks, and I'm not saying this rate isn't inflated, but the market is what it is. If someone wants to overpay a young player they want on their team and can afford to do so, why shouldn't they?
Classless because he didn't wait til Monday? Teams have a week to decide. Who cares when he made the offer? It may be "inconvinient" for Burke, but the world doesn't revolve around his schedule.
Gutless because he didn't call Burke directly? Like he'd be any less upset hearing the news directly? Going to the player instead of the GM isn't that crazy.
Burke being upset doesn't bother me. It also wouldn't bother me if he answered questions regarding how upset he was.
Calling a media conference to attack another GM personally for just doing his job? That bothers me.
Boo-hoo. Compensation is in the form of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick. The team can live without Dustin Penner. Take the picks, punch your pillow, and shut up.
- Uh oh... Vegas Dave is complaining and bashing the Ducks again...
Actually, believe it or not, this has nothing to do with my hatred for the team. If this same event happened the same way with any other team, I'd write the same article about it.
Lets bring you up to date.
The Edmonton Oilers GM Kevin Lowe offered Duck's young restricted free agent Dustin Penner a 5-year, $21.25 million offer sheet.
Hmm... since I presume most of my readers aren't experts on the NHL's salary cap and free agency status, I should probably start there before I continue.
----Hockey Business 101----
Pre-lockout, the NHL had no salary cap. As such, teams in major hockey towns (think Detroit, Colorado, New York) could spend as much money as they wanted on any players they wanted. Teams in smaller markets (or penny-pinching teams like the Kings) were left far behind in the talent department. Most importantly, when a team developed a young star, they could afford to sign him when he came of age without having to worry about a salary cap.
Free Agency is quite complicated, but the jist of it is this; When a player is under a certain age (used to be 28, is now 26) and his contract runs out, he is a RESTRICTED free agent. This means that any team can offer him a contract, but the team that he is currently on (we'll call them Team A) has the chance to match any and all offers. If Team A matches the offer, they keep the player. If they decide not to match the offer, the team that signs the player must compensate Team A with draft picks. If a player is over 26 years old, they are an UNRESTRICTED free agent, and can sign wherever they please.
This is a lot of explaining just to gripe about one guy, but hey, if I can provide sports business knowledge to my loyal readers, I'm happy to do so.
Post-lockout, a salary cap was instituted to try and level the playing field. Each team could only spend $39 million to start, but due to good ticket sales league wide, the cap raised to $44 million in 06-07 and has now been raised to $50.3 million for the 07-08 season. Having a salary cap this high seems like it could cause some new monitary problems for the NHL... but thats a whole different post.
To make sure teams stay competitive, there is also a salary floor. Each team MUST spend a certain amount; in 06-07 it was $28 million and for 07-08 it will be $34.3 million.
Daniel Briere, Chris Drury, and Scott Gomez were the top 3 free agents available this year. Drury and Gomez were both signed by the Rangers to 5 year, $35.25 million and 7 year, $51.5 million deals, respectively. Briere signed an 8 year, $52 million deal with a no-trade-clause! With $50 million of cap space to use as wiggle room, teams can now afford to overpay for players they want, which...
----Hockey Business 101 End----
Is exactly what Kevin Lowe chose to do.
Penner was the second restricted free agent Lowe has gone after this season. He offered Buffalo's Thomas Vanek a 7 year, $50 million offer sheet on July 6th. Buffalo chose to match the offer and keep Vanek.
So Lowe set his sights on Dustin Penner, offering him the deal mentioned at the top of this article. Penner was making the league minimum last year, and needless to say, the Ducks were likely going to sign him for a lot less than this.
Which, naturally, is going to frustrate any GM. If you are trying to iron out a deal with your player and someone else comes along and offers him 5 times more than what you were working out, wouldn't you be angry?
Sure.
But do you have to be a baby about it?
Brian Burke set up a media conference call. Were the Ducks matching or turning down the offer? Were they announcing the retirement or return of veterans Teemu Selanne and Scott Neidermayer?
No answers. Burke just wanted to whine.
"I certainly think [the offer] could have waited until Monday. I think it was a classless move, timing-wise. I was not notified of this until Dustin Penner’s agent faxed it in. I would have thought Kevin would have notified me. I thought that was gutless."
"I have no problem with offer sheets. They’re part of the CBA [Collective Bargaining Agreement]. But in my opinion, Edmonton has offered a mostly inflated salary for a player, and I think it’s an act of desperation for a general manager who is fighting to keep his job."
Classless? Gutless? Desperation?
This is the business. I understand that it sucks, and I'm not saying this rate isn't inflated, but the market is what it is. If someone wants to overpay a young player they want on their team and can afford to do so, why shouldn't they?
Classless because he didn't wait til Monday? Teams have a week to decide. Who cares when he made the offer? It may be "inconvinient" for Burke, but the world doesn't revolve around his schedule.
Gutless because he didn't call Burke directly? Like he'd be any less upset hearing the news directly? Going to the player instead of the GM isn't that crazy.
Burke being upset doesn't bother me. It also wouldn't bother me if he answered questions regarding how upset he was.
Calling a media conference to attack another GM personally for just doing his job? That bothers me.
Boo-hoo. Compensation is in the form of a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick. The team can live without Dustin Penner. Take the picks, punch your pillow, and shut up.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Bob Costas; Journalist, Announcer, Award Winner, Midget Man
What?
Oh Barry. As if the steriod scandal doesn't get him enough press, he has to open his mouth.
I'll get into how I feel about him as a baseball player, steroids, his place in history, and all of that good stuff when he actually breaks the record.
But for now, I just needed a laugh.
In response to Bob Costas running a special on Barry Bonds and his well-documented "alleged" steroid use, Bonds declared that Costas is a "little midget man who knows (nothing) about baseball".
I suppose when you stand (a listed) 6'2", 236 pounds, a measly 5'6" and a half pound man could be considered a "midget".
"As anyone can see, I'm 5'6" and a half and a strapping 150, and unlike some people, I came by all of it naturally" Costas retorted.
Perhaps as funny as the original statement, Bonds response to Costas's retort was "How do you know [he came by it naturally]?... I don't care."
Calling one of the sports' most recognizable and distinguished journalists a "midget man" is certainly not going to make you any more popular, but then, do you think Barry Bonds cares?
While this little episode is pretty good, my all-time favorite Bonds quote comes from when he addressed the grand jury:
"Bonds said that Anderson had so little money that he 'lives in his car half the time.' Asked by a juror why he didn't buy 'a mansion' for his trainer, Bonds answered:
'One, I'm black, and I'm keeping my money. And there's not too many rich black people in this world. There's more wealthy Asian people and Caucasian and white. And I ain't giving my money up.'"
Caucasian and white?
What a guy.
I mean after all, what is life without friendship?
"This is our fraternity, and if we don't stand for each other, who is going to stand for us? And I will stand by my fellow player, regardless of anything."
Oh Barry.
Oh Barry. As if the steriod scandal doesn't get him enough press, he has to open his mouth.
I'll get into how I feel about him as a baseball player, steroids, his place in history, and all of that good stuff when he actually breaks the record.
But for now, I just needed a laugh.
In response to Bob Costas running a special on Barry Bonds and his well-documented "alleged" steroid use, Bonds declared that Costas is a "little midget man who knows (nothing) about baseball".
I suppose when you stand (a listed) 6'2", 236 pounds, a measly 5'6" and a half pound man could be considered a "midget".
"As anyone can see, I'm 5'6" and a half and a strapping 150, and unlike some people, I came by all of it naturally" Costas retorted.
Perhaps as funny as the original statement, Bonds response to Costas's retort was "How do you know [he came by it naturally]?... I don't care."
Calling one of the sports' most recognizable and distinguished journalists a "midget man" is certainly not going to make you any more popular, but then, do you think Barry Bonds cares?
While this little episode is pretty good, my all-time favorite Bonds quote comes from when he addressed the grand jury:
"Bonds said that Anderson had so little money that he 'lives in his car half the time.' Asked by a juror why he didn't buy 'a mansion' for his trainer, Bonds answered:
'One, I'm black, and I'm keeping my money. And there's not too many rich black people in this world. There's more wealthy Asian people and Caucasian and white. And I ain't giving my money up.'"
Caucasian and white?
What a guy.
I mean after all, what is life without friendship?
"This is our fraternity, and if we don't stand for each other, who is going to stand for us? And I will stand by my fellow player, regardless of anything."
Oh Barry.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Quick Fantasy Baseball Update
If you play fantasy baseball, and you need saves go grab JAMIE WALKER. Baltimore' Chris Ray just hit the DL and will be done until at least mid August, likely the rest of the season, with an elbow injury. Walker is a solid replacement that will help your team down the stretch and will be available in 99% of leagues if you go get him now.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Anyone else irritated with ESPN?
ESPN.
The Worldwide Leader in Sports.
Why don't they instead call themselves "The Worldwide Leader in Sports That Matter"?
This isn't even just about lack of hockey coverage anymore. Between "Who's Now" and the ESPYs, it is becoming more and more clear that if you aren't the NBA, NFL, MLB, NCAA, and maybe NASCAR, you really don't matter.
Unless, of course, its poker, which has far surpassed hockey, tennis, golf, softball, bowling, extreme sports, etc etc. (And this isn't a knock on poker either. I love the game. But should highlights of it be on ESPN classic more often than great tennis and golf championships?)
Funny that a network that used to get by by showing only minor sports in the 1970's has now all but completely left them to die. Remember when MTV used to show music videos?
Keyshawn Johnson is going to tell me that Sidney Crosby isn't "now".
The league's top scorer as a 19 year old is simply worth a chuckle, because his sport is a joke.
Roger Federer winning a title gets as much time on Sportscenter as one of the 15 baseball games that were played that day gets.
Any golfer not named Tiger Woods that wins a major is lucky to even get that much time.
Its one thing if ESPN only had so much time to work with, so could only go through the major sports. But with ESPN 2, ESPNews, and so many more, you can't tell me it would be that difficult to get decent coverage of more sports than just football, baseball, and basketball?
And they don't even cover those fairly! Big market teams get long breakdowns and post game interviews while "un-important" teams just get a highlight or two. Assuming you aren't a Yankee or Red Sox fan, how do you feel about the coverage your team gets?
Just imagine for me if it were your favorite sport being completely neglected and ignored.
By the WORLDWIDE LEADER IN SPORTS.
How would you feel?
The Worldwide Leader in Sports.
Why don't they instead call themselves "The Worldwide Leader in Sports That Matter"?
This isn't even just about lack of hockey coverage anymore. Between "Who's Now" and the ESPYs, it is becoming more and more clear that if you aren't the NBA, NFL, MLB, NCAA, and maybe NASCAR, you really don't matter.
Unless, of course, its poker, which has far surpassed hockey, tennis, golf, softball, bowling, extreme sports, etc etc. (And this isn't a knock on poker either. I love the game. But should highlights of it be on ESPN classic more often than great tennis and golf championships?)
Funny that a network that used to get by by showing only minor sports in the 1970's has now all but completely left them to die. Remember when MTV used to show music videos?
Keyshawn Johnson is going to tell me that Sidney Crosby isn't "now".
The league's top scorer as a 19 year old is simply worth a chuckle, because his sport is a joke.
Roger Federer winning a title gets as much time on Sportscenter as one of the 15 baseball games that were played that day gets.
Any golfer not named Tiger Woods that wins a major is lucky to even get that much time.
Its one thing if ESPN only had so much time to work with, so could only go through the major sports. But with ESPN 2, ESPNews, and so many more, you can't tell me it would be that difficult to get decent coverage of more sports than just football, baseball, and basketball?
And they don't even cover those fairly! Big market teams get long breakdowns and post game interviews while "un-important" teams just get a highlight or two. Assuming you aren't a Yankee or Red Sox fan, how do you feel about the coverage your team gets?
Just imagine for me if it were your favorite sport being completely neglected and ignored.
By the WORLDWIDE LEADER IN SPORTS.
How would you feel?
Monday, July 16, 2007
I'm Back
Batteries recharged... I'm good to go again.
Thanks to my regular readers for staying patient and for returning. I appreciate it a lot.
As anyone could have quite easily guessed, my break was induced by the Ducks winning the Stanley Cup. I still haven't gotten over it, and I never will. It hurts me to my very core. And I'm not exaggerating in the least bit; the Ducks' cup win has seriously made me re-consider my passion for sports, what I want to do with my life, just about everything.
"It's just a game!" "You shouldn't take it so personally!"
Yeah. Right. Got all that.
The problem is, you don't get to decide what makes you tick. You can spin certain events in your life by looking at them in a positive or negative way; but if something hits you directly, there really isn't much you can do about it.
I frequent on http://www.letsgokings.com, a message board created by a Kings fan, run by Kings fans, for Kings fans. Thousands upon thousands of fans visit this site daily and talk Kings hockey. I never saw myself as a message board person (and still don't), but this is one site that is simply an exception.
Fans of all ages gather on this site, teenagers, but mainly fans in their 20's, 30's, 40's, and above. Most of these people have been dedicated Kings fans for their entire lives... many have been for the entire 40 years the Kings have been in the league. These thousands of fans only scratch the surface; how many more tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands are huge Kings fans but don't hang out on the message board?
I won't get into why I hate Ducks fans again... I know I've been a broken record. If you want a recap, click here. I'm sure I come off as whiny and unprofessional, but so be it.
It just isn't fair. I know "Life's not fair". But sports to me has always been an escape from the bitterness of real life for me. Despite the fact that my teams have never won, the point is that when I was having an awful day, I could turn on a game and get lost in it. That's been shaken a little, because my dream-like sports world has been shaken back to reality.
It doesn't matter that there are many more Kings fans than Ducks fans. It doesn't matter that there are many bandwagon Ducks fans. It doesn't matter that Cleveland Browns fans never won a Super Bowl, but THEIR TEAM moved to Baltimore and won a championship there. It doesn't matter that millions of people have lived their entire lives as Cubs fan (or until recently, Red Sox fans) and millions have died lifelong Cub fans without ever seeing a championship. It doesn't matter that loyal fans of every major sport team in Philadelphia and Cleveland haven't won a damn thing in years. The list goes on and on and on.
It doesn't matter how much you care or how much you love. All that matters is who's got the best team, and who's got the bounces on their side.
And that hurts me. It is hard to come to terms with the fact that the thing that brings you the most joy in this world; pro sports; is just like everything else. People get screwed. People get heartbroken. Great fans live and die unrewarded and bandwagon fans celebrate 20 championships.
But with each terrible loss comes a great win. With each dream shattered comes a dream come true. That is the beauty of sports... and its also its dark underbelly.
So I return to you a bit broken, a bit bitter, a bit disillusioned, but 100% still in love with the world of sports.
I hope you'll take me back with open arms.
Thanks to my regular readers for staying patient and for returning. I appreciate it a lot.
As anyone could have quite easily guessed, my break was induced by the Ducks winning the Stanley Cup. I still haven't gotten over it, and I never will. It hurts me to my very core. And I'm not exaggerating in the least bit; the Ducks' cup win has seriously made me re-consider my passion for sports, what I want to do with my life, just about everything.
"It's just a game!" "You shouldn't take it so personally!"
Yeah. Right. Got all that.
The problem is, you don't get to decide what makes you tick. You can spin certain events in your life by looking at them in a positive or negative way; but if something hits you directly, there really isn't much you can do about it.
I frequent on http://www.letsgokings.com, a message board created by a Kings fan, run by Kings fans, for Kings fans. Thousands upon thousands of fans visit this site daily and talk Kings hockey. I never saw myself as a message board person (and still don't), but this is one site that is simply an exception.
Fans of all ages gather on this site, teenagers, but mainly fans in their 20's, 30's, 40's, and above. Most of these people have been dedicated Kings fans for their entire lives... many have been for the entire 40 years the Kings have been in the league. These thousands of fans only scratch the surface; how many more tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands are huge Kings fans but don't hang out on the message board?
I won't get into why I hate Ducks fans again... I know I've been a broken record. If you want a recap, click here. I'm sure I come off as whiny and unprofessional, but so be it.
It just isn't fair. I know "Life's not fair". But sports to me has always been an escape from the bitterness of real life for me. Despite the fact that my teams have never won, the point is that when I was having an awful day, I could turn on a game and get lost in it. That's been shaken a little, because my dream-like sports world has been shaken back to reality.
It doesn't matter that there are many more Kings fans than Ducks fans. It doesn't matter that there are many bandwagon Ducks fans. It doesn't matter that Cleveland Browns fans never won a Super Bowl, but THEIR TEAM moved to Baltimore and won a championship there. It doesn't matter that millions of people have lived their entire lives as Cubs fan (or until recently, Red Sox fans) and millions have died lifelong Cub fans without ever seeing a championship. It doesn't matter that loyal fans of every major sport team in Philadelphia and Cleveland haven't won a damn thing in years. The list goes on and on and on.
It doesn't matter how much you care or how much you love. All that matters is who's got the best team, and who's got the bounces on their side.
And that hurts me. It is hard to come to terms with the fact that the thing that brings you the most joy in this world; pro sports; is just like everything else. People get screwed. People get heartbroken. Great fans live and die unrewarded and bandwagon fans celebrate 20 championships.
But with each terrible loss comes a great win. With each dream shattered comes a dream come true. That is the beauty of sports... and its also its dark underbelly.
So I return to you a bit broken, a bit bitter, a bit disillusioned, but 100% still in love with the world of sports.
I hope you'll take me back with open arms.
Friday, June 8, 2007
Taking A Break
I'll be temporarily shutting down this blog until further notice.
Thank you for reading.
(I'm hoping the break won't be for too long... it may only be a week or two. I just need some time to recharge the batteries. Thank you for your patience and please continue to check in periodically).
Thank you for reading.
(I'm hoping the break won't be for too long... it may only be a week or two. I just need some time to recharge the batteries. Thank you for your patience and please continue to check in periodically).
Monday, June 4, 2007
Ask Me Anything! (#4)
This one from my mother:
I have a question. How do you think Pronger should be punished for that cheap shot against McAmmond? I think he should be suspended the rest of the series, seems his one game suspension didn't teach him any lessons! And what was the ref watching? No penalty???
Pronger was suspended one game for the elbow... one game more than I thought he'd get, and one game less than he deserved.
Suspending him for the rest of the series as you suggested would have been a fair move, considering it is his second offense in 2 weeks, but there were two reasons why this wasn't happening. 1) Pronger is a star in the league and thus will receive a bit of special treatment, 2) It is the Stanley Cup Finals. Every single call, review, goal, hit, etc. is magnified tenfold in the finals... no one wants to suspend a guy for the entire series unless he virtually commits murder.
Granted, looking back at #1, if Chris Pronger were say Sean O'Donnell, he'd probably not be seeing another game this series. But he isn't. He's Chris Pronger. It was for this reason that I thought they might just let him get away with it. (Best argument I heard was that McAmmond is short so Pronger meant to hit him legitimately and accidentally elbowed him. Please.)
In my opinion, and that of most unbiased hockey fans (not saying I'm unbiased, but I can be when I have to be...), Chris Pronger should have received a 2-game suspension. One game for the elbow itself, and one game for the fact that this just happened in the last series and he obviously didn't learn anything or care.
To see the elbow, check it out here.
Funny, the more I watch it, the more I have to agree with your series-long suspension.
I have a question. How do you think Pronger should be punished for that cheap shot against McAmmond? I think he should be suspended the rest of the series, seems his one game suspension didn't teach him any lessons! And what was the ref watching? No penalty???
Pronger was suspended one game for the elbow... one game more than I thought he'd get, and one game less than he deserved.
Suspending him for the rest of the series as you suggested would have been a fair move, considering it is his second offense in 2 weeks, but there were two reasons why this wasn't happening. 1) Pronger is a star in the league and thus will receive a bit of special treatment, 2) It is the Stanley Cup Finals. Every single call, review, goal, hit, etc. is magnified tenfold in the finals... no one wants to suspend a guy for the entire series unless he virtually commits murder.
Granted, looking back at #1, if Chris Pronger were say Sean O'Donnell, he'd probably not be seeing another game this series. But he isn't. He's Chris Pronger. It was for this reason that I thought they might just let him get away with it. (Best argument I heard was that McAmmond is short so Pronger meant to hit him legitimately and accidentally elbowed him. Please.)
In my opinion, and that of most unbiased hockey fans (not saying I'm unbiased, but I can be when I have to be...), Chris Pronger should have received a 2-game suspension. One game for the elbow itself, and one game for the fact that this just happened in the last series and he obviously didn't learn anything or care.
To see the elbow, check it out here.
Funny, the more I watch it, the more I have to agree with your series-long suspension.
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Hockey Cards For Sale!
In honor of the Stanley Cup Finals, I've put a bunch of my jersey and autographed cards of the stars of both teams on e-bay.
Even if you aren't interested in buying them, you should still check them out. They are pretty cool.
Also, you guys should ask me something! I've been dying to answer more questions. I have fun with that segment.
The Cards
Even if you aren't interested in buying them, you should still check them out. They are pretty cool.
Also, you guys should ask me something! I've been dying to answer more questions. I have fun with that segment.
The Cards
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Ducks physical play overwhelms Senators through two games
For those of you wondering how the Ducks have managed to jump out to a 2 - 0 lead and put a choke hold on the series on an Ottawa team that has been nothing but dominant throughout these entire playoffs, it is quite simple...
I alluded to it in my first "Ask Me Anything"...
"The biggest knock on [the Sens] has been their physical game, which I didn't think was addressed this off-season or at the trade deadline. Also, goaltending was a question mark; could Ray Emery really outshine the likes of Marty Brodeur or Ryan Miller? The answer to that question has been an emphatic yes. As for physicality, they don't need it against similar-styled Buffalo and Pittsburgh. And as for the Devils series, in that instance, skill trumped toughness. And don't get me wrong... they haven't been playing like a bunch of pansies. They simply have had the good fortune of being able to play to their strengths."
"I will very likely be picking against the Senators in the finals. As I said above, I don't think they have really been physically tested yet; and both the Ducks and the Wings play a very tough physical brand of hockey. And, unlike the Devils, they also have the talent to back it up. Not to mention, the team in the West will have the more experienced goaltender AND home ice advantage. I will certainly be rooting for the Senators - I hate the Wings and Ducks AND I have money riding on a Sens' victory; but I will likely pick against them."
Of course I ended up deciding that the Senators would find a way to overcome this... but so far, it appears that they can not.
With the exception of only Andy McDonald and Teemu Selanne (who try, but aren't that tough), every single player on the Anaheim Ducks hits HARD. And OFTEN. Every single shift these guys take, they hit the guy who has the puck hard, the guy who just passed the puck hard, and sometimes they just take the penalty and hit someone else hard when they aren't even allowed to. And the Ducks are unapologetic and ruthless about it; even after taking a penalty, they'll come right back out and hit some more.
This type of physicality completely changes the game. After getting hit so many times, players - even if only subconsciously, but often consciously as well - begin paying more attention to where opposing team's players are instead of their own in fear and anticipation of getting hit. They also begin second guessing moves that will make them end up in the corners where they will take a punishment.
In a day where the new NHL promotes finesse, it is pretty impressive to see such an overwhelmingly powerful team go out there and crush bodies the way they do.
JS Giguere hasn't been tested much, but when they've needed him to make the big saves, he's been right on the spot. Ray Emery played a decent game 1 and an excellent game 2; but he can't actually go out there and score, can he?
The only chance the Senators have is taking advantage of the home ice rules in Ottawa. Of course having the fans on their side will be helpful enough; but in the NHL, the home team gets to make the last line change. In other words, they can see who the other team has out there and then choose the match-up they like best. This worked to a charm for Anaheim, who completely neutralized the Senators' usually dominant line of Spezza Heatley Alfredsson by putting their best defensive offensive line out there; Rob Niedermayer, Samuel Pahlsson, and Travis Moen with BOTH of their Norris trophy winning defensemen Chris Pronger and Scott Niedermayer. No one in the league is scoring against that line.
If the Sens can find favorable match-ups for their top line instead of always facing those defensive juggernauts, they might have a chance. Granted, as soon as the puck is dropped the Ducks can make a line change; but its those precious few seconds that could be the difference.
And they have to be, or the Ottawa Senators will be staying in Ottawa for good.
I alluded to it in my first "Ask Me Anything"...
"The biggest knock on [the Sens] has been their physical game, which I didn't think was addressed this off-season or at the trade deadline. Also, goaltending was a question mark; could Ray Emery really outshine the likes of Marty Brodeur or Ryan Miller? The answer to that question has been an emphatic yes. As for physicality, they don't need it against similar-styled Buffalo and Pittsburgh. And as for the Devils series, in that instance, skill trumped toughness. And don't get me wrong... they haven't been playing like a bunch of pansies. They simply have had the good fortune of being able to play to their strengths."
"I will very likely be picking against the Senators in the finals. As I said above, I don't think they have really been physically tested yet; and both the Ducks and the Wings play a very tough physical brand of hockey. And, unlike the Devils, they also have the talent to back it up. Not to mention, the team in the West will have the more experienced goaltender AND home ice advantage. I will certainly be rooting for the Senators - I hate the Wings and Ducks AND I have money riding on a Sens' victory; but I will likely pick against them."
Of course I ended up deciding that the Senators would find a way to overcome this... but so far, it appears that they can not.
With the exception of only Andy McDonald and Teemu Selanne (who try, but aren't that tough), every single player on the Anaheim Ducks hits HARD. And OFTEN. Every single shift these guys take, they hit the guy who has the puck hard, the guy who just passed the puck hard, and sometimes they just take the penalty and hit someone else hard when they aren't even allowed to. And the Ducks are unapologetic and ruthless about it; even after taking a penalty, they'll come right back out and hit some more.
This type of physicality completely changes the game. After getting hit so many times, players - even if only subconsciously, but often consciously as well - begin paying more attention to where opposing team's players are instead of their own in fear and anticipation of getting hit. They also begin second guessing moves that will make them end up in the corners where they will take a punishment.
In a day where the new NHL promotes finesse, it is pretty impressive to see such an overwhelmingly powerful team go out there and crush bodies the way they do.
JS Giguere hasn't been tested much, but when they've needed him to make the big saves, he's been right on the spot. Ray Emery played a decent game 1 and an excellent game 2; but he can't actually go out there and score, can he?
The only chance the Senators have is taking advantage of the home ice rules in Ottawa. Of course having the fans on their side will be helpful enough; but in the NHL, the home team gets to make the last line change. In other words, they can see who the other team has out there and then choose the match-up they like best. This worked to a charm for Anaheim, who completely neutralized the Senators' usually dominant line of Spezza Heatley Alfredsson by putting their best defensive offensive line out there; Rob Niedermayer, Samuel Pahlsson, and Travis Moen with BOTH of their Norris trophy winning defensemen Chris Pronger and Scott Niedermayer. No one in the league is scoring against that line.
If the Sens can find favorable match-ups for their top line instead of always facing those defensive juggernauts, they might have a chance. Granted, as soon as the puck is dropped the Ducks can make a line change; but its those precious few seconds that could be the difference.
And they have to be, or the Ottawa Senators will be staying in Ottawa for good.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Senators and Ducks Fans; and why Maple Leafs and Kings fans hate them.
In 1992, the NHL expanded by two teams, adding the Tampa Bay Lightning... and the Ottawa Senators.
This gave the province of Ontario its second team; something that the city of Ottawa was thrilled about, but most Ontario locals were not. The Toronto Maple Leafs had been Ontario's only professional hockey team since 1927 (Though the Maple Leaf franchise under various names had been in Ontario since 1917).
The Maple Leafs won 11 Stanley Cups in the years between 1927 - 1967. This was in an NHL comprised of only 6 teams, which are now known as the "Original 6"; the Montreal Canadians, Boston Bruins, Detroit Red Wings, Chicago Blackhawks, New York Rangers, and the Maple Leafs.
In the season of 1967 - 1968, the league expanded, adding 6 new teams to double the NHL's size to 12 teams.
Since the expansion;
Montreal Canadians: 10 Stanley Cups, 12 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Detroit Red Wings: 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Boston Bruins: 2 Stanley Cups, 4 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
New York Rangers: 1 Stanley Cup, 1 Stanley Cup Final Appearance
Chicago Blackhawks: 0 Stanley Cups, 1 Stanley Cup Final Appearance
Toronto Maple Leafs: 0 Stanley Cups, 0 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Bitter much lately?
The Senators, who have only been in the league for 15 years, are now 4 wins away from winning a Stanley Cup. Where is the justice? Why should the fans that jumped ship from the province's original team, the Toronto Maple Leafs, be awarded with a Cup?
One year after the Ottawa Senators joined the league in the 1992 expansion, two more teams joined the league for the 1993 season; the Florida Panthers and the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim.
The Anaheim Ducks joined the Los Angeles Kings as the only other team in Southern California. Remember that 1967-68 expansion that made the NHL into 12 teams? One of those teams was the Los Angeles Kings. They were Southern California's only team for 26 years, and the entire state's only team for 24 (the San Jose Sharks joined the league in 1991).
(Editors Note: Southern California's only team for 26 years, the Kings were not in fact California's only team. I looked over the Oakland Seals, who joined the league in the 1967-68 season. They were renamed the California Golden Seals in the 1970-71 season, and eventually moved off to Cleveland after playing their final season in California in 1975-76. They never won a playoff series. Thank you to the reader who brought the Seals to my attention.)
Despite having a history rich with some of the greats to ever play the game, including the greatest of them all in Wayne Gretzky, the Kings were never able to win a Stanley Cup. In fact, they made only one Stanley Cup Finals appearance in the 1992 - 93 season; the season preceding the Ducks entering the league. They lost in 5 games to the Montreal Canadians.
It took the Ducks only 9 years to do what it had taken the Kings 25 years to do; make it to the Finals. The Ducks ended up losing the series, but they did win 3 games in the series, tripling the amount of wins the Kings have in Stanley Cup Finals history.
The Ducks, who have only been in the league for 14 years, are now 3 wins away from winning a Stanley Cup. Where is the justice? Why should the fans that jumped ship from Southern California's original team, the Los Angeles Kings, be awarded with a Cup?
Feeling the déjà vu?
Lets get one thing straight. The Ottawa Senators and the Anaheim Ducks deserve to be in the finals. Not only have their players worked as hard or harder than every other teams' in the league, but they also have been brilliantly run franchises. Ottawa has done an excellent job drafting and keeping talent, while the Ducks have not only done a good job drafting but have also made a number of brilliant transactions over the past few years to solidify them as legitimate contenders.
This isn't about the teams. Any Maple Leaf or Kings fan could tell you that they know the Senators and Ducks are great teams. It's the damn fans. Yes, many of them simply lived in the city; both Anaheim and Ottawa are large cities and of course hockey fans are going to be excited to get their own team. Then again, does a team being built in your front yard give you a great opportunity to abandon your current team just because a new one is closer? And what about all the bandwagon fans that simply hopped on for the ride when these teams started becoming playoff forces. You can't deny their presence. They make up a great deal of these young franchises fans. Why are Maple Leafs and Kings fans being punished for their loyalty, while Ducks and Senators fans are being rewarded for their infidelity?
Leafs and Kings fans have every right to be upset, in my opinion. But who should be angrier?
Kings fans. By a MILE.
"Why, Dave? Because you are a Kings fan?"
Actually, no. Two important reasons.
1) THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS HAVE HAD THEIR NAMES INGRAINED INTO THE STANLEY CUP 11 TIMES!
I understand that that isn't much condolence to those fans born in the last 40 years. Think it matters to me that the Raiders were great, once upon a time? We want results in the here and now. But whether it happened long ago or just yesterday, the Stanley Cup is eternal; once a team's name and roster is ingrained into the Cup, it stays there forever. The Maple Leafs have won the cup more than all other teams in the league with the exception of only the Montreal Canadians. No one can ever take those championships away from you. Even if the Sens go on to win 12 Stanley Cups before the Maple Leafs win another; and trust me, I know how bad that would hurt; it would never erase their legacy. A legacy that the Kings don't have. If the Ducks win the Stanley Cup first, it could be the Kings to win the next 3; but no one could ever take away the fact that the Ducks won a Stanley Cup before the Los Angeles Kings.
2) OTTAWA FANS ACTUALLY LOVE HOCKEY AND SUPPORT THEIR TEAM!
Here is an article on how little Southern California cares about the Ducks heading to the Stanley Cup Finals; Ducks aren't hot topic in town.
Meanwhile, celebrities and thousands of fans show up for this pep rally in Ottawa.
As if those two articles were needed to point out the obvious. But lets take a look at the numbers.
Team / League Standing /Fan Attendance Ranking / Average Attendance per home game:
2000-2001 Season:
Leafs / 14th / 5th / 19,257
Sens / 4th / 10th / 17,793
Kings / 13th / 17th / 16,057
Ducks / 26th / 28th / 13,499
2001-2002 Season:
Leafs / 3rd / 4th / 19,279
Sens / 14th / 15th / 16,919
Kings / 12th / 16th / 16,756
Ducks / 24th / 30th / 12,002
2002-2003 Season:
Leafs / 9th / 4th / 19,240
Kings / 18th / 12th / 17,569
Sens / 1st / 14th / 17,198
Ducks / 11th / 26th / 13,988 <----Year Ducks go to Stanley Cup Finals 2003-2004 Season:
Leafs / 5th / 3th / 19,376
Kings / 20th / 11th / 17,855
Sens / 6th / 13th / 17,758
Ducks / 22nd / 23rd / 14,987
2005-2006 Season:
Sens / 2nd / 5th / 19,474
Leafs / 18th / 6th / 19,408
Kings / 20th / 12th / 17,840
Ducks / 12th / 24th / 15,106 <---- Ducks go to Conference Finals 2006-2007 Season:
Leafs / 18th / 4th / 19,487
Sens / 9th / 5th / 19,372
Kings / 28th / 16th / 16,859
Ducks / 4th / 20th / 16,363
Despite the fact that the Kings were in a season long struggle to be the second worst team in hockey, Kings fans still paid MORE money to see MORE games than Ducks fans, who were in a season long struggle to be the BEST IN THE NHL!
Want to bring up the fact that the stadium the Ducks play in is smaller and can't seat as many people as Staples and the Canadian stadiums? Then you'll love the stat that going by percentage of seats sold, the Ducks ranked 17th in the league this year with a 95.3%. The team with the 4th best record in the league.
Want to bring up the fact that the culture is different, and that Canada loves hockey much more than the US does? Of course it does. That doesn't take away from the fact that subtracting the 6 Canadian teams from the totals, there were still 22, 24, 20, 17, 18, and this year 14 US cities that had more fans go out and support their team, INCLUDING Los Angeles, San Jose, Dallas, and Tampa Bay... really icy climates, perfect for hockey I'm sure.
Face it: Ducks fans suck, and they don't deserve the satisfaction of seeing their team win the cup.
I've been asked, Dave, what about the true fans? The ones that were there from the beginning? Kids raised Ducks fans, etc? And truthfully, there are a few of those types of fans out there that deserve to see their team win as much as anyone. Then again, I know what its like to be thrown in with a big fan stereotype; again, I bring up that I'm a Raiders fan. That means I must be a criminal? A gangster? A freak? Violent? Of course not. But that doesn't mean I can't acknowledge that they exist.
I'm a fan of my teams because I'm loyal to those teams, not to the other fans that support them. And I can almost guarantee you that when you come across one of those rare, true Duck fans, that didn't abandon the Kings and actually loves and supports the team, they'll agree with everything I've said about 95% of their fellow fans.
Go Senators. For the love of hockey, go Senators.
This gave the province of Ontario its second team; something that the city of Ottawa was thrilled about, but most Ontario locals were not. The Toronto Maple Leafs had been Ontario's only professional hockey team since 1927 (Though the Maple Leaf franchise under various names had been in Ontario since 1917).
The Maple Leafs won 11 Stanley Cups in the years between 1927 - 1967. This was in an NHL comprised of only 6 teams, which are now known as the "Original 6"; the Montreal Canadians, Boston Bruins, Detroit Red Wings, Chicago Blackhawks, New York Rangers, and the Maple Leafs.
In the season of 1967 - 1968, the league expanded, adding 6 new teams to double the NHL's size to 12 teams.
Since the expansion;
Montreal Canadians: 10 Stanley Cups, 12 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Detroit Red Wings: 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Boston Bruins: 2 Stanley Cups, 4 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
New York Rangers: 1 Stanley Cup, 1 Stanley Cup Final Appearance
Chicago Blackhawks: 0 Stanley Cups, 1 Stanley Cup Final Appearance
Toronto Maple Leafs: 0 Stanley Cups, 0 Stanley Cup Final Appearances
Bitter much lately?
The Senators, who have only been in the league for 15 years, are now 4 wins away from winning a Stanley Cup. Where is the justice? Why should the fans that jumped ship from the province's original team, the Toronto Maple Leafs, be awarded with a Cup?
One year after the Ottawa Senators joined the league in the 1992 expansion, two more teams joined the league for the 1993 season; the Florida Panthers and the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim.
The Anaheim Ducks joined the Los Angeles Kings as the only other team in Southern California. Remember that 1967-68 expansion that made the NHL into 12 teams? One of those teams was the Los Angeles Kings. They were Southern California's only team for 26 years, and the entire state's only team for 24 (the San Jose Sharks joined the league in 1991).
Despite having a history rich with some of the greats to ever play the game, including the greatest of them all in Wayne Gretzky, the Kings were never able to win a Stanley Cup. In fact, they made only one Stanley Cup Finals appearance in the 1992 - 93 season; the season preceding the Ducks entering the league. They lost in 5 games to the Montreal Canadians.
It took the Ducks only 9 years to do what it had taken the Kings 25 years to do; make it to the Finals. The Ducks ended up losing the series, but they did win 3 games in the series, tripling the amount of wins the Kings have in Stanley Cup Finals history.
The Ducks, who have only been in the league for 14 years, are now 3 wins away from winning a Stanley Cup. Where is the justice? Why should the fans that jumped ship from Southern California's original team, the Los Angeles Kings, be awarded with a Cup?
Feeling the déjà vu?
Lets get one thing straight. The Ottawa Senators and the Anaheim Ducks deserve to be in the finals. Not only have their players worked as hard or harder than every other teams' in the league, but they also have been brilliantly run franchises. Ottawa has done an excellent job drafting and keeping talent, while the Ducks have not only done a good job drafting but have also made a number of brilliant transactions over the past few years to solidify them as legitimate contenders.
This isn't about the teams. Any Maple Leaf or Kings fan could tell you that they know the Senators and Ducks are great teams. It's the damn fans. Yes, many of them simply lived in the city; both Anaheim and Ottawa are large cities and of course hockey fans are going to be excited to get their own team. Then again, does a team being built in your front yard give you a great opportunity to abandon your current team just because a new one is closer? And what about all the bandwagon fans that simply hopped on for the ride when these teams started becoming playoff forces. You can't deny their presence. They make up a great deal of these young franchises fans. Why are Maple Leafs and Kings fans being punished for their loyalty, while Ducks and Senators fans are being rewarded for their infidelity?
Leafs and Kings fans have every right to be upset, in my opinion. But who should be angrier?
Kings fans. By a MILE.
"Why, Dave? Because you are a Kings fan?"
Actually, no. Two important reasons.
1) THE TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS HAVE HAD THEIR NAMES INGRAINED INTO THE STANLEY CUP 11 TIMES!
I understand that that isn't much condolence to those fans born in the last 40 years. Think it matters to me that the Raiders were great, once upon a time? We want results in the here and now. But whether it happened long ago or just yesterday, the Stanley Cup is eternal; once a team's name and roster is ingrained into the Cup, it stays there forever. The Maple Leafs have won the cup more than all other teams in the league with the exception of only the Montreal Canadians. No one can ever take those championships away from you. Even if the Sens go on to win 12 Stanley Cups before the Maple Leafs win another; and trust me, I know how bad that would hurt; it would never erase their legacy. A legacy that the Kings don't have. If the Ducks win the Stanley Cup first, it could be the Kings to win the next 3; but no one could ever take away the fact that the Ducks won a Stanley Cup before the Los Angeles Kings.
2) OTTAWA FANS ACTUALLY LOVE HOCKEY AND SUPPORT THEIR TEAM!
Here is an article on how little Southern California cares about the Ducks heading to the Stanley Cup Finals; Ducks aren't hot topic in town.
Meanwhile, celebrities and thousands of fans show up for this pep rally in Ottawa.
As if those two articles were needed to point out the obvious. But lets take a look at the numbers.
Team / League Standing /Fan Attendance Ranking / Average Attendance per home game:
2000-2001 Season:
Leafs / 14th / 5th / 19,257
Sens / 4th / 10th / 17,793
Kings / 13th / 17th / 16,057
Ducks / 26th / 28th / 13,499
2001-2002 Season:
Leafs / 3rd / 4th / 19,279
Sens / 14th / 15th / 16,919
Kings / 12th / 16th / 16,756
Ducks / 24th / 30th / 12,002
2002-2003 Season:
Leafs / 9th / 4th / 19,240
Kings / 18th / 12th / 17,569
Sens / 1st / 14th / 17,198
Ducks / 11th / 26th / 13,988 <----Year Ducks go to Stanley Cup Finals 2003-2004 Season:
Leafs / 5th / 3th / 19,376
Kings / 20th / 11th / 17,855
Sens / 6th / 13th / 17,758
Ducks / 22nd / 23rd / 14,987
2005-2006 Season:
Sens / 2nd / 5th / 19,474
Leafs / 18th / 6th / 19,408
Kings / 20th / 12th / 17,840
Ducks / 12th / 24th / 15,106 <---- Ducks go to Conference Finals 2006-2007 Season:
Leafs / 18th / 4th / 19,487
Sens / 9th / 5th / 19,372
Kings / 28th / 16th / 16,859
Ducks / 4th / 20th / 16,363
Despite the fact that the Kings were in a season long struggle to be the second worst team in hockey, Kings fans still paid MORE money to see MORE games than Ducks fans, who were in a season long struggle to be the BEST IN THE NHL!
Want to bring up the fact that the stadium the Ducks play in is smaller and can't seat as many people as Staples and the Canadian stadiums? Then you'll love the stat that going by percentage of seats sold, the Ducks ranked 17th in the league this year with a 95.3%. The team with the 4th best record in the league.
Want to bring up the fact that the culture is different, and that Canada loves hockey much more than the US does? Of course it does. That doesn't take away from the fact that subtracting the 6 Canadian teams from the totals, there were still 22, 24, 20, 17, 18, and this year 14 US cities that had more fans go out and support their team, INCLUDING Los Angeles, San Jose, Dallas, and Tampa Bay... really icy climates, perfect for hockey I'm sure.
Face it: Ducks fans suck, and they don't deserve the satisfaction of seeing their team win the cup.
I've been asked, Dave, what about the true fans? The ones that were there from the beginning? Kids raised Ducks fans, etc? And truthfully, there are a few of those types of fans out there that deserve to see their team win as much as anyone. Then again, I know what its like to be thrown in with a big fan stereotype; again, I bring up that I'm a Raiders fan. That means I must be a criminal? A gangster? A freak? Violent? Of course not. But that doesn't mean I can't acknowledge that they exist.
I'm a fan of my teams because I'm loyal to those teams, not to the other fans that support them. And I can almost guarantee you that when you come across one of those rare, true Duck fans, that didn't abandon the Kings and actually loves and supports the team, they'll agree with everything I've said about 95% of their fellow fans.
Go Senators. For the love of hockey, go Senators.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
The Stanley Cup Finals - Ask Me Anything! (#3)
My apologies to all of my readers that check here regularly. I usually update 4 - 5 times a week, and its inexcusable I've left it un-updated this long. I've had a very long and busy week. Besides that, some of the things I want to blog on needed to be postponed for a little while;
Jason Giambi - waiting for something to actually HAPPEN before I give an opinion on it... so far its been all talk.
NBA Draft Lottery - look for this one in the very near future... but I'm still "cranky" over the Robert Horry incident, and am not in the best mood to blog about the NBA.
And, of course, the Cup Finals.
The reason I have waited is due to the fact that the Finals don't actually start until Monday, and I think it is extremely important to soak in as much information (and, more importantly, press) as possible. Take for example Sean Avery running his mouth about how his Rangers were going to "hurt" the Buffalo Sabres. Smart. Give the best team in the league MORE motivation to beat you. And they did take both of the first 2 games at home.
Both of these teams have been classy (this certainly isn't the media equivalent of MEDIA WEEK in the NFL before the Super Bowl, especially here in the states, is it?) and haven't said anything disrespectful about their opponents. Both teams are confident, and they both should be. They've played some good hockey to get here.
I did stumble on a good article a few days ago. It tells the story of a young 3-year-old who died of a rare form of childhood cancer called neuroblastoma. The boy was a die-hard Senators fan, who got to meet the team and became an inspiration to them. He defied the odds and stayed alive long enough to watch his favorite team beat the Sabres and make it to the Stanley Cup Finals. It is a great story and its ashame its only being heard in Canada. Here is the link; make sure you have some Kleenex handy; Elgin's Story.
Thus the importance of researching the media. Is this little boy's story going to be the sole deciding factor in this series? Of course not. But when two excellent, very evenly matched hockey teams meet up and something as simple as who wants it more is the deciding factor... you think Elgin's picture won't be hanging high in the Senator's locker room? As if the already-more-dedicated-to-their-team-than-Duck's-fans Senator fans needed MORE to cheer about to give their team that extra little edge at home?
Here goes nothing.
#2 Anaheim Ducks (48 - 20 - 14 regular season, 12 - 4 post season) VS.
#4 Ottawa Senators (48 - 25 - 9 regular season, 12 - 3 post season)
Two 48 win teams, two teams that haven't won a Stanley Cup (well, not the modern day Senators who were born in 1992; a team of the same name won it 80 years ago), two teams that have worked extremely hard to get to this point and deserve to have their names ingrained into Lord Stanley's Cup.
And yet, only one can.
You really can't go wrong picking either of the teams in this series. The Ducks have two of the top 3 defensemen in the league in Chris Pronger and Scott Neidermayer, as well as a goaltender who is nothing short of spectacular come playoff time in Jean-Sebastion Giguere. The Senators have 3 of the top 4 point scorers in these playoffs in Dany Heatley, Jason Spezza, and Daniel Alfredsson; all the more impressive considering the fact that they've played less games than the Sabres, Ducks, and Wings have (The Wings' Nick Lidstrom (18 pts) knocks Alfredsson's 17 points out of the top 3 with his teammates by just one point... but Lidstrom played in 3 more games).
So, OTTAWA OFFENSE VS. DUCK DEFENSE? Not quite. As catchy as that may be, the Ducks also happened to finish 9th overall during the regular season in scoring (Sens 2nd)... and the Senators happened to finish 10th overall in goals against (Ducks 7th). So neither of these teams has a real weakness, which makes this series so darn interesting.
You all know how much I hate the Ducks, but let me make perfectly clear that I know what a good hockey team they are, and I'm looking really hard for any reason to pick them, because I don't want it to be an emotional pick. You'll notice that I've said the Ducks are the best in the West... and that they are. But I thought Buffalo was the best team in the league, and they were handled quite easily by the Ottawa Senators. Think back a few years ago to the Pittsburgh Steelers team that came in on a wild card and tore through everyone en route to a Super Bowl victory. There were "better" teams, but not in those playoffs their weren't. The Senators give me a similar vibe. They've beaten the best young team in the game (Pittsburgh), the best goaltender in the game (Brodeur), and the best team in the game (Buffalo), all handily. Why shouldn't they beat the best team in the West?
But then, the Ducks could make similar claims. They beat the best defensive team in the game (Minnesota), the "best goaltender in the game" (Luongo), and the "best team in the game" (Detroit). After all, Luongo and Brodeur are the clear 1 and 2 but it is tough to decide between them. And Detroit finished with the same point total as Buffalo: 113 (albeit in a much easier division).
Stats make things even more complexing. The Senator's defense/goaltending has been better than the Ducks, allowing only 2.12 goals per game to the Ducks 2.17. However, the Sens run is not only better by .05; they've faced the leagues' 1st, 4th, and 27th ranked offenses (Average 10.67) to the Ducks' 10th, 19th, and 22nd (Average 17).
And needless to say the Sens have scored plenty more goals than the Ducks (3.2 goals a game to the Ducks 2.62), but they have done so against the league's 4th, 13th, and 14th ranked defenses. The Ducks meanwhile have had to face the league's 1st, 2nd, and 5th ranked defenses. Maybe they are due for an offensive explosion?
Dizzy yet? Lets just move on to the questions;
Mom asked;
Do you think it actually comes down to goal tending on which team will win the cup?
Well, yes and no. You can't win a series on goaltending alone (ask Roberto Luongo and Marty Turco about that), but you can certainly lose a series on goaltending alone. If a goalie is on, he gives his team an excellent chance to win. And, if he isn't, he gives them an excellent chance to lose. All eyes are on Ottawa goaltender Ray Emery; JS Giguere has proven he's the real deal in the playoffs. Emery has done an excellent job not only stopping high octane offenses in Buffalo (1st overall) and Pittsburgh (4th overall), but also out-dueling some of the game's great young goalies in Ryan Miller and Marc-Andre Fluery, as well as the games best, Martin Brodeur. I don't think he'll have to be perfect at all to win the cup; but he'll need to be good. And, depending on how JS plays, he just might have to be great.
Can you tell me the records of Ottawa and the Ducks?
They are listed above. Of course, you could have just gone to any major sports web page for that info... but I appreciate you coming here instead!
Do the east coast teams play better, or harder games than the west?
That's debatable. In the old days, the style of play was much rougher in the East than it was in the West. Nowadays, I'd say its evened out a bit. The big difference between the conferences this year was parity (which means strength from top to bottom in sports). The East was more evenly matched up; 13 of their 15 teams finished with 75 or more points, compared to only 10 of 15 in the West. But the West had 7 teams with 100 or more points to the East's 4. What it really comes down to in the new NHL isn't conferences so much as it is divisions. Teams play 8 games against each of their division rivals. So if you are in a weak division with only 2 strong teams, you can easily rise to the top. If you are in a tough division with either 5 competitive teams OR 3 excellent teams, your road will be difficult. Good hockey is good hockey and bad hockey is bad hockey, East, West, North, and South.
Josh asked; Anaheim Ducks or Ottawa Senators - WHO YA GOT?
And isn't that the point of this whole post? As you can read, you can't go wrong with either of these teams. They are both great. And they both don't know each other, so you really don't know what to expect. Since the stats didn't solve it, I have to look no further than the quality of hockey played. In my opinion, as good as the Ducks are, they have looked vulnerable, and they have been outplayed by inferior teams, and they have barely found ways to win games that they didn't deserve to win. Honestly, as much as I like the Sabres, they were the same way this year. Not the Senators. They have played flat out excellent hockey in all 15 games they have played; all 3 of their losses were 1 goal games. These are two evenly matched teams. Flip a coin and pick a side. The side with the Senators logo on it, however, is a little shinier. And I make this pick as a hockey analyst, not a bitter Kings fan.
OTTAWA IN 6.
Jason Giambi - waiting for something to actually HAPPEN before I give an opinion on it... so far its been all talk.
NBA Draft Lottery - look for this one in the very near future... but I'm still "cranky" over the Robert Horry incident, and am not in the best mood to blog about the NBA.
And, of course, the Cup Finals.
The reason I have waited is due to the fact that the Finals don't actually start until Monday, and I think it is extremely important to soak in as much information (and, more importantly, press) as possible. Take for example Sean Avery running his mouth about how his Rangers were going to "hurt" the Buffalo Sabres. Smart. Give the best team in the league MORE motivation to beat you. And they did take both of the first 2 games at home.
Both of these teams have been classy (this certainly isn't the media equivalent of MEDIA WEEK in the NFL before the Super Bowl, especially here in the states, is it?) and haven't said anything disrespectful about their opponents. Both teams are confident, and they both should be. They've played some good hockey to get here.
I did stumble on a good article a few days ago. It tells the story of a young 3-year-old who died of a rare form of childhood cancer called neuroblastoma. The boy was a die-hard Senators fan, who got to meet the team and became an inspiration to them. He defied the odds and stayed alive long enough to watch his favorite team beat the Sabres and make it to the Stanley Cup Finals. It is a great story and its ashame its only being heard in Canada. Here is the link; make sure you have some Kleenex handy; Elgin's Story.Thus the importance of researching the media. Is this little boy's story going to be the sole deciding factor in this series? Of course not. But when two excellent, very evenly matched hockey teams meet up and something as simple as who wants it more is the deciding factor... you think Elgin's picture won't be hanging high in the Senator's locker room? As if the already-more-dedicated-to-their-team-than-Duck's-fans Senator fans needed MORE to cheer about to give their team that extra little edge at home?
Here goes nothing.
#2 Anaheim Ducks (48 - 20 - 14 regular season, 12 - 4 post season) VS.
#4 Ottawa Senators (48 - 25 - 9 regular season, 12 - 3 post season)
Two 48 win teams, two teams that haven't won a Stanley Cup (well, not the modern day Senators who were born in 1992; a team of the same name won it 80 years ago), two teams that have worked extremely hard to get to this point and deserve to have their names ingrained into Lord Stanley's Cup.
And yet, only one can.
You really can't go wrong picking either of the teams in this series. The Ducks have two of the top 3 defensemen in the league in Chris Pronger and Scott Neidermayer, as well as a goaltender who is nothing short of spectacular come playoff time in Jean-Sebastion Giguere. The Senators have 3 of the top 4 point scorers in these playoffs in Dany Heatley, Jason Spezza, and Daniel Alfredsson; all the more impressive considering the fact that they've played less games than the Sabres, Ducks, and Wings have (The Wings' Nick Lidstrom (18 pts) knocks Alfredsson's 17 points out of the top 3 with his teammates by just one point... but Lidstrom played in 3 more games).
So, OTTAWA OFFENSE VS. DUCK DEFENSE? Not quite. As catchy as that may be, the Ducks also happened to finish 9th overall during the regular season in scoring (Sens 2nd)... and the Senators happened to finish 10th overall in goals against (Ducks 7th). So neither of these teams has a real weakness, which makes this series so darn interesting.
You all know how much I hate the Ducks, but let me make perfectly clear that I know what a good hockey team they are, and I'm looking really hard for any reason to pick them, because I don't want it to be an emotional pick. You'll notice that I've said the Ducks are the best in the West... and that they are. But I thought Buffalo was the best team in the league, and they were handled quite easily by the Ottawa Senators. Think back a few years ago to the Pittsburgh Steelers team that came in on a wild card and tore through everyone en route to a Super Bowl victory. There were "better" teams, but not in those playoffs their weren't. The Senators give me a similar vibe. They've beaten the best young team in the game (Pittsburgh), the best goaltender in the game (Brodeur), and the best team in the game (Buffalo), all handily. Why shouldn't they beat the best team in the West?
But then, the Ducks could make similar claims. They beat the best defensive team in the game (Minnesota), the "best goaltender in the game" (Luongo), and the "best team in the game" (Detroit). After all, Luongo and Brodeur are the clear 1 and 2 but it is tough to decide between them. And Detroit finished with the same point total as Buffalo: 113 (albeit in a much easier division).
Stats make things even more complexing. The Senator's defense/goaltending has been better than the Ducks, allowing only 2.12 goals per game to the Ducks 2.17. However, the Sens run is not only better by .05; they've faced the leagues' 1st, 4th, and 27th ranked offenses (Average 10.67) to the Ducks' 10th, 19th, and 22nd (Average 17).
And needless to say the Sens have scored plenty more goals than the Ducks (3.2 goals a game to the Ducks 2.62), but they have done so against the league's 4th, 13th, and 14th ranked defenses. The Ducks meanwhile have had to face the league's 1st, 2nd, and 5th ranked defenses. Maybe they are due for an offensive explosion?
Dizzy yet? Lets just move on to the questions;
Mom asked;
Do you think it actually comes down to goal tending on which team will win the cup?
Well, yes and no. You can't win a series on goaltending alone (ask Roberto Luongo and Marty Turco about that), but you can certainly lose a series on goaltending alone. If a goalie is on, he gives his team an excellent chance to win. And, if he isn't, he gives them an excellent chance to lose. All eyes are on Ottawa goaltender Ray Emery; JS Giguere has proven he's the real deal in the playoffs. Emery has done an excellent job not only stopping high octane offenses in Buffalo (1st overall) and Pittsburgh (4th overall), but also out-dueling some of the game's great young goalies in Ryan Miller and Marc-Andre Fluery, as well as the games best, Martin Brodeur. I don't think he'll have to be perfect at all to win the cup; but he'll need to be good. And, depending on how JS plays, he just might have to be great.
Can you tell me the records of Ottawa and the Ducks?
They are listed above. Of course, you could have just gone to any major sports web page for that info... but I appreciate you coming here instead!
Do the east coast teams play better, or harder games than the west?
That's debatable. In the old days, the style of play was much rougher in the East than it was in the West. Nowadays, I'd say its evened out a bit. The big difference between the conferences this year was parity (which means strength from top to bottom in sports). The East was more evenly matched up; 13 of their 15 teams finished with 75 or more points, compared to only 10 of 15 in the West. But the West had 7 teams with 100 or more points to the East's 4. What it really comes down to in the new NHL isn't conferences so much as it is divisions. Teams play 8 games against each of their division rivals. So if you are in a weak division with only 2 strong teams, you can easily rise to the top. If you are in a tough division with either 5 competitive teams OR 3 excellent teams, your road will be difficult. Good hockey is good hockey and bad hockey is bad hockey, East, West, North, and South.
Josh asked; Anaheim Ducks or Ottawa Senators - WHO YA GOT?
And isn't that the point of this whole post? As you can read, you can't go wrong with either of these teams. They are both great. And they both don't know each other, so you really don't know what to expect. Since the stats didn't solve it, I have to look no further than the quality of hockey played. In my opinion, as good as the Ducks are, they have looked vulnerable, and they have been outplayed by inferior teams, and they have barely found ways to win games that they didn't deserve to win. Honestly, as much as I like the Sabres, they were the same way this year. Not the Senators. They have played flat out excellent hockey in all 15 games they have played; all 3 of their losses were 1 goal games. These are two evenly matched teams. Flip a coin and pick a side. The side with the Senators logo on it, however, is a little shinier. And I make this pick as a hockey analyst, not a bitter Kings fan.
OTTAWA IN 6.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Days like this remind me why I have a blog...
Don't get me wrong; I'm well aware that I get things wrong often enough.
But today kinda made me chuckle.
As the Ducks beat the Wings tonight to move on to the Stanley Cup Finals, as miserable as it makes me feel on a personal level it was kind of cool that I...
Predicted they'd win the series in 6 games 14 days ago as well as predicting the Ducks wouldn't be beaten in the West 39 days ago.
Even cooler... did anyone tell you about this Lincecum guy who out-dueled Roy Oswalt tonight sooner than I did?
Sorry for the self-patting on the back, but you know what? I'm having a bad day, and damnit, I'm going to give myself some props. It is my blog after all isn't it?
But today kinda made me chuckle.
As the Ducks beat the Wings tonight to move on to the Stanley Cup Finals, as miserable as it makes me feel on a personal level it was kind of cool that I...
Predicted they'd win the series in 6 games 14 days ago as well as predicting the Ducks wouldn't be beaten in the West 39 days ago.
Even cooler... did anyone tell you about this Lincecum guy who out-dueled Roy Oswalt tonight sooner than I did?
Sorry for the self-patting on the back, but you know what? I'm having a bad day, and damnit, I'm going to give myself some props. It is my blog after all isn't it?
Sunday, May 20, 2007
NHL Playoff Hockey or The Preakness? Tough choice, huh NBC?
Buffalo and Ottawa, the East's two best offenses were locked up in a close Game 5, with Ottawa seemingly controlling the tempo through the first two periods and earning themselves a 2 - 1 lead heading into the third. Desperation and the home crowd kicked in all at once, and the Sabres went on an offensive flurry and tied the game up on a power play goal with just under 10 minutes left to play. Both goalies were outstanding and kept the puck out of the net for the last 9 minutes and change of play; this baby was heading into overtime.
You know how I feel about overtime playoff hockey. There just isn't anything better.
Would Buffalo be eliminated, or would the Senators be forced to fly back to Ottawa for a Game 6?
Who would be the hero? Who would be the goat? How long would it take to decide a winner?
"The Preakness is coming up next here on NBC. If you'd like continued coverage of this game, check your local provider for the Versus network"
But post time isn't until 3:00 pm, so we could see an overtime period without missing the actual race. Maybe they just meant after...
"What a sunny day it is here where Street Sense will try and take the next step towards immortality and the triple crown!"
Hmm. So, seeing as I don't have Versus, I now have to miss the game so I can see the leadup to the Preakness?
Believe it or not, unlike 99% of my hockey fan friends who were absolutely irate and sent hateful letters and emails to NBC, I don't blame them for the move at all.
The Kentucky Derby, The Preakness, and Belmont Stakes are a bigger deal than the NHL conference finals.
Monetarily, anyways.
People paid great money to get their commercial spots during the hour leading up to the Preakness. Commercials that wouldn't be seen if you kept the hockey game on; there are no commercials in overtime of a playoff hockey game. Besides, the commercials were catered to people who would be tuning into the race, not keeping it on for the hockey game.
So NBC had a choice; refund all those advertisers their money and upset horse racing fans, or upset a bunch of loyal hockey fans.
Easy call.
Because hockey fans love their sport. We can't threaten to boycott a network for pulling stunts like this because quite frankly we are lucky when we get to see hockey at all. After all, NBC can offend me all it wants, because I don't get Versus here at my apartment. I have to watch internet feeds when games aren't televised. So what if we all get piping mad? What does NBC care? You think it needs hockey ratings to survive?
Besides, those of you that work, how many of you heard people bringing up the race on Saturday? Who they had? Whether or not Street Sense would win? Bets? Side bets?
Ever hear that talk surrounding hockey in your workplace?
NBC made the right move. I refuse to criticize them, and I also refuse to criticize horse racing. Its awesome. Does it hold a candle to playoff hockey? No, but what does?
All this emphasized was what an idiot Gary Bettman was for not signing a deal with ESPN. ESPN offered Bettman a contract to cover hockey; granted, it was not very lucrative, but why should it have been? The league was coming off a lock-out and its already small fan base was shaken and there were whispers the NHL might not recover. Signing with ESPN may not have paid the most upfront but it would have given the league the two things it needs the most; advertisements and coverage.
Ever watch Sportscenter or ESPNews and see commercials for arena football? Sure you do. Why? Because ESPN actually gets to cover arena football.
Ever watch Versus and see commercials for the NHL? No. Why? Because you AREN'T WATCHING VERSUS.
You may not even get it!
Bettman's shortsightedness has solidified hockey's spot outside of major sports. Hockey used to be one of the 4 major sports. Well, those are now NASCAR, NFL, MLB, and NBA.
Hockey stays with tennis, golf, boxing, and all the other sports that don't get any respect.
But at least I got to see an awesome horse race available in high definition right after the grainy image of the Senators winning the East on my computer screen came to a close.
You know how I feel about overtime playoff hockey. There just isn't anything better.
Would Buffalo be eliminated, or would the Senators be forced to fly back to Ottawa for a Game 6?
Who would be the hero? Who would be the goat? How long would it take to decide a winner?
"The Preakness is coming up next here on NBC. If you'd like continued coverage of this game, check your local provider for the Versus network"
But post time isn't until 3:00 pm, so we could see an overtime period without missing the actual race. Maybe they just meant after...
"What a sunny day it is here where Street Sense will try and take the next step towards immortality and the triple crown!"
Hmm. So, seeing as I don't have Versus, I now have to miss the game so I can see the leadup to the Preakness?
Believe it or not, unlike 99% of my hockey fan friends who were absolutely irate and sent hateful letters and emails to NBC, I don't blame them for the move at all.
The Kentucky Derby, The Preakness, and Belmont Stakes are a bigger deal than the NHL conference finals.
Monetarily, anyways.
People paid great money to get their commercial spots during the hour leading up to the Preakness. Commercials that wouldn't be seen if you kept the hockey game on; there are no commercials in overtime of a playoff hockey game. Besides, the commercials were catered to people who would be tuning into the race, not keeping it on for the hockey game.
So NBC had a choice; refund all those advertisers their money and upset horse racing fans, or upset a bunch of loyal hockey fans.
Easy call.
Because hockey fans love their sport. We can't threaten to boycott a network for pulling stunts like this because quite frankly we are lucky when we get to see hockey at all. After all, NBC can offend me all it wants, because I don't get Versus here at my apartment. I have to watch internet feeds when games aren't televised. So what if we all get piping mad? What does NBC care? You think it needs hockey ratings to survive?
Besides, those of you that work, how many of you heard people bringing up the race on Saturday? Who they had? Whether or not Street Sense would win? Bets? Side bets?
Ever hear that talk surrounding hockey in your workplace?
NBC made the right move. I refuse to criticize them, and I also refuse to criticize horse racing. Its awesome. Does it hold a candle to playoff hockey? No, but what does?
All this emphasized was what an idiot Gary Bettman was for not signing a deal with ESPN. ESPN offered Bettman a contract to cover hockey; granted, it was not very lucrative, but why should it have been? The league was coming off a lock-out and its already small fan base was shaken and there were whispers the NHL might not recover. Signing with ESPN may not have paid the most upfront but it would have given the league the two things it needs the most; advertisements and coverage.
Ever watch Sportscenter or ESPNews and see commercials for arena football? Sure you do. Why? Because ESPN actually gets to cover arena football.
Ever watch Versus and see commercials for the NHL? No. Why? Because you AREN'T WATCHING VERSUS.
You may not even get it!
Bettman's shortsightedness has solidified hockey's spot outside of major sports. Hockey used to be one of the 4 major sports. Well, those are now NASCAR, NFL, MLB, and NBA.
Hockey stays with tennis, golf, boxing, and all the other sports that don't get any respect.
But at least I got to see an awesome horse race available in high definition right after the grainy image of the Senators winning the East on my computer screen came to a close.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Ask Me Anything! (#2)
Ask me anything, and hockey gets the love huh? That's fine by me.
Question from Don: "What makes you think Senators can't beat Redwings? They got the scoring, speed and age on them."
Make no mistake about it; I definitely think the Senators could beat the Red Wings. Granted, the Wings have to actually finish the series against the Ducks for that to even be the match-up.
The Sens have already contained the league's best forward (Sidney Crosby), beat the league's best goalie (Martin Brodeur), and are one game away from knocking off the league's best team (record wise, anyhow). And I must again point out that it has been no fluke; this team is the real deal.
I guess its just the lack of a true 3rd and 4th line that bothers me about Ottawa. Yes, they do have Chris Neil (177 penalty minutes this season), but this team is essentially a team that sends 4 scoring lines at you. Maybe it's just the hockey purist in me unwilling to appreciate the fact that in the new NHL, speed and skill conquer physicality and grit, but there's just something about the Kris Drapers and Kirk Maltbys and Tomas Holmstroms that feel right in the playoffs. Last year's Carolina team had a lot of speed and skill but also did an excellent job getting down and dirty on its 3rd and 4th lines.
There just seems to be something missing to me, maybe something that can only be exploited by a team like the Ducks or Wings. I certainly hope I'm wrong; I did bet Ottawa this pre-season to win it all, after all.
But Ottawa deserves all the respect in the world, and if Ray Emery stays strong, Canada just might have its first Stanley Cup winning team in 14 years.
Question from Nick: "i could probably just as easily look this up online.... but why in hockey to fans throw octopi (plural of octopus) out on the ice?"
Yep, you could have Nick. Thats exactly what I did... I knew it had something to do with 8 wins, but couldn't iron out the details. So after the good ol' web search, here's what wikipedia.org teaches us;
"This tradition, started on April 15th, 1952, when two brothers, Pete and Jerry Cusimano, who owned a fish market, decided to throw an octopus onto the ice at Olympia Stadium, with the eight tentacles of the octopus symbolizing the eight wins it took to win the Stanley Cup at the time. The Red Wings were a perfect 7-0 in the playoffs and were one win away from not only winning the Cup, but becoming the first perfect team in the NHL's post season history. Sure enough the Red Wings won that game, and the media made mention of the octopus "omen" in the papers the following day, thus establishing the octopus legend in the process. Fans have been throwing octopuses onto the ice at Red Wings games ever since. The tradition died down somewhat in the 1970s and 1980s during the Red Wings dismal seasons, but when the Red Wings became contenders again in the '90s, the tradition resumed."
Have to take what you find on wikipedia with a grain of salt; but that looks about right to me.
(To have your question answered, email me any questions you've got at socaltrojan31@aol.com OR simply leave a comment here and your question will be addressed in a new post. Don't be shy. "Anything" is a pretty broad topic. Sports related, of course.)
Question from Don: "What makes you think Senators can't beat Redwings? They got the scoring, speed and age on them."
Make no mistake about it; I definitely think the Senators could beat the Red Wings. Granted, the Wings have to actually finish the series against the Ducks for that to even be the match-up.
The Sens have already contained the league's best forward (Sidney Crosby), beat the league's best goalie (Martin Brodeur), and are one game away from knocking off the league's best team (record wise, anyhow). And I must again point out that it has been no fluke; this team is the real deal.
I guess its just the lack of a true 3rd and 4th line that bothers me about Ottawa. Yes, they do have Chris Neil (177 penalty minutes this season), but this team is essentially a team that sends 4 scoring lines at you. Maybe it's just the hockey purist in me unwilling to appreciate the fact that in the new NHL, speed and skill conquer physicality and grit, but there's just something about the Kris Drapers and Kirk Maltbys and Tomas Holmstroms that feel right in the playoffs. Last year's Carolina team had a lot of speed and skill but also did an excellent job getting down and dirty on its 3rd and 4th lines.
There just seems to be something missing to me, maybe something that can only be exploited by a team like the Ducks or Wings. I certainly hope I'm wrong; I did bet Ottawa this pre-season to win it all, after all.
But Ottawa deserves all the respect in the world, and if Ray Emery stays strong, Canada just might have its first Stanley Cup winning team in 14 years.
Question from Nick: "i could probably just as easily look this up online.... but why in hockey to fans throw octopi (plural of octopus) out on the ice?"
Yep, you could have Nick. Thats exactly what I did... I knew it had something to do with 8 wins, but couldn't iron out the details. So after the good ol' web search, here's what wikipedia.org teaches us;
"This tradition, started on April 15th, 1952, when two brothers, Pete and Jerry Cusimano, who owned a fish market, decided to throw an octopus onto the ice at Olympia Stadium, with the eight tentacles of the octopus symbolizing the eight wins it took to win the Stanley Cup at the time. The Red Wings were a perfect 7-0 in the playoffs and were one win away from not only winning the Cup, but becoming the first perfect team in the NHL's post season history. Sure enough the Red Wings won that game, and the media made mention of the octopus "omen" in the papers the following day, thus establishing the octopus legend in the process. Fans have been throwing octopuses onto the ice at Red Wings games ever since. The tradition died down somewhat in the 1970s and 1980s during the Red Wings dismal seasons, but when the Red Wings became contenders again in the '90s, the tradition resumed."
Have to take what you find on wikipedia with a grain of salt; but that looks about right to me.
(To have your question answered, email me any questions you've got at socaltrojan31@aol.com OR simply leave a comment here and your question will be addressed in a new post. Don't be shy. "Anything" is a pretty broad topic. Sports related, of course.)
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Ask Me Anything! (#1)
Thanks go out to Joshua for officially getting this new segment of my blog underway. Here goes;
"Here's a question that I don't get...
You, Vegas, are my go-to source when I want to try to understand the ice-capades *cough* i mean the NHL. (sorry, but football is king. anything else is merely a court jester)"
Well, I think baseball and hockey deserve spots as maybe princes or cousins as opposed to court jesters, but I won't argue against football being king.
"You've picked against the Senators in the last two rounds, and even tho they dropped today's game to the once-mighty Buffalo Sabres, they are still in a great position to advance to the Stanley Cup Finals.
I have two questions for ya:
1. How have the Ottawa Senators been able to fly past the Sabres after a taxing series against the Devils? Other than today's game, Buffalo hasn't even shown up. Is this more the Sabres being overrated or are the Senators just "that team" that gets hot at the right time?"
Well before I answer this, let me just point out that this series actually isn't over yet. Granted, I know it sounds cliche - but in this case its true. Usually when a team takes a 3 - 0 lead, it is because they are the significantly better team. Not quite the case here; Buffalo is certainly evenly matched if not better than Ottawa. This series had all the makings of a 7 game series. Buffalo taking game 4 sends them back to Buffalo for game 5, which they dropped the first two there, but they could easily win. All of a sudden game 6 is a bit of a must win for the Senators. I'm not calling the comeback, but I'm not ruling it out either. To answer one part of your question, the Sabres ARE the real deal and are not overrated.
So why is it the Sens are cruising? Well, first of all, the series against the Devils wasn't all that "taxing". It only took 5 games and most of the time the Senators were in command. There was little doubt about who the better team was out there. In fact, it has been that way these entire playoffs for the Sens. So are they "just that hot team"? Actually, no. Since December 23rd (when the team was 18 wins - 18 losses - 1 overtime loss), including these playoffs, the Senators are 41 - 9 - 9. If that doesn't speak towards their legitimacy, nothing will. They have the talent to beat anyone.
The biggest knock on them has been their physical game, which I didn't think was addressed this off-season or at the trade deadline. Also, goaltending was a question mark; could Ray Emery really outshine the likes of Marty Brodeur or Ryan Miller? The answer to that question has been an emphatic yes. As for physicality, they don't need it against similar-styled Buffalo and Pittsburgh. And as for the Devils series, in that instance, skill trumped toughness. And don't get me wrong... they haven't been playing like a bunch of pansies. They simply have had the good fortune of being able to play to their strengths.
But the real reason they are beating Buffalo so bad is special teams. The New York Rangers threw off the Sabres' rhythm on the power play with their stern defense, and it took the Sabres 19 chances to get their first power play goal of the series Wednesday night. When two evenly matched teams face off, special teams is key; and the Sabres have been ice cold. Credit also the Senators' penalty killers.
"2. You haven't picked Ottawa to win a series since the first round. If the Ducks advance to the finals to play the Senators, will you pick the Ducks in the hopes that your anti-Sens picks will turn out in Ottawa's favor, thus smighting the hated Anaheim Quack-Attackers? Or will you pick against Anaheim, picking with your heart but also with the knowledge that the Ducks - as you've been sayin for some time - will probably win it all?"
As of right now, believe it or not, that is a pretty big if. The Detroit Red Wings not only took back home ice by beating the Ducks 5 - 0 in Anaheim, but they also planted a seed of doubt and put a crack in the Ducks-are-invincible mentality. Even more importantly, superstar defenseman Chris Pronger got suspended for elbowing Detroit's Tomas Holmstrom in the back of the head into the boards. This leaves a gaping hole in the Ducks' defensive corps, and the Wings could very easily win game 4, leaving the Ducks in very, very bad shape. After all, the Wings are 35 - 5 - 9 at home this season.
But to answer your question, I will very likely be picking against the Senators in the finals. As I said above, I don't think they have really been physically tested yet; and both the Ducks and the Wings play a very tough physical brand of hockey. And, unlike the Devils, they also have the talent to back it up. Not to mention, the team in the West will have the more experienced goaltender AND home ice advantage. I will certainly be rooting for the Senators - I hate the Wings and Ducks AND I have money riding on a Sens' victory; but I will likely pick against them.
I know your answer will probably have to wait until we have a set Stanley Cup Finals, but the question stands; WHO YA GOT?!
Indeed we do need to wait, but if I had to give an answer at this very moment in time;
The Detroit Red Wings.
(To have your question answered, email me any questions you've got at socaltrojan31@aol.com OR simply leave a comment here and your question will be addressed in a new post. Don't be shy. "Anything" is a pretty broad topic. Sports related, of course.)
"Here's a question that I don't get...
You, Vegas, are my go-to source when I want to try to understand the ice-capades *cough* i mean the NHL. (sorry, but football is king. anything else is merely a court jester)"
Well, I think baseball and hockey deserve spots as maybe princes or cousins as opposed to court jesters, but I won't argue against football being king.
"You've picked against the Senators in the last two rounds, and even tho they dropped today's game to the once-mighty Buffalo Sabres, they are still in a great position to advance to the Stanley Cup Finals.
I have two questions for ya:
1. How have the Ottawa Senators been able to fly past the Sabres after a taxing series against the Devils? Other than today's game, Buffalo hasn't even shown up. Is this more the Sabres being overrated or are the Senators just "that team" that gets hot at the right time?"
Well before I answer this, let me just point out that this series actually isn't over yet. Granted, I know it sounds cliche - but in this case its true. Usually when a team takes a 3 - 0 lead, it is because they are the significantly better team. Not quite the case here; Buffalo is certainly evenly matched if not better than Ottawa. This series had all the makings of a 7 game series. Buffalo taking game 4 sends them back to Buffalo for game 5, which they dropped the first two there, but they could easily win. All of a sudden game 6 is a bit of a must win for the Senators. I'm not calling the comeback, but I'm not ruling it out either. To answer one part of your question, the Sabres ARE the real deal and are not overrated.
So why is it the Sens are cruising? Well, first of all, the series against the Devils wasn't all that "taxing". It only took 5 games and most of the time the Senators were in command. There was little doubt about who the better team was out there. In fact, it has been that way these entire playoffs for the Sens. So are they "just that hot team"? Actually, no. Since December 23rd (when the team was 18 wins - 18 losses - 1 overtime loss), including these playoffs, the Senators are 41 - 9 - 9. If that doesn't speak towards their legitimacy, nothing will. They have the talent to beat anyone.
The biggest knock on them has been their physical game, which I didn't think was addressed this off-season or at the trade deadline. Also, goaltending was a question mark; could Ray Emery really outshine the likes of Marty Brodeur or Ryan Miller? The answer to that question has been an emphatic yes. As for physicality, they don't need it against similar-styled Buffalo and Pittsburgh. And as for the Devils series, in that instance, skill trumped toughness. And don't get me wrong... they haven't been playing like a bunch of pansies. They simply have had the good fortune of being able to play to their strengths.
But the real reason they are beating Buffalo so bad is special teams. The New York Rangers threw off the Sabres' rhythm on the power play with their stern defense, and it took the Sabres 19 chances to get their first power play goal of the series Wednesday night. When two evenly matched teams face off, special teams is key; and the Sabres have been ice cold. Credit also the Senators' penalty killers.
"2. You haven't picked Ottawa to win a series since the first round. If the Ducks advance to the finals to play the Senators, will you pick the Ducks in the hopes that your anti-Sens picks will turn out in Ottawa's favor, thus smighting the hated Anaheim Quack-Attackers? Or will you pick against Anaheim, picking with your heart but also with the knowledge that the Ducks - as you've been sayin for some time - will probably win it all?"
As of right now, believe it or not, that is a pretty big if. The Detroit Red Wings not only took back home ice by beating the Ducks 5 - 0 in Anaheim, but they also planted a seed of doubt and put a crack in the Ducks-are-invincible mentality. Even more importantly, superstar defenseman Chris Pronger got suspended for elbowing Detroit's Tomas Holmstrom in the back of the head into the boards. This leaves a gaping hole in the Ducks' defensive corps, and the Wings could very easily win game 4, leaving the Ducks in very, very bad shape. After all, the Wings are 35 - 5 - 9 at home this season.
But to answer your question, I will very likely be picking against the Senators in the finals. As I said above, I don't think they have really been physically tested yet; and both the Ducks and the Wings play a very tough physical brand of hockey. And, unlike the Devils, they also have the talent to back it up. Not to mention, the team in the West will have the more experienced goaltender AND home ice advantage. I will certainly be rooting for the Senators - I hate the Wings and Ducks AND I have money riding on a Sens' victory; but I will likely pick against them.
I know your answer will probably have to wait until we have a set Stanley Cup Finals, but the question stands; WHO YA GOT?!
Indeed we do need to wait, but if I had to give an answer at this very moment in time;
The Detroit Red Wings.
(To have your question answered, email me any questions you've got at socaltrojan31@aol.com OR simply leave a comment here and your question will be addressed in a new post. Don't be shy. "Anything" is a pretty broad topic. Sports related, of course.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
