2010 playoffs: second round preview

The second round kicks off tonight with Game 1 of the Detroit - San Jose series, so we'll start with the West.

San Jose - Detroit

In all honesty, we expected San Jose to lose to Colorado already, so to make a long story short, Detroit in six. Granted, Phoenix took Detroit to Game 7, but in that game Detroit's big players stepped up. By contrast, while San Jose's "big three" were Team Canada's best line at the Olympics, they're notorious playoff underperformers. San Jose has pretty much taken over Detroit's old gimmick of winning the conference in the regular season and crashing out of the playoffs in the first rounds, so now's their chance. Detroit has more playoff experience, better individual players playing a better system, and better coaching.

Vancouver - Chicago

This blog firmly supports the Chicago Blackhawks for the Stanley Cup, if only because if they manage to win, then Toronto becomes the team with the longest time elapsed since last winning the Cup. We'd also love to see Marian Hossa make history by appearing in three consecutive Stanley Cup finals with a different team every time, and finally win it. That said, we have to reluctantly say the Canucks are going to win this one. It might well go to seven games, but we'll say Vancouver in six. The real question marks are, on the one hand, Luongo and the Canucks defense, and on the other hand, Chicago's youth. They had a good run last year, though, so it's entirely possible the Hawks will win this.

The trouble with handicapping the West is that because of the time difference, we rarely see many western games. For example, today's Wings-Sharks game is on at 4 a.m. local time. Watching them is a bit of a challenge, so our views on the West are most likely to be far less sound than those on the East.

Then again, we're frankly relieved that an illness that struck down 75% of this blog's contributors prevented us from embarrassing ourselves with the first round in the East. We would most likely have gone 1-3. That was a very, very silly first round.

Pittsburgh - Montréal

Question: Can the Habs pull off a second upset?
Answer: No.

Boston - Philadelphia

Who could have guessed we'd even see this series? Despite the brusque treatment I just gave the Habs, huge kudos to both the Habs and the Flyers for coming up big in the playoffs after a questionable regular season. Unfortunately, both of our NHL TV providers refused to show anything but the Caps and Pens, so quite frankly, we didn't see a single game of either the B's or the Flyers' series. I admit that the TV focus on S I D N E Y C R O S B Y pisses me off for this reason as well. Because of it, we don't know how Boston, the worst offensive team in the regular season, managed to get past Ryan Miller, or what the heck happened to the Devils, who I expected to see in the conference final against the Caps. So, working on the basis of the regular season, we have to say the Flyers in six. Bearing in mind that the Flyers' major weakness ever since the lockout has been team defense, it's not impossible that Boston will get their scoring going and power through. Any way you look at it, the fact that one of these teams is going to be in the conference final would have seemed incredible just a couple of weeks ago.

**

Speaking of team defense and the Caps, well, there it is, really. A lot of virtual ink was spilt (sent? posted? wired? transfer protocolled?) over the Capitals' goaltending before the playoffs started, but I keep insisting that with the Caps and the Flyers, the problem is not in goal. Yes, the Flyers have gone through something like 50 bargain-basement goaltenders since the lockout, and managed to give up the best guy they had for nothing to free agency. You'll find him in the previous post on this blog, if you're confused. Similarly, while Varlamov was great last year, Theodore had a catastrophic start this year and Varlamov wasn't that much better.

However, neither of the last two teams to win the Cup had anyone decisively better between the pipes. Fleury isn't nearly as good as the Canadians make him out to be; the simple fact that his team has to win playoff games against Ottawa 7-4 says enough. Also, I defy anyone to seriously argue that Chris Osgood was ever even one of the five best goaltenders in the Western Conference. I haven't got the issue right now because of logistical problems we're having, but Detroit's general manager explained their philosophy very simply after they won the Cup: "we don't spend money in goal." Team defense is much more important than goaltending, and it's defense that's letting both the Flyers and the Caps down.

With Washington, the problem is easier to address. If they hadn't made that idiotic giant deal with Michael Nylander, they could invest in a solid blueliner or two, and be ready to make a real run for the Cup. The fact that they made it to the conference finals last year and were only eliminated with considerable help from the referees is testament to the sheer ability of their forwards and offensive D, but it's the back end that's letting them down. In the Flyers' case, the problem is slightly stranger. Ever since the lockout, it's seemed that no matter who they have on the blueline, their defense plays terribly. The problem has survived several changes of personnel both on the bench and behind it, so it's really hard to understand what causes it, but it persists nonetheless. Having just said that the Flyers will win their series against the Bruins, this is what could come back to bite them.

I titled my previous hockey post "He ain't all that", referring to Cindy, erm, Sidney Crosby. Overall the first round series against the Sens is a good indicator. Yes, he had 14 points in 6 games. One of the 6 goals was a gamewinner, and in the decisive sixth game of the series, Crosby had no points and was a -2. Even nhl.com had to admit he was rubbish, but they inexplicably maintained that Malkin was even worse. Malkin had a power play assist, and despite having more even-strength ice time than Crosby, he was +0. In that game, the Pens were behind 3-0 at one point. Who started the comeback? Matt Cooke. The anointed messiah of hockey was nowhere to be found.

Even though I maintain the Pens are given special treatment by the league, there's no question they're a good team. Ever since the NHL selected Crosby as its "face", the media has focused on him to a ridiculous extent. Even in the nhl.com recap of Game 6, in which Crosby did nothing, he's the first player who gets quoted. Ever since he was made captain, the media can give him credit for everything the Pens do, because it's all supposedly due to his "leadership". When we know that he's a kid barely in his twenties with a monstrous ego problem, this seems more than a bit unlikely. But intanglibles aside, it's enough to look at any of the big games the Pens play. Quite simply, who scores big goals for the Pens? The third and fourth line. The people who decide big games for the Pens are the likes of Matt Cooke and Pascal Dupuis.

All the sound and fury about Cindy manage to obscure the fact that what lifts the Penguins above many other teams in the league isn't Cindy or even Malkin, but their third and fourth lines. In big games, it isn't Crosby or Malkin who step up to score big goals, but the third and fourth liners. The only big goal Crosby's ever scored was at the Olympics, and quite frankly, there's no way that shot should have gotten past Miller. Crosby is an egoist, pure and simple. He does ridiculous stuff like his stunts in the Pens' last regular season game against the Islanders; CBC showed him skating two complete circles around the Isles' zone on the power play, desperately looking for a scoring chance to win the Rocket. His scoring mostly comes in bunches, especially when his team is running up the score. I thought that game against the Isles was despicable. But whatever you think of Crosby, I maintain it's a fact that the constant focus on him leaves the guys who actually put in the hard work and score the game-winning goals in the playoffs in the shadows. And that's just fine with the superstar.

The funny thing is that I'm basically reiterating a very Canadian hockey ethic here. Running up the score, putting yourself before the team and not giving credit to the muckers and grinders is exactly what Canadian "old time hockey" fans accuse "Europeans" of. Yet when Cindy does all these things, they idolize him. There's a fantastic double standard in Canadian hockey culture when it comes to their superstars, and Crosby is the ultimate example.

The World's Sexiest Ice Hockey Player?

Yesterday a Finnish tabloid (Iltalehti) wrote about "world's sexiest ice hockey player". Imagine our surprise when this turned out to be Henrik Lundqvist.



The title was probably a reference to an article on Page Six Magazine on January 2009 by Kirsten Fleming (titled "Henrik Lundqvist: The World's Sexiest Ice Man). And even though Mr Pretty Boy was named on People magazine's list of Most Beautiful People in 2006 we don't care.

The writers of this blag believe only one person can carry the title of the World's Sexiest Ice Hockey Player:



Jarkko Ruutu.

Of course, his brother isn't too bad either.



Some other names we came up with (in no particular order) are Ryan Getzlaf and Teemu Selänne:



Todd Bertuzzi:



Antero Niittymäki:



and Ilya Kovalchuk.



And if we have to have a Swede, why not Zeta?



Even though Alex Ovechkin is not good-looking in any traditional sense, he has animal magnetism so he made our list.



This is by no means a definite list of hot hockey players, just a selection we came up with when discussing the subject (we agreed on most, too. No gender divide here).

Let's finish with another pic of our favourite, just because.

Taking risks the safe way

There is an inherent contradiction to an artistic contest like The American Idol. On one hand, it is a singing contest, the purpose of which is to find a recording artist. To win it all, you have to showcase your artistic talent and range, which requires taking risks and putting it all on the line. On the other hand, to get to the final you have to survive from week to week, which encourages playing it safe and going with what works.

I propose: each results night, give one contestant immunity from elimination for the following week. This would free them from the pressure of threat of elimination and allow them to do one performance without other considerations than how they want to do things as an artist. I believe this would benefit the show.

As judge Kara DioGuardi said in a recent interview it's "about taking a risk and showing people a side of me they never have seen." Granted, she wasn't talking about American Idol.

Fresh Spring

I played hooky today and went over to my friend sarahs house to write a song or two. Im wearing a yellow gap dress $12.00, targèt tights, urban outfitters sandals, and my usual forever 21 floppy hat.

sunny sunday afternoon

Vintage romper and green mariachi boots found during my trip to mexico. Im really starting to dig the simplicity of wearing a one piece and shoes, especially during sunny days in spring.

blue moon

Vintage dress, forever 21 floppy hat, over the knee boots from some random boutique i found in Mexico.

He ain't all that

As I said in a comment earlier, we would've done a playoff preview thing, but those of us contributing to the hockey posts were all ill last week, so it didn't happen. Here's some random thoughts on the Sens-Pens series.

At nhl.com, you can read all about how Sidney Crosby was "stupendous" and "magnificent", saving a goal and brilliantly setting up Letang's game-winner.

Then again, if you actually watched the game, you might have missed all the stupendousness and magnificence. What Crosby actually did on the game-winner was skate back and forth behind the Ottawa net and then pass to the point. I mean, how stupendously magnificent is that? For what it's worth, contrary to what's being reported, he didn't save a goal, either; the puck he batted away from the goal-line had already stopped. All in all, the Pens played a miserably bad game. You won't read that in the media, though; instead you'll read about how brilliant Crosby is.

I know I'm completely biased about Crosby, because I just can't like the guy one bit. The fact is, though, that he's an interesting study in how we create stories in sports. There is so much effort being put into portraying Crosby as the greatest hockey player ever that even in a fairly lackluster, very even game where no-one really stood out, we get headlines that scream CROSBY CROSBY CROSBY. If Pascal Dupuis had 1+1 and "saved a goal", you'd actually get to read about the game. But when it's the anointed messiah of hockey, this is what happens.

The Penguins won largely because the Senators only have one line that's capable of generating any kind of offense at all, and it's the third line. Jason Spezza has been so bad that I think Cory Clouston should bench him. He doesn't look like he even cares.

I hate to talk about the referees, but I have to. On CBC, Don Cherry showed Max Talbot's two dives in the first period, both of which were an Ottawa penalty. They were disgusting, sure, but what's really disgusting is that the refs fell for it. I went on and on about this last year, but now I feel justified, because it's happening again. Watch any playoff game where the Penguins are doing badly. In the third period, the refs are going to start calling soft penalties on the other team. It happened in both games of the Ottawa series, just like it happened in last year's Caps series. I find it astonishing, but it keeps happening.

Perhaps they're just skilled at playing the refs. In every NHL playoff game I've seen, the losing team pretty much immediately leaves the ice. Not so in Game 1, where Crosby inexplicably skated over to the referees to bitch at them instead of heading off the ice. I don't recall ever seeing that before.

In general, I find the refereeing in these playoffs to be really confusing: mostly they're letting everything go, but in almost every game they occasionally call penalties that I would consider soft in a regular season game, let alone in the playoffs. It's just that in the Pens games, they're all going Pittsburgh's way.

As an aside, I was positively shocked that Andy Sutton didn't get a penalty for his hit on Jordan Leopold. I thought it was the right call, which is why I was so shocked.

This time the referee bias is hardly likely to matter at all. Unless Ottawa suddenly finds scoring, and it doesn't seem likely, the Pens will take it in six. The Senators just can't score, and the fact that they couldn't put the Penguins away in Game 2 probably lost them the series.

Finally, we learned last night on CBC that they're now calling Crosby's combination of a "save", goal and assist a "Sidney Crosby hat trick" in Pittsburgh. That's a little disingenuous, as this is the only time he's had one of those, and like I said, he didn't actually save a goal. So we'd like to suggest a more realistic Sidney Crosby hat trick:

- a retaliatory slash to the leg of a player who hit him
- a second assist
- viewer's choice: either diving (vintage) or crying to the referees (playoffs)

Whichever one you go with, he's had plenty of them.